or Identity besides Consent of Will or that they all agree in the Uncreated Nature onely This Grossly asserted in the Dialogues of the Trinity Vulgarly Imputed to Athanasius and to that purpose also That Three Men are not Three Men but onely then when they Dissent from one another in Will and Opinion But these Dialogues Pseudepigraphous Nevertheless to be Granted that Athanasius himself in that Book of the Common Essence of the Persons seems to lay something too much Stresse upon this Common Nature Essence or Substance of the Three Persons as to the making of them all but One God However it is certain he does not there rely upon that alone and elsewhere acknowledgeth it to be insufficient The true Reason why Athanasius laid so great a Stresse upon the Homoousiotes not because this alone would make them One God but because they could not possibly be One God without it For if the Father be Uncreated and the Son a Creature then can they not both be One God Several Passages of Athanasius Cited to this purpose Those Expressions in him of One Godhead and the Sameness of the Godhead and One Essence or Substance in the Trinity not so to be understood as if the Three Persons were but several Names Notions or Modes of One Thing Page 612 616 Wherefore though Athanasius lay his Foundation in this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Common Specifick Unity of the Persons which is their Consubstantiality in order to their being One God yet does he superadde other Considerations also thereunto A◠first of all this That they are not Three Principles but onely One the Essence of the Father being the Root and Fountain of the Son and Spirit and the Three Hypostases gathered together under One Head Where Athanasius implies That were they perfectly Co-ordinate and Independent they would not be One but Three Gods Page 616 In the next place he further addeth That these Three Hypostases are not Three Separated Disjoined Things but Indivisibly United as the Splendor is Indivisible from the Sun and Wisedom from him that is Wise. That neither of these Persons could be without the other nor any thing come between them they so immediately Conjoyned together as that there is a kind of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Continuity betwixt them Page 616 617 Thirdly Athanasius goes yet higher affirming these Three Hypostases not onely to be Indivisibly Conjoyned but also to have a Mutual Inexistence in each other This afterwards called an Emperichoresis That of our Saviour I am in the Father and the Father in me therefore Quarrelled at by the Arians because they conceived of Things Incorporeal after a Corporeal manner That the Godhead of the Son is the Godhead of the Father and the Father exercises a Providence over all in the Son Page 617 619 Lastly Athanasius also in Sundry Places supposes the Three Divine Hypostases to make up one Entire Divinity as the Fountain and the Stream make up one entire River the Root Stock and Branches one entire Tree Accordingly the word Homoousios used by Athanasius in a further Sense not onely to signify things Agreeing in one Common and General Essence but also such as Essentially Concurr to the making up of One Entire thing That the Three Hypostases do Outwardly or Ad extrà produce all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 One and the self-same Action the Father By the Word In the Holy Spirit doing all things That all this Doctrine of Athanasius would have been readily assented to by Plato and his Genuine Followers The Platonick Christian therefore Concludeth That there is no such Real Difference betwixt the Genuine Platonick Trinity and that of the First Orthodox Anti-Arian Fathers as some conceive From which notwithstanding that Tritheistick Trinity of S. Greg. Nyssen Cyril and others of Three Co-ordinate Individuals under the same Species as Three Men seems to have been a Deviation Page 619 620 Hitherto the Platonick Christians Apology for the Genuine Platonick Trinity or Endeavour to reconcile it with the Doctrine of the Ancient Church Where nothing is asserted by our selves but all Submitted to the Judgement of the Learned in these Matters And whatsoever in Plato's Trinity shall be found Discrepan◠from the sense of the First Orthodox Anti-Arian Fathers utterly disclaimed by us Athanasius a great Instrument of Divine Providence for preserving the Christian Church from Lapsing into a kind of Paganick and Idolatrous Christianity ibid. The Reason of this Apology for the Genuine Platonick Trinity Because it is against the Interest of Christianity that this should be made more Discrepant from the Christian then indeed it is Moreover certain that this Genuine Platonick Trinity was Anti-Arian or rather the Arian Anti-Platonick Wherefore Socrates wondered that Georgius and Timotheus Presbyters should adhere to the Arian Faction when one of them was accounted much a Platonist the other an Origenist Page 620 621 Furthermore Platonick Pagans after Christianity highly approved of the Beginning of S. John's Gospell concerning the Logos as exactly agreeing with their Platonick Doctrine Thus Amelius in Eusebius and others A Platonist in S. Austine That it deserved to be writ in Golden Letters and set up in some Eminent places in every Christian Church But that which is most of all Considerable to Justify this Apology The generality of Christian Fathers before and after the Nicene Councill look'd upon this Platonick Trinity if not as really the Same thing with the Christian yet as approaching so near thereunto that it differed chiefly in Circumstances or Manner of Expression Thus Justin Martyr Clemens Alexandrinus Origen S. Cyprian or the Authour of the Book De Spiritu Sancto Eusebius Caesariensis and which is most of all to the purpose Athanasius himself he giving a Signal Testimony thereunto To which may be added S. Austine and Theodoret. S. Cyril though blaming the Platonick Subordination Himself supposing the Trinity to be Three Co-ordinate Individuals under the same Specifick Nature of the Godhead yet acknowledges that Plato was not altogether ignorant of the Truth c. But that Plato's Subordination of his Second Hypostasis to the First was not as the Arian of a Creature to the Creatour already made unquestionably Evident Page 621 625 Wherefore a Wonderfull Providence of Almighty God here to be taken notice of That this Doctrine of a Trinity of Divine Hypostases should be entertained in the Pagan World before Christianity as it were to prepare a way for the Reception of it amongst the Learned Which the Junior Platonists were so sensible of that besides their other Adulterations of the Platonick Trinity before mentioned for the Countenancing of their Polytheism and Idolatry they at length Innovated and Altered the whole Cabbala now no longer acknowledging a Trinity but at least a Quaternity of Divine Hypostases namely before and besides the Trinity another Hypostasis superiour thereunto and standing alone by it self This first started by Iamblichus carried on by Proclus taken notice of by S. Cyril besides which
the Second Book The Confutation of the Divine Fate Immoral There is a large Account given of the Pagan Polytheism to satisfy a very considerable Objection that lay in our way from thence Against the Naturality of the Idea of God as Including Oneliness and Singularity in it For had that upon enquiry been found True which is so commonly taken for granted That the generality of the Pagan Nations had constantly Scattered their Devotions amongst a multitude of Self-Existent and Independent Deities they acknowledging no One Sovereign Numen This would much have Stumbled the Naturality of the Divine Idea But now it being on the Contrary clearly Proved That the Pagan Theologers all along acknowledged One Sovereign and Omnipotent Deity from which all their other Gods were Generated or Created we have thereby not onely Removed the forementioned Objection out of the way but also Evinced That the Generality of mankind have constantly had a certain Prolepsis or Anticipation in their Minds concerning the Actual Existence of a God according to the True Idea of him And this was the rather done Fully and Carefully by us because we had not met with it sufficiently performed before A. Steuchus Eugubinus having laboured mâ—st in this Subject from whose profitable Industry though we shall no way detract yet whosoever will compare what he hath written with ours will find no Just Cause to think ours Superfluous and Unnecessary much less a Transcription out of his In which besides other things there is no Account at all given of the Many Pagan Poetical and Political Gods what they were which is so great a part of our Performance to prove them Really to have been but the Polyonymy