knowledge of what belonged to the Persian Religion Wherefore from the Authority of Eubulus we may well conclude also that notwithstanding the Sun was generally worship'd by the Persians as a God yet Zoroaster and the ancient Magi who were best initiated in the Mithraick Mysteries asserted another Deity Superior to the Sun for the True Mithras such as was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Maker and Father of all things or of the whole World whereof the Sun is a part However these also look'd upon the Sun as the most lively Image of this Deity in which it was worshipped by them as they likewise worship'd the same Deity Symbolically in Fire as Maximus Tyrius informeth us agreeable to which is that in the Magick Oracles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All things are the Off-spring of one Fire that is of One Supreme Deity And Julian the Emperor was such a Devout Sun-worshipper as this who acknowledged besides the Sun another Incorporeal Deity transcendent to it Nevertheless we deny not but that others amongst the Persians who were not able to conceive of any thing Incorporeal might as well as Heraclitus Hippocrates and the Stoicks amongst the Greeks look upon the Fiery Substance of the whole World and especially the Sun as Animated and Intellectual to be the Supreme Deity and the only Mithras according to that Inscription Deo Soli Invicto Mithrae However Mithras whether supposed to be Corporeal or Incorporeal was unquestionably taken by the Persians for the Supreme Deity according to that of Hesychius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mithras The First God among the Persians who was therefore called in the Inscription Omnipotent Omnipotenti Deo Mithrae Which First Supreme and Omnipotent God was acknowledged by Artabanus the Persian in his Conference with Themistocles in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Amongst those many excellent Laws of ours the most excellent is this that the King is to be honoured and worshipped religiously as the Image of that God which conserveth all things Scaliger with some others though we know not upon what certain grounds affirm that Mither in the Persian Language signified Great and Mithra Greater or Greatest according to which Mithras would be all one with Deus Major or Maximus The Greatest God Wherefore we conclude that either Herodotus was mistaken in making the Persian Mithras the same with Mylitta or Venus And perhaps such a mistake might be ocasioned from hence because the Word Mader or Mether in the Persian Language signified Mother as Mylitta in the Syrian did or else rather that this Venus of his is to be understood of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the heavenly Venus or Love and thus indeed is she there called in Herodotus Vrania by which though some would understand nothing else but the Moon yet we conceive the Supreme Deity True Heavenly love the Mother and Nurse of all things to have been primarily signified therein But Zoroaster and the ancient Magi are said to have called the Supreme God also by another name viz. Oromasdes or Ormisdas however Oromasdes according to Plato seems to have been the Father of Zoroaster Thus besides Plutarch and others Porphyrius in the Life of Pythagoras 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which we would understand thus Pythagoras exhorted men chiefly to the Love of Truth as being that alone which could make them resemble God he having learn'd from the Magi that God whom they call Oromasdes was as to Corporeals most like to Light and as to Incorporeals to Truth Though perhaps some would interpret these words otherwise so as to signifie Oromasdes to have been really compounded of Soul and Body and therefore nothing else but the Animated Sun as Mithras is commonly supposed also to have been But the contrary hereunto is plainly implied in those Zoroastrian Traditions or Fables concerning Oromasdes recorded in Plutarch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Oromasdes was as far removed from the Sun as the Sun was from the Earth Wherefore Oromasdes was according to the Persians a Deity superior to the Sun God properly as the Fountain of Light and Original of all Good and the same with Plato's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or First Good From whom the Persians as Scaliger informs us called the First Day of every Month Ormasda probably because he was the Beginning of all things And thus Zoroaster and the ancient Magi acknowledged one and the same Supreme Deity under the different names of Mithras and Oromasdes But it is here observable that the Persian Mithras was commonly called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Three-fold or Treble Thus Dionysius the Pseudo-Areopagite 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Persian Magi to this very day celebrate a Festival Solemnity in honour of the Triplasian that is the Three-fold or Triplicated Mithras And something very like to this is recorded in Plutarch concerning Oromasdes also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Oromasdes Thrice augmented or Triplicated himself from whence it further appears that Mithras and Oromasdes were really one and the same Numen Now the Scholiasts upon Dionysius pretend to give a reason of this Denomination of the Persian Mithras Triplasios or Threefold from the Miracle done in Hezekiah's Time when the Day was encreased and almost Triplicated as if the Magi then observing the same had thereupon given the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Threefold to their God Mithras that is the Sun and appointed an Anniversary Solemnity for a Memorial thereof But Learned men have already shewed the Foolery of this Conceit and therefore it cannot well be otherwise concluded but that here is a manifest Indication of a Higher Mystery viz. a Trinity in the Persian Theology which Gerardus J. Vossius would willingly understand according to the Christian Hypothesis of a Divine Triunity or Three Hypostases in one and the same Deity whose Distinctive Characters are Goodness Wisdom and Power But the Magical or Zoroastrian Oracles seem to represent this Persian Trinity more agreeably to that Pythagorick or Platonick Hypothesis of Three Distinct Substances Subordinate one to another the Two First whereof are thus expressed in the following Verses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To this Sence The Father or First Deity perfected all things and delivered them to the Second Mind who is that whom the Nations of men commonly take for the First Which Oracle Psellus thus glosseth upon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The First Father of the Trinity having produced this whole Creation delivered it to Mind or Intellect Which Mind the whole Generation of Mankind being ignorant of the Paternal Transcendency commonly call the First God After which Psellus takes notice of the difference here betwixt this Magical or Chaldaick Theology and that of Christians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. But our Christian Doctrine is contrary hereunto namely thus That the First Mind or Intellect being the Son of the Great Father made the whole Creation For the Father in the Mosaick Writings speaks to his Son the Idea
