That the first Elements Fire water Air and Earth were all made by Nature and Chance without any Art or Method and then that the bodies of the Sun Moon and Stars and the whole Heavens were afterward made out of those Elements as devoid of all manner of Life and only fortuitously moved and mingled together and lastly that the whole Mundane System together with the orderly Seasons of the year as also Plants Animals and Men did arise after the same manner from the mere Fortuitous Motion of sensless and stupid Matter In the very same manner does Plato state this Controversie again betwixt Theists and Atheists in his Philebus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whether shall we say O Protarchus that this whole Vniverse is dispensed ond ordered by a mere Irrational Temerarious and Fortuitous Principle and so as it happens or contrariwise as our fore-fathers have instructed us that Mind and a certain Wonderful Wisdom did at first frame and does still govern all things Wherefore we conclude that Plato took no notice of any other Form of Atheism as then set on foot than such as derives all things from a mere Fortuitous Principle from Nature and Chance that is the unguided Motion of Matter without any Plastick Artificialness or Methodicalness either in the whole Universe or the parts of it But because this kind of Atheism which derives all things from a mere Fortuitous Nature had been managed two manner of ways by Democritus in the way of Atoms and by Anaximander and others in the way of Forms and Qualities of which we are to speak in the next place therefore the Atheism which Plato opposes was either the Democritick or the Anaximandrian Atheism or else which is most probable both of them together IX It is hardly imaginable that there should be no Philosophick Atheists in the world before Democritus and Leucippus Plato long since concluded that there have been Atheists more or less in every Age when he bespeaks his young Atheist after this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The full sence whereof seems to be this Neither you my Son nor your friends Democritus Leucippus and Protagoras are the first who have entertained this Opinion concerning the Gods but there have been always some more or less sick of this Atheistick Disease Wherefore we shall now make a diligent search and enquiry to see if we can find any other Philosophers who Atheized before Democritus and Leucippus as also what Form of Atheism they entertained Aristotle in his Metaphysicks speaking of the Quaternio of Causes affirms that many of those who first Philosophized assigned only a Material Cause of the whole Mundane System without either Intending or Efficient Cause The reason whereof he intimates to have been this because they asserted Matter to be the only Substance and that whatsoever else was in the World besides the substance or bulk of Matter were all nothing else but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 different Passions and Affections Accidents and Qualities of Matter that were all Generated out of it and Corruptible again into it the Substance of Matter always remaining the same neither Generated nor Corrupted but from Eternity unmade Aristotle's words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Most of those who first philosophized took notice of no other Principle of things in the Vniverse than what is to be referred to the Material Cause for that out of which all things are and out of which they are first made and into which they are all at last corrupted and resolved the Substance always remaining the same and being changed only in its Passions and Qualities This they concluded to be the first Original and Principle of all things X. But the meaning of these old Material Philosophers will be better understood by those Exceptions which Aristotle makes against them which are Two First that because they acknowledged no other Substance besides Matter that might be an Active Principle in the Universe it was not possible for them to give any account of the Original of Motion and Action 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Though all Generation be made never so much out of something as the Matter yet the question still is by what means this cometh to pass and what is the Active Cause which produceth it because the Subject-matter cannot change it self As for example neither Timber nor Brass is the cause that either of them are changed for Timber alone does not make a Bed nor Brass a Statue but there must be something else as the Cause of the Change and to enquire after this is to enquire after another Principle besides Matter which we would call that from whence Motion springs In which words Aristotle intimates that these old Material Philosopers shuffled in Motion and Action into the World unaccountably or without a Cause forasmuch as they acknowledged no other Principle of Things besides Passive Matter which could never move change or alter it self XI And Aristotle's second Exception against these old Material Philosophers is this that since there could be no Intending Causality in Sensless and Stupid Matter which they made to be the only Principle of all things they were not able to assign 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 any Cause of Well and Fit and so could give no account of the Regular and Orderly Frame of this Mundane System 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That things partly are so well in the World and partly are made so well cannot be imputed either to Earth or Water or any other sensless Body much less is it reasonable to attribute so noble and Excellent an Effect as this to mere Chance or Fortune Where Aristotle again intimates that as these Material Philosophers shuffled in Motion into the world without a Cause so likewise they must needs suppose this Motion to be altogether Fortuitous and Unguided and thereby in a manner make Fortune which is nothing but the absence or defect of an Intending Cause to supply the room both of the Active and Intending Cause that is Efficient and Final Whereupon Aristotle subjoyns a Commendation of Anaxagoras as the first of the Ionick Philosophers who introduced Mind or Intellect for a Principle in the Universe that in this respect he alone seemed to be sober and in his wits comparatively with those others that went before him who talked so idly and Atheistically For Anaxagoras his Principle was such saith Aristotle as was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at once a cause of Motion and also of Well and Fit of all the Regularity Aptitude Pulchritude and Order that is in the whole Universe And thus it seems Anaxagoras himself had determined 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Anaxagoras saith that Mind is the only Cause of Right and Well this being proper to Mind to aim at Ends and Good and to order one thing Fitly for the sake of another Whence it was that Anaxagoras concluded Good also as well as Mind to have been a Principle of the Universe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
as also that there was no Theogonia nor Temporary Production of the Inferiour Gods from these Verses of his according to Grotius his Correction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nempe Dî semper fuerunt atque nunquam intercident Haec quae dico semper nobis rebus in iisdem se exhibent Extitisse sed Deorum Primum perhibetur Chaos Quînam verò nam de nihilo nîl pote primum existere Ergo nec Primum profecto quicquam nec fuit Alterum Sed quae nunc sic appellantur alia fient postmodum Where though he acknowledges this to have been the General Tradition of the ancient Theists That Chaos was before the Gods and that the Inferior Mundane Gods had a Temporary Generation or Production with the World yet notwithstanding does he conclude against it from this Ground of Reason because Nothing could procede from Nothing and therefore both the Gods and indeed whatsoever else is Substantial in the World was from Eternity Unmade only the Fashion of things having been altered Moreover Diodorus Siculus affirms the Chaldeans likewise to have asserted this Dogma of the Worlds Eternity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Chaldeans affirm the Nature of the World to be Eternal and that it was neither Generated from any Beginning nor will ever admit Corruption Who that they were not Atheists for all that no more than Aristotle appears from those following words of that Historiographer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They believe also that the Order and Disposition of the World is by a certain Divine Providence and that every One of those things which come to pass in the Heavens happens not by chance but by a certain determinate and firmly ratified Judgment of the Gods However it is a thing known to all that the Generality of the later Platonists stiffly adhered to Aristotle in this neither did they onely assert the Corporeal World with all the Inferior Mundane Gods in it to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Ingenerate and to have existed from Eternity but also maintained the same concerning the Souls of Men and all other Animals They concluding that no Souls were Younger than Body or the World and because they would not seem to depart from their Master Plato therefore did they endeavour violently to force this same sence upon Plato's words also Notwithstanding which concerning these Latter Platonists it is here observable that though they thus asserted the World and all Inferior Gods and Souls to have been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to that stricter sence of the Word declared that is to have had no Temporary Generation or Beginning but to have Existed from Eternity yet by no means did they therefore conceive them to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Self-originated and Self-existing but concluded them to have been all derived from one sole Self-existent Deity as their Cause which therefore though not in order of Time yet of Nature was before them To this purpose Plotinus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mind or God was before the World not as if it existed before it in Time but because the World proceeded from it and that was in order of Nature First as the cause thereof and its Archetype or Paradigm the World also always subsisting by it and from it And again elsewhere to the same purpose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The things which are said to have been made or Generated were not so Made as that they ever had a Beginning of their Existence but yet they were Made and will be always Made in another sence nor will they ever be destroyed otherwise than as being dissolved into those Simple Principles out of which some of them were compounded Where though the World be said never to have been Made as to a Temporary beginning yet in another sence is it said to be always Made as depending upon God perpetually as the Emanative Cause thereof Agreeably whereunto the Manner of the Worlds Production from God is thus declared by that Philosopher 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They do not rightly who Corrupt and Generate the World for they will not understand what Manner of Making or Production the World had to wit by way of Effulgency or Eradiation from the Deity From whence it follows that the World must needs have been so long as there was a God as the Light was coeve with the Sun So likewise Proclus concludes that the World was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 always Generated or Eradiated from God and therefore must needs be Eternal God being so Wherefore these Latter Platonists supposed the same thing concerning the Corporeal World and the Lower Mundane Gods which their Master Plato did concerning his Higher Eternal Gods that though they had no Temporary Production yet they all depended no less upon one Supreme Deity than if they had been made out of Nothing by Him From whence it is manifest that none of these Philosophers apprehended any Repugnancy at all betwixt these Two Things Existence from Eternity and Being Caused or produced by Another Nor can we make any great Doubt but that if the Latter Platonists had been fully convinced of any Contradictious Inconsistency here they would readily have disclaimed that their so beloved Hypothesis of the Worlds Eternity it being so far from Truth what some have supposed that the Assertors of the Worlds Eternity were all Atheists that these Latter Platonists were led into this Opinion no otherwise than from the sole Consideration of the Deity to wit its 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 its Essential Goodness and Generative Power or Emanative Fecundity as Proclus plainly declares upon the Timaeus Now though Aristotle were not Acted with any such Divine Enthusiasm as these Platonists seem to have been yet did he notwithstanding after his sober Manner really maintain the same thing That though the World and Inferior Mundane Gods had no Temporary Generation yet were they nevertheless all Produced from One Supreme Deity as their Cause Thus Simplicius represents that Philosopher's Sence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aristotle would not have the World to have been made so as to have had a Beginning but yet nevertheless to have been produced from God after some other manner And again afterward 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aristotle though making God the Cause of the Heaven and its Eternal Motion yet concludes it notwithstanding to have been Ingenerate or Vnmade that is without Beginning However we think sit here to observe that though Aristotle do for the most part express a great deal of Zeal and Confidence for that Opinion of the Worlds Eternity yet doth he sometimes for all that seem to flag a little and speak more Languidly and Sceptically about it as for Example in his Book De Partibus Animalium where he treats concerning an Artificial Nature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is more likely that the Heaven was
made by such a Cause as this if it were Made and that it is maintained by such a Cause than that Mortal Animals should be so which yet is a thing more generally acknowledged Now it was before declared that Aristotle's Artificial Nature was nothing but the mere Executioner or Opificer of a Perfect Mind that is of the Deity which Two therefore he sometimes joyns together in the Cosmopoeia affirming that Mind and Nature that is God and Nature were the Cause of this Universe And now we see plainly that though there was a Real Controversie amongst the Pagan Theologers especially from Aristotle's time downward concerning the Cosmogonia and Theogonia according to the Stricter notion of those words the Temporary Generation or Production of the World and Inferior Gods or whether they had any Beginning or no yet was there no Controversie at all concerning the Self-existency of them but it was Universally agreed upon amongst them That the World and the Inferior Gods however supposed by some to have existed from Eternity yet were nevertheless all derived from one Sole Self-existent Deity as their Cause 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being either Eradiated or Produced from God Wherefore it is observable that these Pagan Theists who asserted the Worlds Eternity did themselves distinguish concerning the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orium Natum Factum as that which was Equivocal and though in one sence of it they denied that the World and Inferior Gods were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet notwithstanding did they in another sence clearly affirm the same For the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 say they strictly and properly taken is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which in respect of time passed out of Non-existence into Being or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which being not before afterwards was Nevertheless they acknowledge that in a larger sence this Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be taken also for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which doth any way depend upon a Superior Being as its Cause And there must needs be the same Equivocation in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so that this in like manner may be taken also either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for that which is Ingenerate in respect of Time as having no Temporary Beginning or else for that which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ingenerate or Vnproduced from any Cause in which latter sence that word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Vnmade is of equal force and extent with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which is Self-subsistent or Selforiginated and accordingly it was used by those Pagan Theists who concluded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. That Matter was Vnmade that is not only existed from Eternity without Beginning but also was Self-existent and Independent upon any Superior Cause Now as to the Former of these two sences of those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Generality of the ancient Pagans and together with them Plato affirmed the World and all the Inferior Gods to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to have been Made in Time or to have had a Beginning for whatever the Latter Platonists pretend this was undoubtedly Plato's Notion of that word and no other when he concluded the World to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 forasmuch as himself expresly opposes it to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which is Eternal But on the contrary Aristotle and the Later Platonists determined the World and all the Inferior Gods to be in this sence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as had no Temporary Beginning but were from Eternity However according to the later Sence of those words all the Pagan Theologers agreed together that the World and all the Inferior Gods whether having a Beginning or Existing from Eternity were notwithstanding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 produced or derived from a Superior Cause and that thus there was only One 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 One Vnproduced and Self-existent Deity who is said by them to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Superior to a Cause and Older than any Cause he being the Cause of all things besides himself Thus Crantor and his Followers in Proclus zealous Assertors of the Worlds Eternity determined 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the World with all the Inferior Mundane Gods in it notwithstanding their Being from Eternity might be said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is orti or made as being produced from another Cause and not Self-originated or Self-existing In like manner Proclus himself that grand Champion for the Worlds Eternity plainly acknowledged notwithstanding the Generation of the Gods and World in this sence as being produced from a Superior Cause 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We call it the Generations of the Gods meaning thereby not any Temporary Production of them but their Ineffable Procession from a Superior First Cause Thus also Salustius in his Book de Diis Mundo where he contends the World to have been from Eternity or without Beginning yet concludes both it and the other Inferiour Gods to have been made by One Supreme Deity who is called by him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the First God For saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God or the First Cause having the greatest power or being Omnipotent ought therefore to make not only Men and other Animals but also Gods and Demons And accordingly this is the Title of his 13. Chapter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 How Eternal things may be said to be Made or Generated It is true indeed as we have often declared that some of the Pagan Theists asserted God not to be the only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the only Vnmade and Self-existent Being but that Matter also was such nevertheless this Opinion was not so generally received amongst them as is commonly supposed and though some of the ancient Fathers confidently impute it to Plato yet there seems to be no sufficient ground for their so doing and Porphyrius Jamblychus Proclus and other Platonists do not only professedly oppose the same as false but also as that which was dissonant from Plato's Principles Wherefore according to that larger Notion of the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as taken synonymously with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there were Very many of the Pagan Theologers who agreed with Christians in this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That God is the only Ingenerate or Vnmade Being and that his very Essence is Ingenerability or Innascibility all other things even Matter it self being made by him But all the rest of them only a few Ditheists excepted though they supposed Matter to be Self-existent yet did they conclude that there was only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 onely One Vnmade or Vnproduced God and that all their other Gods were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in One sence or other if not as Made in Time yet at least as Produced from a Superiour Cause Nothing now remaineth but onely that we shew how
such as made the World to be the Third God Such a Trinity a Confounding of God and Creature together Page 551 552 And that this an Adulterated Notion of the Trinity evident from hence because no Reason why these Philosophers should stop here since the Sun Moon and Stars and their other Generated Gods differ not in Kind but onely in Degree from the World Page 552 Neither will this excuse them that they understood this chiefly of the Soul of the World Since if there were such a Mundane Soul as together with the VVorld made up One Animal this it self must needs be a Creature also ibid. This probably the Reason why Philo though acknowledging the Divine Word as a Second God and Second Cause yet no-where speaketh of a Third God lest he should thereby seem to Deify the whole Created World Though he call God also in some Sense the Soul of the World too whether meaning thereby his First or his Second God So that Philo seems to have acknowledged onely a Duality and not a Trinity of Divine Hypostases Page 552 553 Another Depravation of this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theology of Divine Tradition or Cabbala of the Trinity That some of these Platonists and Pythagoreans concluding all those several Idea's of the Divine Intellect or Archetypall World to be so many distinct Substances Animals and Gods have thereby made their Second Hypostasis not One but a Heap of Innumerable Gods and Hypostases and consequently destroyed their Trinity Page 553 Though Philo again here Platonized so far as to suppose an Incorporeal Heaven and Earth and an Intelligible Sun Moon and Stars to have been made before the Corporeal and Sensible yet does he no-where declare them to be so many distinct Substances and Animals much less Gods but on the contrary censures that for Pagan Idolatry This Pretence of worshipping the Divine Idea's in all Sensible things that which gave Sanctuary and Protection to the Foulest and Sottishest of all the Pagan Idolatries The Egyptians worshipping Brute Animals thus and the Greeks the Parts of the World Inanimate and Natures of Things Page 554 A Third Depravation or Adulteration of the Divine Cabbala of the Trinity by Proclus and other latter Platonists asserting an innumerable Company of Henades Particular Unities Superiour to the First Nous or Intellect their Second Hypostasis as also innumerable Noes Substantiall Minds or Intellects Superiour to the First Psyche their Third Hypostasis Page 555 These Noes seem to be asserted by Plotinus also as likewise the Henades and Agathotetes were by Simplicius Page 555 556 A Swarm of Innumerable Pagan Gods from hence besides their Intelligible Gods or Idea's Particular Henades and Noes Unities and Intellects ibid. Now since these Particular Henades and Noes of theirs must needs be Creatures the Trinity of Proclus and such others nothing but a Scale or Ladder of Nature wherein God and the Creature are Confounded together the Juncture or Commissure betwixt them being no-where discernible as if they differ'd onely in Degrees A gross Mistake and Adulteration of the Ancient Cabbala of the Trinity Page 556 557 This that Platonick or rather Pseudo-Platonick Trinity by us opposed to the Christian viz. such a Trinity as confounds the Differences betwixt God and the Creature bringing the Deity by degrees down lower and lower and at length scattering it into all the Animated Parts of the World A Foundation for Infinite Polytheism Cosmolatry or World-Idolatry and Creature-Worship Hence the Platonists and Pythagoreans the Fittest men to be Champions for Paganism against Christianity Page 557 558 Concerning the Christian Trinity Three things to be Observed First that it is not a Trinity of meer Names and Words nor Logicall Notions or Inadequate Conceptions of God this Doctrine having been condemned by the Christian Church in Sabellius and others but a Trinity of Hypostases Subsistences or Persons Page 558 559 The Second thing Observable in the Christian Trinity That though the Second Hypostasis thereof were Begotten from the First and the Third Proceedeth both from the First and Second yet neither of them Creatures First because not made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or from an Antecedent Non-existence brought forth into Being but both of them Coeternall with the Father Secondly because all Necessarily existent and Un-Annihilable Thirdly because all of them Universall or Infinite and Creatours of all other Particular Beings Page 559 The Third Observable as to the Christian Trinity That the Three Hypostases thereof are all Truly and Really One God not onely by Reason of Agreement of Will but also of a Mutuall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Permeation of each other and Inexistence Though no Instance of the like Unity to be found elsewhere in Nature yet since two distinct Substances Corporeal and Incorporeal make one Man and Person in our Selves much more may Three Divine Hypostases be One God ibid. Though much of Mystery in the Christian Trinity yet nothing of plain Contradiction to Reason therein that is no Nonsense and Impossibility The Ill Design of those who represent the Christian Trinity as absolutely Contradictious to Reason that they may thereby debauch mens Vnderstandings and make them swallow down other things which unquestionably are such Page 560 The Christian Trinity much more agreeable to Reason then the Pseudo-Platonick in the Three Particulars before mentioned First its making their Third Hypostasis the Animated World or Mundane Soul Which not onely too great a Leap betwixt the Second and Third but also a gross Debasement of the Deity and Confounding it with the Creature a Foundation for World-Idolatry and worshipping Inanimate Things as Parts and Members of God ibid. God to Origen but Quasi Anima Mundi As it were the Soul of the World and not Truly and Properly such All the Perfection of this Notion to be attributed to God but not the Imperfection thereof Page 560 561 Certain that according to the more refined Platonists their Third Divine Hypostasis not a Mundane but Supra-mundane Soul and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Opificer of the whole World So to Amelius Porphyrius and Plotinus A Double Soul of the World to Plato likewise The Third Hypostasis to these no Creature but a Creatour Page 562 So in their Second Particular whereby the forementioned Pseudo-Platonick Trinity no Trinity its making all the Idea's and Archetypal Paradigms of things so many Hypostases Animals and Gods This a Monstrous Extravagancy Not to be doubted but that Plato well understood these Idea's to be Nothing but Noemata or Conceptions of the Divine Mind existing no-where apart by themselves however called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Essences or Substances because not such Accidental and Evanid things as our Humane Thoughts are they being the Standing and Eternall Objects of all Science As also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Animals to signify that they were not meer Dead Forms as Pictures upon Paper or Carved Statues And thus did not onely Amelius understand S. John