of one God From whence it follows also That the Pagan Religion though sufficiently Faulty yet was not altogether so Nonsensical as the Atheists would represent it out of design that they might from thence infer all Religion to be nothing but a meer Cheat and Imposture they worshipping onely One Supreme God in the several Manifestations of his Goodness Power and Providence throughout the World together with his Inferiour Ministers Nevertheless we cannâ—t deny that being once engaged in this Subject we thought our Selves the more Concerned to doe the business thoroughly and effectually because of that Controversy lately Agitated concerning Idolatry which cannot otherwise be Decided then by giving a True Account of the Pagan Religion and the so Confident Affirmations of some That none could possibly be Guilty of Idolatry in the Scripture Sense who Believed One God the Creator of the whole world Whereas it is most certain on the contrary that the Pagan Polyteism and Idolatry consisted not in worshipping Many Creators or Uncreateds but in giving Religious Worship to Creatures besides the Creator they directing their Devotion as Athanasius plainly affirmeth of them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To One Uncreated onely but besides him to many Created Gods But as for the Polemick Management of this Controversy concerning Idolatry we leave it to other Learned Hands that are already engaged in it Moreover We have in this Fourth Chapter largely Insisted also upon the Trinity The Reason whereof was Because it came in our way and our Contents engaged us thereunto in order to the giving a full Account of the Pagan Theology it being certain that the Platonicks and Pythagoreans at least if not other Pagans also had their Trinity as well as Christians And we could not well avoid the Comparing of these Two together Vpon which Occasion we take notice of a Double Platonick Trinity the One Spurious and Adulterated of some latter Platonists the Other True and Genuine of Plato himself Parmenides and the Ancients The Former of which though it be Opposed by us to the Christian Trinity and Confuted yet betwixt the Latter and that do we find a Wonderfull Correspondence which is Largely Pursued in the Platonick Christians Apology Wherein notwithstanding nothing must be lookt upon as Dogmatically Asserted by us but onely Offered and Submitted to the Judgment of the Learned in these Matters We confining our selves in this Mysterious Point of the Holy Trinity within the Compass of those its Three Essentials declared First That it is not a Trinity of meer Names and Words or of Logical Notions onely But of Persons or Hypostases Secondly That none of those Persons or Hypostases are Creatures but all Uncreated And Lastly That they are all Three Truely and Really One God Nevertheless we acknowledge That we did therefore the more Copiously insist upon this Argument because of our then Designed Defence of Christianity we conceiving that this Parallelism betwixt the Ancient or Genuine Platonick and the Christian Trinity might be of some use to satisfy those amongst us who Boggle so much at the Trinity and look upon it as the Choak-Pear of Christianity when they shall find that the Freest Wits amongst the Pagans and the Best Philosophers who had nothing of Superstition to Determine them that way were so far from being shy of such an Hypothesis as that they were even Fond thereof And that the Pagans had indeed such a Cabbala amongst them which some perhaps will yet hardly believe notwithstanding all that we have said might be further convinced from that memorable Relation in Plutarch of Thespesius Solensis who after he had been lookt upon as Dead for Three days Reviving Affirmed amongst other things which he thought he saw or heard in the mean time in his Ecstasy This Of Three Gods in the Form of a Triangle pouring in Streams into one another Orpheus his Soul being said to have arrived so far accordingly as from the Testimonies of other Pagan Writers we have proved that a Trinity of Divine Hypostases was a part of the Orphick Cabbala True indeed our Belief of the Holy Trinity is Founded upon no Pagan Cabbala's but onely Scripture Revelation it being that which Christians are or should be all Baptized into Nevertheless these things are Reasonably noted by us to this end That that should not be made a Prejudice Against Christianity and Revealed Religion nor lookt upon as such an Affrightfull Bugbear or Mormo in it which even Pagan Philosophers themselves and those of the most Accomplished Intellectuals and Uncaptivated Minds though having neither Councils nor Creeds nor Scriptures had so great a Propensity and Readiness to entertain and such a Veneration for In this Fourth Chapter We were necessitated by the Matter it self to run out into Philology and Antiquity as also in the other Parts of the Book we do often give an Account of the Doctrine of the Ancients which however some Over-severe Philosophers may look upon Fastidiously or Undervalue and Depretiate yet as we conceived it often Necessary so possibly may the Variety thereof not be Ungratefull to others and this Mixture of Philology throughout the Whole Sweeten and Allay the Severity of Philosophy to them The main thing which the Book pretends to in the mean time being the Philosophy of Religion But for our
World 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epicurus according to Vulgar Opinion leaves a God but according to the Nature of things none at all And as Epicurus so other Atheists in like manner have commonly had their Vizards and Disguises Atheism for the most part prudenly chusing to walk abroad in Masquerade And though some over-credulous Persons have been so far imposed upon hereby as to conclude that there was hardly any such thing as an Atheist any where in the World yet they that are Sagacious may easily look through these thin Veils and Disguises and perceive these Atheists oftentimes insinuating their Atheism even then when they most of all profess themselves Theists by affirming that it is impossible to have any Idaea or Conception at all of God and that as he is not Finite so he cannot be Infinite and that no Knowledge or Understanding is to be attributed to him which is in effect to say that there is no such thing But whosoever entertains the Democritick Principles that is both rejects Forms and Qualities of Body and makes all things to be Body though he pretend never so much to hold a Corporeal Deity yet he is not at all to be believed in it it being a thing plainly Contradictious to those Principles III. Wherefore this Mongrel Philosophy which Leucippus Democritus and Protagoras were the Founders of and which was entertained afterwards by Epicurus that makes as Laertius writes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sensless Atoms to be the first Principles not only of all Bodies for that was a thing admitted before by Empedocles and other Atomists that were Theists but also of All things whatsoever in the whole Universe and therefore of Soul and Mind too this I say was really nothing else but a Philosophical Form of Atheology a Gigantical and Titanical Attempt to dethrone the Deity not only by Salving all the Phaenomena of the World without a God but also by laying down such Principles from whence it must needs follow that there could be neither an Incorporeal nor Corporeal Deity It was Atheism openly Swaggering under the glorious Appearance of Wisdom and Philosophy There is indeed another Form of Atheism which insisting on the Vulgar way of Philosophizing by Forms and Qualities we for distinction sake shall call Stratonical such as being too modest and shame-faced to fetch all things from the Fortuitous Motion of Atoms would therefore allow to the several Parts of Matter a certain Kind of Natural though not Animal Perception such as is devoid of Reflexive Consciousness together with a Plastick power whereby they may be able Artificially and Methodically to Form and Frame themselves to the best advantage of their Respective Capabilities something like to Aristotle's Nature but that it hath no dependence at all upon any higher Mind or Deity And these Atheists may be also called Hylozoick as the other Atomick because they derive all things in the whole Universe not only Sensitive but also Rational Souls together with the Artificial Frame of Animals from the Life of the Matter But this kind of Atheism seems to be but an unshapen Embryo of some Dark and Cloudy Brains that was never yet digested into an entire System nor could be brought into any such tolerable Form as to have the confidence to shew it self abroad in full and open View But the Democritik and Atomick Atheism as it is the boldest and rankest of all Atheisms it not