Active Power Three Inadequate Conceptions thereof 'T is true that Plotinus was so high flown as to maintain that the First and Highest Principle of all by reason of its Perfect Vnity and Simplicity is above the Multiplicity of Knowledge and Understanding and therefore does not so much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in a proper sence Vnderstand it self Notwithstanding which this Philosopher himself adds that it cannot therefore be said to be Ignorant nor Vnwise neither these Expressions belonging only to such a Being as was by Nature Intellectual 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Intellectus nisi intelligat demens meritò judicatur And he seems to grant that it hath a certain Simple Clarity and Brightness in it Superiour to that of Knowledge As the Body of the Sun has a certain Brightness Superiour to that Secondary Light which streameth from it and that it may be said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Knowledge it self that does not Vnderstand as Motion it self does not Move But this can hardly be conceived by ordinary Mortals that the Highest and most Perfect of all Beings should not fully comprehend it self the Extent of its own Fecundity and Power and be conscious of all that proceedeth from it though after the most Simple manner And therefore this high-flown conceit of Plotinus and perhaps of Plato himself too has been rejected by latter Platonists as Phantastical and Unsafe for thus Simplicius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But it must needs have also the most perfect Knowledge since it cannot be ignorant of any thing that is produced from it self And St. Austin in like manner confutes that Assertion of some Christians that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Eternal Word was that very Wisdom and Vnderstanding by which the Father himself was wise as making it nothing but an Inadequate Conception of God But this opinion that the Christian Trinity is but a Trinity of Words or meer Logical Notions and Inadequate Conceptions of God hath been plainly condemned by the Christian Church in Sabellius and others Wherefore we con-clude it to be a Trinity of Hypostases or Subsistences or Persons The Second Thing that we observe concerning the Christian Trinity is this that though the Second Hypostasis or Person thereof were begotten from the First and the Third Proceedeth both from the First and Second yet are neither this Second nor Third Creatures and that for these following Reasons First because they were not made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Arius maintained that is from an Antecedent Non-existence brought forth into being nor can it be said of either of them Erat Quando Non erant that once they were not but their Going forth Was from Eternity and they were both Coeve and Coeternal with the Father Secondly because they were not only Eternal Emanations if we may so call them but also Necessary and therefore are they both also Absolutely Vndestroyable and Vnannihilable Now according to true Philosophy and Theology no Creature could have existed from Eternity nor be Absolutely Vndestroyable and therefore that which is both Eternal and Vndestroyable is ipso facto Vncreated Nevertheless because some Philosophers have asserted though erroneously both the whole World's Eternity and its being a Necessary Emanation also from the Deity and consequently that it is Vndestroyable we shall therefore further add that these Second and Third Hypostases or Persons of the Holy Trinity are not only therefore Vncreated because they were both Eternal and Necessary Emanations and likewise are Vnannihilable but also because they are Vniversal each of them comprehending the Whole World and all created things under it which Vniversality of theirs is the same thing with Infinity Whereas all other Beings besides this Holy Trinity are Particular and Finite Now we say that no Intellectual Being which is not only Eternal and Necessarily Existent or Vndestroyable but also Vniversal or Infinite can be a Creature Again in the Last place we add that these Three Hypostases or Persons are truly and really One God Not only because they have all Essentially One and the same Will according to that of Origen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We worship the Father of Truth and the Son the Truth it self being Two Things as to Hypostasis but one in Agreement Consent and Sameness of Will but also because they are Physically if we may so speak One also and have a Mutual 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Inexistence and Permeation of one another according to that of our Saviour Christ I am In the Father and the Father In Me. And the Father that Dwelleth In Me he doth the Works We grant indeed that there can be no Instance of the like Unity or Oneness found in any Created Beings nevertheless we certainly know from our very selves that it is not impossible for two distinct Substances that are of a very different Kind from one another the One Incorporeal the other Corporeal to be so closely united together as to become One Animal and Person much less therefore should it be thought impossible for these Three Divine Hypostases to be One God We shall conclude here with Cnfidence that the Christian Trinity though there be very much of Mystery in it yet is there nothing at all of plain Contradiction to the Undoubted Principles of Humane Reason that is of Impossibility to be found therein as the Atheists would pretend who cry down all for Non-sence and Absolute Impossibility which their Dull Stupidity cannot reach to or their Infatuated Minds easily comprehend and therefore even the Deity it self And it were to be wished that some Religionists and Trinitarians did not here symbolize too much with them in affecting to represent the Mystery of the Christian Trinity as a thing directly contradictious to all Humane Reason and Understanding and that perhaps out of design to make men surrender up themselves and Consciences in a Blind and Implicit Faith wholly to their Guidance as also to debauch their Understandings by this means to the swallowing down of other Opinions of theirs plainly repugnant to Humane Faculties As who should say he that believes the Trinity as well all must do if we will be Christians should boggle at nothing in Religion never after nor scrupulously chew or examine any thing as if there could be nothing more Contradictious or Impossible to Humane Understanding propounded than this Article of the Christian Faith But for the present we shall endeavour only to shew that the Christian Trinity though a Mystery yet is much more agreeable to Reason than that Platonick or Pseudo-Platonick Trinity before described and that in those Three Particulars then mentioned For First when those Platonists and Pythagoreans interpret their Third God or Last Hypostasis of their Trinity to be either the World or else a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such an Immediate Soul thereof as together with the World its Body makes up One Animal and God as there is plainly too great a Leap here