rough and smooth hookey and crooked Atoms he judging these things to be nothing but the mere Dreams and Dotages of Democritus not teaching but wishing Here we see that Strato denied the World to be made by a Deity or perfect Understanding Nature as well as Democritus and yet that he dissented from Democritus notwithstanding holding another kind of Nature as the Original of things than he did who gave no account of any Active Principle and Cause of Motion nor of the Regularity that is in Things Democritus his Nature was nothing but the Fortuitous Motion of Matter but Strato's Nature was an Inward Plastick Life in the several Parts of Matter whereby they could Artificially frame themselves to the best advantage according to their several Capabilities without any Conscious or Reflexive Knowledg Quicquid aut sit aut fiat says the same Authour Naturalibus fieri aut factum esse docet ponderibus motibus Strato teaches whatsoever is or is made to be made by certain inward Natural Forces and Activities VI. Furthermore it is to be observed that though Strato thus attributed a certain kind of Life to Matter yet he did by no means allow of any one Common Life whether Sentient and Rational or Plastick and Spermatick only as Ruling over the whole mass of Matter and Corporeal Universe which is a thing in part affirmed by Plutarch and may in part be gathered from these words of his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Strato affirmeth that the World is no Animal or God but that what is Natural in every thing follows something Fortuitous antecedent Chance first beginning and Nature acting consequently thereupon The full sence whereof seems to be this that though Strato did not derive the Original of all Mundane things from mere Fortuitous Mechanism as Democritus before him had done but supposed a Life and Natural Perception in the Matter that was directive of it yet not acknowledging any one Common Life whether Animal or Plastick as governing and swaying the whole but only supposing the several Parts of Matter to have so many several Plastick Lives of their own he must needs attribute something to Fortune and make the Mundane System to depend upon a certain Mixture of Chance and Plastick or Orderly Nature both together and consequently must be an Hylozoist Thus we see that these are two Schemes of Atheism very different from one another that which fetches the Original of all things from the mere Fortuitous and Unguided Motion of Matter without any Vital or Directive Principle and that which derives it from a certain Mixture of Chance and the Life of Matter both together it supposing a Plastick Life not in the whole Universe as one thing but in all the several Parts of Matter by themselves the first of which is the Atomick and Democritick Atheism the second the Hylozoick and Stratonick VII It may perhaps be suspected by some that the famous Hippocrates who lived long before Strato was an Assertour of the Hylozoick Atheism because of such Passages in him as these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nature is Vnlearned or Vntaught but it learneth from it self what things it ought to do And again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nature findeth out ways to it self not by Ratiocination But there is nothing more affirmed here concerning Nature by Hippocrates than what might be affirmed likewise of the Aristotelick and Platonick Nature which is supposed to act for Ends though without Consultation and Ratiocination And I must confess it seems to me no way mis-becoming of a Theist to acknowledge such a Nature or Principle in the Universe as may act according to Rule and Method for the Sake of Ends and in order to the Best though it self do not understand the reason of what it doth this being still supposed to act dependently upon a higher Intellectual Principle and to have been first set a work and employed by it it being otherwise Non-sence But to assert any such Plastick Nature as is Independent upon any higher Intellectual Principle and so it self the first and highest Principle of Activity in the Universe this indeed must needs be either that Hylozoick Atheism already spoken of or else another different Form of Atheism which shall afterwards be described But though Hippocrates were a Corporealist yet we conceive he ought not to lie under the suspicion of either of those two Atheisms forasmuch as himself plainly asserts a higher Intellectual Principle than such a Plastick Nature in the Universe namely an Heraclitick Corporeal God or Vnderstanding Fire Immortal pervading the whole World in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It seems to me that that which is called Heat or Fire is Immortal and Omniscient and that it sees hears and knows all things not only such as are present but also future Wherefore we conclude that Hippocrates was neither an Hylozoick nor Democritick Atheist but an Heraclitick Corporeal Theist VIII Possibly it may be thought also that Plato in his Sophist intends this Hylozoick Atheism where he declares it as the Opinion of many 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That Nature generates all Things from a certain Spontaneous Principle without any Reason and Vnderstanding But here the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be as well rendred Fortuitous as Spontaneous however there is no necessity that this should be understood of an Artificial or Methodical Unknowing Nature It is true indeed that Plato himself seems to acknowledge a certain Plastick or Methodical Nature in the Universe Subordinate to the Deity or that perfect Mind which is the supreme Governour of all things as may be gathered from these words of his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That Nature does rationally or orderly together with Reason and Mind govern the whole Vniverse Where he supposes a certain Regular Nature to be a Partial and Subordinate Cause of things under the Divine Intellect And it is very probable that Aristotle derived that whole Doctrine of his concerning a Regular and Artificial Nature which acts for Ends from the Platonick School But as for any such Form of Atheism as should suppose a Plastick or Regular but Sensless Nature either in the whole World or the several parts of Matter by themselves to be the highest Principle of all things we do not conceive that there is any Intimation of it to be found any where in Plato For in his De Legibus where he professedly disputes against Atheism he states the Doctrine of it after this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That Nature and Chance produced all the first greatest and most excellent things but that the smaller things were produced by Humane Art The plain meaning whereof is this that the First Original of things and the frame of the whole Universe proceeded from a mere Fortuitous Nature or the Motion of Matter unguided by any Art or Method And thus it is further explained in the following words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c.
not be the First Principle of all things Wherefore we see no very great reason but that in a Rectified and Qualified sence this may pass for true Theology That Love is the Supreme Deity and Original of all things namely if by it be meant Eternal Self-originated Intellectual Love or Essential and Substantial Goodness that having an Infinite overflowing Fulness and Fecundity dispenses it self Uninvidiously according to the best Wisdom Sweetly Governs all without any Force or Violence all things being Naturally subject to its Autority and readily obeying its Laws and reconciles the whole World into Harmony For the Scripture telling us that God is Love seems to warrant thus much to us that Love in some rightly Qualified sence is God XIX But we are to omit the Fabulous Age and to descend to the Philosophical to enquire there who they were among the professed Philosophers who Atheized in that manner before described It is true indeed that Aristotle in other Places accuses Democritus and Leucippus of the very same thing that is of assigning only a Material Cause of the Universe and giving no account of the Original of Motion but yet it is certain that these were not the Persons intended by him here Those which he speaks of being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some of the first and most ancient Philosophers of all Moreover it appears by his Description of them that they were such as did not Philosophize in the way of Atoms but resolved all things whatsoever in the Universe into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Matter and the Passions or Affections Qualities and Forms of Matter so that they were not Atomical but Hylopathian Philosophers These two the old Materialists and the Democriticks did both alike derive all things from Dead and Stupid Matter fortuitously Moved and the Difference between them was only this that the Democriticks manag'd this business in the way of Atoms the other in that more vulgar way of Qualities and Forms So that indeed this is really but one and the same Atheistick Hypothesis in two several Schemes And as one of them is called the Atomick Atheism so the other for Distinctions sake may be called the Hylopathian XX. Now Aristotle tells us plainly that these Hylopathian Atheists of his were all the first Philosophers of the Ionick Order and Succession before Anaxagoras Whereof Thales being the Head he is consentaneously thereunto by Aristotle made to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Prince and Leader of this kind of Atheistical Philosophy he deriving all things whatsoever as Homer had done before him from Water and acknowledging no other Principle but the Fluid Matter Notwithstanding which Accusation of Aristotle's Thales is far otherwise represented by good Authors Cicero telling us that besides Water which he made to be the Original of all Corporeal things he asserted also Mind for another Principle which formed all things out of the Water and Laertius and Plutarch recording that he was thought to be the first of all Philosophers who determined Souls to be Immortal He is said also to have affirmed that God was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the oldest of all things and that the World was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Workmanship of God Clemens likewise tells us that being asked 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whether any of a mans Actions could be concealed from the Deity he replied not so much as any Thought Moreover Laertius further writes of him that he held 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the World was animated and full of Daemons Lastly Aristotle himself elsewhere speaks of him as a Theist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Some think saith he that Soul and Life is mingled with the whole Universe and thence perhaps was that of Thales that all things are full of Gods Wherefore we conceive that there is very good reason why Thales should be acquitted from this Accusation of Atheism Only we shall observe the occasion of his being thus differently represented which seems to have been this Because as Laertius and Themistius intimate he left no Philosophick Writings or Monuments of his own behind him Anaximander being the first of all the Philosophick Writers Whence probably it came to pass that in after times some did interpret his Philosopy one way some another and that he is sometimes represented as a Theist and sometime again as a down-right Atheist But though Thales be thus by good Authority acquitted yet his next Successor Anaximander can by no means be excused from this Imputation and therefore we think it more reasonable to fasten that Title upon him which Aristotle bestows on Thales that he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Prince and Founder of this Atheistick Philosophy who derived all things from Matter in the way of Forms and Qualities he supposing a certain Infinite Materia Prima which was neither Air nor Water nor Fire but indifferent to every thing or a mixture of all to be the only Principle of the Universe and leading a Train of many other Atheists after him such as Hippo surnamed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Simplicius and others Anaximines and Diogenes Apolloniates and many more who though they had some petty Differences amongst themselves yet all agreed in this one thing that Matter devoid of Vnderstanding and Life was the first Principle of all things till at length Anaxagoras stopt this Atheistick Current amongst these Ionick Philosophers introducing Mind as a Principle of the Universe XXI But there is a Passage in Aristotle's Physicks which seems at first sight to contradict this again and to make Anaximander also not to have been an Atheist but a Divine Philosopher Where having declared that several of the Ancient Physiologers made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Infinite to be the Principle of all things he subjoyus these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Therefore there seems to be no Principle of this Infinite but this to be the Principle of other things and to Contain all things and Govern all things as they all say who do not make besides Infinite any other Causes such as Mind or Friendship and that this is the only real Numen or God in the World it it being Immortal and Incorruptible as Anaximander affirms and most of the Physiologers From which Place some Late Writers have confidently concluded that Anaximander with those other Physiologers there mentioned did by Infinite understand God according to the True Notion of him or an Infinite Mind the Efficient Cause of the Universe and not Sensless and Stupid Matter since this could not be said to be Immortal and to Govern all things and consequently that Aristotle grosly contradicts himself in making all those Ionick Philosophers before Anaxagoras to have been Mere Materialists or Atheists And it is possible that Clemens Alexandrinus also might from this very Passage of Aristotle's not sufficiently considered have been induced to rank Anaximander amongst the Divine Philosophers as he doth in his Protreptick to the Greeks where after
of a Wooden Hand For thus these Physiologers declare the Generations and Causes of Figures only or the Matter out of which things are made as Air and Earth Whereas no Artificer would think it sufficient to render such a Cause of any Artificial Fabrick because the Instrument happened to fall so upon the Timber that therefore it was Hollow here and Plane there but rather because himself made such strokes and for such Ends c. Now in the close of all this Philosopher at length declares That there is another Principle of Corporeal things besides the Material and such as is not only the Cause of Motion but also acts Artificially in order to Ends 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there is such a thing as that which we call Nature that is not the Fortuitous Motion of Sensless Matter but a Plastick Regular and Artificial Nature such as acts for Ends and Good declaring in the same place what this Nature is namely that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Soul or Part of Soul or not without Soul and from thence inferring that it properly belongs to a Physiologer to treat concerning the Soul also But he concludes afterwards 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the whole Soul is not Nature whence it remains that according to Aristotle's sence Nature is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 either part of a Soul or not without Soul that is either a lower Part or Faculty of some Conscious Soul or else an Inferiour kind of Life by it self which is not without Soul but Suborditate to it and dependent on it 22. As for the Bodies of Animals Aristotle first resolves in General that Nature in them is either the whole Soul or else some part of it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nature as the Moving Principle or as that which acts Artificially for Ends so far as concerns the Bodies of Animals is either the whole Soul or else some Part of it But afterward he determines more particularly that the Plastick Nature is not the whole Soul in Animals but only some part of it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Nature in Animals properly so called is some Lower Power or Faculty lodged in their respective Souls whether Sensitive or Rational And that there is Plastick Nature in the Souls of Animals the same Aristotle elsewhere affirms and proves after this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What is that which in the Bodies of Animals holds together such things as of their own Nature would otherwise move contrary ways and flie asunder as Fire and Earth which would be distracted and dissipated the one tending upwards the other downwards were there not something to hinder them now if there be any such thing this must be the Soul which is also the Cause of Nourishment and Augmentation Where the Philosopher adds that though some were of Opinion that Fire was that which was the Cause of Nourishment and Augmentation in Animals yet this was indeed but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only the Concause or Instrument and not simply the Cause but rather the Soul And to the same purpose he philosophizeth elsewhere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neither is Concoction by which Nourishment is made in Animals done without the Soul nor without Heat for all things are done by Fire And certainly it seems very agreeable to the Phaenomena to acknowledge something in the Bodies of Animals Superiour to Mechanism as that may well be thought to be which keeps the more fluid parts of them constantly in the same Form and Figure so as not to be enormously altered in their Growth by disproportionate nourishment that which restores Flesh that was lost consolidates dissolved Continuities Incorporates the newly received Nourishment and joyns it Continuously with the preexistent parts of Flesh and Bone which regenerates and repairs Veins consumed or cut off which causes Dentition in so regular a manner and that not only in Infants but also Adult persons that which casts off Excrements and dischargeth Superfluities which makes things seem ungrateful to an Interiour Sense that were notwithstanding pleasing to the Taste That Nature of Hippocrates that is the Curatrix of Diseases 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that Archeus of the Chymists or Paracelsians to which all Medicaments are but Subservient as being able to effect nothing of themselves without it I say there seems to be such a Principle as this in the Bodies of Animals which is not Mechanical but Vital and therefore since Entities are not to be multiplied without necessity we may with Aristotle conclude it to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a certain part of the Soul of those Animals or a Lower Inconscious Power lodged in them 23. Besides this Plastick Nature which is in Animals forming their several Bodies Artificially as so many Microcosms or Little Worlds there must be also a general Plastick Nature in the Macrocosm the whole Corporeal Universe that which makes all things thus to conspire every where and agree together into one Harmony Concerning which Plastick Nature of the Universe the Author de Mundo writes after this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 One Power passing thorough all things ordered and formed the whole World Again he calls the same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Spirit and a Living and Generative Nature and plainly declares it to be a thing distinct from the Deity but Subordinate to it and dependent on it But Aristotle himself in that genuine Work of his before mentioned speaks clearly and positively concerning this Plastick Nature of the Universe as well as that of Animals in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It seemeth that as there is Art in Artificial things so in the things of Nature there is another such like Principle or Cause which we our selves partake of in the same manner as we do of Heat and Cold from the Vniverse Wherefore it is more probable that the whole World was at fiâ—st made by such a Cause as this if at least it were made and that it is still conserved by the same than that Mortal Animals should be so For there is much more of Order and determinate Regularity in the Heavenly Bodies than in our selves but more of Fortuitousness and inconstant Regularity among these Mortal things Notwithstanding which some there are who though they cannot but acknowledge that the Bodies of Animals were all framed by an Artificial Nature yet they will needs contend that the System of the Heavens sprung merely from Fortune and Chance although there be not the least appearance of Fortuitousness or Temerity in it And then he sums up all into this Conclusion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wherefore it is manifest that there is some such thing as that which we call Nature that is that there is not only an Artificial Methodical and Plastick Nature in Animals by which their respective Bodies are Framed and Conserved but also that there is such a General Plastick Nature likewise in the Vniverse by which the Heavens