only undertaking to salve all Phaenomena by Matter Fortuitously moved without a God but also to demonmonstrate that there cannot be so much as a Corporeal Deity so it is that alone which pretending to an entire and coherent System hath publickly appeared upon the Stage and therefore doth in a manner only deserve our Consideration And now we shall exhibit a full View and Prospect of it and discover all its Dark Mysteries and Profundities we being much of this Perswasion that a plain and naked Representation of them will be a great part of a Confutation at least not doubting but it will be made to appear that though this Monster big-swoln with a Puffy shew of Wisdom strutt and stalk so Gigantically and march with such a kind of stately Philosophick Grandeur yet it is indeed but like the Giant Orgoglio in our English Poet a mere Empty Bladder blown up with vain Conceit an Empusa Phantasm or Spectre the Off-spring of Night and Darkness Non-sence and Contradiction And yet for all that we shall not wrong it the least in our Representation but give it all possible Advantages of Strength and Plausibility that so the Atheists may have no Cause to pretend as they are wont to do in such Cases that either we did not understand their Mysteries nor apprehend the full strength of their Cause or else did purposely smother and conceal it Which indeed we have been so far from that we must confess we were not altogether unwilling this business of theirs should look a little like something that might deserve a Confutation And whether the Atheists ought not rather to give us Thanks for Mending and Improving their Arguments then complain that we have any way Empaired them we shall leave it to the Censure of impartial Judgments IV. Plato tells us that even amongst those Pagans in his time there was generally such a Religious Humor that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whosoever had but the least of Seriousness and Sobriety in them whensoever they took in hand any Enterprize whether great or small they would always invoke the Deity for Assistance and Direction Adding moreover that himself should be very faulty if in his Timaeus when he was to treat about so grand a point concerning the whole World 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whether it were made or unmade he should not make his Entrance thereinto by a Religious Invocation of the Deity Wherefore certainly it could not be less than a piece of Impiety in a Christian being to treat concerning the Deity it self and to produce all that Prophane and Unhallowed stuff of Atheists out of their Dark Corners in order to a Confutation and the better Confirmation of our Faith in the Truth of his Existence not to implore his Direction and Assistance And I know no Reason but that we may well do it in that same Litany of Plato's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that we may first speak agreeably to his own mind or becomingly of his Nature and then consentaneously with our Selves V. Now there are these two things here to be performed by us First to discover and produce the Chief Heads of Arguments or Grounds of Reason insisted on by the Atheists to disprove a Deity evincing withall briefly the Ineffectualness and Falsness of them And Secondly to shew how they Endeavour either to Confute or Salve consistently with their own Principles all those Phaenomenae which are commonly urg'd against them to prove a Deity and Incorporeal Substance manifesting likewise the Invalidity thereof The grounds of Reason alledged for the Atheistical Hypothesis
Platonical or Grecanical therefore was not Egyptian The only Instance that Casaubon insists upon is this Dogma in the Trismegistick Books That Nothing in the World perisheth and that Death is not the Destruction but Change and Translation of Things only Which because he finds amongst some of the Greek Philosophers he resolves to be peculiar to them only and not common with the Egyptians But since the chief design and tendency of that Dogma was plainly to maintain the Immortality preexistence and Transmigration of Souls which Doctrine was unquestionably derived from the Egyptians there is little reason to doubt but that this Dogma was it self Egyptian also And Phythagoras who was the chief Propagator of this Doctrine amongst the Greeks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That no real Entity in Generations and Corruptions was Made or destroyed according to those Ovidian Verses before cited Nec perit in toto quicquam mihi credite mundo Sed variat faciemque novat Nascique vocatur Incipere esse Aliud c. did in all probability derive it together with its superstructure the Preexistence and Transmigration of Souls at once from the Egyptians But it is observable that the Egyptians had also a peculiar ground of their own for this Dogma which we do not find insisted upon by the Greek Philosophers and it is thus expressed in the Eighth of Ficinus his Hermetick Books or Chapters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If the World be a Second God and an Immortal Animal then is it impossible that any part of this Immortal Animal should perish or come to nothing but all things in the World are Parts of this great Mundane Animal and chiefly Man who is a Rational Animal Which same Notion we find also insisted on in the Asclepian Dialogue Secundum Deum hunc crede ô Asclepi omnia gubernantem omniaque mundana illustrantem animalia Si enim Animal Mundus vivens semper fuit est erit nihil in mundo mortale est viventis enim uniuscujusque Partis quae in ipso mundo sicut in uno eodemque Animale semper vivente nullus est mortalitatis locus Where though the Latin be a little imperfect yet the sence is this You are to believe the World ô Asclepius to be a Second God governing all things and illustrating all Mundane Animals Now if the World be a Living Animal and Immortal then there is nothing Mortal in it there being no place for mortality as to any Living Part or Member of that Mundane Animal that always Liveth Notwithstanding which we deny not but that though Pythagoras First derived this Notion from the Egyptians yet he and his Followers might probably improve the same farther as Plato tells us that the Greeks generally did what they received from the Barbarians namely to the taking away the Qualities and Forms of Bodies and resolving all Corporeal Things into Magnitude Figure and Motion But that there is indeed some of the old Egyptian Learning contained in these Trismegistick Books now extant shall be clearly proved afterwards when we come to speak of that Grand Mystery of the Egyptian Theology derived by Orpheus from them That God is All. To conclude Jamblichus his judgment in this case ought without controversie to be far preferred before Casaubon's both by reason of his great Antiquity and his being much better skilled not only in the Greek but also the Egyptian Learning That the Books imputed to Hermes Trismegist did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 really contain the Hermaick Opinions though they spake sometimes the Language of the Greek Philosophers Wherefore upon all these Considerations we conceive it reasonable to conclude that though there have been some Hermaick Books counterfeited by Christians since Jamblichus his time as namely the Paemander and The Sermon in the Mount concerning Regeneration neither of which are found cited by any ancient Father yet there were other Hermaick Books which though not written by Hermes Trismegist himself nor all of them in the Egyptian Language but some of them in Greek were truly Egyptian and did for the substance of them contain the Hermaick Doctrine Such probably were those mentioned by the Ancient Fathers but since lost as the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which seems to have been a discourse concerning the Cosmogonia and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the like And such also may some of these Hermaick Books be that are still extant as to instance particularly the Asclepian Dialogue entituled in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Perfect Oration and in all probability translated into Latin by Apuleius For it can hardly be imagined that he who was so devout a Pagan so learned a Philosopher and so Witty a man should be so far imposed upon by a counterfeit Trismegistick Book and mere Christian Cheat as to bestow Translating upon it and recommend it to the World as that which was genuinely Pagan But however whether Apuleius were the Translator of this Asclepian Dialogue or no it is evident that the Spirit of it is not at all Christian but rankly Pagan one Instance whereof we have in its glorying of a power that men have of Making Gods upon which accompt St. Austin thought