expressed by Sanchuniathon in his Description of the Phoenician Theology 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Turbid and Dark Chaos and the Second is intimated in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Spirit was affected with love towards its own Principles perhaps expressing the Force of the Hebrew word Merachepheth and both of them implyng an Understanding Prolifical Goodness Forming and Hatching the Corporeal World into this perfection or else a Plastick Power subordinate to it Zeno who was also originally a Phoenician tells us that Hesiod's Chaos was Water and that the Material Heaven as well as Earth was made out of Water according to the Judgment of the best Interpeters is the genuine sence of Scripture 2 Pet. 3.5 by which water some perhaps would understand a Chaos of Atoms confusedly moved But whether Thales were acquainted with the Atomical Physiology or no it is plain that he asserted besides the Soul's Immortality a Deity distinct from the Corporeal World We pass to Pythagoras whom we have proved already to have been an Atomist and it is well known also that he was a professed Incorporealist That he asserted the Immortality of the Soul and consequently its Immateriality is evident from his Doctrine of Pre-existence and Transmigration And that he likewise held an Incorporeal Deity distinct from the World is a thing not questioned by any But if there were any need of proving it because there are no Monuments of his Extant perhaps it might be done from hence because he was the chief Propagator of that Doctrine amongst the Greeks concerning Three Hypostases in the Deity For that Plato and his Followers held 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Three Hypostases in the Deity that were the first Principles of all things is a thing very well known to all Though we do not affirm that these Platonick Hypostases are exactly the same with those in the Christian Trinity Now Plato himself sufficiently intimates this not to have been his own Invention and Plotinus tells us that it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Ancient Opinion before Plato's time which had been delivered down by some of the Pythagoricks Wherefore I conceive this must needs be one of those Pythagorick Monstrosities which Xenophon covertly taxes Plato for entertaining and mingling with the Socratical Philosophy as if he had thereby corrupted the Purity and Simplicity of it Though a Corporealist may pretend to be a Theist yet I never heard that any of them did ever assert a Trinity respectively to the Deity unless it were such an one as I think not fit here to mention XXIII That Parmenides who was likewise a Pythagorean acknowledged a Deity distinct from the Corporeal World is evident from Plato And Plotinus tells us also that he was one of them that asserted the Triad of Divine Hypostases Moreover whereas there was a great Controversie amongst the Ancient Philosophers before Plato's time between such as held all things to Flow as namely Heraclitus and Cratylus and others who asserted that some things did Stand and that there was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a certain Immutable Nature to wit an Eternal Mind together with Eternal and Immutable Truths amongst which were Parmenides and Melissus the former of these were all Corporealists this being the very Reason why they made all things to Flow because they supposed all to be Body though these were not therefore all of them Atheists But the latter were all both Incorporealists and Theists for whosoever holds Incorporeal Substance must needs according to Reason also assert a Deity And although we did not before paticularly mention Parmenides amongst the Atomical Philosophers yet we conceive it to be manifest from hence that he was one of that Tribe because he was an eminent Asserter of that Principle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That no Real Entity is either Made or Destroyed Generated or Corrupted Which we shall afterwards plainly shew to be the grand Fundamental Principle of the Atomical Philosophy XXIV But whereas we did evidently prove before that Empedocles was an Atomical Physiologer it may notwithstanding with some Colour of Probability be doubted whether he were not an Atheist or at least a Corporealist because Aristotle accuses him of these following things First of making Knowledge to be Sense which is indeed a plain sign of a Corporealist and therefore in the next place also of compounding the Soul out of the four Elements making it to understand every corporeal thing by something of the same within it self as Fire by Fire and Earth by Earth and Lastly of attributing much to Fortune and affirming that divers of the Parts of Animals were made such by chance and that there were at first certain Mongrel Animals fortuitously produced that were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as had something of the shape of an Oxe together with the Face of a Man though they could not long continue which seems to give just Cause of Suspicion that Empedocles Atheized in the same manner that Democritus did To the first of these we reply that some others who had also read Empedocles's Poems were of a different Judgment from Aristotle as to that conceiving Empedocles not to make Sense but Reason the Criterion of Truth Thus Empiricus informs us Others say that according to Empedocles the Criterion of Truth is not Sense but Right Reason and also that Right Reason is of two sorts the one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Divine the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Humane Of which the Divine is inexpressible but the Humane declarable And there might be several Passages cited out of those Fragments of Empedocles his Poems yet left to confirm this but we shall produce only this one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To this Sence Suspend thy Assent to the Corporeal Senses and consider every thing clearly with thy Mind or Reason And as to the Second Crimination Aristotle has much weakened his own Testimony here by accusing Plato also of