of the World or the Golden Age as they call'd it namely Equality of Seasons throughout the Year or a perpetual Equinox We have also taken in all the adjuncts or concomitants of these States as they are mention'd in Scripture The Longevity of the Ante-diluvians and the declension of their age by degrees after the Flood As also that wonderful Phaenomenon the Rainbow which appear'd to Noah for a Sign that the Earth should never undergo a second Deluge And we have shewn wherein the force and propriety of that Sign consisted for confirming Noah's faith in the promise and in the divine veracity Thus far we have explain'd the past Phaenomena of the Natural World The rest are Futurities which still lie hid in their Causes and we cannot properly prove a Theory from effects that are not yet in being But so far as they are foretold in Scripture both as to substance and circumstance in prosecution of the same Principles we have ante-dated their birth and shew'd how they will come to pass We may therefore I think reasonably conclude That this Theory has performed its task and answer'd its title having given an account of all the general changes of the Natural World as far as either Sacred History looks backwards or Sacred Prophecy looks forwards So far as the one tells us what is past in Nature and the other what is to come And if all this be nothing but an appearance of truth 't is a kind of fatality upon us to be deceiv'd SO much for Natural Evidence from the Causes or Effects We now proceed to Scripture which will make the greatest part of this Review The Sacred Basis upon which the whole Theory stands is the doctrine of S. Peter deliver'd in his Second Epistle and Third Chapter concerning the Triple Order and Succession of the Heavens and the Earth That comprehends the whole extent of our Theory which indeed is but a large Commentary upon S. Peter's Text. The Apostle sets out a threefold state of the Heavens and Earth with some general properties of each taken from their different Constitution and different Fate The Theory takes the same threefold state of the Heavens and the Earth and explains more particularly wherein their different Constitution consists and how under the conduct of Providence their different fate depends upon it Let us set down the Apostle's words with the occasion of them and their plain sence according to the most easie and natural explication Ver. 3. Knowing this first that there shall come in the last days scoffers walking after their own lusts 4. And saying Where is the promise of his coming for since the fathers fell asleep all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation 5. For this they willingly are ignorant of that by the word of God the heavens were of old and the earth consisting of water and by water 6. Whereby the world that then was being over flowed with water perished 7. But the heavens and the earth that are now by the same word are kept in store reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men 10. The day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise and the elements shall melt with fervent heat the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burnt up 13. Nevertheless we according to his promise look for new heavens and a new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness This is the whole Discourse so far as relates to our Subject S. Peter you see had met with some that scoff'd at the future destruction of the World and the coming of our Saviour and they were men it seems that pretended to Philosophy and Argument and they use this argument for their opinion Seeing there hath been no change in Nature or in the World from the beginning to this time why should we think there will be any change for the future The Apostle answers to this That they willingly forget or are ignorant that there were Heavens of old and an Earth so and so constituted consisting of Water and by Water by reason whereof that World or those Heavens and that Earth perish'd in a Deluge of Water But saith he the Heavens and the Earth that are now are of another constitution fitted and reserved to another fate namely to perish by Fire And after these are perish'd there will be New Heavens and a New Earth according to God's promise This is an easie Paraphrase and the plain and genuine sence of the Apostle's discourse and no body I think would ever look after any other sence if this did not draw them into paths they do not know and to conclusions which they do not fancy This sence you see hits the objection directly or the Cavil which these scoffers made and tells them that they vainly pretend that there hath been no change in the World since the beginning for there was one sort of Heavens and Earth before the Flood and another sort now the first having been destroyed at the Deluge So that the Apostle's argument stands upon this Foundation That there is a diversity betwixt the present Heavens and Earth and the Ante-diluvian Heavens and Earth take away that and you take away all the force of his Answer Then as to his New Heavens and New Earth after the Conflagration they must be material and natural in the same sence and signification with the former Heavens and Earth unless you will offer open violence to the Text. So that this Triplicity of the Heavens and the Earth is the first obvious plain sence of the Apostle's discourse which every one would readily accept if it did not draw after it a long train of Consequences and lead them into other Worlds than they ever thought of before or are willing to enter upon now But we shall have occasion by and by to examine this Text more fully in all its circumstances Give me leave in the mean time to observe that S. Paul also implyes that triple Creation which S. Peter expresses S. Paul I say in the 8th chap. to the Romver 20 21. tell us of a Creation that will be redeem'd from Vanity which are the new Heavens and new Earth to come A Creation in subjection to Vanity which is the present state of the World And a Creation that was subjected to Vanity in hopes of being restor'd which was the first Paradisiacal Creation And these are the three states of the Natural World which make the subject of our Theory To these two places of St. Peter and St. Paul I might add that third in St. John concerning the new Heavens and new Earth with that distinguishing Character that the Earth was without a Sea As this distinguisheth it from the present Earth so being a Restitution or Restauration as we noted before it must be the same with some former Earth and consequently it implies that there was another precedent