fit to concern himself in the confutation of it Moreover it being extant and vulgarly known before Jamblichus his time it must needs be included in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and consequently receive this attestation from him that it did contain not merely the Greekish but the Hermaical and Egyptian Doctrine There are indeed some Objections made against this as first from what we read in this Dialogue concerning the Purgation of the World partly by Water and partly by Fire Tunc ille Dominus Pater Deus Primipotens Vnus Gubernator mundi intuens in mores factaque hominum voluntate sua quae est Dei Benignitas vitiis resistens corruptelae errorem revocans malignitatem omnem vel Alluvione diluens vel igne consumens ad antiquam faciem mundum revocabit When the World becomes thus Degenerate then that Lord and Father the Supreme God and the only Governour of the World beholding the manners and deeds of men by his Will which is his Benignity always resisting vice and restoring things from their Degeneracy will either wash away the Malignity of the World by Water or else consume it by Fire and restore it to its ancient form again But since we find in Julius Firmicus that there was a Tradition amongst the Egyptians concerning the Apocatastasis of the World partim per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 partim per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 partly by Inundation and partly by Conflagration this Objection can signifie nothing Wherefore there is another Objection that hath some more plausibility from that Prophecy which we find in this Asclepius concerning the overthrow of the Egyptian Paganism ushered in with much Lamentation in these words Tunc Terra ista sanctissima sedes Delubrorum Sepulchrorum erit mortuorumque plenissima Then
was for his free and open condemning those Traditions concerning the Gods wherein Wicked Dishonest and Unjust Actions were imputed to them For when Euthyphro having accused his own Father as guilty of Murther meerly for committing a Homicide into prison who hapned to die there would justifie himself from the examples of the Gods namely Jupiter and Saturn because Jupiter the Best and Justest of the Gods had committed his Father Saturn to Prison for devouring his sons as Saturn himself also had castrated his Father Caelius for some miscarriages of his Socrates thus bespeaks him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Is not this the very thing O Euthyphro for which I am accused namely because when I hear any one affirming such matters as these concerning the Gods I am very loath to believe them and stick not Publickly to declare my dislike of them And can you O Euthyphro in good earnest think that there are indeed Wars and Contentions amongst the Gods and that those other things were also done by them which Poets and Painters commonly impute to them such as the Peplum or Veil of Minerva which in the Panathenaicks is with great pomp and ceremony brought into the Acropolis is embroidered all over with Thus we see that Socrates though he asserted one Supreme Deity yet he acknowledged notwithstanding other Inferiour created Gods together with the rest of the Pagans honouring and worshipping them only he disliked those Poetick Fables concerning them believed at that time by the Vulgar in which all manner of Unjust and Immoral Actions were Fathered on them which together with the Envy of many was the only true reason why he was then accused of Impiety and Atheism It hath been also affirmed by many that Plato really asserted One only God and no more and that therefore whensoever he speaks of Gods Plurally he must be understood to have done this not according to his own Judgment but only in a way of Politick Compliance with the Athenians and for fear of being made to drink poyson in like manner as Socrates was In confirmation of which opinion there is also a Passage cited out of that Thirteenth Epistle of Plato's to Dionysius wherein he gives this as a Mark whereby his Serious Epistles and such as were written according to the true sence of his own mind might by his friends be distinguished from those which were otherwise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 When I begin my Epistles with God then may you conclude I write seriously but not so when I begin with Gods And this place seems to be therefore the more Authentick because it was long since produced by Eusebius to this very purpose namely to prove that Plato acknowledged One Only God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is manifest that Plato really acknowledged One only God however in compliance with the Language of the Greeks he often spake of Gods Plurally from that Epistle of his to Dionysius wherein he gives this Symbol or Mark whereby he might be known to write seriously namely when he began his Epistles with God and not with Gods Notwithstanding which we have allready manifested out of Plato's Timaeus that he did in good earnest assert a Plurality of Gods by which Gods of his are to be understood Animated or Intellectual Beings Superiour to Men to whom there is an Honour and Worship from men due He therein declaring not only the Sun and Moon and Stars but also the Earth it self as Animated to be a God or Goddess For though it be now read in our Copies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the Earth was the Oldest of all the Bodies within the Heavens yet it is certain that anciently it was read otherwise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Oldest of the Gods not only from Proclus and Cicero but also from Laertius writing thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Though Plato 's Gods were for the most part Fiery yet did he suppose the Earth to be a God or Goddess too affirming it to be the Oldest of all the Gods within the Heavens Made or Created to distinguish day and night by its Diurnal Circumgyration upon its own Axis in the Middle or Centre of the World For Plato when he wrote his Timaeus acknowledged only the Diurnal Motion of the Earth though afterwards he is said to have admitted its Annual too And the same might be further evinced from all his other writings but especially his Book of Laws together with his Epinomis said to have been written by him in his old age in which he much insists upon the Godships of the Sun Moon and Stars and complains that the young Gentlemen of Athens were then so much infected with that Anaxagorean Doctrine which made them to be nothing but Inanimate Stones and Earth as also he approves of that then vulgarly received Custom of Worshipping the Rising and Setting Sun and Moon as Gods to which in all probability he conformed himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Prostrations and Adorations that are used both by the Greeks and all Barbarians towards the Rising and Setting Sun and Moon As well in their Prosperities as Adversities declare them to be unquestionably esteemed Gods Wherefore we cannot otherwise conclude but that this Thirteenth Epistle of Plato to Dionysius though extant it seems before Eusebius his time yet was Supposititious and counterfeit by some Zealous but Ignorant Christian. As there is accordingly a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Brand of Bastardy prefixed to it in all the Editions of Plato's Works However though Plato acknowledged and worshiphed Many Gods yet is it undeniably evident that he was no Polyarchist but a Monarchist an assertor of One Supreme God the only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Self-originated Being the maker of the Heaven and Earth and of all those other Gods For first it is plain that according to Plato the Soul of the whole World was not it self Eternal much less Self-existent but Made or produced by God in time though indeed before its Body the World from these words of his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God did not fabricate or make the Soul of the world in the same order that we now treat concerning it that is After it as Junior to it but that which was to rule over the world as its Body being more excellent he made it First and Seniour to the same Upon which account Aristotle quarrels with Plato as contradicting himself in that he affirmed the Soul to be a Principle and yet supposed it not to be Eternal but Made together with the Heaven 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neither is it possible for Plato here to extricate himself who sometimes declares the Soul to be a Principle as that which Moves it self and yet affirms it again not to be Eternal but made together with the Heaven For which cause some Platonists conclude that Plato asserted a Double Psyche one the Third Hypostasis of his Trinity and Eternal the other Created in Time together with the World