aâ—firms of these his Inferiour Intelligences likewise as well as of the Supreme Mover that they do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Move only as the end Where it is Evident that though Aristotle did plainly suppose a Mundane Intellectual Soul such as also conteined either in it or under it a Plastick Nature yet he did not make either of these to be the Supreme Deity but resolved the First Principle of things to be One Absolutely Perfect Mind or Intellect Separate from Matter which was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Immoveable Nature whose Essence was his Operation and which Moved only as being Lovâ—d or as the Final Cause of which he pronounces in this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That upon such a Principle as this Heaven and Nature depends that is the Animated Heaven or Mundane Soul together with the Plastick Nature of the Universe must of necessity depend upon such an Absolutely Perfect and Immoveable Mind or Intellect Having now declared the Aristotelick Doctrine concerning the Plastick Nature of the Universe with which the Platonick also agrees that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 either Part of a Mundane Intellectual Soul that is a Lower Power and Faculty of it or else not without it but some inferior thing depending on it we think sit to add in this place that though there were no such Mundane Soul as both Plato and Aristotle supposed distinct from the Supreme Deity yet thâ—re might notwithstanding be a Plastick Nature of the Universe depending immediately upon the Deity it self For the Plastick Nature essentially depends upon Mind or Intellect and could not possibly be without it according to those words before cited 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nature depends upon such an Intellectual Principle and for this Cause that Philosopher does elsewhere joyn 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mind and Nature both together 25. Besides this General Plastick Nature of the Universe and those Particular Plastick Powers in the Souls of Animals it is not impossible but that there may be other Plastick Natures also as certain Lower Lives or Vegetative Souls in some Greater Parts of the Universe all of them depending if not upon some higher Conscious Soul yet at least upon a Perfect Intellect presiding over the whole As for Example Though it be not reasonable to think that every Plant Herb and Pile of Grass hath a Particular Plastick Life or Vegetative Soul of its own distinct from the Mechanism of the Body nor that the whole Earth is an Animal endued with a Conscious Soul yet there may possibly be for ought we know one Plastick Nature or Life belonging to the whole Terrestrial or Terraqueous Globe by which all Plants and Vegetables continuous with it may be differently formed according to their different Seeds as also Minerals and other Bodies framed and whatsoever else is above the Power of Fortuitous Mechanism effected as by the Immediate Cause though always Subordinate to other Causes the chief whereof is the Deity And this perhaps may ease the Minds of those who cannot but think it too much to impose all upon one Plastick Nature of the Universe 26. And now we have finished our First Task which was to give an Accompt of the Plastick Nature the Sum whereof briefly amounts to this That it is a certain Lower Life than the Animal which acts Regularly and Artificially according to the Direction of Mind and Vnderstanding Reason and Wisdom for Ends or in Order to Good though it self do not know the Reason of what it does nor is Master of that Wisdom according to which it acts but only a Servant to it and Drudging Executioner of the same it operating Fatally and Sympathetically according to Laws and Commands prescribed to it by a Perfect Intellect and imprest upon it and which is either a Lower Faculty of some Conscious Soul or else an Inferiour kind of Life or Soul by it self but essentially depending upon an Higher Intellect We procede to our Second Vndertaking which was to shew how grosly those Two Sorts of Atheists before mentioned the Stoical or Cosmo-plastick and the Stratonical or Hylozoick both of them acknowledging this Plastick Life of Nature do mistake the Notion of it or Pervert it and Abuse it to make a certain Spurious and Counterfeit God-Almighty of it or a First Principle of all things thereby excluding the True Omnipotent Deity which is a Perfect Mind or Consciously Vnderstanding Nature presiding over the Universe they substituting this Stupid Plastick Nature in the room of it Now the Chief Errors or Mistakes of these Atheists concerning the Plastick Nature are these Four following First that they make that to be the First Principle of all and the Highest thing in the Universe which is the Last and Lowest of all Lives a thing Essentially Secondary Derivative and Dependent For the Plastick Life of Nature is but the mere Vmbrage of Intellectuality a faint and shadowy Imitation of Mind and Vnderstanding upon which it doth as Essentially depend as the Shadow doth upon the Body the Image in the Glass upon the Face or the Eccho upon the Original Voice So that if there had been no Perfect Mind or Intellect in the World there could no more have been any Plastick Nature in it than there could be an Image in the Glass without a Face or an Eccho without an Original Voice If there be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then there must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if there be a Plastick Nature that acts Regularly and Artificially in Order to Ends and according to the Best Wisdom though it self not comprehending the reason of it nor being clearly Conscious of what it doth then there must of necessity be a Perfect Mind or Intellect that is a Deity upon which it depends Wherefore Aristotle does like a Philosopher in joyning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nature and Mind both together but these Atheists do very Absurdly and Unphilosophically that would make a Sensless and Inconscious Plastick Nature and therefore without any Mind or Intellect to be the First Original of all things Secondly these Atheists augment the Former Error in supposing those Higher Lives of Sense or Animality and of Reason or Vnderstanding to rise both of them from that Lower Sensless Life of Nature as the only Original Fundamental Life Which is a thing altogether as Irrational and Absurd as if one should suppose the Light that is in the Air or Aether to be the Only Original and Fundamental Light and the Light of the Sun and Stars but a Secondary and Derivative thing from it and nothing but the Light of the Air Modificated and Improved by Condensation Or as if one should maintain that the Sun and Moon and all the Stars were really nothing else but the mere Reflections of those Images that we see in Rivers and Ponds of Water But this hath always been the Sottish Humour and Guise of Atheists to invert the Order of the
is the Cause of those other things that are Made something 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that was Self-originated and Self-existing and which is as well 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Incorruptible and Vndestroyable as Ingenerable whose Existence therefore must needs be Necessary because if it were supposed to have happened by Chance to exist from Eternity then it might as well happen again to Cease to Be. Wherefore all the Question now is what is this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this Ingenerable and Incorruptible Self-originated and Self-existent Thing which is the Cause of all other things that are Made IV. Now there are Two Grand Opinions Opposite to one another concerning it For first some contend that the only Self-existent Vnmade and Incorruptible Thing and First Principle of all things is Sensless Matter that is Matter either perfectly Dead and Stupid or at least devoid of all Animalish and Conscious Life But because this is really the Lowest and most Imperfect of all Beings Others on the contrary judge it reasonable that the First Principle and Original of all things should be that which is Most Perfect as Aristotle observes of Pherecydes and his Followers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That they made the First Cause and Principle of Generation to be the Best and then apprehending that to be endewed with Conscious Life and Vnderstanding is much a Greater Perfection than to be devoid of both as Balbus in Cicero declares upon this very occasion Nec dubium quin quod Animans sit habeátque Mentem Rationem Sensum id sit melius quà m id quod his careat they therefore conclude That the only Vnmade thing which was the Principle Cause and Original of all other things was not Sensless Matter but a Perfect Conscious Vnderstanding Nature or Mind And these are they who are strictly and properly called Theists who affirm that a Perfectly Conscious Vnderstanding Being or Mind existing of it self from Eternity was the Cause of all other things and they on the contrary who derive all things from Sensless Matter as the First Original and deny that there is any Conscious Vnderstanding Being Self-existent or Vnmade are those that are properly called Atheists Wherefore the true and genuine Idea of God in general is this A Perfect Conscious Vnderstanding Being or Mind Existing of it self from Eternity and the Cause of all other things V. But it is here observable that those Atheists who deny a God according to this True and Genuine Notion of him which we have declared do often Abuse the Word calling Sensless Matter by that Name Partly perhaps as indeavouring thereby to decline that odious and ignominious name of Atheists and partly as conceiving that whatsoever is the First Principle of things Ingenerable and Incorruptible and the Cause of all other things besides it self must therefore needs be the Divinest Thing of all Wherefore by the word God these mean nothing else but that which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vnmade or Self-existent and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or First Principle of things Thus it was before observed that Anaximander called Infinite Matter devoid of all manner of Life the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or God and Pliny the Corporeal World endewed with nothing but a Plastick Vnknowing Nature Numen as also others in Aristotle upon the same account called the Inanimate Elements Gods as Supposed First Principles of things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for these are also Gods And indeed Aristotle himself seems to be guilty of this miscarriage of Abusing the word God after this manner when speaking of Love and Chaos as the two first Principles of things he must according to the Laws of Grammar be understood to call them both Gods 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concerning these two Gods how they ought to be ranked and which of them is to be placed first whether Love or Chaos is afterwards to be resolved Which Passage of Aristotle's seems to agree with that of Epicharmus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But Chaos is said to have been made the first of the Gods unless we should rather understand him thus That Chaos was said to have been made before the Gods And this Abuse of the Word God is a thing which the learned Origen took notice of in his Book against Celsus where he speaks of that Religious Care which ought to be had about the use of Words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He therefore that hath but the least consideration of these things will take a Religious care that he give not improper names to things left he should fall into a like miscarriage with those who attribute the name of God to Inanimate and Sensless matter Now according to this false and spurious Notion of the word God when it is taken for any Supposed First Principle or Self-existent Unmade Thing whatsoever that be there neither is nor can be any such things as an Atheist since whosoever hath but the least dram of Reason must needs acknowledge that Something or other Existed from Eternity Vnmade and was the Cause of those other things that are Made But that Notion or Idea of God according to which some are Atheists and some Theists is in the strictest sence of it what we have already declared A Perfect Mind or Consciously Vnderstanding Nature Self-existent from Eternity and the Cause of all other things The genuine Theists being those who make the First Original of all things Universally to be a Consciously Vnderstanding Nature or Perfect Mind but the Atheists properly such as derive all things from Matter either perfectly Dead and Stupid or else devoid of all Conscious and Animalish Life VI. But that we may more fully and punctually declare the true Idea of God we must here take notice of a certain Opinion of some Philosophers who went as it were in a middle betwixt both the Former and neither made Matter alone nor God the Sole Principle of all things but joyned them both together and held Two First Principles or Self-existent Vnmade Beings independent upon one another God and the Matter Amongst whom the Stoicks are to be reckoned who notwithstanding because they held that there was no other Substance besides Body strangely confounded themselves being by that means necessitated to make their Two First Principles the Active and the Passive to be both of them really but One and the self-same Substance their Doctrine to this purpose being thus declared by Cicero Naturam dividebant in Res Duas ut Altera esset Efficiens Altera autem quasi huic se praebens ex qua Efficeretur aliquid In eo quod Efficeret Vim esse censebant in eo quod Efficeretur Materiam quandam in Vtroque tamen Vtrumque Neque enim Materiam ipsam ohaerere potuisse si nullâ Vi contineretur neque Vim sine aliqua Materia
of Darkness Another God makes a World out of it c. And again afterwards he writes further to the same purpose Discat ergò Faustus Monarchiae Opinionem non ex Gentibus nos habere sed Gentes non usque adeò ad Falsos Deos esse dilapsas ut Opinionem amitterent Vnius Veri Dei ex quo est Omnis qualiscunque Natura Let Faustus therefore know that We Christians have not derived the Opinion of Monarchy from the Pagans but that the Pagans have not so far degenerated sinking down into the Worship of false Gods as to have lost the Opinion of One True God from whom is all Whatsoever Nature XIV It follows from what we have declared that the Pagan Polytheism or Multiplicity of Gods is not to be understood in the sence before expressed of Many 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Many Vnproduced and Self-existent Deities but according to some other Notion or Equivocation of the word Gods For God is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one of those words that hath been used in many different sences the Atheists themselves acknowledging a God and Gods according to some Private Sences of their own which yet they do not all agree in neither and Theists not always having the same Notion of that Word Forasmuch as Angels in Scripture are called Gods in one sence that is as Vnderstanding Beings Superiour to men Immortal Holy and Happy and the word is again sometimes carried down lower to Princes and Magistrates and not only so but also to Good men as such when they are said to be Made Partakers of the Divine Nature And thus that learned Philosopher and Christian Boethius Omnis Beatus Deus sed Natura quidem Vnus Participatione verò nihil prohibet esse quamplurimos every Good and Happy man is a God and though there be only One God by Nature yet nothing hinders but that there may be Many by Participation But then again all Men and Angels are alike denied to be Gods in other Respects and particularly as to Religious Worship Thou shalt Worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou Serve Now this is that which seems to be Essentially included in the Pagan Notion of the word God or Gods when taken in general namely a Respect to Religious Worship Wherefore a God in general according to the sence of the Pagan Theists may be thus defined An Vnderstanding Being superiour to Men not originally derived from Sensless Matter and look'd upon as an Object for mens Religious Worship But this general Notion of the word God is again restrained and limited by Differences in the Division of it For such a God as this may be either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ingenerate or Vnproduced and consequently Self-existent or else 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Generated or Produced and Dependent on some Higher Being as its Cause In the former sence the Intelligent Pagans as we have declared acknowledged only One God who was therefore called by them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to that of Thales in Laertius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God is the oldest of all things because he is Vnmade or Vnproduced and the only thing that is so but in the latter they admitted of Many Gods Many Vnderstanding Beings which though Generated or Produced yet were Superiour to Men and look'd upon as Objects for their Religious Worship And thus the Pagan Theists were both Polytheists and Monotheists in different Sences they acknowledged both Many Gods and One God that is Many Inferiour Deities subordinate to One Supreme Thus Onatus the Pythagorean in Stobaeus declares himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It seemeth to me that there is not only One God but that there is One the Greatest and Highest God that governeth the whole World and that there are Many other Gods besides him differing as to power that One God reigning over them all who surmounts them all in Power Greatness and Vertue This is that God who conteins and comprehends the whole World but the other Gods are those who together with the Revolution of the Vniverse orderly follow that First and Intelligible God Where it is evident that Onatus his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Many Gods were only the Heavenly Bodies or Animated Stars And partly from those words cited but chiefly others which follow after in the same place that will be produced elsewhere it plainly appears that in Onatus his time there were some who acknowledged One Only God denying all those other Gods then commonly Worshipped And indeed Anaxagoras seems to have been such a one forasmuch as asserting One Perfect Mind Ruling over all which is the True Deity he effectually degraded all those other Pagan Gods the Sun Moon and Stars from their Godships by making the Sun nothing but a Globe of Fire and the Moon Earth and Stones and the like of the other Stars and Planets And some such there were also amongst the Ancient Egyptians as shall be declared in due place Moreover Proclus upon Plato's Timaeus tells us that there hath been always less doubt and controversie in the World concerning the One God than concerning the Many Gods Wherefore Onatus here declares his own sence as to this particular viz. that besides the One Supreme God there were also Many other Inferiour Deities that is Vnderstanding Beings that ought to be Religiously Worshipped But because it is not impossible but that there might be imagin'd One Supreme Deity though there were many other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vnmade made and Self-existent Gods besides as Plutarch supposed before One Supreme God together with a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Irrational Soul or Daemon Vnmade Inferiour in power to it therefore we add in the next place that the more Intelligent Pagans did not only assert One God that was Supreme and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the most Powerful of all the Gods but also who being Omnipotent was the Principle and Cause of all the rest and therefore the only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the only Vnproduced and Self-existent Deity Maximus Tyrius affirms this to have been the general sence of all the Pagans that there was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 One God the King and Father of all and many Gods the Sons of God reigning together with God Neither did the Poets imply any thing less when 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was so often called by the Greeks and Jupiter by the Latins 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Hominum Pater atque Deorum or Hominum Satórque Deorum and the like And indeed the Theogonia of the ancient Pagans before mention'd was commonly thus declared by them universally 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the Gods were Generated or as Herodotus expresseth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that every one of the Gods was Generated or Produced which yet is not so to be understood as if they had therefore supposed no God at all Vnmade or Self-exâ—stent which is Absolute Atheism but that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the
pass for a general Observation here that the Pagan Theology was all along Confounded with a certain Mixture of Physiology and Herology or History blended together Nevertheless it is unquestionable that the more intelligent of the Greekish Pagans did frequently understand by Zeus that Supreme Vnmade Deity who was the Maker of the World and of all the Inferiour Gods Porphyrius in Eusebius thus declares their sence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By Zeus the Greeks understand that Mind of the World which framed all things in it and containeth the whole World Agreeable whereunto is that of Maximus Tyrius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By Jupiter you are to understand that most Ancient and Princely Mind which all things follow and obey And Eusebius himself though not forward to grant any more than needs he must to Pagans concludes with this acknowledgment hereof 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let Jupiter therefore be no longer that Fiery and Ethereal Substance which the ancient Pagans according to Plutarch supposed him to be but that Highest Mind which was the Maker of all things But Phornutus by Jupiter understands the Soul of the World he writing thus concerning him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As we our selves are governed by a Soul so hath the World in like manner a Soul that containeth it and this is called Zeus being the Cause of Life to all things that live and therefore Zeus or Jupiter is said to reign over all things However though these were two different Conceptions amongst the Pagans concerning God some apprehending him to be an Abstract Mind separate from the World and Matter but others to be a Soul of the World only yet nevertheless they all agreed in this that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Jupiter was the Supreme Moderator or Governour of all And accordingly Plato in his Cratylus taking these Two Words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both together etymologizeth them as one after this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These Two words compounded together declare the Nature of God for there is nothing which is more the Cause of Life both to our selves and all other Animals than He who is the Prince and King of all things so that God is rightly thus called He being that by whom all things Live And these are really but one Name of God though divided into Two Words But because it was very obvious then to object against this Position of Plato's that Zeus or Jupiter could not be the Prince of all things and First Original of Life from the Theogonia of Hesiod and other ancient Pagans in which himself was made to have been the Son of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Saturn therefore this Objection is thus preoccupated by Plato 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whosoever shall hear this saith he will presently conclude it to be contumelious to this Zeus or Jupiter as he hath been described by us to be accounted the Son of Cronos or Saturn And in answer hereunto that Philosopher stretcheth his Wits to salve that Poetick Theogonia and reconcile it with his own Theological Hypothesis and thereupon he interprets that Hesiodian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Jupiter into a Compliance with the Third Hypostasis of his Divine Triad so as properly to signifie the Superiour Soul of the World 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nevertheless it is reasonable to suppose Zeus or Jupiter to be the Off-spring of some Great Mind and Chronos or Saturn signifieth a pure and Perfect Mind Eternal who again is said to be the Son of Uranus or Coelius Where it is manifest that Plato endeavours to accommodate this Poetick Trinity of Gods Vranus Chronos and Zeus or Coelius Saturn and Jupiter to his own Trinity of Divine Hypostases 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the First Good a Perfect Intellect and the Highest Soul Which Accommodation is accordingly further pursued by Plotinus in several places as Enn. 5. l. 1. c. 4. and Enn. 5. l. 8. c. 13. Nevertheless these Three Archical Hypostases of the Platonick Trinity though look'd upon as Substances distinct from each other and Subordinate yet are they frequently taken all together by them for the Whole Supreme Deity However the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is by Plato severally attributed to each of them which Proclus thus observed upon the Timaeus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We say therefore that there are several Orders Ranks or Degrees of Zeus or Jupiter in Plato for sometimes he is taken for the Demiurgus or Opificer of the World as in Cratylus sometimes for the First of the Saturnian Triad as in Gorgias sometimes for the Superiour Soul of the World as in Phaedrus and lastly sometimes for the Lower Soul of the Heaven Though by Proclus his lieve that Zeus or Jupiter which is mentioned in Plato's Cratylus being plainly the Superiour Psyche or Soul of the World is not properly the Demiurgus or Opificer according to him that Title rather belonging to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Intellect which is the Second Hypostasis in his Trinity As for the Vulgar of the Greekish Pagans whether they apprehended God to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Mind or Intellect separate from the World or else to be a Soul of the World only it cannot be doubted but that by the word Zeus they commonly understood the Supreme Deity in one or other of those sences the Father and King of Gods he being frequently thus stiled in their solemn Nuncupations of Vows 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O Jupiter Father and O Jupiter King As he was invoked also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that excellent Prayer of an ancient Poet not without cause commended in Plato's Alcibiades 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O Jupiter King give us good things whether we pray or pray not for them but with-hold evil things from us though we should pray never so earnestly for them But the Instances of this kind being innumerable we shall forbear to mention any more of them Only we shall observe that Zeus Sabazius was a name for the Supreme God sometime introduced amongst the Greeks and derived in all probability from the Hebrew Sabaoth or Adonai Tsebaoth the Lord of Hosts that is of the Heavenly Hosts or the Supreme Governour of the World Which therefore Aristophanes took notice of as a strange and foreign God lately crept in amongst them that ought to be banish'd out of Greece these several Names of God being then vulgarly spoken of as so many distinct Deities as shall be more fully declared afterwards We shall likewise elsewhere show that besides 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 also was used by the Greeks as a Name for that God who is the supreme Moderator and Governour of the whole World That the Latins did in like manner by Jupiter and Jovis frequently denote the Supreme Deity and Monarch of the Vniverse is a thing unquestionable and which does sufficiently appear from those Epithets that were commonly given