the very same thing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Plato compounds the Soul out of the four Elements because Like is known by Like and things are from their Principles Wherefore it is probable that Empedocles might be no more guilty of this fault of making the Soul Corporeal and to consist of Earth Water Air and Fire than Plato was who in all mens Judgments was as free from it as Aristotle himself if not more For Empedocles did in the same manner as Pythagoras before him and Plato after him hold the Transmigration of Souls and consequently both their Future Immortality and Preexistence and therefore must needs assert their Incorporeity Plutarch rightly declaring this to have been his Opinion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That as well those who are yet Vnborn as those that are Dead have a Being He also asserted Humane Souls to be here in a Lapsed State 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wanderers Strangers and Fugitives from God declaring as Plotinus tells us that it was a Divine Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That Souls sinning should
Independent upon the Deity since according to the best and most ancient Writers his Dyad was no Primary but a Secondary Thing only and derived from his Monad the sole Original of all things Thus Diogenes Laertius tells us that Alexander who wrote the Successions of Philosophers affirmed he had found in the Pythagorick Commentaries 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That a Monade was the Principle of all things but that from this Monade was derived infinite Duality as Matter for the Monade to work upon as the Active Cause With which agreeth Hermias affirming this to be one of the greatest of all the Pythagorick Mysteries that a Monade was the sole Principle of all things Accordingly whereunto Clomens Alexandrinus cites this Passage out of Thearidas an ancient Pythagorean in his Book concerning Nature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The true Principle of all things was only One for this was in the beginning One and Alone Which words also seem to imply the World to have had a Novity of Existence or beginning of Duration And indeed however Ocellus Lucanus write yet that Pythagoras himself did not hold the Eternity of the World may be concluded from what Porphyrius records of him where he gives an Account of that his superstitious abstinence from Beans 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That at the beginning things being confounded and mingled together the Generation and Secretion of them afterwards proceeded by degrees Animals and Plants appearing at which time also from the same putrified Matter sprung up both Men and Beans Pythagoras is generally reported to have held a Trinity of Divine Hypostases and therefore when St. Cyril affirmeth Pythagoras to have called God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Animation of the whole Heavens and the Motion of all things adding that God was not as some supposed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without the Fabrick of the World but whole in the whole this seems properly to be understood of that Third Divine Hypostasis of the Pythagorick Trinity namely the Eternal Psyche Again when God is called in Plutarch according to Pythagoras 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mind it self this seems to be meant properly of his Second Hypostasis the Supreme Deity according to him being something above Mind or Intellect In like manner when in Cicero Pythagoras his Opinion concerning the Deity is thus represented Deum esse animum per naturam rerum omnium intentum commeantem ex quo Animi nostri carperentur That God was a Mind passing through the whole Nature of things from whom our Souls were as it were decerped or cut out And again Ex universa mente Divina delibatos esse animos nostros this in all probability was to be understood also either of the Third or Second Divine Hypostasis and not of the First which was properly called by him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Vnity and Monade and also as Plutarch tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Goodness it self Aristotle plainly affirmeth that some of the ancient Theologers amongst the Pagans made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Love to be the First Principle of all things that is the Supreme Deity and we have already shewed that Orpheus was one oft hese For when 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Delightful Love and that which is not blind but full of Wisdom and Counsel is made by him to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Self-perfect and the Oldest of all Things it is plain that he supposed it to be nothing less than the Supreme Deity Wherefore since Pythagoras is generally affirmed to have followed the Orphick Principles we may from hence presume that he did it in this also Though it be very true that Plato who called the Supreme Deity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well as Pythagoras did dissent from the Orphick Theology in this and would not acknowledge Love for a name of the Supreme Deity as when in his Symposion in the person of Agatho he speaks thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Though I should readily grant to Phaedrus many other things yet I cannot consent to him in this that Love was Older than Saturn and Japet but on the contrary I do affirm him to be the Youngest of the Gods as he is always youthful They who made Love Older than Saturn as well as Japhet supposed it to be the Supreme Deity wherefore Plato here on the contrary affirms Love not to be the Supreme Deity or Creator of all but a Creature a Certain Junior God or indeed as he afterwards adds not so much a God as a Daemon it being a thing which plainly implies Imperfection in it Love saith he is a Philosopher whereas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no God philosophizeth nor dâ—sires to be made wise because he is so already Agreably with which Doctrine of his Plotinus determines that Love is peculiar to that middle rank of Beings called Souls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Every Soul is a Venus which is also intimated by Venus her Nativity and Loves being begotten with her wherefore the Soul being in its right natural state Loves God desiring to be united with him which is a pure heavenly and virgin Love but when it descends to Generation being courted with these Amorous allurements here below and deceived by them it changeth that its Divine and Heavenly Love for another Mortal one but if it again shake off these lascivious and wanton Loves and keep it self chast from them returning back to its own Father and Original it will be rightly affected as it ought But the reason of this difference betwixt