built upon it and at first was sustain'd by it And when such a Key as this is put into our hands that does so easily unlock this hard passage and makes it intelligible according to the just force of the words why should we pertinaciously adhere to an interpretation that neither agrees with the words nor makes any sence that is considerable Thirdly If the Apostle had made the ante-diluvian Heavens and Earth the same with the present his apodosis in the 7th Verse should not have been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. I say it should not have been by way of antithesis but of identity or continuation And the same Heavens and Earth are kept in store reserv'd unto fire c. Accordingly we see the Apostle speaks thus as to the Logos or the Word of God Verse 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the same Word of God where the thing is the same he expresseth it as the same And if it had been the same Heavens and Earth as well as the same Word of God Why should he use a mark of opposition for the one and of identity for the other to this I do not see what can be fairly answer'd Fourthly the ante-diluvian Heavens and Earth were different from the present because as the Apostle intimates they were such and so constituted as made them obnoxious to a Deluge whereas ours are of such a form as makes them incapable of a Deluge and obnoxious to a Conflagration the just contrary fate If you say there was nothing of natural tendency or disposition in either World to their respective fate but the first might as well have perish'd by fire as water and this by water as by fire you unhinge all Nature and natural providence in that method and contradict one main scope of the Apostle in this discourse His first scope is to assert and mind them of that diversity there was betwixt the ancient Heavens and Earth and the present and from that to prove against those Scoffers that there had been a change and revolution in Nature And his second scope seems to be this to show that diversity to be such as under the Divine conduct leads to a different fate and expos'd that World to a Deluge for when he had describ'd the constitution of the first Heavens and Earth he subjoyns 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quià talis erat saith Grotius qualem diximus constitutio Terrae Coeli W H E R E B Y the then World perish'd in a Flood of Water This whereby notes some kind of causal dependance and must relate to some means or conditions precedent It cannot relate to Logos or the Word of God Grammar will not permit that therefore it must relate to the state of the ante-diluvian Heavens and Earth immediately premis'd And to what purpose indeed should he premise the description of those Heavens and Earth if it was not to lay a ground for this inference Having given these Reasons for the necessity of this Interpretation in the last place let 's consider St. Austin's judgment and his sence upon this place as to the point in question As also the reflections that some other of the Ancients have made upon this doctrine of St. Peter's Didymus Alexandrinus who was for some time St. Jerome's Master made such a severe reflection upon it that he said this Epistle was corrupted and should not be admitted into the Canon because it taught the doctrine of a Triple or Triform World in this third Chapter As you may see in his Enarr in Epist. Canonicas Now this threefold World is first that in the 6th Verse The World that then was In the 7th Verse The Heavens and the Earth that are now And in the 13th Verse We expect new Heavens and a new Earth according to his promise This seems to be a fair account that St. Peter taught the doctrine of a triple World And I quote this testimony to show what St. Peter's words do naturally import even in the judgment of one that was not of his mind And a Man is not prone to make an exposition against his own Opinion unless he think the words very pregnant and express But St. Austin owns the authority of this Epistle and of this doctrine as deriv'd from it taking notice of this Text of St. Peter's in several Parts of his Works We have noted three or four places already to this purpose and we may further take notice of several passages in his Treatise de Civ Dei which confirm our exposition In his 20th Book ch 24. he disputes against Porphyry who had the same Principles with these Aeternalists in the Text or if I may so call them Incorruptarians and thought the World never had nor ever would undergo any change especially as to the Heavens St. Austin could not urge Porphyry with the authority of St. Peter for he had no veneration for the Christian Oracles but it seems he had some for the Jewish and arguing against him upon that Text in the Psalms Coeli peribunt he shows upon occasion how he understands St. Peter's destruction of the Old World Legitur Coelum Terra transibunt Mundus transit sed puto quod proeterit transit