suspicable that it was really a Design or Policy of the Devil by imitating the Miracles of our Saviour Christ both in Apollonius and Vespasian to counter-work God Almighty in the Plot of Christianity and to keep up or conserve his own Usurped Tyranny in the Pagan World still Nevertheless we shall here show Apollonius all the favour we can and therefore suppose him not to have been one of those more foul and black Magicians of the common sort such as are not only grosly sunk and debauched in their Lives but also knowingly do Homage to Evil Spirits as such for the gratification of their Lusts but rather one of those more refined ones who have been called by themselves Theurgists such as being in some measure freed from the grosser Vices and thinking to have to do only with good Spirits nevertheless being Proud and Vainglorious and affecting Wonders and to transcend the Generality of Mankind are by a Divine Nemesis justly exposed to the illusions of the Devil or Evil Spirits cunningly insinuating here and aptly accommodating themselves to them However concerning this Apollonius it is undeniable that he was a zealous Upholder of the Pagan Polytheism and a stout Champion for The Gods he professing to have been taught by the Samian Pythagoras his Ghost how to Worship these Gods Invisible as well as Visible and to have converse with them For which cause he is stiled by Vopiscus Amicus verus Deorum A true Friend of the Gods that is a hearty and sincere Friend to that old Pagan Religion now assaulted by Christianity in which not One only True God but a Multiplicity of Gods were Worshipped But notwithstanding all this Apollonius himself was a clear and undoubted Asserter of One Supreme Deity as is evident from his Apologetick Oration in Philostratus prepared for Domitian in which he calls him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that God who is the Maker of the whole Vniverse and of all things And as he elsewhere in Philostratus declares both the Indians and Egyptians to have agreed in this Theology insomuch that though the Egyptians condemn'd the Indians for many other of their Opinions yet did they highly applaud this Doctrine of theirs 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That God was the Maker both of the Generation and Essence of all things and that the cause of his making them was his Essential Goodness So doth he himself very much commend this Philosophy of Jarchas the Indian Brachman viz. That the whole World was but One Great Animal and might be resembled to a Vast Ship wherein their are many Inferiour subordinate Governours under One Supreme the Oldest and Wisest as also expert Mariners of several sorts some to attend upon the Deck and others to climb the Masts and order the Sails 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In which the first and highâ—st seat is to be given to That God who is the Generatour or Creator of this great Animal and the next under it to those Gods that govern the several parts of it respectively so that the Poets were to be approved of here when they affirm that there are Many Gods in the Heavens Many in the Seas Many in the Rivers and Fountains Many also upon the Earth and some under the Earth Wherein we have a true representation of the old Paganick Theology which both Indians and Egyptians and European Poets Greek and Latin all agreed in That there is One Supreme God the Maker of the Universe and under him Many Inferiour Generated Gods or Understanding Beings Superiour to Men appointed to govern and preside over the several parts thereof who were also to be religiously honoured and worshipped by Men. And thus much for Apollonius Tyanaeus The first Pagan Writer against Christianity was Celsus who lived in the times of Adrian and was so professed a Polytheist that he taxes the Jews for having been seduced by the Frauds of Moses into this Opinion of One God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Those silly Shepherds and Herdsmen following Moses their Leader and being seduced by his Rustick frauds came to entertain this Belief that there was but One only God Nevertheless this Celsus himself plainly acknowledged amongst his Many Gods One Supreme whom he sometimes calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the First God sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Greatest God and sometimes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Supercelestial God and the like and he doth so zealously assert the Divine Omnipotence that he casts an imputation upon the Christians of derogating from the same in that their Hypothesis of an Adversary Power 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Christians are erroneously led into most wicked Opinions concerning God by reason of their great ignorance of the Divine Enigms whilst they make a certain Adversary to God whom they call the Devil and in the Hebrew Language Satan And affirm contrary to all Piety that the Greatest God having a mind to do good to men is disabled or withstood by an Adversary resisting him Lastly where he pleads most for the worship of Demons he concludes thus concerning the Supreme God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But God is by no means any where to be laid aside or left out neither by Day nor by Night neither in Publick nor in Private either in our Words or Actions but in every thing our Mind ought constantly to be directed towards God A Saying that might very well become a Christian. The next and greatest Champion for the Pagan Cause in Books and Writings was that Famous Tyrian Philosopher Malchus called by the Greeks Porphyrius who published a Voluminous and elaborate Treatise containing Fifteen Books against the Christians and yet He notwithstanding was plainly as zealous an Assertor of One Supreme Deity and One Onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vnmade or Self-existent Principle of all things as any of the Christians themselves could be he strenuously opposing that forementioned Doctrine of Plutarch and Atticus concerning Three Unmade Principles a Good God an Evil Soul or Demon and the Matter and endeavouring to demonstrate that all things whatsoever even Matter it self was derived from One Perfect Understanding Being or Self-originated Deity The Sum of whose Argumentation to which purpose we have represented by Proclus upon the Timaeus Page 119. After Porphyrius the next eminent Antagonist of Christianity and Champion for Paganism was Hierocles the Writer of that Book entituled in Eusebius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or a Lover of the Truth which is noted to have been a Modester Inscription than that of Celsus his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or True Oration For if Eusebius Pamphili were the Writer of that Answer to this Philalethes now Extant as we both read in our Copies and as Photius also read then must it needs be granted that Hierocles the Author of it was either contemporary with Porphyrius or else but little his Junior Moreover this Hierocles seems plainly to be the person intended by Lactantius in
Philosophers after Thales and before Anaxagoras were generally Atheistical And indeed from them the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Naturalists came to be often used as Synonymous with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Atheists Now these Two are here condemned by Plutarch for Two Contrary Extremes the One who resolved all into Natural and Necessary Causes that is into Matter Motion and Qualities of Bodies leaving out the Divine Cause as guilty of Atheism the other who altogether neglecting the Natural and Necessary Causes of things resolved all into the Divine Cause as it were swallowing up all into God as guilty of a kind of Fanaticism And thus we see plainly that this was one Grand Arcanum of the Orphick Cabala and the ancient Greekish Theology That God is All things Some Fanaticks of Latter Times have made God to be All in a Gross Sence so as to take away all Real Distinction betwixt God and the Creature and indeed to allow no other Being besides God they supposing the Substance of every thing and even of all Inanimate Bodies to be the very Substance of God himself and all the variety of things that is in the World to be nothing but God under several Forms Appearances and Disguizes The Stoicks anciently made God to be All and All to be God in somewhat a different way they conceiving God properly to be the Active Principle of the whole Corporeal Universe which yet because they admitted of no Incorporeal Substance they supposed together with the Passive or the Matter to make up but one and the same complete Substance And others who acknowledged God to be an Incorporeal Substance distinct from the Matter have notwithstanding made All to be God also in a certain sence they supposing God to be nothing but a Soul of the World which together with the Matter made up all into One entire Divine Animal Now the Orphick Theologers cannot be charged with making God all in that First and Grosly-Fanatick Sence as if they took away all Real Distinction betwixt God and the Creature they so asserting God to be all as that notwithstanding they allowed other things to have Distinct Beings of their own Thus much appearing from that Riddle which in the Orphick Verses was proposed by the Maker of the World to Night 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 How can All things be One and yet Every thing have a distinct Being of its own Where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All things One. or One all things seems to be the Supreme Deity or Divine Intellect as Proclus also interprets it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jupiter who conteineth the Vniverse and All things within himself Vnitively and Intellectually according to these Orphick Oracles gives a Particular Subsistence of their own also to all the Mundane Gods and other parts of the Vniverse And this is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that fore-cited Orphick Verse Every thing apart by it self the whole Produced or Created Universe with all its Variety of things in it which yet are Orphically said to be God also in a certain other sence that shall be declared afterward Nor can the Orphick Theologers be charged with making God All in the Second Stoical Sence as if they denied all Incorporeal Substance they plainly asserting as Damascius and others particularly note 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Incorporeal Deity But as for the Third way it is very true that the Orphick Theologers did frequently call the World The Body of God and its Several Parts His Members making the Whole Universe to be One Divine Animal Notwithstanding which they supposed not this Animated World to be the First and Highest God but either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Hermaick or Trismegistick Writers call it The Second God or else as Numenius and others of the Platonists speak 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Third God the Soul thereof being as well in the Orphick as it was in the Pythagorick and Platonick Trinity but the Third Hypostasis they supposing Two other Divine Hypostases Superiour thereunto which were perfectly Secrete from Matter Wherefore as to the Supreme Deity these Orphick Theologers made Him to be All things chiefly upon the Two following Accompts First because All things coming from God they inferred that therefore they were all conteined in Him and consequently were in a certain sence Himself thus much being declared in those Orphick Verses cited by Proclus and others 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which Apuleius thus renders Namque Sinu Occultans dulces in luminis oras Cuncta tulit sacro versans sub pectore curas The Sence whereof is plainly this That God at first Hiding or Occultly conteining all things within himself did from thence display them and bring them forth into light or distinct Beings of their own and so make the World The Second is Because the World produced by God and really existing without him is not therefore quite cut off from him nor subsists alone by it self as a Dead Thing but is still Livingly united to him essentially Dependent on him always Supported and Upheld Quickned and Enlivened Acted and Pervaded by him according to that Orphick Passage 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God passes through and intimately pervades All things Now it is very true that some Christian Theologers also have made God to be All according to these Latter sences as when they affirm the whole World to be nothing else but Deum Explicatum God Expanded or Vnfolded and when they call the Creatures as St. Jerom and others often do Radios Deitatis the Rays of the Deity Nay the Scripture it self may seem to give some countenance also hereunto when it tells us That Of Him and Through Him and To Him are All things which in the Orphick Theology was thus expressed God is the Beginning and Middle and End of All things That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All things were made in him as in the Orphick Verses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All things consist in him That In Him we Live and Move and have our Being That God doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quicken all things and that he ought to be made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All in All which supposeth him in some sence to be so Notwithstanding which this is a very Ticklish Point and easily lyable to Mistake and Abuse and as we conceive it was the mistake and abuse of this One Thing which was the Chief Ground and Original of the both Seeming and Real Polytheism not only of the Greekish and European but also of the Egyptian and other Pagans as will be more particularly declared afterwards They concluding that because God was All things and consequently All things God that therefore God ought to be Worshipped in All things that is in all the several Parts of the World and Things of Nature but especially in those Animated Intellectual Beings which are Superiour to Men.
Doctrine belonging thereunto which all were not alike capable of he elsewhere observing this to be that Wisdom that St. Paul spake amongst the Perfect From whence he concludes that Celsus vainly boasted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For I know all things belonging to Christianity when he was acquainted only with the exteriour Surface of it But concerning the Egyptians this was a thing most notorious and observed by sundry other Writers as for Example Clemens of Alexandria a man also well acquainted with the affairs of Egypt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Egyptians do not reveal their Religious Mysteries promiscuously to all nor communicate the knowledge of Divine things to the Profane but only to those who are to succeed in the Kingdom and to such of the Priests as are judged most fitly qualified for the same upon account both of their Birth and Education With which agreeth also the Testimony of Plutarch he adding a further Confirmation thereof from the Egyptian Sphinges 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 When a mongst the Egyptians there is any King chosen out of the Military Order he is forthwith brought to the Priests and by them instructed in that Arcane Theology which conceals Mysterious Truths under obscure Fables and Allegories Wherefore they place Sphinges before their Temples to signifie that their Theology contained a certain Arcane and Enigmatical Wisdom in it And this meaning of the Sphinges in the Egyptian Temples is confirmed likewise by Clemens Alexandrinus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Therefore do the Egyptians place Sphinges before their Temples to declare thereby that the Doctrine concerning God is Enigmatical and Obscure Notwithstanding which we acknowledge that the same Clemens gives another interpretation also of these Sphinges or Conjecture concerning them which may not be unworthy to be here read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But perhaps the meaning of those Egyptian Sphinges might be also to signifie that the Deity ought both to be Loved and Feared to be Loved as benigne and propitious to the Holy but to be Feared as inexorably just to the Impious the Sphinx being made up of the Image both of a Man and a Lion Moreover besides these Sphinges the Egyptians had also Harpocrates and Sigalions in their Temples which are thus described by the Poet QuÃque premunt vocem digitóque silentia suadent They being the Statues of Young men pressing their Lips with their Finger The meaning of which Harpocrates is thus expressed by Plutarch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Harpocrates of the Egyptians is not to be taken for an Imperfect and Infant God but for the President of mens Speech concerning the Gods that is but imperfect balbutient and inarticulate and the Regulator or Corrector of the same his Finger upon his Mouth being a Symbol of Silence and Taciturnity It is very true that some Christians have made another Interpretation of this Egyptian Harpocrates as if the meaning of it had been this That the Gods of the Egyptians had been all of them really nothing else but Mortal Men but that this was a Secret that was to be concealed from the Vulgar Which Conceit however it be witty yet is it devoid of Truth and doubtless the meaning of those Egyptian Harpocrates was no other than this That either the Supreme and Incomprehensible Deity was to be adored with Silence or not spoken of without much caution and circumspection or else that the Arcane Mysteries of Theology were not to be promiscuously communicated but concealed from the profane Vulgar Which same thing seems to have been allso signified by that yearly Feast kept by the Egyptians in honour of Thoth or Hermes when the Priests eating Honey and Figs pronounced those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Truth is sweet As also by that Amulet which Isis was fabled to have worn about her the interpretation whereof was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 True speech This 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this Arcane and Recondite Theology of the Egyptians was concealed from the Vulgar Two manner of ways by Fables or Allegories and by Symbols or Hieroglyphicks Eusebius informs us that Porphyrius wrote a Book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concerning the Allegorical Theology both of the Greeks and Egyptians And here by the way we may observe that this business of Allegorizing in matters of Religion had not its first and only Rise amongst the Christians but was a thing very much in use among the Pagan Theologers also and therefore Celsus in Origen commends some of the Christians for this that they could Allegorize ingeniously and handsomly It is well known how both Plutarch and Synesius Allegorized those Egyptian Fables of Isis and Osiris the one to a Philosophical the other to a Political sence And the Egyptian Hieroglyphicks which were Figures not answering to Sounds or Words but immediately representing the Objects and Conceptions of the Mind were chiefly made use of by them to this purpose to express the Mysteries of their Religion and Theology so as that they might be concealed from the prophane Vulgar For which cause the Hieroglyphick Learning of the Egyptians is commonly taken for one and the same thing with their Arcane Theology or Metaphysicks And this the Author of the Questions and Answers ad Orthodoxos tells us was anciently had in much greater esteem amongst the Egyptians than all their other Learning and that therefore Moses was as well instructed in this Hieroglyphick Learning and Metaphysical Theology of theirs as in their Mathematicks And for our parts we doubt not but that the Mensa Isiaca lately published containing so many strange and uncouth Hieroglyphicks in it was something of this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this Arcane Theology of the Egyptians and not meer History as some imagine Though the late confident Oedipus seem to arrogate too much to himself in pretending to such a certain and exact Interpretation of it Now as it is reasonable to think that in all those Pagan Nations where there was another Theology besides the Vulgar the principal part thereof was the Doctrine of One Supreme and Vniversal Deity the Maker of the whole World so can it not well be conceived what this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this Arcane and Mysterious and Enigmatick Theology of the Egyptians so much talked of should be other than a kind of Metaphysicks concerning God as One Perfect Incorporeal Being the Original of all things We know nothing of any Moment that can be objected against this save only that which Porphyrius in his Epistle to Anebo an Egyptian Priest writeth concerning Chaeremon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Chaeremon and others acknowledge nothing before this Visible and Corporeal World alledging for the countenance of their Opinion such of the Egyptians as talk of no other Gods but the Planets and those Stars that fill up the Zodiack or rise together with them their Decans and Horoscopes and Robust Princes as they call them whose names are
also inserted into their Almanacks or Ephemerides together with the times of their Risings and Settings and the Prognosticks or significations of future Events from them For he observed that those Egyptians who made the Sun the Demiurgus or Architect of the World interpreted the Stories of Isis and Osiris and all those other Religious Fables into nothing but Stars and Planets and the River Nile 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and referred all things universally into Natural or Inanimate nothing into Incorporeal and Living Substances Which Passage of Porphyrius concerning Chaeremon we confess Eusebius lays great stress upon endeavouring to make advantage of it first against the Egyptians and then against the Greeks and other Pagans as deriving their Religion and Theology from them It is manifest from hence saith he that the very Arcane Theology of the Egyptians Deified nothing but Stars and Planets and acknowledged no Incorporeal Principle or Demiurgick Reason as the Cause of this Vniverse but only the Visible Sun And then he concludes in this manner See now what is become of this Arcane Theology of the Egyptians that deifies nothing but sensless Matter or Dead Inanimate Bodies But it is well known that Eusebius took all advantages possible to represent the Pagans to the worst and render their Theology ridiculous and absurd nevertheless what he here urgeth against the Egyptians is the less valuable because himself plainly contradicts it elsewhere declaring that the Egyptians acknowledged a Demiurgick Reason and Intellectual Architect of the World which consequently was the Maker of the Sun and confessing the same of the other Pagans also Now to affirm that the Egyptians acknowledged no other Deity than Inanimate Matter and the Sensless Corporeal World is not only to deny that they had any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 any Arcane Theology at all which yet hath been sufficiently proved but also to render them absolute Atheists For if this be not Atheism to acknowledge no other Deity besides Dead and Sensless Matter then the word hath no signification Chaeremon indeed seems to impute this Opinion not to all the Egyptians but to some of them and it is very possible that there might be some Atheists amongst the Egyptians also as well as amongst the Greeks and their Philosophers And doubtless this Chaeremon himself was a kind of Astrological Atheist for which cause we conclude that it was not Chaeremon the Stoick from whom notwithstanding Porphyrius in his Book of Abstinence citeth certain other things concerning the Egyptians but either that Chaeremon whom Strabo made use of in Egypt or else some other of that name But that there ever was or can be any such Religious Atheists as Eusebius with some others imagine who though acknowledging no Deity besides Dead and Sensless Matter notwithstanding devoutly court and worship the same constantly invoking it and imploring its assistance as expecting great Benefit to themselves thereby This we confess is such a thing as that we have not Faith enough to believe it being a sottishness and contradictious Non-sence that is not incident to humane Nature Neither can we doubt but that all the devout Pagans acknowledged some Living and Vnderstanding Deities or other nor easily believe that they ever Worshipped any Inanimate or Sensless Bodies otherwise than as some way referring to the same or as Images and Symbols of them But as for that Passage in Porphyrius his Epistle concerning Chaeremon where he only propounds doubts to Anebo the Egyptian Priest as desiring further Information from him concerning them Jamblichus hath given us a full answer to it under the person of Abammo another Egyptian Priest which notwithstanding hath not hitherto been at all taken notice of because Ficinus and Scutellius not understanding the word Chaeremon to be a Proper name ridiculously turn'd it in their Translations Optarem and Gauderem thereby also perverting the whole sence The words in the Greek MS. now in the hands of my Learned Friend Mr. Gale run thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But Chaeremon and those others who pretend to write of the first Causes of the World declare only the Last and Lowest Principles as likewise they who treat of the Planets the Zodiack the Decans the Horoscopes and the Robust Princes And those things that are in the Egyptian Almanacks or Ephemerides contain the least part of the Hermaical Institutions namely the Phases and Occultations of the Stars the Increase and Decrease of the Moon and the like Astrological Matters which things have the lowest place in the Egyptian Aetiology Nor do the Egyptians resolve all things into Sensles Nature but they distinguish both the Life of the Soul and the Intellectual Life from that of Nature and that not only in our selves but also in the Vniverse they determining Mind and Reason first to have existed of themselves and so this whole World to have been made Wherefore they acknowledge before the Heaven and in the Heaven a Living Power and place pure Mind above the World as the Demiurgus and Architect thereof From which Testimony of Jamblichus who was but little Juniour to Porphyrius and Contemporary with Eusebius and who had made it his business to inform himself thoroughly concerning the Theology of the Egyptians it plainly appears that the Egyptians did not generally suppose as Chaeremon pretended concerning some of them a Sensless Inanimate Nature to be the first Original of all things but that as well in the World as in our selves they acknowledged Soul superiour to Nature and Mind or Intellect superiour to Soul this being the Demiurgus of the World But we shall have afterwards occasion more opportunely to cite other Passages out of this Jamblichus his Egyptian Mysteries to the same purpose Wherefore there is no pretense at all to suspect that the Egyptians were universally Atheists and Anarchists such as supposed no Living Understanding Deity but resolved all into Sensless Matter as the first and highest Principle But all the question is whether they were not Polyarchists such as asserted a Multitude of Understanding Deities Self-existent or Unmade Now that Monarchy was an essential part of the Arcane and True Theology of the Egyptians A. Steuchus Eugubinus and many other learned men have thought to be unquestionably evident from the Hermetick or Trismegistick Writings they taking it for granted that these are all genuine and sincere Whereas there is too much cause to suspect that there have been some Pious Frauds practised upon these Trismegistick Writings as well as there were upon the Sibylline and that either whole Books of them have been counterfeited by pretended Christians or at least several spurious and supposititious Passages here and there inserted into some of them Isaac Casaubon who was the first Discoverer has taken notice of many such in that first Hermetick Book entituled Paemander some also in the Fourth Book inscribed Crater and some in the Thirteenth call'd the Sermon in the Mount concerning Regeneration which may justly render those Three whole Books or at least