the Orpheists and Plato that the former made Love to be the Oldest of all the Gods but the latter to be a Junior God or Daemon proceeded only from an Equivocation in the word Love For Plato's Love was the Daughter of Penia that is Poverty and Indigency together with a mixture of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Riches and being so as it were compounded of Plenty and Poverty was in plain language no other than the Love of Desire which as Aristotle affirmeth is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 accompanied with Grief and Pain But that Orphick and Pythagorick Love was nothing else but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Infinite Riches and Plenty a Love of Redundancy and Overflowing Fulness delighting to communicate it self which was therefore said to be the Oldest of all things and most Perfect that is the Supreme Deity according to which notion also in the Scripture it self God seems to be called Love though the word be not there 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But to say the Truth Parmenides his Love however made a Principle somewhere by Aristotle seems to be neither exactly the same with the Orphick nor yet with the Platonick Love it being not the Supreme Deity and yet the First of the Created Gods which appears from Simplicius his connecting these Two
Natural only by a certain mixture of Fabulosity in it and was therefore look'd upon by them as a Middle betwixt the Natural and the Fabulous or Poetical Theology Wherefore it was acknowledged that the Vulgar Theology of the Pagans that is not only their Fabulous but even their Civil also was oftentimes very discrepant from the Natural and True Theology though the wise men amongst them in all ages endeavoured as much as they could to dissemble and disguise this Difference and by Allegorizing the Poetick Fables of the Gods to bring that Theology into some seeming conformity with the Natural and Philosophick but what they could not in this way reconcile was by them excused upon the necessity of the Vulgar The Fabulous Theology both of the Greeks and Romans did not only Generate all the other Gods but even Jupiter himself also their Supreme Numen it assigning him both a Father and a Mother a Grandfather and a Grandmother And though the Romans did not plainly adopt this into their Civil Theology yet are they taxed by St. Austin for suffering the Statue of Jupiter's Nurse to be kept in the Capitol for a Religious Monument And however this differ'd nothing at all from that Atheistick Doctrine of Evemerus That all the Gods were really no other than Mortal Men yet was it tolerated and connived at by the Politicians in way of necessary compliance with the Vulgar it being so extremely difficult for them to conceive any such Living Being or Animal as was never Made and without Beginning Insomuch that Callimachus who would by no means admit of Jupiter's Sepulchre either in Crete or Arcadia but look'd upon it as a foul reproach to him for this reason 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because he was Immortal and could never die did notwithstanding himself attribute a Temporary Generation and Nativity to him as Origen and others observe Nevertheless the generality of the more Civilized and Intelligent Pagans and even of the Poets themselves did all this while constantly retain thus much of the Natural and True Theology amongst them That Jupiter was the Father both of Gods and Men that is the Maker of the whole World and consequently himself Without Father Eternal and Vnmade according to that Peleadean Oracle before cited out of Pausanias 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Again the Civil Theology of the Pagans as well as the Poetick had not only many Phantastick Gods in it but also an appearance of a Plurality of Independent Deities it making Several Supreme in their several Territories and Functions as One to be the Chief Ruler over the Heavens Another over the Air and Winds Another over the Sea and Another over the Earth and Hell One to be the Giver of Corn Another of Wine One the God of Learning Another the God of Pleasure and Another the God of War and so for all other things But the Natural Theology of the Pagans so called though it did admit a Plurality of Gods too in a certain sence that is of Inferiour Deities Subordinate to One Supreme yet did it neither allow of more Independent Deities than One nor own any Gods at all but such as were Natural that is such as had a Real Existence in Nature and the World without and not in mens Opinion Only And these Varro concluded to be no other than First the Soul of the World and then the Animated Parts thereof Superiour to men that is One Supreme Vniversal Numen Vnmade and other Particular Generated Gods such as Stars Demons and Heroes Wherefore all the other Gods besides these are frequently exploded by Pagan Writers as Cicero and others under the Name of Dii Poetici that is not Philosophical but Poetical Gods and Dii Commentitii and Fictitii that is not Natural and Real but Feigned and Fictitious Gods They in the mean time giving this Account of them that they were indeed nothing else but so Many Several Names and Notions of One Supreme Numen according to his Several Powers and various Manifestations and Effects in the World it being thought fit by the wisdom of the ancient Pagan Theologers that all those manifold Glories and Perfections of the Deity should not be huddled up and as it were crouded and crumpled together in one General Acknowledgment of an Invisible Being the Maker of the world but that they should be distinctly and severally displayed and each of them adored singly and apart and this too for the greater Pomp and Solemnity under so many Personal Names Which perhaps the Unskilful and sottish Vulgar might sometimes mistake not only for so many Real and Substantial but also Independent and Self-existent Deities We have before proved that one and the same Supreme God in the Egyptian Theology had several Proper and Personal Names given him according to several Notions of him and his several Powers and Effects Jamblichus himself in that passage already cited plainly affirming thus much 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Demiurgical Mind and President of Truth as with wisdom it proceedeth to Generation and bringeth forth the hidden Power of the occult Reasons contained within it self into light is called in the Egyptian Language Ammon as it Artificially effects all things with Truth Phtha as it is productive of Good things Osiris besides which it hath also several other Names according to its other Powers and Energies as namely Neith or according to Proclus his Copy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neïthas the Tutelar God of the City Sais from whence probably