transibunt aliquantò mitiùs dicta sunt quà m peribunt In Epistolà quoque Petri Apostoli ubi aquâ inundatus qui tum erat periisse dictus est Mundus satis clarum est quae pars mundi à toto significata est quatenùs periisse dicta sit qui coeli repositi igni reservandi This he explains more fully afterwards by subjoyning a caution which we cited before that we must not understand this passage of St. Peter's concerning the destruction of the ante diluvian World to take in the whole Universe and the highest Heavens but onely the aerial Heavens and the sublunary World In Apostolicâ illâ Epistolâ à toto pars accipitur quod Diluvio periisse dictus est mundus quamvis sola ejus cum suis coelis pars ima perierit In that Apostolical Epistle a part is signified by the whole when the World is said to have perish'd in the Deluge although the lower part of it onely with the Heavens belonging to it perished that is the Earth with the regions of the Air that belong to it And consonant to this in his exposition of that hundred and first Psalm upon those words The Heavens are the work of thy hands They shall perish but thou shalt endure This perishing of the Heavens he says S. Peter tells us hath been once done already namely at the Deluge Apertè dixit hoc Apostolus Petrus Coeli erant olim Terra de aquâ per aquam constituti Dei verbo per quod qui factus est mundus aquâ inundatus deperiit Terra autem coeli qui nunc sunt igni reservantur Jam ergo dixit periisse coelos per Diluvium These places shew us that
Scripture-Testimonies with design chiefly to obviate and disappoint the evasions of such as would beat down solid Texts into thin Metaphors and Allegories The Testimonies of Scripture concerning the Renovation of the World are either express or implicit Those I call express that mention the New Heavens and New Earth And those implicit that signifie the same thing but not in express terms So when our Saviour speaks of a Palingenesia or Regeneration Matt. 19. 28 29. Or St. Peter of an Apocatastasis or Restitution Act. 3. 21. These being words us'd by all Authors prophane or Ecclesiastical for the Renovation of the World ought in reason to be interpreted in the same sence in the holy Writings And in like manner when St. Paul speaks of his Future Earth or an habitable World to come Hebr. 2. 5. or of a Redemption or melioration of the present state of nature Rom. 8. 21 22. These lead us again in other terms to the same Renovation of the World But there are also some places of Scripture that set the New Heavens and New Earth in such a full and open view that we must shut our eyes not to see them St. John says he saw them and observ'd the form of the New Earth Apoc. 21. 1. The Seer Isaish spoke of them in express words many hundred years before And St. Peter marks the time when they are to be introduc'd namely after the Conflagration or after the Dissolution of the present Heavens and Earth 2 Pet. 3. 12 13. These later Texts of Scripture being so express there is but one way left to elude the force of them and that is by turning the Renovation of the World into an Allegory and making the New Heavens and New Earth to be Allegorical Heavens and Earth not real and material as ours are This is a bold attempt of some modern Authors who chuse rather to strain the Word of God than their own notions There are Allegories no doubt in Scripture but we are not to allegorize Scripture without some warrant either from an Apostolical interpretation or from the necessity of the matter and I do not know how they can pretend to either of these in this case However that they may have all fair play we will lay aside at present all the other Texts of Scripture and confine our selves wholly to St. Peter's words to see and examine whether they are or can be turn'd into an Allegory according to the best rules of interpretation St. Peter's words are these Seeing then all these things shall be dissolv'd what manner of persons ought ye to be in holy conversation and godliness Looking for and hasting the coming of the Day of God wherein the Heavens being on fire shall be dissolv'd and the Elements shall melt with fervent heat NEVERTHELESS we according to his promise look for New Heavens and a New Earth wherein Righteousness shall dwell The Question is concerning this last Verse Whether the New Heavens and Earth here promis'd are to be real and material Heavens and Earth or onely figurative and allegorical The words you see are clear And the general rule of interpretation is this That we are not to recede from the letter or the literal sence unless there be a necessity from the subject matter such a necessity as makes a literal interpretation absurd But where is that necessity in this Case Cannot God make new Heavens and a new Earth as easily as he made the Old ones Is his strength decay'd since that time or is Matter grown more disobedient Nay does not Nature offer her self voluntarily to raise a new World from the second Chaos as well as from the first and under the conduct of Providence to make it as convenient an habitation as the Primaeval Earth Therefore no necessity can be pretended of leaving the literal sence upon an incapacity of the subject matter The second rule to determine an Interpretation to be Literal or Allegorical is the use of the same words or phrase in the Context and the signification of them there Let 's then examine our cafe according to this rule St. Peter had us'd the same phrase of Heavens and Earth twice before in the same Chapter The old Heavens and Earth ver 5. The Present Heavens and Earth ver 7. and now he uses it again ver 13. The new Heavens and Earth Have we not then reason to suppose that he takes it here in the same sence that he had done twice before for real and material Heavens