sermone 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 indicatur qui Graecis vel Gentilibus auctoribus ostenditur quum de Incorporeâ Naturâ à Philosophis disputatur In hoc enim Libello Incorporeum Daemonium dixit pro eo quod ipse ille quicunque est habitus vel circumscriptio Daemonici Corporis non est similis huic nostro Crassiori vel Visibili Corpori sed secundum sensum ejus qui composuit illam Scripturam intelligendum est quod dixit non esse tale Corpus quale habent Daemones quod est naturaliter Subtile velut Aura Tenue propter hoc vel imputatur à multis vel dicitur Incorporeum sed habere se Corpus Solidum Palpabile The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Incorporeal is not to be taken here in that sense wherein it is used by the Greek and Gentile Writers when they Philosophised concerning the Incorporeal Nature But a Demon is here said to be Incorporeal because of the Disposition of the Demoniack Body not like to this Gross and Visible Body of ours So that the sense is as if Christ should have said I have not such a Body as the Demons have which is naturally Subtle Thin and Soft as the Air and therefore is either supposed to be by many or at least called Incorporeal but the Body which I now have is Solid and Palpable Where we see plainly that Angels though supposed to have Bodies may notwithstanding be called Incorporeal by reason of the Tenuity and Subtlety of those Bodies comparatively with the Grossness and Solidity of these our Terrestrial Bodies But that indeed which now most of all inclineth some to this Perswasion That Angels have nothing at all Corporeal hanging about them is a Religious regard to the Authority of the Third Lateran Council having passed its Approbation upon this Doctrine as if the Seventh Oecumenical so called or Second Nicene wherein the contrary was before owned and allowed were not of equal force at least to counterbalance the other But though this Doctrine of Angels or all Created Vnderstanding Beings Superiour to men having a Corporeal Indument or Clothing does so exactly agree with the Old Pythagorick Cabbala yet have we reason to think that it was not therefore meerly borrowed or derived from thence by the Ancient Fathers but that they were led into it by the Scripture it self For first the Historick Phaenomena of Angels in the Scripture are such as cannot well be otherwise Salved than by supposing them to have Bodies and then not to lay any stress upon those words of the Psalmist Who maketh his Angels Spirits and Ministers a flame of fire though with good reason by the Ancient Fathers interpreted to this sense because they may possibly be understood otherwise as sometime they are by Rabbinical Commentators nor to insist upon those passages of S. Paul where he speaks of the Tongues of Angels and of the Voice of an Arch-Angel and such like there are several other Places in Scripture which seem plainly to confirm this Opinion As first that of our Saviour before mentioned to this purpose Luke the 20. the 35. They who shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world and the Resurrection from the dead neither Marry nor are given in Marriage neither can they die any more for they are Equal unto the Angels For were Angels utterly devoid of all Bodies then would the Souls of Good men in a State of Separation and without any Resurrection be rather Equal to Angels than after a Resurrection of their Bodies Wherefore the Natural meaning of these words seems to be this as St. Austin hath interpreted them that the Souls of Good men after the Resurrection shall have Corpora Angelica Angelical Bodies and Qualia sunt Angelorum Corpora such Bodies as those of Angels are Wherein it is supposed that Angels also have Bodies but of a very different kind from those of ours here Again that of St. Jude where he writeth thus of the Devils The Angels which kept not their First Estate or rather according to the Vulgar Latin Suum Principatum Their own Principality but left thei◠Proper Habitation or Dwelling House hath he reserved in everlasting Chains under darkness unto the Judgement of the Great Day In which words it is first Implied that the Devils were Created by God Pure as well as the other Angels but that they kept not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Their own Principality That is their Lordly Power and Dominion over their Worser and Inferiour part they having also a certain Duplicity in their Nature of a Better and Worser Principle of a Superiour Part which ought to Rule and Govern and of an Inferiour which out to be Governed nor is it indeed otherwise easily conceivable how they should be Capable of Sinning And this Inferiour Part in Angels seems to have a respect to something that is Corporeal or Bodily in them also as well as it hath in men But then in the next place St. Jude addeth as the Immediate Result and Natural Consequent of these Angels Sinning that they thereby Left or Lost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Suum Proprium Domicilium That is not only their Dwelling Place at Large those Etherial Countries and Heavenly Regions above but also their Proper Dwelling House or Immediate Mansion to wit their Heavenly Body For as much as that Heavenly Body which Good men expect after the Resurrection is thus called by St. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Our Habitation or Dwelling House that is from Heaven The Heavenly Body is the Proper House or Dwelling Clothing or Indument both of Angelical and Humane Souls and this is that which makes them fit Inhabitants for the Heavenly Regions This I say was the Natural effect and Consequent of these Angels Sinning their Leaving or Loosing their Pure Heavenly Body which became thereupon forthwith Obscured and Incrassated the Bodies of Spirits Incorporate always bearing a Correspondent Purity or Impurity to the different disposition of their Mind or Soul But then again in the last place that which was thus in Part the Natural Result of their Sin was also by the Just Judgment of God converted into their Punishment For their Etherial Bodies being thus changed into Gross Aerial Feculent and Vaporous ones themselves were Immediately hereupon as St. Peter in the Parallel Place expresseth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cast down into Tartarus and there Imprisoned or Reserved in Chains Under Darkness until the Judgment of the Great Day Where it is observable that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used by St. Peter is the very same that Apollodorus and other Greek Writers frequently make use of in a like case when they speak of the Titan's being Cast down from Heaven which seems to have been Really nothing else but this Fall of Angels Poetically Mythologized And by Tartarus here in all probability is meant this Lower Caliginous Air or Atmosphere of the Earth according to that of St. Austin concerning these
Angels Post Peccatum in hanc sunt detrusi Caliginem ubi tamen Aer That after their Sin they were thrust down down into the Misty darkness of this Lower Air. And here are they as it were Chained and Fettered also by that same Weight of their Gross and heavy Bodies which first sunk them down hither this not suffering them to reascend up or return back to those Bright Etherial Regions above And being thus for the present Imprisoned in this Lower Tartarus or Caliginous Air or Atmosphere they are indeed here Kept and Reserved in Custody unto the Judgment of the Great Day and General Assizes however they may notwithstanding in the mean time seem to Domineer and Lord it for a while here And Lastly our Saviours Go ye Cursed into everlasting fire prepared for the Devil and his Angels seems to be a clear Confirmation of Devils being Bodied because First to Allegorize this Fire into nothing but Remorse of Conscience would indanger the rendering of other Points of our Religion uncertain also but to say that Incorporeal Substances Vnunited to Bodies can be tormented with Fire is as much as in us lieth to expose Christianity and the Scripture to the Scorn and Contempt of all Philosophers and Philosophick Wits Wherefore Psellus laies no small stress upon this Place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I am also convinced of this That Demons have Bodies from the words of our Saviour affirming That they shall be Punished with Fire which how could it be were they altogether Incorporeal it being Impossible for that which is both it self Incorporeal and Vitally Vnunited to any Body to suffer from a Body Wherefore of necessity it must be granted by us Christians that Devils shall receive Punishment of Sense and Pain hereafter in Bodies capable of Suffering Now if Angels in general