the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was derived the Athenians being said to have been at first a Colony of these Saites and this is The Divine Wisdom diffusing it self thorough all So likewise Serapis which though some would have to be the Sun is by others plainly described as an Vniversal Numen As Aristides in his Eighth Oration upon this God Serapis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They who inhabit the great City in Egypt call upon this God Serapis as their only Jupiter he being supposed to be no way defective in Power but to Pervade all things and to Fill the whole Vniverse And whereas the Powers and Honours of the other Gods are divided and some of them are invoked for one thing and some for another This is look'd upon by them as the Coryphaeus of all the Gods who contains the beginning and end of all things and who is able to supply all wants Cneph is also described by Eusebius as that Divine Intellect which was the Demiurgus of the world and which giveth life to all things as he is by Plutarch said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Vnmade so that this was also another Egyptian Name of God as likewise was Emeph and Eicton in Jamblichus though these may be severally distinguished into a Trinity of Divine Hypostases Lastly when Isis which was sometimes called Multimammea and made all over full of Breasts to signifie her Feeding all things thus describes her self in Apuleius
against Theists We have been hiâ—herto prevented of â—hat full and Copious Confutation of them intended by us by reason of that large Account given of the Pâ—gan Polythâ—ism which yet was no Impertinent Digression neither it removing the Grand Objâ—ction against the Naturality of the Idea of God as including Onelinâ—ss in it as also preparing a way for that Defence of Christianity designed by us against Atheists Wherefore that we may not here be quite excluded of what was principally intended we shall subjoyn a Contracted and Compendious Confutation of all the Premised Atheistick Principles The FIRST whereof was this That either men have no Idea of God at all or else none but such as is Compounded and Made up of Impossible and Contradictious Notions from whence these Atheists would inferr Him to be an Vnconceivable Nothing In Answer whereunto there hath been something done already it being declared in the Beginning of the Fourth Chapter what the Idea of God is viz. A Perfect Vnderstanding Nature Necessarily Self-Existent and the Cause of all other things And as there is Nothing either Vnconceivable or Contradictious in this Idea so have we shewed that these Confounded Atheists do not only at the same time when they verbally deny an Idea of God implicitly acknowledge and confess it for as much as otherwise denying his Existence they should deny the Existence of Nothing but also that they agree with Theists in this very Idea it being the only thing which Atheists Contend for That the First Originl and Head of all things is no Perfect Vnderstanding Nature but that all sprung from Tohu and Bohu or Dark and Senslâ—ss Matter Fortuitoâ—sly moved Moreover we have not only thus declared the Idea of God but also largely proved and made it clearly evident that the Generality of Mankind in all Ages have had a Prolepsis or Anticipation in their Minds concerning the Real and Actual Existence of such a Being the Pagans themselves besides their other Many Gods which were Vnderstanding Beings Superiour to men acknowledging One Chief and Sovereign Numen the Maker of them all and of the Whole World From whence it plainly appears that those few Atheists that formerly have been and still are here and there up and down in the World are no other than the Monsters and Anomalies of Humane Kind And this alone might be sufficient to repel the First Atheistick Assault made against the Idea of God Nevertheless that we may not seem to dissemble any of the Atheists Strength we shall here Particularly declare all their most Colourable Pretences against the Idea of God and then show the Folly and Invalidity of them Which Pretences are as follow First That we have no Idea nor Thought of any thing not Subject to Corporeal Sense nor the least Evidence of the Existence of any thing but from the same Secondly That Theists themselves acknowledging God to be Incomprehensible he may be from thence inferred to be a Non-Entity Thirdly That the Theists Idea of God including Infinity in it is therefore absolutely Vnconceivable and Impossible Fourthly That Theology is an Arbitrarious Compilement of Inconsistent and Contradictious Notions And Lastly That the Idea and Existence of God ows all its being either to the Confounded Non-Sence of Astonish'd Minds or else to the Fiction and Imposture of Politicians We begin with the First That we can have no Idea Conception or Thought of any thing not Subject to Sense nor the least Evidence of the Existence of any thing but from the same Thus a Modern Atheistick Writer Whatsoever we can conceive hath been Perceived first by Sense either at once or in parts and a man can have no Thought representing any thing not Subject to Sense From whence it fâ—llows that whatsoever is not Sensible and Imaginable is utterly unconceivable and to us Nothing Moreover the same Writer adds That the only Evidence which we have of the Existence of any thing is from Sense the Consequence whereof is this That there being no Corporeal Sense of a Deity there can be no Evidence at all of his Existence Wherefore according to the Tenour of the Atheistick Philosophy all is Resolved into Sense as the only Criterion of Truth accordingly as Protagoras in Plato's Theaetetus concludes Knowledge to be Sense and a late Writer of our own determins Sense to be Original Knowledge Here have we a wide Ocean before us but we must Contract our Sayls Were Sense Knowledge and Vnderstanding then he that sees Light and Colours and feels Heat and Cold would understand Light and Colours Heat and Cold and the like of all other Sensible Things neither would there be any Philosophy at all concerning them Whereas the Mind of man remaineth altogether unsatisfied concerning the Nature of these Corporeal Things even after the Strongest Sensations of them and is but thereby awakened to a further Philosophick Enquiry and Search about them what this Light and Colours this Heat and Cold c. Really should be and whether they be indeed Qualities in the Objects without us or only Phantasms and Sensations in our selves Now it is certain that there could be no Suspicion of any such thing as this were Sense the Highest Faculty in us neither can Sense it self ever decide this Controversie since once Sense cannot judge of another or correct the Error of it all Sense as such that is as Phancy and Apparition being alike True And had not these Atheists been Notorious Dunces in that