and Earth There is no mark set of a new signification nor why we should alter the sence of the words That he us'd them always before for the material Heavens and Earth I think none will question and therefore unless they can give us a sufficient reason why we should change the signification of the words we are bound by this second rule also to understand them in a literal sence Lastly The very form of the words and the manner of their dependence upon the Context leads us to a literal sence and to material Heavens and Earth NEVERTHELESS says the Apostle we expect new Heavens c. Why Nevertheless that is notwithstanding the dissolution of the present Heavens and Earth The Apostle foresaw what he had said might raise a doubt in their minds whether all things would not be at an end Nothing more of Heavens and Earth or of any habitable World after the Conflagration and to obviate this he tells them Notwithstanding that wonderful desolation that I have describ'd we do according to God's promises expect new Heavens and a new Earth to be an Habitation for the Righteous You see then the New Heavens and New Earth which the Apostle speaks of are substituted in the place of those that were destroy'd at the Conflagration and would you substitute Allegorical Heavens and Earth in the place of Material A shadow for a substance What an Equivocation would it be in the Apostle when the doubt was about the material Heavens and Earth to make an answer about Allegorical Lastly the timeing of the thing determines the sence When shall this new World appear after the Conflagration the Apostle says Therefore it cannot be understood of any moral renovation to be made at or in the times of the Gospel as these Allegorists pretend We must therefore upon all accounts conclude that the Apostle intended a literal sence real and material Heavens to succeed these after the Conflagration which was the thing to be prov'd And I know not what Bars the Spirit of God can set to keep us within the Compass of a Literal sence if these be not sufficient Thus much for the Explication of St. Peter's Doctrine concerning the new Heavens and new Earth which secures the second Part of our Theory For the Theory stands upon two Pillars or two pedestals The Ante-diluvian Earth and the Future Earth or in S. Peter's phrase The Old Heavens and Earth and the New Heavens and Earth And it cannot be
like manner and to the same sence he hath these words upon Psal. 101. Aerii utique coeli perierunt ut propinqui Terris secundum quod dicuntur volucres coeli sunt autem coeli coelorum superiores in Firmamento sed utrùm ipfi perituri sint igni an hi soli qui etiam diluvio perierunt disceptatio est aliquanto scrupulosior inter doctos And in his Book de Civ Dei he hath several passages to the same purpose Quemadmodum in Apostolicâ illâ Epistolâ à toto pars accipitur quod diluvio periisse dictus est mandus quamvis sola ejus cum suis coelis pars ima perierit These being to the same effect with the first citation I need not make them English and this last place refers to the Earth as well as the Heavens as several other places in S. Austin do whereof we shall give you an account when we come to shew his judgment concerning the second point the diversity of the ante-diluvian and post-diluvian World This being but a foretaste of his good will and inclinations towards this doctrine These considerations alledg'd so far as I can judge are full and unanswerable proofs that this discourse of the Apostle's comprehends and refers to the Natural World and consequently they warrant our interpretation in this particular and destroy the contrary We have but one step more to make good That there was a change made in this natural world at the Deluge according to the Apostle and this is to confute the second part of their interpretation which supposeth that S. Peter makes no distinction or opposition betwixt the antediluvian Heavens and Earth and the present Heavens and Earth in that respect This second difference betwixt us methinks is still harsher than the first and contrary to the very form as well as to the matter of the Apostle's discourse For there is a plain antithesis or opposition made betwixt the Heavens and the Earth of old ver the 5th and the Heavens and the Earth that are now verse the 7th 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the adversative particle but you see marks the opposition so that it is full and plain according to Grammar and Logick And that the parts or members of this opposition differ in nature from one another is certain from this because otherwise the Apostle's argument or discourse is of no effect concludes nothing to the purpose he makes no answer to the objection nor proves any thing against the Scoffers unless you admit that diversity For they said All things had been the same from the beginning in the Natural World and unless he say as he manifestly does that there hath been a change in Nature and that the Heavens and Earth that are now are different from the ancient Heavens and Earth which perish'd at the Flood he says nothing to destroy their argument nor to confirm the Prophetical doctrine of the future destruction of the Natural World This I think would be enough to satisfie any clear and free mind concerning the meaning of the Apostle but because I desire to give as full a light to this place as I can and to put the sence of it out of controversie if possible for the future I will make some further remarks to confirm this exposition And we may observe that several of those reasons which we have given to prove That the Natural World is understood by S. Peter are double reasons and do also prove the other point in question a diversity betwixt the two Natural Worlds the Anti-diluvian and the