the First and Last of them to be suspected We shall here repeat none of Casaubon's condemned Passages but add one more to them out of the Thirteenth Book or Sermon in the Mount which however omitted by him seems to be more rankly Christian than any other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tell me this also Who is the Cause or Worker of Regeneration The Son of God One Man by the will of God Wherefore though Ath. Kircherus contend with much zeal for the sincerity of all these Trismegistick Books yet we must needs pronounce of the Three forementioned at least the Paemander properly so called and the Sermon in the Mount that they were either wholly forged and counterfeited by some pretended Christians or else had many spurious Passages inferted into them Wherefore it cannot be solidly proved from the Trismegistick Books after this manner as supposed to be all alike Genuine and sincere that the Egyptian Pagans acknowledged One Supreme and Vniversal Numen Much less can the same be evinced from that pretended Aristotelick Book De secretiore parte Divinae Sapientiae secundùm Aegyptios greedily swallowed down also by Kircherus but unquestionably pseudepigraphous Notwithstanding which we conceive that though all the Trismegistick Books that now are or have been formerly extant had been forged by some pretended Christians as that Book of the Arcane Egyptian Wisdom was by some Philosopher and imputed to Aristotle yet would they for all that upon another accompt afford no inconsiderable Argument to prove that the Egyptian Pagans asserted One Supreme Deity viz. Because every Cheat and Imposture must needs have some Basis or Foundation of Truth to stand upon there must have been something truly Egyptian in such counterfeit Egyptian Writings and therefore this at least of One Supreme Deity or else they could never have obtained credit at first or afterwards have maintain'd the same The rather because these Trismegistick Books were dispersed in those ancient times before the Egyptian Paganism and their Succession of Priests were yet extinct and therefore had that which is so much insisted upon in them been dissonant from the Egyptian Theology they must needs have been presently exploded as meer Lyes and Forgeries Wherefore we say again that if all the Hermaick or Trismegistick Books that are now extant and those to boot which being mentioned in ancient Fathers have been lost as the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the like had been nothing but the Pious Frauds and Cheats of Christians yet must there needs have been some Truth at the bottom to give subsistence to them This at least that Hermes Trismegist or the Egyptian Priests in their Arcane and True Theology really acknowledged One Supreme and Vniversal Numen But it does not all follow that because some of these Hermaick or Trismegistick Books now extant were counterfeit or supposititious that therefore all of them must needs be such and not only so but those also that are mentioned in the Writings of ancient Fathers which are now lost Wherefore the Learned Casaubon seems not to have reckoned or concluded well when from the detection of Forgery in Two or Three of those Trismegistick Books at most he pronounces of them all universally that they were nothing but Christian Cheats and Impostures And probably he was lead into this mistake by reason of his too securely following that vulgar Errour which yet had been confuted by Patricius that all that was published by Ficinus under the name of Hermes Trismegist was but one and the same Book Poemander consisting of several Chapters whereas they are all indeed so many Distinct and Independent Books whereof Poemander is only placed First However there was no shadow of reason why the Asclepius should have fallen under the same condemnation nor several other Books superadded by Patricius they being unquestionably distinct from the Poemander and no signs of Spuriousness or Bastardy discovered in them Much less ought those Trismegistick Books cited by the Fathers and now lost have been condemned also Unseen Wherefore notwithstanding all that Casaubon has written there may very well be some Hermetick or Trismegistick Books Genuine though all of them be not such that is according to our after-declaration there may be such Books as were really Egyptian and not counterfeited by any Christian though perhaps not written by Hermes Trismegist himself nor in the Egyptian Language And as it cannot well be conceived how there should have beeen any counterfeit Egyptian Books had there been none at all Real so that there were some Real and Genuine will perhaps be rendered probable by these following Considerations That there was anciently amongst the Egyptians such a man as Thoth Theuth or Taut who together with Letters was the First Inventor of Arts and Sciences as Arithmetick Geometry Astronomy and of the Hieroglyphick Learning therefore called by the Greeks Hermes and by the Latins Mercurius cannot reasonably be denied it being a thing confirmed by general Fame in all Ages and by the Testimonies not only of Sanchuniathon a Phenician Historiographer who lived about the times of the Trojan War and wrote a Book concerning the Theology of the Egyptians and Manethos Sebennyta an Egyptian Priest contemporary with Ptol. Philadelphus but also of that grave Philosopher Plato who is said to have sojourned Thirteen years in Egypt that in his Philebus speaks of him as the First Inventor of Letters who distinguished betwixt Vowels and Consonants determining their several Numbers there calling him either a God or Divine Man but in his Phaedrus attributeth to him also the Invention of Arithmetick Geometry and Astronomy together with some ludicrous Recreations making him either a God or Demon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I have heard saith he that about Naucratis in Egypt there was one of the ancient Egyptian Gods to whom the Bird Ibis was sacred as his Symbol or Hieroglyphick the name of which Demon was Theuth In which place the Philosopher subjoyns also an Ingenious Dispute betwixt this Theuth and Thamus then King of Egypt concerning the Convenience and Inconvenience of Letters the Former boasting of that Invention 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as a Remedy for Memory and great Help to Wisdom but the Latter contending that it would rather beget Oblivion by the neglect of Memory and therefore was not so properly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Remedy for Memory as Reminiscence or the Recovery of things forgotten adding that it would also weaken and enervate Mens Natural Faculties by slugging them and rather beget 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Puffy Conceit and Opinion of Knowledge by a Multifarious Rabble of Indigested Notions than the Truth thereof Moreover since it is certain that the Egyptians were famous for Literature before the Greeks they must of necessity have some One or More Founders of Learning amongst them as the Greeks had and Thoth is the Only or First Person celebrated amongst them
That Perfect Happiness is a Speculative or Contemplative Energy maybe made manifest from hence because we account the Gods most of all Happy Now what Moral Actions can we attribute to them Whether those of Justice amongst one another as if it were not ridiculous to suppose the Gods to make Contracts and Bargains among themselves and the like Or else those of Fortitude and Magnanimity As if the Gods had their Fears Dangers and Difficulties to encounter withal Or those of Liberality as if the Gods had some such thing as Money too and there were among them Indigent to receive Alms. Or Lastly shall we attribute to them the Actions of Temperance but would not this be a Reproachful Commendation of the Gods to say that they conquer and master their vitious Lusts and appetites Thus running through all the Actions of Moral Virtue we find them to be small and mean and unworthy of the Gods And yet we all believe the Gods to live and consequently to Act unless we should suppose them perpetually to sleep as Endymion did Wherefore if all Moral Actions and therefore much more Mechanical Operations be taken away from that which Lives and Vnderstands what is there left to it besides Contemplation To which he there adds a further Argument also of the same thing Because other Animals who are depriv'd of Contemplation partake not of Happiness For to the Gods all their Life is Happy to men so far forth as it appoacheth to Contemplation but brute Animals that do not at all contemplate partake not at all of Happiness Where Aristotle plainly acknowledges a Plurality of Gods and that there is a certain Higher Rank of Beings above Men. And by the way we may here observe how from those words of his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All men suppose the Gods to live and from what follows in him that Opinion of some late Writers may be confuted that the Pagans generally worshipped the Inanimate Parts of the World as true and proper Gods Aristotle here telling us that they Universally agreed in this that the Gods were Animals Living and Understanding Beings and such as are therefore capable of Contemplation Moreover Aristotle in his Politicks writing of the means to conserve a Tyranny as he calls it sets down this for one amongst the rest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For a Prince or Monarch to seem to be always more than ordinarily sedulous about the Worship of the Gods because men are less afraid of suffering any Injustice from such Kings or Princes as they think to be Religiously disposed and devouâ—ly affected towards the Gods Neither will they be so apt to make conspiracies against such they supposing that the Gods will be their Abettors and Assistants Where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seems to be taken in a good sence and in way of Commendation for a Religious Person though we must confess that Aristotle himself does not here write so much like a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as a Meer Politician Likewise in his First Book De Coelo he writeth thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. All men have an Opinion or Perswasion That there are Gods And they who think so as well Bvrbarians as Greeks attribute the Highest place to that which is Divine as supposing the Immortal Heavens to be most accommodate to Immortal Gods Wherefore if there be any Divinity as unquestionably there is the Body of the Heavens must be acknowledged to be of a different kind from that of the Elements And in the following Book he tells us again That it is most agreeable 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to that Vaticination which all men have in their minds concerning the Gods to suppose the Heaven to be a Quintessence distinct from the Elements and therefore Incorruptible Where Aristotle affirmeth that men have generally 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Vaticination in their Minds concerning Gods to wit that Themselves are not the Highest Beings but that there is a Rank of Intellectual Beings superiour to men the chief of which is the Supreme Deity concerning whom there is indeed the Greatest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Vaticination of all We acknowledge it to be very true that Aristotle does not so much insist upon Demons as Plato and the generality of Pagans in that Age did and probably he had not so great a Belief of their Existence though he doth make mention of them also as when in his Metaphysicks speaking of Bodies compounded of the Elements he instanceth in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Animals and Demons and elsewhere he insinuates them to have Airy Bodies in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some perhaps would demand a Reason why the Soul that is in the Air is better and more immortal than that in Animals However whether Aristotle believed these Lower Demon-Gods or no it is certain that he acknowledged a Higher kind of Gods namely the Intelligences of all the Several Spheres if not also the Souls of them and the Stars which Spheres being according to the Astronomy then received Forty Seven in number he must needs acknowledge at least so many Gods Besides which Aristotle seems also to suppose another sort of Incorporeal Gods without the Heavens where according to him there is neither Body nor Place nor Vacuum nor Time in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They who exist there are such as are neither apt to be in a Place nor to wax old with Time nor is there any change at all in those things above the Highest Sphere but they being impassible and unalterable lead the best and most self-sufficient Life throughout all Eternity But this Passage is not without suspicion of being Supposititious Notwithstanding all which that Aristotle did assert One Supreme and Vniversal Numen is a thing also unquestionable For though it be granted that he useth the Singular 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as likewise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 many times Indefinitly for a God in General or any Divine Being and that such places as these have been oftentimes mistaken by Christian Writers as if Aristotle had meant the Supreme God in them yet it is nevertheless certain that he often useth those words also Emphatically for One only Supreme God As in that of his Metaphysicks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God seemeth to be a Cause and certain Principle to all things And also in his De Anima where he speaks of the Soul of the Heavens and its Circular Motion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neither is that a good Cause of the Circular Motion of the Heavens which they that is the Platonists call the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because it is Better that it should be so than otherwise as if God therefore ought to have made the Soul of the World such as to move the Heaven circularly because it was better for it to move so than otherwise but this being a Speculation that properly belongs to some other Science we
omne convenit Ex quo nata sunt omnia Cujus Spiritu vivimus Totum suis partibus inditum se sustinentem sua vi Cujus Consilio huic mundo providetur ut inconcussus eat actus suos explicet Cujus Decreto omnia fiunt Divinum Spiritum per omnia maxima minima aequali intentione diffusum Deum potentem omnium Deum illum maximum potentissimumque qui ipse vehit omnia Qui ubique omnibus praesto est Coeli Deorum omnium Deum a quo ista Numina quae singula adoramus colimus suspensa sunt and the like The Framer and Former of the Vniverse the Governour Disposer and keeper thereof Him upon whom all things depend The Mind and Spirit of the World The Artificer and Lord of this whole Mundane Fabrick To whom every name belongeth From whom all things spring By whose Spirit we live Who is in all his parts and susteineth himself by his own force By whose Counsel the World is provided for and carried on in its Course constantly and uninterruptedly By whose Decree all things are done The Divine Spirit that is diffused through all things both great and small with equal intention The God whose power extends to all things The Greatest and most Powerful God who doth himself support and uphold all things Who is present every where to all things The God of Heaven and of all the Gods upon whom are suspended all those other Divine Powers which we singly worship and adore Moreover we may here observe from St. Austin that this Seneca in a Book of his against Superstitions that is now lost did not only Highly extol the Natural Theology but also plainly censure and condemn the Civil Theology then received amongst the Romans and that with more Freedom and Vehemency than Varro had done the Fabulous or Theatrical and Poetical Theology Concerning a great part whereof he pronounced that a wise man would observe such things tanquam Legibus jussa non tanquam Diis grata only as commanded by the Laws he therein exercising Civil Obedience but not at all as Grateful to the Gods M. Fabius Quintilianus though no admirer of Seneca yet fully agreed with him in the same Natural Theology and sets down this as the generally received Notion or Definition of God Deum esse Spiritum omnibus partibus immistum That God is a Spirit mingled with and diffused through all the part◠of the World he from thence inferring Epicurus to be an Atheist notwithstanding that he verbally asserted Gods because he denyed a God according to this Generally received Notion he bestowing upon his Gods a circumscribed humane form and placing them between the Worlds And the Junior Pliny though he were a Persecutor of the Christians he concluding qualecunque esset quod faterentur pervicaciam certè inflexibilem obstinationem debere puniri that whatsoever their Religion were yet notwithstanding their Stubbornness and Inflexible Obstinacy ought to be punished and who compelled many of them to worship the Images of the Emperour and to sacrifice and pray to the Statues of the Pagan Gods and lastly to blaspheme Christ yet himself plainly acknowledged also One Supreme Universal Numen as may sufficiently appear from his Panegyrick Oration to Trajan where he is called Deus ille qui manifestus ac praesens Coelum ac Sydera insidet that God who is present with and inhabits the whole Heaven and Stars himself making a Solemn Prayer and Supplication to him both in the beginning and close thereof and sometimes speaking of him therein Singularly and in way of Eminency as in these words Occultat utrorumque Semina Deus plerumque Bonorum Malorumque Causae sub diversâ specie latent God hideth the Seeds of good and evil so that the causes of each often appear disguised to men L. Apuleius also whose pretended Miracles the Pagans endeavoured to confirm their Religion by as well as they did by those of Apollonius doth in sundry places of his writings plainly assert One Supreme and Vniversal Numen we shall only here set down one Cum Summus Deorum cuncta haec non solùm cogitationum ratione consideret sed Prima Media Vltima obeat compertaque intimae Providentiae ordinationis universitate Constantia regat Since the Highest of the Gods does not only consider all these things in his mind and Cogitation but also pass through and comprehend within himself the Beginning Middle and End of all things and constantly Govern all by his occult Providence Lastly Symmachus who was a zealous Stickler for the Restitution of Paganism declared the Pagans to worship One and the same God with the Christians but in several ways he conceiving that there was no necessity God should be worshipped by all after the same manner Aequum est quicquid omnes colunt VNVM putari Eadem spectamus Astra Commune Coelum est Idem nos Mundus involvit Quid interest qua quisque prudentia Verum requirat Vno Itinere non potest perveniri ad tam grande Secretum We ought in reason to think that it is One and the same Thing which all men worship As we all behold the same Stars have the same Common Heaven and are involved within the same World Why may not men pursue One and the same thing in different ways One Path is not enough to lead men to so Grand a Secret The Sence whereof is thus elegantly expressed by Prudentius Vno omnes sub sole siti vegetamur eodem Aere Communis cunctis viventibus Aura Sed quid sit qualisque Deus diversa secuti Quaerimus atque Viis longè distantibus Unum Imus ad Occultum suus est mos cuique genti Per quod iter properans eat ad tam Grande Profundum And again afterward Secretum sed grande nequit Rationis opertae Quaeri aliter quà m si sparsis via multiplicetur Tramitibus centenos terat orbita calles Quaesitura Deum variata indage latentem And the beginning of Prudentius his Confutation is this Longè aliud verum est Nam multa ambago viarum Anfractus dubios habet perplexius errat Sola errore caret simplex via nescia flecti In diverticulum biviis nec pluribus anceps c. We shall now instance also in some of the Latter Greek Writers Though the Author of the Book De Mundo were not Aristotle yet that he was a Pagan plainly appears from some passages thereof as where he approves of Sacrificing to the Gods and of Worshipping Heroes and Dead men as also because Apuleius would not otherwise have translated so much of that book and incorporated it into his De Mundo He therefore does not only commend this of Heraclitus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That there is one Harmonious System made out of all things and that All things are derived from One But doth himself also write excellently concerning the Supreme God whom he
apprehensions Thus that Roman Pontifex Scaevola in St. Austin declareth Expedire existimat falli in Religione Civitates That it was expedient as he thought that Cities and Commonwealths should be deceived in their Religion or have something False or Fabulous intermingled with it He giving this reason for the same Because the Natural and Philosophick Theology contained many things in it which though True yet would be hurtful for the Vulgar to know as for example Quod Verus Deus nec Sexum habeat nec Aetatem nec definita Corporis Membra That the True God hath neither Sex nor Age nor bodily Members and that Hercules and Aesculapius c. were not Gods but Men obnoxious to the same infirmities with others and the like And the Learned Varro in his Book of Religions publickly maintained the same Doctrine Varro de Religionibus loquens evidenter dicit Multa esse Vera quae vulgo scire non sit Vtile Multaque quae tametsi Falsa sint aliâ—er existimare Populum expediat ideò Graecos Teletas Mysteria taciturnitate parietibusque clausisse c That there were many things True in Religion which it was not convenient for the Vulgar to know as likewise many things False of which it was expedient they should think otherwise and that for this cause the Greeks enclosed their Teletae or Mysteries within walls and kept them under a Seal of Secrecy Upon which of Varro St. Austin thus noteth Hîc certè totum Consilium prodidit Sapientium per quos Civitates Populi regerentur Varro here plainly discovers and betrays the whole counsel and secrecy of States-men and Politicians by whom Cities and Nations were governed and their very Arcanum of Government namely this That People were to be deceived in their Religion for their own good and the good of their Governours The same Father there adding That Evil Demons were much gratified with this Doctrine and liked this Fraud and Imposture very well which gave them an advantage to Rule and Tyrannize as well over the Deceivers as the Deceived Lastly Strabo also though otherwise a grave and sober Writer speaks freely and broadly to the same purpose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is not possible that women and others of the Vulgar sort should be conducted and carried on towards Piety Holiness and Faith meerly by Philosophick Reason and Truth but this must be done by Superstition and that not without the help of Fables and Prodigious or Wonderful Narrations From whence it is plain that Strabo did not only allow a necessity of a Civil Theology besides the Natural and Philosophical but also of a Fabulous and Poetical one too And this is a thing the less to be wondâ—ed at in these Pagans because some Christians also seem to acknowledge a kind of truth herein Synesius himself writing after this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That which is easie and ordinary will be contemned by the Vulgar or Common People and therefore there is need of something Strange and Prodigious in Religion for them Flavius Josephus making this Free Acknowledgment concerning the Wise men among the Greeks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That they held the same things concerning God which the Jews did adds nothwithstanding afterwards 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That they were afraid to declare the Truth of this their Doctrine to the Vulgar prepossessed with other Opinions And indeed they did not think it safe to declare the Natural and True Theology promiscuously to all Plato himself intimating as much in these Words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That as it was hard to find out the Maker of this Vniverse so neither being found out could he be declared to the vulgar Wherefore since God was so hard to be understood they conceived it necessary that the Vulgar should be permitted to Worship him in his Works by Parts and Piecemeal according to the various Manifestations of himself that is should have a Civil Theology at least distinct from the Natural and Philosophical if not another Fabulous one too XXXV We have now dispatched the First of those Three Heads proposed to be insisted on viz. That the Pagans worshipped One and the same Supreme God under Many Personal Names so that much of their Polytheism was but Seeming and Phantastical and indeed nothing but the Polyonymy of One Supreme God they making Many Poetical and Political Gods of that One Natural God and thus worshipping God by Parts and Piece-meal according to that clear acknowledgement of Maximus Madaurensis before cited Vnius Summi Dei Virtutes per Mundanum Opus Diffusas nos multis Vocabulis invocamus dum Ejus quasi quaedam Membra carptim variis Supplicationibus prosequimur Totum colere videmur The vertues of the One Supreme God diffused throughout the whole World we Pagans invoke under many several Names and so prosecuting with our supplications his as it were Divided Members must needs be thought to worship him whole we leaving out nothing of him We shall proceed to the Second Head proposed That besides this Polyonymy of One Supreme God in the Poetical and Civil Theology of the Pagans which was their Seeming and Phantastick Polytheism they had another Real Polytheism also they acknowledging in their Natural and Philosophick Theology likewise a Multiplicity of Gods that is of Substantial Vnderstanding Beings Superiour to men really Existing in the world Which though they were called by them Gods yet were they not therefore supposed to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vnmade and Self-existent or Independent Beings but all of them One only excepted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Generated Gods according to the larger Notion of that word before declared that is though not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet at least 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though not as Made in time yet as Produced from a Superiour Cause Plutarch propounding this for one amongst his Platonick Questions Why 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Highest or Supreme God was called by Plato both The Father and Maker of all things gives this Reply to it in the Words before cited 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That perhaps he was said to be the Father of all the Generated Gods and of Men as he is also stiled in Homer but the Maker of all other Irrational and Inanimate Beings From which Passage of Plutarch's it plainly appears that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The One Highest God being every way 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vnmade and unproduced was thought to be the Maker or Father of all the other Gods therefore called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which is further plainly declared elsewhere by the same Plutarch in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Plato calleth the One Vnmade and Eternal God the Father and Maker of the World and of all other things Generated And though some of those Many Gods of Plato's were by him also called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Eternal yet were they likewise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