Atomick Philosophy which they so much pretend to they would clearly have learn'd from thence That Sense is not Knowledge and Vnderstanding nor the Criterion of Truth as to Sensible things themselves it reaching not to the Essence or Absolute Nature of them but only taking notice of their Outside and perceiving its own Passions from them rather than the Things themselves and That there is a Higher Faculty in the Soul of Reason and Vnderstanding which judges of Sense detects the Phantastry and Imposture of it discovers to us that there is nothing in the Objects themselves like to those forementioned Sensible Ideas and resolves all Sensible Things into Intelligible Principles the Ideas whereof are not Foraign and Adventitious and meer Passive Impressions upon the Soul from without but Native and Domestick to it or Actively Exerted from the Soul it self no Passion being able to make a Judgment either of it self or other things This is a thing so Evident that Democritus himself could not but take notice of it and acknowledge it though he made not a right use thereof he in all Probability continuing notwithstanding a Confounded and Besotted Atheist Sextus Empiricus having recorded this of him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Democritus in his Canons affirmeth that there are Two kinds of Knowledges One by the Senses and another by the Mind Of which that by the Mind is only accounted Knowledge he bearing witness to the Faithfulness and Firmness thereof for the judgment of Truth The other by the Senses he calleth
Dark denying it to be a Rule and Measure of Truth His own words are these There are Two Species of Knowledge the One Genuine the other Dark or Obscure The Dark and Obscure Knowledge is Seeing Hearing Smelling Tasting Touching But the Genuine Knowledge is another more Hidden and Recondit To which purpose there is another Fragment also of this Democritus preserved by the same Sextus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bitter and Sweet Hot and Cold are only in Opinion or Phancy Colour is only in opinion Atoms and Vacuum alone in Truth and Reality That which is thought to be are Sensibles but these are not according to Truth but Atoms and Vacuum only Now the chief Ground of this Rational Discovery of the ancient Atomists that Sensible things as Heat and Cold Bitter and Sweet Red and Green are no Real Qualities in the Objects without but only our own Phancies was because in Body there are no such things Intelligible but only Magnitude Figure Site Motion and Rest. Of which we have not only Sensible Ideas Passively impressed upon us from without but also Intelligible Notions Actively Exerted from the Mind it self Which Latter notwithstanding because they are not unaccompanied with Sensible Phantasms are by many unskilfully confounded with them But besides these we have other Intelligible Notions or Ideas also which have no Genuine Phantasms at all belonging to them Of which whosoever doubts may easily be satisfied and convinced by reading but a Sentence or two that he understands in any Book almost that shall come next to his hand and reflexively examining himself whether he have a Phantasm or Sensible Idea belonging to every Word or no. For whoever is modest and ingenuous will quickly be forced to confess that he meets with many Words which though they have a Sence or Intelligible Notion yet have no Genuine Phantasm belonging to them And we have known some who were confidently engaged in the other Opininon being put to read the beginning of Tully's Offices presently non-plust and confounded in that first word Quanquam they being neither able to deny but that there was a Sence belonging to it nor yet to affirm that they had any Phantasm thereof save only of the Sound or Letters But to prove that there are Cogitations not subject to Corporeal Sense we need go no further than this very Idea or Description of God A Substance Absolutely Perfect Infinitely Good Wise and Powerful Necessarily Self-existent and the Cause of all other things Where there is not One Word unintelligible to him that hath any Uunderstanding in him and yet no Considerative and Ingenuous Person can pretend that he hath a Genuine Phantasm or Sensible Idea answering to any one of those words either to Substance or to Absolutely Perfect or to Infinitely or to Good or to Wise or to Powerful or to Necessity or to Self-existence or to Cause or indeed to All or Other or Things Wherefore it is nothing but want of Meditation together with a Fond and Sottish Dotage upon Corporeal Sense which hath so far imposed upon some as to make them believe that they have not the least Cogitation of any thing not subject to Corporeal Sense or that there is nothing in Humane Vnderstanding or Conception which was not First in Bodily Sense a Doctrine highly favourable to Atheism But since it is certain on the contrary that we have many Thoughts not Subject to Sense it is manifes◠that whatsoever falls not under External Sense is not therefore Vnconceivable and Nothing Which whosoever asserts must needs affirm Life and Cogitation it self Knowledge or Vnderstanding Reason and Memory Volition and Appetite things of the greatest Moment and Reality to be Nothing but mere Words without any Significaetion Nay Phancy and Sense it self upon this Hypothesis could hardly scape from becoming Non-Entities too forasmuch as neither Phancy nor Sense falls under Sense but only the Objects of them we neither seeing Vision nor feeling Taction nor hearing Audition much less hearing Sight or seeing Tast or the like Wherefore though God should be never so much Corporeal as some Theists have conceived him to be yet since the Chief of his Essence and as it were his Inside must by these be acknowledged to consist in Mind Wisdom and Vnderstanding he could not possibly as to this fall under Corporeal Sense Sight or Touch any more than Thought can But that there is Substance Incorporeal also and therefore in it self altogether Insensible and that the Deity is such is demonstrated elsewhere We grant indeed that the Evidence of Particular Bodies existing Hîc Nunc without us doth necessarily depend upon the Information of Sense but yet nevertheless the Certainty of this very Evidence is not from Sense alone but from a Complication of Reason and Vnderstanding together with it Where Sense the only Evidence of things there could be no Absolute Truth and Falshood nor Certainty at all of any thing Sense as such being only Relative to Particular Persons Seeming and Phantastical and obnoxious to much Delusion For if our Nerves and Brain be inwardly so moved and affected as they would be by such an Object present when indeed it is absent and no other Motion or Sensation in the mean time prevail against it and obliterate it then must that Object of necessity seem to us present Moreover those