that is all Created Beings Superiour to men be Substances Incorporeal or Souls Vitally United to Bodies though not always the same but sometimes of one kind and sometimes times of another and never quite Separate from all Body it may seem probable from hence that though there be other Incorporeal Substances besides the Deity yet Vita Incorporea a Life perfectly Incorporeal in the forementioned Origenick Sense or Sine Corporeae Adjectionis Societate Vivere to Live altogether without the Society of any Corporeal Adjection is a Privilege properly belonging to the Holy Trinity only and consequently therefore that Humane Souls when by Death they are Devested of these Gross Earthly Bodies they do not then Live and Act Compleatly without the Conjunction of any Body and so continue till the Resurrection or Day of Judgment this Being a priviledge which not so much as the Angels themselves and therefore no Created Finite Being is capable of the Imperfection of whose Nature necessarily requires the Conjunction of some Body with them to make them up Complete without which it is unconceivable how they should either have Sense or Imagination And Thus doth Origen Consentaneously to his own Principles Conclude 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Our Soul which in its own Nature is Incoâ—poreal and Invisible in whatsoever Corporeal place it Existeth doth always stand in need of a Body suitable to the Nature of that place respectively Which Body it sometimes beareth having Put Off that which before was necessary but is now Superfluous for the Following State and sometimes again Putting On something to what before it had now standing in need of some better Clothing to fit it for those more Pure Etherial and Heavenly places But in what there follows we conceive that Origen's sense having not been rightly understood his words have been altered and perverted and that the whole place ought to be read thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Sense whereof iâ— this The Soul descending hither into Generation Put on first that Body which was useful for it whilst to continue in the Womb and then again afterward such a Body as was necessary for it to Live here upon the Earth in Again it having here a Two fold kind of Body the one of which is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by St. Paul being a more Subtle Body which it had before the other the Superinduced Earthly House necessarily subservient to this Schenos here the Scripture Oracles affirm that the Earthly House of this Schenos shall be corrupted or dissolved but the Schenos it self Superindue or Put On a House not made with hands Eternal in the Heavens The same declaring that the Corruptible shall put on Incorruption and the Mortal Immortality Where it is plain that Origen takes that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in St. Paul 1 Cor. 5.1 for a Subtle Body which the Soul had before its Terrene Nativity and which Continues with it after death but in good men will at last Superindue or Put on without Death the Clothing of Immortality Neither can there be a better Commentary upon this place of Origen than those Excerpta out of Methodius the Martyr in Photius though seeming to be Vitiated also where as we conceive the sense of Origen and his Followers is first contained in those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That in St. Paul the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is One thing and the Earthly House of this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Another thing and We that is our Souls a Third thing distinct from both And then it is further declared in this that follows 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That this short Life of our Earthly Body being destroyed our Soul shall then have before the Resurrection a dwelling from God until we shall at last receive it renewed restored and so made an Incorruptible House Wherefore in this we groan desirous not to put off all Body but to put on Life or Immortality upon the Body which we shall then have For that House which is from Heaven That we desire to put on is Immortality Moreover that the Soul is not altogether Naked after Death the same Origen endeavours to confirm further from that of our Saviour concerning the Rich Man and Lazarus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Rich man Punished and the Poor man refreshed in Abraham 's bosome before the Coming of our Saviour and before the end of the world and therefore before the Resurrection plainly teaches that even now also after Death the Soul useth a Body He thinketh the same also to be further proved from the Visible Apparition of Samuel's Ghost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Samuel also visibly appearing after Death maketh it manifest that his Soul was then clothed with a Body To which he adds in Photius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. That the Exteriour Form and Figure of the Souls Body after Death doth resemble that of the Gross Terrestrial Body here in this Life All the Histories of Apparitions making Ghosts or the Souls of the Dead to appear in the same Form which their Bodies had before This therefore as was observed is that which Origen understands by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
betwixt the Death of the Body and the Resurrection or Day of Judgment the Souls of the Dead be said to suffer such a Fire as can do no Execution upon those who have no Wood Hay nor Stuble to burn up but shall be felt by such as have made such Buildings or Superstructures c. I reprehend it not because perhaps it is True The Opinion here mentioned is thus Expressed by Origen in his Fifth Book against Celsus which very place St. Austin seems to have had respect to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Celsus did not understand That this Fire as well according to the Hebrews and Christians as to some of the Greeks will be Purgatory to the World as also to every one of those persons who stand in need of such Punishment and Remedy by Fire which Fire can do no Execution upon those who have no combustible Matter in them but will be felt by such as in the Moral structure of their Thoughts Words and Actions have built up Wood Hay and Stuble Now since Souls cannot suffer from Fire nor any thing else in way of Sense or Pain without being Vitally Vnited to some Body we may conclude that St. Austin when he wrote this was not altogether abhorrent from Souls having Bodies after Death Hitherto have we declared How the Ancient Asserters of Incorporeal Substance as Vnextended did repel the Assaults of Atheists and Corporealists made against it but especially How they quitted themselves of that Absurdity of the Illocality and Immobility of Finite Created Spirits by Supposing them always to be Vitally Vnited to some Bodies and consequently by the Locality of those their respective Bodies determined to Here and There according to that of Origen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Our Soul stands in need of a Body in order to Local Motions We shall in the next place declare what Grounds of Reason there were which induced those Ancients to assert and maintain a thing so repugnant to Sense and Imagination and consequently to all Vulgar Apprehension as a Substance in it self Vnextended Indistant and Indivisible or Devoid of Magnitude and Parts Wherein we shall only represent the Sense of these Ancient Incorporealists so far as we can to the best advantage in order to their Vindication against Atheists and Materialists our selves in the mean time not asserting any thing but leaving every one that can to make his own Judgment and so either to close with this or that other following Hypothesis of Extended Incorporeals Now it is here observable That it was a thing formerly taken for granted on both sides as well by the Asserters as the Deniers of Incorporeal Substance That there is but One kind of Extension only and Consequently that whatsoever hath Magnitude and Parts or One Thing Without Another is not only Intellectually and Logically but also Really and Physically Divisible or Discerpible as likewise Antitypous and Impenetrable so that it cannot Coexist with a Body in the same Place from whence it follows that whatsoever Arguments do evince That there is some other Substance besides Body the same do therefore Demonstrate according to the Sense of these Ancients as well Corporealists as Incorporealists that there is Something Vnextended it being supposed by them both alike that whatsoever is Extended is Body Nevertheless we shall here principally propound such Considerations of theirs as tend directly to Prove That there is something Vnextendedly Incorporeal And that an Vnextended Deity