Being which is the proper Notion of a Creature So that the Animated World is by Plato made to be only the chief of all the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the Creature-Gods Wherefore it is plain that in this Trinity of some Platonists and Pythagoreans wherein the World is made to be the Third God there is a confused Jumble of Created and Vncreated Beings together For the First of those Gods is the Father and Fountain of all or the Original of the Godhead And the Second forasmuch as he is called by them both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Maker and the Opificer of the whole World he therefore can be no Creature neither whereas the Third which is said to be the World was by Numenius himself also expresly called both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Work or Thing Made that is plainly the Creature of both the Former Proclus thus fully represents his sence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Numenius called the First of the Three Gods the Father the Second of them the Maker and the Third the the Work or Thing Made so that according to Numenius there were two Opificers or Creators of the World the First and the Second God and the World it self that is the Thing Made and Created by them both is said to be the Third God And that this Notion of the Trinity is an Adulterated One may be also further concluded from hence because according to this Hypothesis they might have said that there were Three Hundred and more Gods as well as that there are Three since all the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Generated Gods might have come into the Number too as well as the World they being Parts thereof and Gods that differ not in kind from it but only in degree Wherefore these Philosophers ought not to have made a Trinity of Gods distinguished from all the rest but rather First to have distributed their Gods into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Eternal or Vncreated and Created Gods and then to have subdivided those Created Gods into the Whole World and the Parts thereof Animated But because it may be here alledged in favour of this Spurious Hypothesis of the Trinity That the World was accounted the Third God only by Accident in respect of its Soul which is properly that Third God though Numenius with others plainly affirm the World it self as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Work and Thing Made to be the Third we shall therefore reply to this that even the Soul of the Mundane Animal it self according to Timaeus and Plato and others is affirmed to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Generated God that is such as was produced from Non-existence into Being and therefore truly and properly a Creature Which Aristotle observing therefore took occasion to taxe Plato as contradicting himself in making the Soul of the World a Principle that is the Third God and yet supposing it to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not Eternal but Made or Created together with the Heaven of which something before Wherefore we conclude that this ancient Cabala of the Trinity was Depraved and Adulterated by those Platonists and Pythagoreans who made either the World it self or else 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Informing Soul of the World to be the Third Hypostasis thereof they Mingling Created and Vncreated Beings together in that which themselves notwithstanding call a Trinity of Causes and of Principles And we think it highly probable that this was the true Reason why Philo though he admitted the Second Hypostasis of the Platonick and Phythagorick if not Egyptian Trinity called by him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Divine Word and styled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Second God and as Eusebius adds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Second Cause yet he would not Platonize or Pythagorize any further so as to take in that Third God or Cause supposed by so many of them to be the Soul of the whole World as an Animal because he must then have offer'd violence to the Principles of his own Religion in making the whole Created World a God which Practice is by him condemned in the Pagans It is true that he somewhere sticks not to call God also the Soul of the World as well as the Mind thereof whether he meant thereby 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That God who is before the Word or else rather the Word it self the Second God according to him the Immediate Creator and Governour of the same nevertheless he does not seem to understand thereby such a deeply Immersed Soul as would make the World an Animal and a God but a more Elevated One that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Supermundane Soul To this First Depraviation of that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Theology of Divine Tradition and ancient Cabbala of the Trinity by many of the Platonists and Pythagoreans may be added another That some of them declaring the Second Hypostasis of their Trinity to be the Archetypal World or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Philo calls it the World that is compounded and made up of Ideas and conteineth in it all those kinds of things Intelligibly that are in this Lower World Sensibly and further concluding that all these several Ideas of this Archetypal and Intelligible World are really so many distinct Substances Animals and Gods have thereby made that Second Hypostasis not to be One God but a Congeries and Heap of Gods These are those Gods commonly called by them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Intelligible Gods not as before in way of distinction from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Sensible Gods which is a more general notion of the word but from from those other Gods of theirs afterwards to be insisted on also called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Intellectual Gods Proclus upon Plato's Politia concludes that there is no Idea of Evil for this reason because if there were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that very Idea of Evil also would it self be a God because Every Idea is a God as Parmenides hath affirmed Neither was Plotinus himself though otherwise more sober altogether uninfected with this Phantastick Conceit of the Ideas being all of them Gods he writing thus concerning the Second God The First Mind or Intellect 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That he being begotten by the First God that is by way of Emanation and from Eternity generated all Entities together with himself the Pulchritude of the Ideas which are all Intelligible Gods Apuleius also as hath been already noted grosly and fulsomely imputes the same to Plato in those words Quos Deos Plato existimat Veros Incorporales Animales sine ullo neque fine neque exordio sed prorsus ac retrò aeviternos ingenio ad summam beatitudinem porrecto c. And he with Julian and others reduce the Greater part of the Pagan Gods to these Ideas of
Person the Son or Word a Multitude of Particular Sons or Words all Superiour to the Third Person the Holy Ghost For this is plainly to make a Breach upon the Deity to confound the Creator and Creature together and to suppose a company of such Creaturely Gods as imply a manifest contradiction in the very Notion of them Wherefore we shall here observe that this was not the Catholick Doctrine of the Platonick School that there were such Henades and Noes but only a private Opinion of some Doctors amongst them and that of the latter sort too For First as for those Henades as there are not the least Footsteps of them to be found any where in Plato's Writings so may it be plainly gather'd from them that he supposed no such thing Forasmuch as in his Second Epistle where he describes his Trinity he doth not say of the First 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 about the First are the First as he doth of the Second 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and of the Third 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 about the Second are the Second and about the Third the Third but of the First he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 About the King of all things are all things and for his sake are all Things and he is the cause of all Things that are good Wherefore here are no Particular Henades and Autoagathotetes Vnities and Goodnesses about the First 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 One and Good but all Good things are about him he being both the Efficient and Final Cause of all Moreover Plotinus throughout all his Works discovers not the Least suspicion neither of these Henades and Agathotetes this Language being scarcely to be found any where in the Writings of any Platonists Seniour to Proclus who also as if he were conscious that this assumentum to the Platonick Theology were not so defensible a thing doth himself sometime as it were tergiversate and decline it by equivocating in the Word Henades taking them for the Ideas or the Intelligible Gods before mentioned As perhaps Synesius also uses the Word in his First Hymn when God is called by him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The First Henad of Henades and the First Monad of Monades That is The First Idea of Good and Cause of all the Ideas And as for the Particular Noes Minds or Intellects these indeed seem to have crept up somewhat before Plotinus his time he besides the Passage before cited elsewhere giving some Intimations of them as Enn. 6. L. 4. c. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But how can there be many Souls and many Minds and not only one but many Entia From which and other places of his Ficinus concluded Plotinus himself really to have asserted above the Rank of Souls a Multitude of other Substantial Beings called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Minds or Intellects Nevertheless Plotinus speaking of them so uncertainly and making such an Union betwixt all these Noes and their Particular Respective Souls it may well be question'd whether he really took them for any thing else but the Heads and Summities of those Souls he supposing that all Souls have a Mind in them the Participation of the First Mind as also a Vnity too the Participation of the First Vnity whereby they are capable of being conjoyn'd with both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There must needs be Mind in us as also the Principle and Cause of Mind God Not as if he were divided but because though remaining in himself yet he is also considered in Many as capable to receive him As the Centre though it remain in it self yet is it also in every Line drawn from the Circumference each of them by a certain Point of its own touching it And by some such Thing in us is it that we are capable of touching God and of being Vnited to him when we direct our Intention towards him And in the next Chapter he adds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. That though we have these things in us yet do we not perceive them being for the most part idle and asleep as to these higher Energies as some never at all exercise them However those do always act Mind and that which is before Mind Vnity but every thing which is in our Souls is not perceived by us unless come to the Whole when we dispose our selves towards it c. Where Plotinus seems to make the Noes or Minds to be nothing else but something in Souls whereby they partake of the First Mind And it is said of Porphyrius who was well acquainted with Plotinus his Philosophy that he quite discarded and rejected these Noes or Intellects as Substances really distinct from the First Mind and separate from Souls And it is certain that such Minds as these are no where plainly mentioned by Plato he speaking only of Minds in Souls but not of any Abstract and Separate Minds save only one And though some might think him to have given an Intimation of them in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before mentioned his Second about the Second Things or Second Things about the Second yet by these may very well be understood the Ideas as by the Third Things about the Third all Created Beings Wherefore we may conclude that this Platonick or rather Pseudo-Platonick Trinity which confounds the Differences betwixt God and the Creature and that probably in favour of the Pagan Polytheism and Idolatry is nothing so agreable to Reason it self as that Christian Trinity before described which distinctly declares how far the Deity goes and where the Creature begins namely that the Deity extends so far as to this Whole Trinity of Hypostases and that all other things whatsoever this Trinity of Persons only excepted are truly and properly their Creatures produced by the joynt concurrence and Influence of them all they being really but One God But it is already manifest that all the forementioned Depravations and Adulterations of that Divine Cabbala of the Trinity and that Spurious Trinity described which because asserted by some Platonists was called Platonical in way of distinction from the Christian cannot be justly charged neither upon Plato himself nor yet upon all his Followers Universally But on the contrary we shall now make it appear that Plato and some of the Platonists reteined much of the Ancient Genuine Cabbala and made a very near approach to the True Christian Trinity forasmuch as their Three Hypostases distinguish'd from all their other Gods seem to have been none of them accounted Creatures but all other things whatsoever the Creatures of them First therefore we affirm that Plato himself does in the beginning of his Timaeus very carefully distinguish betwixt God and the Creature he determining the Bounds between them after this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We being here to treat concerning the Vniverse judge it necessary to begin with a Distinction betwixt that which
to the First God and to the Second Cause and to the Third the Soul of the World they calling this also the Third God Wherefore we think there is good reason to conclude that those Eternal or Vncreated Gods of Plato in his Timaeus whose Image or Statue this whole Generated or Created World is said by him to be were no other than his Trinity of Divine Hypostases the Makers or Creators thereof And it was before as we conceive rightly guessed that Cicero also was to be understood of the same Eternal Gods as Platonizing when he affirmed A Diis omnia à Principio facta That all things were at first made by the Gods and à Providentiâ Deorum Mundum omnes Mundi partes constitutas esse That the World and all its Parts were constituted by the Providence of the Gods But that the Second Hypostasis in Plato's Trinity viz. Mind or Intellect though said to have been Generated or to have Proceeded by way of Emanation from the First called Tagathon The Good was notwithstanding unquestionably acknowledged to have been Eternal or without Beginning might be proved by many express Testimonies of the most Genuine Platonists but we shall here content our selves only with Two one of Plotinus writing thus concerning it Enn. 5. L. 1. c. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Let all Temporal Generation here be quite banished from our thoughts whilst we treat of things Eternal or such as alwayes are we attributing Generation to them only in respect of Causality and Order but not of Time And though Plotinus there speak particularly of the Second Hypostasis or Nous yet does he afterwards extend the same also to the Third Hypostasis of that Trinity called Psyche or the Mundane Soul which is there said by him likewise to be the Word of the Second as that Second was the Word of the First 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That which is Generated from what is better than Mind can be no other than Mind because Mind is the Best of all things and every thing else is after it and Junior to it as Psyche or Soul which is in like manner the Word of Mind and a certain Energy thereof as Mind is the Word and Energy of the First Good The other Testimony is of Porphyrius cited by S. Cyril out of the Fourth Book of his Philosophick History where he sets down the Doctrine of Plato after this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Wherefore we ought not to entertain any other Principles but having placed First the Simple Good to set Mind or the Supreme Intellect next after it and then the Vniversal Soul in the third place For this is the right order according to Nature neither to make More Intelligibles or Universal Principles nor yet Fewer than these three For he that will contract the number and make fewer of them must of necessity either suppose Soul and Mind to be the same or else Mind and the First Good But that all these three are divers from one another hath been often demonstrated by us It remains now to consider that if there be more than these three Principles what Natures they should be c. Thirdly as all these three Platonick Hypostases are Eternal and Necessarily Existent so are they plainly supposed by them not to be Particular but Vniversal Beings that is such as do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 contain and comprehend the whole World under them and preside over all things which is all one as to say that they are each of them Infinite and Omnipotent For which reason are they also called by Platonick Writers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Principles and Causes and Opificers of the whole World First as for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mind or Vnderstanding Whereas the Old Philosophers before Plato as Anaxagoras Archelaus c. and Aristotle after him supposed Mind and Vnderstanding to be the very First and Highest Principle of all which also the Magick or Caldee Oracles take notice of as the most Common opinion of mankind 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That Mind is generally by all men look'd upon as the First and Highest God Plato considering that Vnity was in order of Nature before Number and Multiplicity and that there must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Intelligible before Intellect so that Knowledge could not be the First and Lastly that there is a Good transcending that of Knowledge made One most Simple Good the Fountain and Original of all things and the First Divine Hypostatis and Mind or Intellect only the Second next to it but Inseparable from it and most nearly Cognate with it For which cause in his Philebus though he agree thus far with those other Ancient Philosophers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Mind alwayes rules over the whole Vniverse yet does he add afterwards 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Mind is not absolutely the First Principle but Cognate with the Cause of all things and that therefore it rules over all things with and in a kind of subordination to that First Principle which is Tagathon or the Highest Good Where when Plato affirms that Mind or his Second Divine Hypostasis is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the First it is all one as if he should have said that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with it all which words are used by Athanasius as Synonymous with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Co-Essential or Con-Substantial So that Plato here plainly and expresly agrees or Symbolizes not with the Doctrine of Arius but with that of the Nicene Council and Athanasius that the Second Hypostasis of the Trinity whether called Mind or Word or Son is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Co-Essential or Con-Substantial with the First and therefore not a Creature And then as for the Third Hypostasis called Psyche or the Superiour Mundane Soul Plato in his Cratylus bestowing the name of Zeus that is of the Supreme God upon it and etymologizing the same from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 adds these words concerning it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There is nothing which is more the Cause of Life to us and all other Animals than this Prince and King of all things And that therefore God was called by the Greeks Zeus because it is by him that all Animals live And yet that all this was properly meant by him of the Third Hypostasis of his Trinity called Psyche is manifest from those words of his that follow where he expounds the Poetick Mythology before mentioned making Zeus to be the Son of Chronos 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is agreeable to reason that Zeus should be the Progeny or Off-spring of a certain great Mind Now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are equivalent Terms