present As for instance unless you admit this diversity betwixt the two natural Worlds you make the 5th verse in this Chapter superfluous and useless and you must suppose the Apostle to make an inference here without premises In the 6th verse he makes an inference Whereby the World that then was perish'd in a Deluge what does this whereby relate to by reason of what sure of the particular constitution of the Heavens and the Earth immediately before describ'd Neither would it have signified any thing to the Scoffers for the Apostle to have told them how the Ante-diluvian Heavens and Earth were constituted if they were constituted just in the same manner as the present Besides what is it as I ask'd before that the Apostle tells these Scoffers they were ignorant of does he not say formally and expresly ver 5. that they were ignorant that the Heavens and the Earth were constituted so and so before the Flood but if they were constituted as these present Heavens and Earth are they were not ignorant of their constitution nor did pretend to be ignorant for their own mistaken argument supposeth it But before we proceed any further give me leave to note the impropriety of our Translation in the 5th Verse or latter part of it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This we translate standing in the water and out of the water which is done manifestly in compliance with the present form of the Earth and the notions of the Translators and not according to the natural force and sence of the Greek words If one met with this sentence in a Greek Author who would ever render it standing in the water and out of the water nor do I know any Latin Translator that hath ventur'd to render them in that sence nor any Latin Father St. Austin and St. Jerome I 'me sure do not but Consistens ex aquâ or de aquâ per aquam for that later phrase also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 does not with so good propriety signifie to stand in the water as to consist or subsist by water or by the help of water Tanquam per causam sustinentem as St. Austin and Jerome render it Neither does that instance they give from 1 Pet. 3. 20. prove any thing to the contrary for the Ark was sustain'd by the waters and the English does render it accordingly The Translation being thus rectified you see the ante-diluvian Heavens and Earth consisted of Water and by water which makes way for a second observation to prove our sence of the Text for if you admit no diversity betwixt those Heavens and Earth and the present shew us 'pray how the present Heavens and Earth consist of water and by water What watery constitution have they The Apostle implies rather that The now Heavens and Earth have a fiery constitution We have now Meteors of all sorts in the air winds hail snow lightning thunder and all things engender'd of fiery exhalations as well as we have rain but according to our Theory the ante-diluvian Heavens of all these Meteors had none but dews and rain or watery Meteors onely and therefore might very aptly be said by the Apostle to be constituted of water or to have a watery 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Then the Earth was said to consist by water because it was
coming out of the Abyss Which disruption at the Deluge seems also to be alluded to Job 12. 14 15 and more plainly Prov. 3.20 by his knowledge the Abysses are broken up Thus you have already a threefold state of the Abyss which makes a short History of it first Open at the beginning then covered till the Deluge Then broke open again as it is at present And we pursue the History of it no further but we are told Apoc. 20. 3. That it shall be shut up again and the great Dragon in it for a Thousand years In the mean time we may observe from this form and posture of the Ante-diluvian Abyss how suitable it is and coherent with that form of the Ante-diluvian Earth which S. Peter and the Psalmist had describ'd sustain'd by the waters founded upon the waters stretcht above the waters for if it was the cover of this Abyss and it had some cover that was broke at the Deluge it was spread as a Crust or Ice upon the face of those waters and so made an orbis Terrarum an habitable sphere of Earth about the Abyss So much for the form of the Ante-diluvian Earth and Abyss which as they aptly correspond to one another so you see our Theory answers and is adjusted to both and I think so fitly that we have no reason hitherto to be displeas'd with the success we have had in the examination of it according to Scripture We have dispatch'd the two main points in question first to prove a diversity in general betwixt the two natural Worlds or betwixt the Heavens and the Earth before and after the Flood Secondly to prove wherein this diversity consisted or that the particular form of the Ante-diluvian Heavens and Earth was such according to Scripture as we have describ'd it in the Theory You 'l say then the work is done what needs more all the rest follows of course for if the Ante-diluvian Earth had such a form as we have propos'd and prov'd it to have had there could be no Deluge in it but by a dissolution of its parts and exteriour frame And a Deluge so made would not be in the nature of a standing Pool but of a violent agitation and commotion of the waters This is true These parts of the Theory are so cemented that you must grant all if you grant any However we will try if even these two particulars also may be prov'd out of Scripture That is if there be any marks or memorandums left there by the Spirit of God of such a fraction or dissolution of the Earth at the Deluge And also such characters of the Deluge it self as show it to have been by a fluctuation and impetuous commotion of the waters To proceed then That there was a Fraction