is no Impossible Idea to wit from hence because there is something Vnextended even in our very Selves Where not to repeat the forementioned Ratiocinacion of Simplicius That whatsoever can Act and Reflect upon its Whole Self cannot possibly be Extended nor have Parts Distant from one another Plotinus first argues after this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What then will they say who contend that the Soul is a Body or Extended whether or no will they grant concerning every Part of the Soul in the same Body as that of it which is in the Foot and that in the Hand and that in the Brain c. and again every Part of those Parts that each of them is Soul such as the Whole If this be consented to then is it plain that Magnitude or such a Quantity would confer nothing at all to the Essence of the Soul as it would do were it an Extended Thing but the Whole would be in many Parts or Places which is a thing that cannot possibly belong to Body That the same Whole should be in more and That a Part should be what the whole is But if they will not grant every Part of their Extended Soul to be Soul then according to them must the Soul be Made up and Compounded of Soul-less Things Which Argument is else where again thus propounded by him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If every one of the Parts of this Extended Soul or Mind have Life in it then would any one of them alone be sufficient But to say that though none of the Parts alone bave Life in them yet the Conjunction of them altogether maketh Life is absurd it being impossible that Life and Soul should result from a Congeries of Lifeless and Souless things or that Mindless things put together should beget Mind The sum of this Argumentation is this That either every part of an Extended Soul is Soul and of an Extended Mind Mind or not Now if no Part of a Soul as supposed to be Extended alone be Soul or have Life and Mind in it then is it certain that the Whole resulting from all the Parts could have no Life nor Mind because Nothing can Causally come from Nothing It is true indeed that Corporeal Qualities and Forms according to the Atomick Physiology result from a Composition and Contexture of Atoms or Parts each of which taken alone by themselves have nothing of that Quality or Form in them Ne ex Albis Alba rearis Aut ea quae Nigrant nigro de Semine nata You are not to think that White things are made out of White principles nor Black things out of Black but the Reason of the difference here is plain because these Qualities and Forms are not Entities Really distinct from the Magnitude Figure Site and Motion of Parts but only such a Composition of them as cause different Phancies in us but Life and Vnderstanding Soul and Mind are Entities Really distinct from Magnitude Figure Site and Motion of Parts they are neither meer Phancies nor Syllables of things but Simple and Vncompounded Realities But if every supposed Part of a Soul be Soul and of a Mind Mind then would all the rest of it besides any One Part be Superfluous or indeed every supposed Part thereof would be the Same with the Whole from whence it follows that it could not be Extended or have any Real Parts at all since no Part of an Extended thing can possibly be the Same with the Whole Again the same Philosopher endeavours further to prove
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
Piece of State-craft or Cozenage nor yet have been able to possess the Minds of men every-where with such a constant Awe and Dread of an Invisible Nothing The World would long since have discovered this Cheat and suspected a Plot upon their Liberty in the Fiction of a God at least Governours themselves would have understood it many of which notwithstanding as much awed with the Fear of this Invisiblâ— Nothing as any Others Other Cheats and Juggles when once Detected no longer Practised But Religion now as much in Credit as ever though so long since Decried by Atheists for a Political Cheat. That Christianity a Religion Founded in no Humane Policy prevailed over the Craft and Power of all Civill Sovereigns and Conquered the Persecuting World by suffering Deaths and Martyrdoms This Presignified by the Prophetick Spirit Page 691 692 Had the Idea of God been an Arbitrarious Figment not conceivable hâ—w men should have universally agreed in the same and the Attributes belonging thereunto This Argument used by Sextus Nor that Civil Sovereigns themselves should so universally have Jumped in it Page 692 693 Furthermore Not Conceivable how this Thought or Idea of a God should have been Formed by any had it been the Idea of Nothing The Superficialness of Atheists in Pretending that Politicians by telling men of Such a thing put the Idea into their Minds No Notions or Idea's put into mens minds by Words but onely the Phantasms of the Sounds Though all Learning be not Remembrance yet is all Humane Teaching but Maieutical or Obstetricious not the Filling of the Soul as a Vessel by Pouring into it from without but the Kindling of it from within Words signifie nothing to him that cannot raise up within himself the Notions or Idea's correspondent to them However the Difficulty still remains How States-men themselves or the first Inventer of this Cheat could have framed any Notion at all of a Non-Entity Page 693 694 Here the Atheists Pretend That there is a Feigning Power in the Soul whereby it can make Idea's and Conceptions of Non-Entities as of a Golden Mountain or a Centaur and that by this an Idea of God might be framed though there be no such Thing Answer That all the Feigning Power of the Soul consisteth onely in Compounding Idea's of things that Really Exist Apart but not in that Conjunction The Mind cannot make any New Conceptive Cogitation which was not Before as the Painter or Limner cannot Feign Colours Moreover the whole of these Fictitious Idea's though it have no Actual yet hath it a Possible Entity The Deity it Self though it could Create a World out of Nothing yet can it not Create more Cogitation or Conception then Is or was always contained in its own Mind from Eternity nor frame a Positive Idea of that which hath no Possible Entity Page 694 695 The Idea of God no Compilement or Aggregation of things that Exist Severally apart in the World because then it would be a meer Arbitrarious thing and what Every one Pleased the contrary whereunto hath been before manifested Page 695 Again Some Attributes of the Deity nowhere else to be found in the whole World and therefore must be Absolute Non-Entities were there no God Here the Painter must Feign Colours and Create New Cogitation out of Nothing ibid. Lastly Vpon Supposition That there is no God it is Impossible not onely that there should be any for the Future but also that there should ever have been any whereas all Fictitious Idea's must have a Possible Entity since otherwise they would be Unconceivable and No Idea's ibid. Wherefore some Atheists will further Pretend That besides this Power of Compounding things together the Soul hath another Ampliating or Amplifying Power by both which together though there be no God Existing nor yet Possible the Idea of him might be Fictitiously Made those Attributes which are nowhere else to be found arising by way of Amplification or Augmentation of Something found in Men. Page 695 696 Answer First That according to the Principles of these Atheists that all our Conceptions are nothing but Passions from Objects without there cannot Possibly be any such Amplifying Power in the Soul whereby it could make More then Is. Thus Protagoras in Plato No man can Conceive any thing but what he suffers Here also as Sextus Intimateth the Atheists guilty of that Fallacy called a Circle or Diallelus For having First undiscernedly made the Idea of Imperfection from Perfection they then goe about again to make the Idea of Perfection out of Imperfection That men have a Notion of Perfection by which as a Rule they Judge things to be Imperfect Evident from that Direction given by all Theologers To Conceive of God in way of Remotion or Abstraction of all Imperfection Lastly Finite Things added together can never make up Infinite as more and more Time backward can never reach to Eternity without Beginning God differs from Imperfect things not in Degree but Kind As for Infinite Space said to consist of Parts Finite we certain of no more then this that the Finite World might have been made Bigger and Bigger Infinitely for which very Cause it could never be Actually Infinite Gassendus his Objection That the Idea of an Infinite God might as well be Feigned as that of Infinite Worlds But Infinite Worlds are but Words or Notions ill Put together or Combined Infinity being a Real Thing in Nature but Misapplied it being Proper onely