which also was the Demiurgus the Maker both of other Souls and of the whole World As Plato had before expresly affirmed him to be the Inspirer of all Life and Creator of Souls or the Lord and Giver of Life And likewise declared that amongst all those things which are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Congenerous and Cognate with our Humane Souls there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nothing any where to be found at all like unto it So that Plato though he were also a Star-worshipper and Idolater upon other grounds yet in all probability would he not at all have approved of Plotinus his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our Souls being of the same Species with that Third Hypostasis of the Divine Triad but rather have said in the Language of the Psalmist It is he that hath made us and not we our selves we are his People and the Sheep of his Pasture Notwithstanding all which a Christian Platonist or Platonick Christian would in all probability Apologize for Plato himself and the ancient and most Genuine Platonists and Pythagoreans after this manner First That since they had no Scriptures Councils nor Creeds to direct their steps in the Darkness of this Mystery and to confine their Language to a Regular Uniformity but Theologized all Freely and Boldly and without any Scrupulosity every one according to his own private apprehensions it is no wonder at all if they did not only speak many times unadvisedly and inconsistently with their own Principles but also plainly wander out of the Right Path. And that it ought much rather to be wondred at that living so long before Christianity as some of them did they should in so Abstruse a Point and Dark a Mystery make so near an approach to the Christian Truth afterwards revealed than that they should any where fumble or fall short of the Accuracy thereof They not only extending the True and Real Deity to Three Hypostases but also calling the Second of them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Reason or Word too as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mind or Intellect and likewise the Son of the First Hypostasis the Faâ—her and affirming him to be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Artificer and Cause of the whole World and Lastly describing him as the Scripture doth to be the Image the Figure or Character and the Splendour or Brightness of the First This I say our Christian Platonist supposes to be much more wonderful that this so Great and Abstruse a Mystery of Three Eternal Hypostases in the Deity should thus by Pagan Philosophers so long before Christianity have been asserted as the Principle and Original of the whole World it being more indeed than was acknowledged by the Nicene Fathers themselves they then not so much as determining that the Holy Ghost was an Hypostasis much less that he was God But Particularly as to their Gradual Subordination of the Second Hypostasis to the First and of the Third to the First and Second our Platonick Christian doubtless would therefore plead them the more excusable because the Generality of Christian Doctors for the First Three Hundred years after the Apostles times plainly asserted the same as Justin Martyr Athenagoras Tatianus Irenaeus the Author of the Recognitions Tertullian Clemens Alexandrinus Origen Gregorius Thaumaturgus Dionysius of Alexandria Lactantius and many others All whose Testimonies because it would be too tedious to set down here we shall content our selves only with one of the last mentioned Et Pater Filius Deus est Sed Ille quasi exuberans Fons Hic tanquam defluens ex eo Rivus Ille tanquam Sol Hic tanquam Radius à Sole porrectus Both the Father and the Son is God But he as it were an Exuberant Fountain this as a Stream derived from him He like to the Sun This like to a Ray extended from the Sun And though it be true that Athanasius writing against the Arians does appeal to the Tradition of the Ancient Church and amongst others cites Origen's Testimony too yet was this only for the Eternity and Divinity of the Son of God but not at all for such an Absolute Co-equality of him with the Father as would exclude all Dependence Subordination and Inferiority those Ancients so Unanimously agreeing therein that they are by Petavius therefore taxed for Platonism and having by that means corrupted the Purity of the Christian Faith in this Article of the Trinity Which how it can be reconciled with those other Opinions of Ecclesiastick Tradition being a Rule of Faith and the Impossibility of the Visible Churches Erring in any Fundamental Point cannot easily be understood However this General Tradition or Consent of the Christian Church for Three Hundred years together after the Apostles Times though it cannot Justifie the Platonists in any thing discrepant from the Scripture yet may it in some measure doubtless plead their excuse who had no Scripture Revelation at all to guide them herein and so at least make their Error more Tolerable or Pardonable Moreover the Platonick Christian would further Apologize for these Pagan Platonists after this manner That their Intention in thus Subordinating the Hypostases of their Trinity was plainly no other than to exclude thereby a Plurality of Co-ordinate and Independent Gods which they supposed an absolute Co-equality of them would infer And that they made only so much Subordination of them as was both necessary to this purpose and unavoidable the Juncture of them being in their Opinion so close that there was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nothing Intermedious or that could possibly be Thrust in between them But now again on the otherhand whereas the only ground of the Co-Equality of the Persons in the Holy Trinity is because it cannot well be conceived how they should otherwise all be God since the Essence of the Godhead being Absolute Perfection can admit of no degrees these Platonists do on the contrary contend that notwithstanding that Dependence and Subordination which they commonly suppose in these Hypostases there is none of them for all that to be accounted Creatures but that the General Essence of the Godhead or the Vncreated Nature truly and properly belongeth to them all according to that of Porphyrius before cited 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Essence of the Godhead proceedeth to Three Hypostases Now these Platonists conceive that the Essence of the Godhead as common to all the Three Hypostases of their Trinity consisteth besides Perfect Intellectuality in these Following things First In Being Eternal which as we have already showed was Plato's Distinctive Character betwixt God and the Creature That whatsoever was Eternal is therefore Vncreated and whatsoever was not Eternal is a Creature He by Eternity meaning the having not only no Beginning but also a Permanent Duration Again In having not a Contingent but Necessary Existence and therefore being Absolutely Vndestroyable which perhaps is included also in the Former Lastly In being not Particular but
Trinity was doubtless Anti-Arian or else the Arian Trinity Anti-Platonick the Second and Third Hypostases in the Platonick Trinity being both Eternal Infinite and Immutable And as for those Platonick 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Gradations so much spoken of these by St. Cyril's leave were of a different Kind from the Arian there being not the Inequality of Creatures in them to the Creator Wherefore Socrates the Ecclesiastick Historian not without Cause wonders how those Two Presbyters Georgius and Timotheus should adhere to the Arian Faction since they were accounted such great Readers of Plato and Origen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It seems to me wonderful how those Two Persons should persist in the Arian Perswasion one of them having always Plato in his hands and the other continually breathing Origen Since Plato no where affirmeth his First and Second Cause as he was wont to call them to have had any beginning of their Existence and Origen every where confesseth the Son to be Coeternal with the Father Besides which Another Reason for this Apology of the Christian Platonist was because as the Platonick Pagans after Christianity did approve of the Christian Doctrine concerning the Logos as that which was exactly agreeable with their own so did the Generality of the Christian Fathers before and after the Nicene Council represent the Genuine Platonick Trinity as really the same thing with the Christian or as approaching so near to it that they differed chiefly in Circumstances or the manner of Expression The Former of these is Evident from that famous Passage of Amelius Contemporary with Plotinus recorded by Eusebius St. Cyril and Theodoret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And this was the Logos or Word by whom Existing from Eternity according to Heraclitus all things were made and whom that Barbarian also placeth in the rank and dignity of a Principle affirming him to have been with God and to be God and that all things were made by him and that whatsoever was made was Life and Being in him As also that he descended into a Body and being cloathed in Flesh appeared as a Man though not without demonstration of the Divinity of his Nature But that afterwards being Loosed or Separated from the same he was Deified and became God again such as he was before he came down into a Mortal Body In which words Amelius speaks favourably also of the Incarnation of that Eternal Logos And the same is further manifest from what St. Austin writeth concerning a Platonist in his time Initium Sancti Evangelii cui nomen est secundum Johannem quidam Platonicus sicut à sancto Sene Simpliciano qui posteà Mediolanensi Ecclesiae praesedit Episcopus solebamus audire aureis Literis conscribendum per omnes Ecclesias in locis eminentissimis proponendum esse dicebat We have often heard from that holy man Simplicianus afterward Bishop of Millain that a certain Platonist affirmed the beginning of St. John 's Gospel deserved to be writ in Letters of Gold and to be set up in all the most Eminent places throughout the Christian Churches And the latter will sufficiently appear from these following Testimonies Justin Martyr in his Apology affirmeth of Plato 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. That he gave the Second place to the Word of God and the Third to that Spirit which is said to have moved upon the waters Clemens Alexandrinus speaking of that Passage in Plato's Second Epistle to Dionysius concerning the First Second and Third writeth thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I understand this no otherwise than that the Holy Trinity is signified thereby the Third being the Holy Ghost and the Second the Son by whom all things were made according to the Will of the Father Origen also affirmeth the Son of God to have been plainly spoken of by Plato in his Epistle to Hermias and Coriscus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Celsus who pretendeth to know all things and who citeth so many other passages out of Plato doth purposely as I suppose dissemble and conceal that which he wrote concerning the Son of God in his Epistle to Hermias and Coriscus where he calls him the God of the whole Vniverse and the Prince of all things both present and future afterwards speaking of the Father of this Prince and Cause And again elsewhere in that Book he writeth to the same purpose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neither would Celsus here speaking of Chistians making Christ the Son of God take any notice of that passage in Plato 's Epistle before mentioned concerning the Framer and Governour of the whole world as being the Son of God lest he should be compelled by the Authority of Plato whom he so often magnifieth to agree with this Doctrine of ours that the Demiurgus of the whole World is the Son of God but the First and Supreme Deity his Father Moreover St. Cyprian or who ever were the Author of the Book inscribed De Spiritu Sancto affirmeth the Platonists First and Vniversal Psyche to be the same with the Holy Ghost in the Christian Theology in these words Hujus Sempiterna Virtus Divinitas cum in propria natura ab Inquisitoribus Mundi antiquis Philosophis propriè investigari non posset Subtilissimis tamen intuiti conjecturis Compositionem Mundi distinctis Elementorum affectibus praesentem omnibus Animam adfuisse dixerunt quibus secundum genus ordinem singulorum vitam praeberet motum intransgressibiles figeret Metas Stabilitatem assignaret Vniversam hanc Vitam hunc motum hanc rerum Essentiam Animam Mundi vocaverunt In the next place Eusebius Caesariensis gives a full and clear Testimony of the Concordance and Agreement of the Platonick at least as to the main with the Christian Trinity which he will have to have been the Cabala of the ancient Hebrews thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The Oracles of the Hebrews placing the Holy Ghost after the Father and the Son in the Third Rank and acknowledging a Holy and Blessed Trinity after this manner so as that this Third Power does also transcend all Created Nature and is the First of those Intellectual Substances which proceed from the Son and the Third from the First Cause see how Plato Enigmatically declareth the same things in his Epistle to Dionysius in these words c. These things the Interpreters of Plato refer to a First God and to a Second Cause and to a Third the Soul of the World which they call also The Third God And the Divine Scriptures in like manner rank the Holy Trinity of Father Son and Holy Ghost in the place or degree of a Principle But it is most observable what Athanasius himself affirmeth of the Platonists that though they derived the Second Hypostasis of their Trinity from the First and the Third from the Second yet they supposed both their Second and Third Hypostases to be Vncreated and therefore does he send the Arians to
though Formally Idolaters according to their own false Hypothesis yet were not Materially and Really so whereas these Religious Angel and Saint-Worshippers must be as well Materially as Formally such And here it is observable that these Ancient Fathers made no such Distinction of Religious Worship into Latria as peculiar to the Supreme God it being that whereby he is adored as Self-Existent and Omnipotent or the Creator of all and Dulia such an Inferiour Religious Worship as is communicable to Creatures but concluded of Religious Worship Universally and without Distinction that the due Object of it all was the Creator only and not any Creature Thus Athanasius plainly in his Third Oration 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If the Son or Word of God were to be Worshipped though a Creature because transcending us in glory and dignity then ought every Inferiour Being to Worship what is Superiour to it Whereas the case is otherwise For a Creature doth not Religiously worship a Creature but only God the Creator Now they who distinguish Religious Worship into Latria and Dulia must needs suppose the Object of it in general to be that which is Superiour to us and not the Creator only which is here contradicted by Athanasius But because it was objected against these Orthodox Fathers by the Arians that the Humanity of our Saviour Christ which is unquestionably a Creature did share in their Religious Worship also it is worth the while to see what account Athanasius gives of this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We give no Religious Worship to any Creature far be it from us For this is the Errour of the Pagans and of the Arians But We Worship the Word of God the Lord of the Creation Incarnated For though the Flesh of Christ considered alone by it self were but a part of the Creatures nevertheless was it made the Body of God And we neither Worship this Body by it self alone divided from the Word nor yet intending to worship the Word do we remove it at a great distance from this flesh but knowing that of the Scripture The Word was made Flesh we look upon this Word even in the Flesh as God And again to the same purpose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let these Arians Know at length that we who Worship the Lord in Flesh Worship no Creature but only the Creator cloathed with a Creaturely Body And for the same cause was it that Nestorius afterwards dividing the Word from the Flesh the Divinity of Christ from the Humanity and not acknowledging such an Hypostatick Vnion betwixt them as he ought but nevertheless Religiously Worshipping our Saviour Christ was therefore branded by the Christian Church with the Name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Man-Worshipper or Idolater To conclude they who excuse themselves from being Idolaters no otherwise than because they do not give that very same Religious Worship to Saints and Angels which is pecular to God Almighty and consists in honouring him as Self-Existent and the Creator of all things but acknowledge those others to be Creatures Suppose that to be Necessary to Idolatry which is Absolutely Impossible viz. to acknowledge more Omnipotents as Creators of all than One or to account Creatures as such Creators as they imply all those to be Uncapable of Idolatry who acknowledge One Supreme God the Creator of the whole World which is directly contradictious to the Doctrine of the Ancient Church Hitherto in way of Answer to an Atheistick Objection against the Naturality of the Idea of God as including Oneliness in it from the Pagan Polytheism have we largely proved that at least the Civilized and Intelligent Pagans generally acknowledged One Sovereign Numen and that their Polytheism was partly but Phantastical nothing but the Polyonymy of one Supreme God or the Worshipping him under different Names and Notions according to his several Vertues and Manifestations And that though besides this they had another Natural and Real Polytheism also yet this was only of Many Inferiour or Created Gods Subordinate to One Supreme 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Vncreated Which notwithstanding is not so to be understood as if we did confidently affirm that Opinion of Many Independent Deities never to have so much as entred into the Mind of any Mortal For since Humane Nature is so Mutable and Depravable as that notwithstanding the Connate Idea and Prolepsis of God in the Minds of Men some unquestionably do degenerate and lapse into Atheism there can be no reason why it should be thought absolutely impossible for any ever to entertain that false Conceit of More Independent Deities But as for Independent Gods Invisible we cannot trace the footsteps of such a Polytheism as this any where nor find any more than a Ditheism of a Good and Evil Principle Only Philo and others seem to have conceived That amongst the ancient Pagans some were so grosly sottish as to suppose a Plurality of Independent Gods Visible and to take the Sun and Moon and all the Stars for Such However if there were any such and these Writers were not mistaken as it frequently happened it is certain that they were but very few because amongst the most Barbarian Pagans at this day there is hardly any Nation to be found without an acknowledgment of a Sovereign Deity as appears from all those Discoveries which have been made of them since the improvement of Navigation Wherefore what hath been hitherto declared by us might well be thought a sufficient Answer to the forementioned Atheistick Objection against the Idea of God Notwithstanding which when we wrote the Contents of this Chapter we intended a further Account of the Natural and Real Polytheism of the Pagans and their Multifarious Idolatry chiefly in order to the Vindication of the Truth of Christianity against Atheists forasmuch as one grand Design hereof was unquestionably to destroy the Pagan Polytheism and Idolatry which consisted in Worshipping the Creature besides the Creator But we are very Sensible that we have been surprized in the Length of this Chapter which is already swelled into a Disproportionate Bigness by means whereof we cannot comprehend within the compass of this Volume all that belongs to the Remaining Contents together with such a Full and Copious Confutation of the Atheistick Grounds as was intended Wherefore we shall here Divide the Chapter and reserve those Remaining Contents together with a further Confutation of Atheism for another Volume which God affording Life Health and Leisure we intend shall follow Only subjoyning in the mean time a Short and Compendious Confutation of all the Atheistick Arguments proposed A CONFUTATION OF ATHEISM CHAP. V. HAving in the Second Chapter revealed all the Dark Mysteries of Atheism and producâ—d the utmost strength of that Cause and in the Tâ—ird made an Introduction to the Coâ—â—utation of those Atheistick Grounds by representing all the several Forms and Schemes of Atheism and shewing both thâ—ir Disagreements amongst themselves and wherein they all agree together
Dark denying it to be a Rule and Measure of Truth His own words are these There are Two Species of Knowledge the One Genuine the other Dark or Obscure The Dark and Obscure Knowledge is Seeing Hearing Smelling Tasting Touching But the Genuine Knowledge is another more Hidden and Recondit To which purpose there is another Fragment also of this Democritus preserved by the same Sextus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bitter and Sweet Hot and Cold are only in Opinion or Phancy Colour is only in opinion Atoms and Vacuum alone in Truth and Reality That which is thought to be are Sensibles but these are not according to Truth but Atoms and Vacuum only Now the chief Ground of this Rational Discovery of the ancient Atomists that Sensible things as Heat and Cold Bitter and Sweet Red and Green are no Real Qualities in the Objects without but only our own Phancies was because in Body there are no such things Intelligible but only Magnitude Figure Site Motion and Rest. Of which we have not only Sensible Ideas Passively impressed upon us from without but also Intelligible Notions Actively Exerted from the Mind it self Which Latter notwithstanding because they are not unaccompanied with Sensible Phantasms are by many unskilfully confounded with them But besides these we have other Intelligible Notions or Ideas also which have no Genuine Phantasms at all belonging to them Of which whosoever doubts may easily be satisfied and convinced by reading but a Sentence or two that he understands in any Book almost that shall come next to his hand and reflexively examining himself whether he have a Phantasm or Sensible Idea belonging to every Word or no. For whoever is modest and ingenuous will quickly be forced to confess that he meets with many Words which though they have a Sence or Intelligible Notion yet have no Genuine Phantasm belonging to them And we have known some who were confidently engaged in the other Opininon being put to read the beginning of Tully's Offices presently non-plust and confounded in that first word Quanquam they being neither able to deny but that there was a Sence belonging to it nor yet to affirm that they had any Phantasm thereof save only of the Sound or Letters But to prove that there are Cogitations not subject to Corporeal Sense we need go no further than this very Idea or Description of God A Substance Absolutely Perfect Infinitely Good Wise and Powerful Necessarily Self-existent and the Cause of all other things Where there is not One Word unintelligible to him that hath any Uunderstanding in him and yet no Considerative and Ingenuous Person can pretend that he hath a Genuine Phantasm or Sensible Idea answering to any one of those words either to Substance or to Absolutely Perfect or to Infinitely or to Good or to Wise or to Powerful or to Necessity or to Self-existence or to Cause or indeed to All or Other or Things Wherefore it is nothing but want of Meditation together with a Fond and Sottish Dotage upon Corporeal Sense which hath so far imposed upon some as to make them believe that they have not the least Cogitation of any thing not subject to Corporeal Sense or that there is nothing in Humane Vnderstanding or Conception which was not First in Bodily Sense a Doctrine highly favourable to Atheism But since it is certain on the contrary that we have many Thoughts not Subject to Sense it is manifes◠that whatsoever falls not under External Sense is not therefore Vnconceivable and Nothing Which whosoever asserts must needs affirm Life and Cogitation it self Knowledge or Vnderstanding Reason and Memory Volition and Appetite things of the greatest Moment and Reality to be Nothing but mere Words without any Significaetion Nay Phancy and Sense it self upon this Hypothesis could hardly scape from becoming Non-Entities too forasmuch as neither Phancy nor Sense falls under Sense but only the Objects of them we neither seeing Vision nor feeling Taction nor hearing Audition much less hearing Sight or seeing Tast or the like Wherefore though God should be never so much Corporeal as some Theists have conceived him to be yet since the Chief of his Essence and as it were his Inside must by these be acknowledged to consist in Mind Wisdom and Vnderstanding he could not possibly as to this fall under Corporeal Sense Sight or Touch any more than Thought can But that there is Substance Incorporeal also and therefore in it self altogether Insensible and that the Deity is such is demonstrated elsewhere We grant indeed that the Evidence of Particular Bodies existing Hîc Nunc without us doth necessarily depend upon the Information of Sense but yet nevertheless the Certainty of this very Evidence is not from Sense alone but from a Complication of Reason and Vnderstanding together with it Where Sense the only Evidence of things there could be no Absolute Truth and Falshood nor Certainty at all of any thing Sense as such being only Relative to Particular Persons Seeming and Phantastical and obnoxious to much Delusion For if our Nerves and Brain be inwardly so moved and affected as they would be by such an Object present when indeed it is absent and no other Motion or Sensation in the mean time prevail against it and obliterate it then must that Object of necessity seem to us present Moreover those Imaginations that spring and bubble from the Soul it self are commonly taken for Sensations by us when asleep and sometimes in Melancholick and Phanciful Persons also when awake That Atheistick Principle that there is no Evidence at all of any thing as Existing but only from Corporeal Sense is plainly contradicted by the Atomick Atheists themselves When they assert Atoms and Vacuum to be the Principles of all things and the Exuvious Images of Bodies to be the Causes both of Sight and Cogitation for Single Atoms and those Exuvious Images were never Seen nor Felt and Vacuum or Empty Space is so far from being Sensible that these Atheists themselves allow it to be the One Only Incorporeal Wherefore they must here go beyond the Ken of Sense and appeal to Reason only for the Existence of these Principles as Protagoras one of them in Plato professedly doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Have a Care that none of the Prophane and Vninitiated in the Mysteries over-hear you By the Prophane I mean saith he those who think nothing to Exist but what they can feel with their Fingers and exclude all that is Invisible out of the Rank of Being Were Existence to be allowed to nothing that doth not fall under Corporeal Sense then must we deny the Existence of Soul and Mind in our selves and others because we can neither Feel nor See any such thing Whereas we are certain of the Existence of our own Souls partly from an inward Consciousness of our own Cogitations and partly from that Principle of Reason That Nothing can not Act. And the Existence of other Individual Souls is manifest to us