or Dissolution of the Earth at the Deluge the history of it by Moses gives us the first account seeing he tells us as the principal cause of the Flood that the Fountains of the Great Abyss were cloven or burst asunder and upon this disruption the waters gush'd out from the bowels of the Earth as from the widen'd mouths of so many Fountains I do not take Fountains there to signifie any more than Sources or Stores of Water noting also this manner of their eruption from below or out of the ground as Fountains do Accordingly in the Proverbs chap. 3.20 't is onely said the Abysses were broken open I do not doubt but this refers to the Deluge as Bede and others understand it the very word being us'd here both in the Hebrew and Septuagint that express'd the disruption of the Abyss at the Deluge And this breaking up of the Earth at that time is elegantly exprest in Job by the bursting of the Womb of Nature when the Sea was first brought to light when after many pangs and throes and dilacerations of her body Nature was deliverd of a burthen which she had born in her Womb Sixteen Hundred Years These three places I take to be memorials and proofs of the disruption of the Earth or of the Abyss at the universal Deluge And to these we may add more out of the Prophets Job and the Psalms by way of allusion commonly to the state of Nature at that time The Prophet Isaiah in describing the future destruction of the World chap. 24. 18 19. seems plainly to allude and have respect to the past destruction of it at the Deluge as appears by that leading expression the windows from an high are open 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 taken manifestly from Gen. 7. 11. Then see how the description goes on the windows from an high are open and the foundations of the Earth do shake The Earth is utterly broken down the Earth is quite dissolv'd the Earth is exceedingly moved Here are Concussions and Fractions and Dissolutions as there were in the Mundane Earth-quake and Deluge which we had exprest before only by breaking open the Abyss By the Foundations of the Earth here and elsewhere I perceive many understand the Centre so by moving or shaking the foundations or putting them out of course must be understood a displacing of the Centre which was really done at the Deluge as we have shewn in its proper place If we therefore remember that there was both a dislocation as I may so say and a fraction in the body of the Earth by that great fall a dislocation as to the centre and a fraction as to the surface and exterior region it will truly answer to all those expressions in the Prophet that seem so strange and extraordinary 'T is true this place of the Prophet respects also and foretells the future destruction of the World but that being by Fire when the Elements shall melt with servent heat and the Earth with the works therein shall be burnt up these expressions of fractions and concussions seem to be taken originally from the manner of the World's first destruction and to be transferr'd by way of application to represent and signifie the second destruction of it though it may be not with the same exactness and propriety There are several other places that refer to the dissolution and subversion of the Earth at the Deluge Amos 9. 5 6. The Lord of Hosts is he that toucheth the Earth and it shall melt or be dissolv'd and it shall rise up wholly like a Flood and shall be drowned as by the Flood of Aegypt By this and by the next Verse the Prophet seems to allude to the Deluge and to the dissolution of the Earth that was then This in Job seems to be call'd breaking down the Earth and overturning the Earth Chap. 12. 14 15. Behold he breaketh down and it cannot be built again He shutteth upon man and there can be no opening Behold he withholdeth the waters and they dry up also he sendeth them out and they overturn the Earth Which place you may see paraphras'd Theor. Book 1. p. 91 92. We have already cited and shall hereafter
owning the Deluge to be universal supplies it self with Water from the Divine Omnipotency and says new Waters were created then for the nonce and again annihilated when the Deluge was to cease Both these explications you see and I know no more of note that are not obnoxious to the same exceptions differ from Moses in the substance or in one of the two substantial points and consequently more than ours doth The first changeth the Flood into a kind of national innundation and the second assigns other causes of it than Moses had assigned And as they both differ apparently from the Mosaical history so you may see them refuted upon other grounds also in the third Chapter of the First Book of the Theory This may be sufficient as to the History of the Flood by Moses But possibly it may be said the principal objection will arise from Moses his Six-days Creation in the first Chapter of Genesis where another sort of Earth than what we have form'd from the Chaos is represented to us namely a Terraqueous Globe such as our Earth is at present 'T is indeed very apparent that Moses hath accommodated his Six-days Creation to the present form of the Earth or to that which was before the eyes of the people when he writ But it is a great question whether that was ever intended for a true Physical account of the origine of the Earth or whether Moses did either Philosophize or Astronomize in that description The ancient Fathers when they answer the Heathens and the adversaries of Christianity do generally deny it as I am ready to make good upon another occafion And the thing it self bears in it evident marks of an accommodation and condescention to the vulgar notions concerning the form of the World Those that think otherwise and would make it literally and physically true in