to the Deity Page 696 697 The Conclusion That since the Soul can neither Make the Idea of Infinite by Amplification of Finite nor Feign or Create any New Cogitation which was not before nor make a Positive Idea of a Non-Entity certain that the Idea of God no Fictitious Thing Page 697 Further made Evident That Religion not the Figment of Civil Sovereigns Obligation in Conscience the Foundation of all Civil Right and Authority Covenants without this Nothing but Words and Breath Obligation not from Laws neither but before them or otherwise they could not Oblige Lastly This derived not from Utility neither Were Obligation to Civil Obedience Made by mens Private Utility then could it be Dissolved by the Same Wherefore if Religion a Fiction or Imposture Civil Sovereignty must needs be so too Page 697 698 Had Religion been a Fiction of Politicians they would then have made it every way Pliable and Flexible since otherwise it would not Serve their Turn nor consist with their Infinite Right Page 698 But Religion in its own Nature a Stiff Inflexible thing as also Justice it being not Factitious or Made by Will There may therefore be a Contradiction betwixt the Laws of God and of Men and in this case does Religion conclude That God ought to be Obeyed rather then Men. For this Cause Atheistick Politicians of Latter times declare against Religion as Inconsistent with Civil Sovereignty It destroying Infinite Right Introducing Private Judgment or Conscience and a Fear Greater then that of the Leviathan
be Outside again Were a Cogitative Being Extended yet must it have besides this Extended Outside an Unextended Inside But One and the Same Substance cannot be Extended and Unextended Wherefore in this Opinion of Extended Incorporealls a Complication of Two Substances and a Confusion of them together into One. True nevertheless That all Finite Incorporeall Substance is always Naturally united with some Extended Body as it s Outside Page 831 All Summed up Together Page 832 Hitherto the Sense of the Ancient Asserters of Unextended Incorporealls represented to the best Advantage Nothing Asserted by us but that these and other Arguments do Demonstrate against the Atheists some Other Substance besides Body but whether or no they Prove this to be Indistant and Unextended left to others to make a Judgment The Atheists who deny this must acknowledge every Thought to be not onely Mentally but also Physically Divisible and Separable together with the Soul as also deny Internal Energy and consequently make Cogitation Nothing but Locall Motion and Lastly Hold That no Substance can Co-Exist with Another Substance more Inwardly then by Juxta-Position Page 832 833 This the First Answer to the Forementioned Atheistick Argument against Incorporeall Substance made by the Ancients By denying the Minor That though whatsoever is Extended be Body yet Every thing is not Extended But the Argument otherwise Answered by some Learned Asserters of Incorporeall Substance By denying the Major That though every thing be Extended or what Unextended Nothing yet what-ever is Extended is not Body they asserting another Extension Incorporeall which is both Penetrable and not made up of Parts Physically Separable from one another to which belongeth Life Self-Activity and Cogitation Probable That some would Compound both the Forementioned Hypotheses together by supposing the Deity to be altogether Unextended and Indivisibly all every-where but Souls or Created Incorporealls to have an Unextended Inside Diffused as it were into an Extended Outside Our selves here onely to Oppose Atheists and Dogmatize no further then to Assert what all Incorporealists agree in That besides Body there is Another Substance which consisteth not of Parts Really Separable from one another which is Penetrable of Body and Self-Active and hath an Internall Energy distinct from Locall Motion All which is Demonstratively Certain This the Full Answer to the First Atheistick Argument Against Incorporeal Substance That either there is Something Unextended or at least Extended otherwise then Body so as to be Penetrable thereof and Indiscerpibly One with it self and Self-Active Page 833 834 The Second Atheistick Assault against Incorporeall Substance By Pretending the Originall of this Mistake to have sprung from the Scholastick Essences Distinct from the things themselves and the Abuse of Abstract Names and Notions they being made to be Substances Existing by themselves For though the Opinion of Ghosts and Spirits whereof God is the Chief sprung first from Fear yet that these should be Incorporeall could never have entered into the Minds of men had they not been Enchanted with these Abstract Names and Seperate Essences Page 834 The First Generall Reply to this That it is all but Romantick Fiction That the Opinion of the Deity sprung not from Fear and That all Invisible Ghosts are not Phancies already sufficiently Proved as also The Existence of a God Demonstrated by Reason That Apparitions are Reall Phaenomena and Reasonable to think That there may as well be Invisible Aeriall and Aetheriall as there are Visible Terrestriall Animals Sottishness to conclude That there is no Understanding Nature Superiour to Man Page 834 835 The Second Particular Reply That the Opinion of Spirits Incorporeall sprung not from the Scholastick Essences whether considered Concretely as Universals onely or Abstractly No man supposing these to be Things Really and Substantially Existing without the Mind either an Universall Man and Universall Horse or else Humanity and Equinity and that these walk up and down in Airy Bodies they being onely Noemata or the Intelligible Essences of Things as Objects of the Mind These Essences of Things said to be Eternall as their Verities The meaning of these Eternall Essences not That they are so many Eternall Substances Incorporeall but That Knowledge is Eternall and That there is an Eternall Unmade Mind that comprehends them which all other Minds Partake of Page 835 836 Again That another Atheistick Dream That the Abstract Names and Notions of the Meer Accidents of Bodies were Made Substances Incorporeall Souls Minds and Ghosts Conscious Life no Accident of Bodies as Atheists Suppose but the Essentiall Attribute of Another Substance which Incorporeall as Magnitude or Extension is the Essentiall Attribute of Body Page 836 The following Atheistick Arguments to be dispatched with more Brevity That the Four Next Fifth Sixth Seventh and Eighth proceed onely upon this Supposition That there is no Other Substance in the World besides Body or Matter and therefore signify Nothing to the Asserters of an Incorporeall Deity Stoicks and the like onely concerned to Answer them Nevertheless From the Impossibility of these Atheistick Corporealisms contained in the Fifth and Sixth a Necessity of Incorporeall Substance will be Evinced Page 836 Here two Atheistick Corporealisms Founded upon these Suppositions That all is Body or Matter and That Matter as such is devoid of Life and Understanding The First in the way of Qualities and Forms Generable and Corruptible called the Hylopathian This the most Ancient Atheistick Form as we learn from Aristotle viz. That Bulky Extension the onely Substantiall and Unmade thing and all other things but the Passions Qualities and Accidents thereof Makeable out of it and Destroyable into it The Consequence from whence That there is no Substantiall Unmade Life and Understanding And That no Mind could be a God or Creator it being all Accidentall Factitious and Creature Page 836 837 This Hylopathian Atheism called also by us Anaximandrian Though we are not Ignorant That Simplicius conceives Anaximander to have held an Homoeomery or Similar Atomology of Eternall Unmade Qualities as Anaxagoras afterwards onely that he acknowledged no Unmade Life or Mind but Generated it all from the Fortuitous Commixture of those Qualified Atoms Which no Improbable Opinion though not Certain Because however Anaximander supposed Life and Understanding to be at least Secondary Qualities and Accidents of Body Generable and Corruptible And not Fit to multiply Forms of Atheism Page 837 The Second Atheistick Corporealism in the way of Unqualified Atoms producing all things even Life and Understanding from Figures Sites Motions and Magnitudes of Parts From whence it will also follow That Mind is no Primordial Thing but Secondary Compounded and Derivative Creature and no Creator This called Democritick not because Democritus was the First Inventer of the Dissimilar Atomology but because he was the First Atheizer of it or the First who made Dissimilar Atoms the Principles of All things whatsoever even of Life and Understanding ibid. Not to be Denied But that from these Two things Granted That