Animals the True and Proper Cause of Motion or the Determination thereof at least is not the Matter it self Organized but the Soul either as Cogitative or Plastickly-Self Active Vitally united thereunto and Naturally Ruling over it But in the whole World it is either God himsel◠Originally impressing a certain Quantity of Motion upon the Matter of the Universe and constantly conserving the same according to that of the Sripture In him we Live Move which seems to have been the Sence also of that Noble Agrigentine Poet and Philosopher when he described God to be only A Pure or Holy Mind that with swift thoughts agitates the whole World or else it is Instrumentally an Inferiour Created Spirit Soul or Life of Nature that is a Subordinate Hylarchical Principle which hath a Power of Moving Matter Regularly according to the Direction of a Superiour Perfect Mind And thus do we see again that Ignorance of Causes is the Seed of Atheism and not of Theism no Atheists being able to assign a true Cause of Motion the Knowledge whereof plainly leadeth to a God Furthermore those Atheists who acknowledge no other Principle of things but Sensless Matter Fortuitously moved must needs be Ignorant also of the Cause of that Grand Phaenomenon called by Aristotle the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Well and Fit in Nature that is of the most Artificial Frame of the whole Mundane System in General and of the Bodies of Animals in Particular together with the Conspiring Harmony of all For they who boasted themselves able to give Natural Causes of all things whatsoever without a God can give no other Cause at all of this Phaenomenon but only that the World Happened by Chance to be thus made as it is Now they who make Fortune and Chance to be the only Cause of this so Admirable Phaenomenon the most Regular and Artificial Frame and Harmony of the Vniverse they either make the meer Absence and Want of a Cause to be a Cause Fortune and Chance being nothing else but the Absence or want of an Intending Cause Or else do they make their own Ignorance of a Cause and They know not How to be a Cause as the Author of the Leviathan interprets the meaning hereof Many times saith he men put for Cause of Natural Events their own Ignorance but disguised in other words as when they say that Fortune is the Cause of things Contingent that is of things whereof they know no Cause Or they affirm against all Reason one Contrary to be the Cause of another as Confusion to be the Cause of Order Pulchritude and Harmony Chance and Fortune to be the Cause of Art and Skill Folly and Nonsence the Cause of the most Wise and Regular Contrivance Or Lastly they deny it to have any Cause at all since they deny an Intending Cause and there cannot Possibly be any other Cause of Artificialness and Conspiring Harmony than Mind and Wisdom Councel and Contrivance But because the Atheists here make some Pretences for this their Ignorance we shall not conceal any of them but bring them all to light to the end that we may discover their Weakness and Foolery First therefore they Pretend that the World is not so Artificially and Well made but that it might have been made much Better and that there are many Faults and Flaws to be found therein from whence they would infer that it was not made by a God he being supposed by Theists to be no Bungler but a Perfect Mind or a Being Infinitely Good and Wise who therefore should have made all things for the Best But this being already set down by it self as a Twelfth Atheistick Objection against a Deity we must reserve the Confutation thereof for its proper place Only we shall observe thus much here by the way That those Theists of Later times who either because they Fancy a meer Arbitary Deity or because their Faith in the Divine Goodness is but weak or because they Judge of things according to their own Private Appetites and Selfish Passions and not with a Free Uncaptivated Vniversality of Mind and an Impartial Regard to the Good of the Whole or because they look only upon the Present Scene of things and take not in the Future into consideration nor have a Comprehensive View of the whole Plot of Divine Providence together or lastly because we Mortals do all stand upon too Low a Ground to take a commanding view and Prospect upon the whole Frame of things and our shallow Understandings are not able to fathom the Depths of the Divine Wisdom nor trace all the Methods and Designs of Providence grant That the World might have been made much Better than now it is which indeed is all one as to say that it is Not Well made these Neoterick Christians I say seem hereby to give a much greater advantage to the Atheists than the Pagan Theists themselves heretofore did who stood their Ground and generously maintained against them that Mind being the Maker of all things and not Fortune or Chance nor Arbitary Self-will and Irational Humour Omnipotent the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which is Absolutely the Best in every case so far as the Necessity of things would admit and in compliance with the Good of the Whole was the Measure and Rule both of Nature and Providence Again the Atomick Atheists further alledge that though there be many things in the world which serve well for Vses yet it does not at all follow that therefore they were made Intentionally and Designedly for those Vses because though things Happen by Chance to be so or so Made yet may they serve for something or other afterward and have their several Vses Consequent Wherefore all the things of Nature Happened say they by Chance to be so made as they are and their several Uses notwithstanding were Consequent or Following thereupon Thus the Epicurean Poet Nil ideo natum est in Corpore ut Vti Possemus sed quod Natum est id procreat Vsum. Nothing in mans Body was made out of design for any Vse but all the several Parts thereof happening to be so made as they are their Vses were Consequent thereupon In like manner the Old Atheistick Philosophers in Aristotle concluded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the Former Teeth were made by Material or Mechanical Necessity Thin and Sharp by means whereof they became fit for Cutting but the Jaw-Teeth Thick and Broad whereby they became Vseful for the Grinding of Food But neither of them were Intended to be such for the sake of these Vses but Happened by Chance only And the like concerning all the other Parts of the Body which seem to be made for Ends. Accordingly the same Aristotle represents the sence of those ancient Atheists concerning the other Parts of the Universe or Things of Nature that they were all likewise made such by the Necessity of Material or Mechanical Motions Vndirected and yet had nevertheless their several
them assigned meerly from Matter and Mechanism or the Necessary and Vnguided Motion thereof without Design or Intention for Ends and Good Wherefore to say that the Bodies of Animals became such meerly because the Fluid Seed by Motion Happened to make such Traces and beget such Stamina and Lineamentâ— as out of which that Compages of the whole resulted is not to assign a Cause of them but to Dissemble Smother and Conceal their True Efficient Cause which is the Wisdom and Contrivance of that Divine Architect and Geometer making them every way fit for the Inhabitation and uses of their respective Souls Neither indeed can we banish all Final that is all Mental Causality from Philosophy or the Consideration of Nature without banishing at the same time Reason and Vnderstanding from our selves and looking upon the Things of Nature with no other Eyes than Brutes do However none of the Ancient Atheists would ever undertake to assign Necessary Causes for all the Parts of the Bodies of Animals and their Efformation from meer Matter Motion and Mechanism Those small and pitiful attempts in order thereunto that have been made by some of them in a few Instances as that the Spina Dorsi came from the Flexure of the Bodies of Animals when they first sprung out of the Earth the Intestines from the Flux of Humours excavating a crooked and winding Channel for it self and that the Nostrils were broke open by the Eruption of breath these I say only showing the Vnfeisableness and Impossibility thereof And therefore Democritus was so wise as never to pretend to give an Account in this way of the Formation of the Foetus he looking upon it as a thing absolutely Desperate nor would he venture to say any more concerning it as Aristotle informeth us than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that it always cometh so to pass of necessity but stopp'd all further Enquiry concerning it after this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That to demand about any of these things for what Cause it was thus was to demand a Beginning of Infinite As if all the Motions from Eternity had an Influence upon and Contribution to whatsoever Corporeal thing was now produced And Lucretius notwithstanding all his swaggering and boasting that He and Epicurus were able to assign Natural and Necessary Causes for every thing without a God hath no where so much as one word concerning it We conclude therefore that Aristotle's Judgment concerning Final Causes in Philosophy is much to be preferred before that of Democritus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That Both kind of Causes Material and Final ought to be declared by a Physiologer but especially the Final the End being the Cause of the Matter but the Mâ—tter not the Cause of the End And thus do we see plainly that the Atomick Atheists are utterly ignorant of the Cause 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Râ—â—uâ—ar and Artificial Frame of thâ— things in Nâ—ture and consâ—quently of the whâ—le Mundane Sâ—stem the True Knowledge whereof nâ—câ—ssâ—rily leadeth to a God But it is prodigiously strange that these Atheists should in this their Ignorance and Sottâ—shnâ—ss be Justified by any Professed Theists and Christians of Later times who Atomizing in their Physiology also would fain perswade us in like manner that this whole Mundane System together with Plants and Animals was derived meerly from the Necessary and Vnguided Motion of the Small Particles of Matter at first turned round in a Vortex or else jumbled all together in a Chaos without any Intention for Ends and Good that is without the Direction of any Mind God in the mean time standing by only as an Idle Spâ—ctator of this Lusus Atomorum this Sportful Dance of Atoms and of the various Results thereof Nay these Mechanick Theists have here quite outstripped and out-done the Atomick Atheists themselves they being much more Immodest and Extravagant than ever those were For the Professed Atheists durst never venture to affirm that this Regular System of things Resulted from the Fortuitous Motions of Atoms at the very first before they had for a long time together produced many other Inept Combinations or Aggregate Forms of particular things and Nonsensical Systems of the whole And they supposed also that the Regularity of things here in this world would not always continue such neither but that some time or other Confusion and Disorder would break in again Moreover that besides this World of ours there are at this very instant Innumerable other worlds Irregular and that there is but One of a Thousand or ten Thousand amongst the Infinite Worlds that have such Regularity in them The reason of all which is because it was generally taken for granted and look'd upon as a Common Notion that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Aristotle expresseth it that None of those things which are from Fortune or Chance come to pass constantly and always alike But our Mechanick or Atomick Theists will have their Atoms never so much as once to have Fumbled in these their Fortuitous Motions nor to have produced any Inept System or Incongruous Forms at all but from the very first all along to have taken up their Places and have Ranged themselves so Orderly Methodically and Discreetly as that they could not possibly have done it better had they been Directed by the most Perfect Wisdom Wherefore these Atomick Theists utterly Evacuate that grand Argument for a God taken from the Phaenomenon of the Artificial Frame of things which hath been so much insisted on in all Ages and which commonly makes the strongest impression of any other upon the Minds of men they leaving only certain Metaphysical Arguments for a Deity which though never so good yet by reason of their Subtilty can do but little Execution upon the Minds of the Generality and even amongst the Learned do oftentimes beget more of Doubtful Disputation and Scepticism than of Clear Conviction and Satisfaction The Atheists in the mean time laughing in their sleeves and not a little triumphing to see the Cause of Theism thus betrayed by its professed Friends and Assertors and the Grand Argument for the same totally Slurred by them and so their work done as it were to their hands for them Now as this argues the greatest Insensibility of Mind or Sottishness and Stupidity in Pretended Theists not to take the least notice of the Regular and Artificial Frame of things or of the Signatures of the Divine Art and Wisdom in them nor to look upon the World and things of Nature with any Other Eyes than Oxen and Horses do so are there many Phaenomena in Nature which being partly Above the Force of these Mechanick Powers and partly Contrary to the same can therefore never be Salved by them nor without Final Causes and some Vital Principle As for example that of Gravity or the Tendency of Bodies Downward the Motion of the Diaphragma in Respiration the Systole and Diastole of the Heart which was before declared to be a Muscular Constriction and
is some confirmation of the Truth of Christianity the Scripture insisting so much upon these Evil Demons or Devils and declaring it to be one design of our Saviour Christ's coming into the World to oppose these Confederate Powers of the Kingdom of Darkness and to rescue mankind from the Thraldom and Bondage thereof As for Wizards and Magicians Persons who associate and confederate themselves in a peculiar manner with these Evil Spirits for the gratification of their own Revenge Lust Ambition and other Passions besides the Scriptures there hath been so full an attestation given to them by persons unconcerned in all Ages that those our so confident Exploders of them in this present Age can hardly escape the suspicion of having some Hankring towards Atheism But as for the Demoniacks and Energumeni It hath been much wondred that there should be so many of them in our Saviour's time and hardly any or none in this present Age of ours Certain it is from the Writings of Josephus in sundry places that the Pharisaick Jews were then generally possessed with an Opinion of these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Demoniacks men Possessed with Devils or Infested by them And that this was not a meer Phrase or Form of Speech only amongst them for persons very Ill-affected in their Bodies may appear from hence that Josephus declares it as his opinion concerning the Demons or Devils that they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Spirits or Souls of wicked men deceased getting into the Bodies of the Living From hence it was that Jews in our Saviour's time were not at all Surprised with his casting out of Devils it being usual for them also then to Exorcise the same an Art which they pretended to have learn'd from Solomon Of whom thus Josephus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God also taught Solomon an Art against Demons and Devils for the benefit and Cure of men Who composed certain Incantations by which diseases are cured and left forms of exorcisms whereby Devils are expelled and driven away Which Method of curing prevails much amongst us at this very day Notwithstanding which we think it not at all probable what a late Atheistick Writer hath asserted that the heads of the Jews were then all of them so full of Demons and Devils that they generally took all manner of Bodily Diseases such as Feavers and Agues and Dumbness and Deafness for Devils Though we grant that this very thing was imputed by Plotinus afterward to the Gnosticks that they supposed all Diseases to be Devils and therefore not to be cured by Physick but expelled by Words or Charms Thus he En. 2. Lib. 9. c. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now when they affirm Diseases to be Demons or Devils and pretend that they can expel them by words undertaking to do the same they hereby indeed render themselves considerable to the vulgar who are wont not a little to admire the powers of Magicians But they will not be able to perswade wise men that Diseases have no natural Causes as from Repletion or Inanition or Putrefaction or the like Which is a thing manifest from their cure they being oftentimes removed by purgation and bleeding and abstinence Vnless perhaps these men will say that the Devil is by this means Starved and made to Pine away Nor can we think that the Jews in our Saviour's time either supposed all Mad-men to be Demoniacks or all Demoniacks Mad-men though this latter seems to be asserted by an Eminent Writer of our own we reading of Devils cast out from others besides Mad-men and of a woman which had a Spirit of Infirmity only and was bowed together and could not lift up her self which is said by our Saviour Christ to have been bound by Satan Wherefore the sense of the Jews formerly seems to have been this that when there was any unusual and extraordinary Symptoms in any bodily Distemper but especially that of Madness this being look'd upon something more than Natural was imputed by them to the Possession or Infestation of some Devil Neither was this proper to the Jews only at that time to suppose Evil Demons to be the Causes of such bodily diseases as had extraordinary Symptoms and especially Madness but the Greeks and other Gentiles also were embued with the same Perswasion as appeareth from Apollonius Tyanaeus his curing a Laughing Demoniack at Athens he ejecting that Evil Spirit by threats and menaces who is said at his departure to have tumbled down a Royal Porch in the City with great noise As also from his freeing the City of Ephesus from the Plague by stoning an old Ragged Beggar said by Apollonius to have been the Plague which appeared to be a Demon by his changing himself into the form of a Shagged Dog But that there is some Truth in this Opinion and that at this very day Evil Spirits or Demons do sometimes really Act upon the Bodies of men and either Inflict or Augment bodily Distempers and Diseases hath been the Judgment of two very experienced Physicians Sennertus and Fernelius The Former in his Book De Mania Lib. 1. cap. 15. writing thus Etsi sine ulla Corporis Morbosa Dispositione Deo permittente hominem Obsidere Occupare Daemon possi◠tamen quandoque Morbis praecipuè Melancholicis sese immiscet Daemon forsan frequentius hoc accidit quam saepè creditur Although the Devil may by Divine permission Possess men without any Morbid Disposition yet doth he usually intermingle himself with Bodily Diseases and especially those of Melancholy and perhaps this cometh to pass ostner than is commonly believed or suspected The other in his De Abditis rerum Causis where having attributed real Effects upon the bodies of men to Witchcraft and Enchantment he addeth Neque solum morbos verum etiam Daemonas scelerati homines in corpora immittunt Hi quidem visuntur Furoris quadam specie distorti hoc uno tamen à Simplici Furore distant quod summè ardua obloquantur praeterita occulta renuntient assidentiúmque arcana reserent Neither do these wicked Magicians only inflict Diseases upon mens Bodies but also send Devils into them By means whereof they appear distorted with a kind of fury and madness which yet differs from a Simple Madness or the Disease so called in this that they speak of very high and difficult matters declare things past unknown and discover the Secrets of those that sit by Of which he subjoyns two Notable Instances of Persons well known to himself that were plainly Demoniacal Possessed or Acted by an Evil Demon one whereof shall be afterwards mentioned But when Maniacal Persons do not only discover Secrets and declare things Past but Future also besides this speak in Languages which they had never learnt this puts it out of all doubt and question that they are not meer Mad men or Maniaci but Demoniacks or Energumeni And that since the time of our Saviour Christ there have been often
Religion not fit for the Vulgar to know Varro's Supreme Numen the great Soul or Mind of the whole World his Inferiour Gods Parts of the World Animated Image-Worship Condemned by him as disagreeable to the Natural Theology Page 438 439 Seneca a Pagan Polytheist but plain asserter of One Supreme Numen excellently described by him That in his Book of Superstition now lost he did as freely Censure the Civil Theology of the Romans as Varro had done the Fabulous or Theatrical Page 440 Quintilian Pliny Apuleius their clear acknowledgments of One Sovereign Universal Deity Symmachus a great stickler for Paganism his Assertion That it was One and the Same thing which was Worshipped in all Religions though in different ways Page 440 441 The Writer De Mundo though not Astotle yet a Pagan His Cause that conteineth All things and God from whom all things are Which Passage being left out in Apuleius his Latin Version gives occasion of suspicion that he was infected with Plutarch's Ditheism or at least held Matter to be Unmade Page 442 Plutarch a Priest of Apollo however unluckily ingaged in those Two False Opinions of an Evil Principle and Matter Unmade yet a Maintainer of One Sole Principle of all Good Page 443 Dio Chrysostomus a Sophist his clear Testimony 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the whole World was under a Kingly Government or Monarchy ibid. Galen's True Hymn to the praise of him that made us in his Book De usu Partium Page 444 Maximus Tyrius his short Account of his own Religion One Supreme God the Monarch of the whole World and Three Subordinate Ranks of Inferiour Gods the Sons and Friends of God and his Ministers in the Government of the World Page 444 445 A most full and Excellent Description of the Supreme God in Aristides his First Oration or Hymn to Jupiter wherein he affirmeth all the several kinds of Gods to be but a Defluxion and Derivation from Jupiter Page 445 446 All the Latter Philosophers after Christianity though maintainers of the Worlds Eternity yet agreed in One Supreme Deity the Cause of this World and of the other Gods Excellent Speculations in them concerning the Deity especially Plotinus who though deriving Matter and all from One Divine Principle yet was a Contender for Many Gods he supposing the Grandeur and Majesty of the Supreme God to be declared by the Multitude of Gods under him Themistius That the Same Supreme God was worshipped by Pagans Christians and all Nations though in different Forms and that God was delighted with this Variety of Religions Page 446 447 The full Testimony of S. Cyril That the Greek Philosophers universally acknowledged One God the Maker of the Universe from whom were produced into Being certain other Gods both Intelligible and Sensible ibid. XXVII This not onely the Opinion of Philosophers and Learned men but also the General Belief of the Vulgar amongst the Pagans A Judgment of the Vulgar and Generality to be made from the Poets Dio Chrysost. his Affirmation That all the Poets acknowledged One First and Greatest God the Father of all the Rational Kind and the King thereof Page 447 The Testimony of Aristotle That all men acknowledged Kingship or Monarchy amongst the Gods of Maximus Tyrius That notwithstanding so great a Discrepancy of Opinion in other things yet throughout all the Gentile World as well the Unlearned as Learned did universally agree in this That there was One God the King and Father of all and Many Gods the Sons of that One God Of Dio Chrysostomus also to the same purpose he intimating likewise that of the two the acknowledgment of the One Supreme God was more General than that of the Many Inferiour Gods Page 448 Page 449 That the sense of the Vulgar Pagans herein is further evident from hence because all Nations had their several Proper Names for the One Supreme God as the Romans Jupiter the Greeks Zeus the Africans and Arabians Hammon the Scythians Pappaeus the Babylonians Bel c. Page 449 True that Origen though allowing Christians to use the Appellative Names for God in the Languages of the several Nations yet accounted it unlawfull for them to call him by those Proper Names because not onely given to Idols but also contaminated with wicked Rites and Fables according to which they should be judged rather the Names of a Daemon than of a God Notwithstanding which he does not deny those Pagans ever to have meant the Supreme God by them but often acknowledge the same But Lactantius indeed denies the Capitoline Jupiter to be the Supreme God and that for two Reasons First because he was not worshipped without the Partnership of Minerva and Juno his Daughter and Wife Granted here that there was a Mixture of the Fabulous or Poetical Theology with the Natural to make up the Civil But that Wise men understood these to be but Three several Names or Notions of One Supreme God This confirmed from Macrobius Page 450 Vossius his Conjecture that in this Capitoline Trinity there was a further Mystery aimed at of Three Divine Hypostases This Roman Trinity derived from the Samothracian Cabiri Which word being Hebraical gives Cause to suspect this Tradition of a Trinity amongst the Pagans to have sprung from the Hebrews Page 451 Lactantius his Second Reason Because Jupiter being Juvans Pater was a name below the Dignity of the Supreme God The Answer that the true Etymon thereof was Jovis Pater the Hebrew Tetragrammaton ibid. That the Capitoline Jupiter was the Supreme God evident from those Titles of Optimus Maximus and of Omnipotens by the Pontifices in their Publick Sacrifices Seneca's Testimony that the ancient Hetrurians by Jupiter meant the Mind and Spirit Maker and Governour of the whole World The Roman Souldiers Acclamation in Marcus Aurelius his German Expedition To Jove the God of Gods who alone is Powerfull according to Tertullian a Testimony to the Christians God Page 452 453 That as the Learned Pagans in their Writings so likewise the Vulgar in their common Speech when most serious often used the word God Singularly and Emphatically for the Supreme proved from Tertullian Minucius Felix and Lactantius together with the Testimony of Proclus that the One Supreme God was more universally believed throughout the World than the Many Gods Page 453 454 That Kyrie Eleeson was anciently a Pagan Litany to the Supreme God proved from Arianus The Supreme God often called by the Pagans also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Lord. Page 454 455 That even the most sottishly Superstitious Idolatrous and Polytheistical amongst the Pagans did notwithstanding generally acknowledge One Supreme Deity fully attested and elegantly declared by Aurelius Prudentius in his Apotheosis Page 455 However some of the Ancient Pagans were said to have acknowledged none but Visible and Corporeal Gods yet as they conceived these to be endued with Life and Understanding so did they suppose One Supreme amongst them as either the whole Heaven or