all the parts of it I desire them without entring upon the strict merits of the cause to determine these Preliminaries First whether the whole universe rise from a Terrestrial Chaos Secondly what Systeme of the World this Six-days Creation proceeds upon whether it supposes the Earth or the Sun for the Center Thirdly Whether the Sun and Fixt Stars are of a later date and a later birth than this Globe of Earth And lastly Where is the Region of the Super-celestial Waters When they have determin'd these Fundamentals we will proceed to other observations upon the Six-days work which will further assure us that 't is a narration suited to the capacity of the people and not to the strict and physical nature of things Besides we are to remember that Moses must be so interpreted in the first Chapter of Genesis as not to interfere with himself in other parts of his History nor to interfere with S. Peter or the Prophet David or any other Sacred Authors when they treat of the same matter Nor lastly so as to be repugnant to clear and uncontested Science For in things that concern the natural World that must always be consulted With these precautions let them try if they can reduce that narrative of the Origine of the World to physical truth so as to be consistent both with Nature and with Divine Revelation every where It is easily reconcileable to both if we suppose it writ in a Vulgar style and to the conceptions of the People And we cannot deny that a Vulgar style is often made use of in the holy Writings How freely and unconcernedly does Scripture speak of God Allmighty according to the opinions of the vulgar of his passions local motions parts and members of his body Which all are things that do not belong or are not compatible with the Divine nature according to truth and Science And if this liberty be taken as to God himself much more may it be taken as to his works And accordingly we see what motion the Scripture gives to the Sun what figure to the Earth what figure to the Heavens All according to the appearance of sence and popular credulity without any remorse for having transgressed the rules of intellectual truth This vulgar style of Scripture in describing the natures of things hath been often mistaken for the real sence and so become a stumbling block in the way of truth Thus the Anthropomorphites of old contended for the humane shape of God from the Letter of Scripture and brought many express Texts for their purpose but sound reason at length got the upper hand of Literal authority Then several of the Christian Fathers contended that there were no Antipodes and made that doctrine irreconcileable to Scripture But this also after a while went off and yielded to reason and experience Then the Motion of the Earth must by no means be allow'd as being contrary to Scripture for so it is indeed according to the Letter and Vulgar style But all intelligent Persons see thorough this argument and depend upon it no more in this case than in the former Lastly The original of the Earth from a Chaos drawn according to the rules of Physiology will not be admitted because it does not agree with the Scheme of the Six-days Creation But why may not this be writ in a Vulgar style as well as the rest Certainly there can be nothing more like a Vulgar style than to set God to work by the day and in Six-days to finish his task as he is there represented We may therefore probably hope that all these disguises of truth will at length fall off and that we shall see God and his Works in a pure and naked Light Thus I have finish'd what I had to say in confirmation of this Theory from Scripture I mean of the former part of it which depends chiefly upon the Deluge and the Antediluvian Earth When you have collated the places of Scripture on either side and laid them in the balance to be weigh'd one against another If you do but find them equal or near to an equal poise you know in whether Scale the Natural Reasons are to be laid and of what weight they ought to be in an argument of this kind There is a great difference betwixt Scripture with Philosophy on its side and Scripture with Philosophy against it when the question is concerning the Natural World And this is our Case which I leave now to the consideration of the unprejudic'd Reader and proceed to the Proof of the Second Part of the Theory THE later Part consists of the Conflagration of the World and the New Heavens and New Earth And seeing there is no dispute concerning the former of these two our task will now lie in a little compass Being onely this To prove that there will be New Heavens and a New Earth after the Conflagration This to my mind is sufficiently done already in the first second and third Chapters of the 4th Book both from Scripture and Antiquity whether Sacred or prophane and therefore at present we will onely make a short and easie review of
's this to the natural World whereof they were speaking this takes away neither antecedent nor consequent neither ground nor inference nor any way toucheth their argument which proceeded from the natural World to the natural World Therefore you must either suppose that the Apostle takes away their ground or he takes away nothing Secondly what is it that the Apostle tells these Scoffers they were ignorant of that there was a Deluge that destroyed Mankind They could not be ignorant of that nor pretend to be so It was therefore the constitution of those old Heavens and Earth and the change or destruction of them at the Deluge that they were ignorant of or did not attend to and of this the Apostle minds them These Scoffers appear to have been Jews by the phrase they use since the Fathers fell asleep which in both parts of it is a Judaical expression And does St. Peter tell the Jews that had Moses read to them every Sabbath that they were ignorant that Mankind was once destroyed with a Deluge in the Days of Noah or could they pretend to be ignorant of that without making themselves ridiculous both to Jews and Christians Besides these do not seem to have been of the vulgar amongst them for they bring a Philosophical argument for their opinion and also in their very argument they refer to the History of the Old Testament in saying Since the Fathers fell asleep amongst which Fathers Noah was one of the most remarkable Thirdly the design of the Apostle is to prove to them or to dispose them to the belief of the Conflagration or future destruction of the World which I suppose you will not deny to be a destruction of the natural World therefore to prove or perswade this he must use an argument taken from a precedent destruction of the natural World for to give an instance of the perishing of Mankind onely would not reach home to his purpose And you are to observe here that the Apostle does not proceed against them barely by authority for what would that have booted If these Scoffers would have submitted to authority they had already the authority of the Prophets and Apostles in this point but he deals with them at their own weapon and opposes reasons to reasons What hath been done may be done and if the natural World hath been once destroyed 't is not hard nor unreasonable to suppose those Prophecies to be true that say it shall be destroyed again Fourthly unless we understand here the natural World we make the Apostle both redundant in his discourse and also very obscure in an easie argument If his design was onely to tell them that Mankind was once destroy'd in a Deluge what 's that to the Heavens and the Earth the 5th Verse would be superfluous which yet he seems to make the foundation of his discourse He might have told them how Mankind had perish'd before with a Deluge and aggravated that destruction as much as he pleas'd without telling them how the Heavens and the Earth were constituted then what was that to the purpose if it had no dependance or connection with the other In the precedent Chapter Verse 5th when he speaks onely of the Floods destroying Mankind he mentions nothing of the Heavens or the Earth and if you make him to intend no more here what he says more is superfluous I also add that you make the Apostle very obscure and operose in a very easie argument How easie had it been for him without this Apparatus to have told them as he did before that God brought a Flood upon the World of the ungodly and not given us so much difficulty to understand his sence or such a suspicion and appearance that he intended something more for that there is at least a great appearance and tendency to a further sence I think none can deny And St. Austin Didymus Alex. Bede as we shall see hereafter understood it plainly of the natural World Also modern Expositors and Criticks as Cajetan Estius Drusius Heinsius have extended it to the natural World more or less tho' they had no Theory to mislead them nor so much as an hypothesis to support them but attended onely to the tenor of the Apostle's discourse which constrain'd them to that sence in whole or in part Fifthly the opposition carries it upon the natural World The opposition lies betwixt the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Heavens that were of old and the Earth and the present Heavens and Earth or the two natural Worlds And if they will not allow them to be oppos'd in their natures which yet we shall prove by and by at least they must be oppos'd in their date and as This is to perish by fire so That perish'd by water And if it perish'd by water it perish'd which is all we contend for at present Lastly if we would be as easily govern'd in the exposition of this place as we are of other places of Scripture it would be enough to suggest that in reason and fairness of interpretation the same World is destroy'd in the 6th verse that was describ'd in the foregoing verse but it is the Natural World that is describ'd there the Heavens and the Earth so and so constituted and therefore in fairness of interpretation they ought to be understood here that World being the subject that went immediately before and there being nothing in the words that restrains them to the animate World or to Mankind In the 2d ch ver 5. the Apostle does restrain the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by adding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the World of the ungodly but here 't is not only illimited but according to the context both preceding and following to be extended to the Natural World I say by the following context too for so it answers to the World that is to perish by Fire which will reach the frame of Nature as well as Mankind For a conclusion of this first point I will set down S. Austin's judgment in this case who in several parts of his works hath interpreted this place of S. Peter of the natural world As to the heavens he hath these words in his Exposition upon Genesis Hos etiam aerios calos quondam periisse Diluvio in quâdam earum quae Canonica appellantur Epistolâ legimus We read in one of the Epistles called Canonical meaning this of S. Peter's that the aerial heavens perish'd in the Deluge And he concerns himself there to let you know that it was not the starry heavens that were destroy'd the waters could not reach so high but the regions of our air Then afterwards he hath these words Faciliùs eos coelos secundum illius Epistolae authoritatem credimus periisse alios sicut ibi scribitur repositos We do more easily believe according to the authority of that Epistle those heavens to have perish'd and others as it is there written substituted in their place In