Imaginations that spring and bubble from the Soul it self are commonly taken for Sensations by us when asleep and sometimes in Melancholick and Phanciful Persons also when awake That Atheistick Principle that there is no Evidence at all of any thing as Existing but only from Corporeal Sense is plainly contradicted by the Atomick Atheists themselves When they assert Atoms and Vacuum to be the Principles of all things and the Exuvious Images of Bodies to be the Causes both of Sight and Cogitation for Single Atoms and those Exuvious Images were never Seen nor Felt and Vacuum or Empty Space is so far from being Sensible that these Atheists themselves allow it to be the One Only Incorporeal Wherefore they must here go beyond the Ken of Sense and appeal to Reason only for the Existence of these Principles as Protagoras one of them in Plato professedly doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Have a Care that none of the Prophane and Vninitiated in the Mysteries over-hear you By the Prophane I mean saith he those who think nothing to Exist but what they can feel with their Fingers and exclude all that is Invisible out of the Rank of Being Were Existence to be allowed to nothing that doth not fall under Corporeal Sense then must we deny the Existence of Soul and Mind in our selves and others because we can neither Feel nor See any such thing Whereas we are certain of the Existence of our own Souls partly from an inward Consciousness of our own Cogitations and partly from that Principle of Reason That Nothing can not Act. And the Existence of other Individual Souls is manifest to us
is some confirmation of the Truth of Christianity the Scripture insisting so much upon these Evil Demons or Devils and declaring it to be one design of our Saviour Christ's coming into the World to oppose these Confederate Powers of the Kingdom of Darkness and to rescue mankind from the Thraldom and Bondage thereof As for Wizards and Magicians Persons who associate and confederate themselves in a peculiar manner with these Evil Spirits for the gratification of their own Revenge Lust Ambition and other Passions besides the Scriptures there hath been so full an attestation given to them by persons unconcerned in all Ages that those our so confident Exploders of them in this present Age can hardly escape the suspicion of having some Hankring towards Atheism But as for the Demoniacks and Energumeni It hath been much wondred that there should be so many of them in our Saviour's time and hardly any or none in this present Age of ours Certain it is from the Writings of Josephus in sundry places that the Pharisaick Jews were then generally possessed with an Opinion of these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Demoniacks men Possessed with Devils or Infested by them And that this was not a meer Phrase or Form of Speech only amongst them for persons very Ill-affected in their Bodies may appear from hence that Josephus declares it as his opinion concerning the Demons or Devils that they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Spirits or Souls of wicked men deceased getting into the Bodies of the Living From hence it was that Jews in our Saviour's time were not at all Surprised with his casting out of Devils it being usual for them also then to Exorcise the same an Art which they pretended to have learn'd from Solomon Of whom thus Josephus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God also taught Solomon an Art against Demons and Devils for the benefit and Cure of men Who composed certain Incantations by which diseases are cured and left forms of exorcisms whereby Devils are expelled and driven away Which Method of curing prevails much amongst us at this very day Notwithstanding which we think it not at all probable what a late Atheistick Writer hath asserted that the heads of the Jews were then all of them so full of Demons and Devils that they generally took all manner of Bodily Diseases such as Feavers and Agues and Dumbness and Deafness for Devils Though we grant that this very thing was imputed by Plotinus afterward to the Gnosticks that they supposed all Diseases to be Devils and therefore not to be cured by Physick but expelled by Words or Charms Thus he En. 2. Lib. 9. c. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now when they affirm Diseases to be Demons or Devils and pretend that they can expel them by words undertaking to do the same they hereby indeed render themselves considerable to the vulgar who are wont not a little to admire the powers of Magicians But they will not be able to perswade wise men that Diseases have no natural Causes as from Repletion or Inanition or Putrefaction or the like Which is a thing manifest from their cure they being oftentimes removed by purgation and bleeding and abstinence Vnless perhaps these men will say that the Devil is by this means Starved and made to Pine away Nor can we think that the Jews in our Saviour's time either supposed all Mad-men to be Demoniacks or all Demoniacks Mad-men though this latter seems to be asserted by an Eminent Writer of our own we reading of Devils cast out from others besides Mad-men and of a woman which had a Spirit of Infirmity only and was bowed together and could not lift up her self which is said by our Saviour Christ to have been bound by Satan Wherefore the sense of the Jews formerly seems to have been this that when there was any unusual and extraordinary Symptoms in any bodily Distemper but especially that of Madness this being look'd upon something more than Natural was imputed by them to the Possession or Infestation of some Devil Neither was this proper to the Jews only at that time to suppose Evil Demons to be the Causes of such bodily diseases as had extraordinary Symptoms and especially Madness but the Greeks and other Gentiles also were embued with the same Perswasion as appeareth from Apollonius Tyanaeus his curing a Laughing Demoniack at Athens he ejecting that Evil Spirit by threats and menaces who is said at his departure to have tumbled down a Royal Porch in the City with great noise As also from his freeing the City of Ephesus from the Plague by stoning an old Ragged Beggar said by Apollonius to have been the Plague which appeared to be a Demon by his changing himself into the form of a Shagged Dog But that there is some Truth in this Opinion and that at this very day Evil Spirits or Demons do sometimes really Act upon the Bodies of men and either Inflict or Augment bodily Distempers and Diseases hath been the Judgment of two very experienced Physicians Sennertus and Fernelius The Former in his Book De Mania Lib. 1. cap. 15. writing thus Etsi sine ulla Corporis Morbosa Dispositione Deo permittente hominem Obsidere Occupare Daemon possi◠tamen quandoque Morbis praecipuè Melancholicis sese immiscet Daemon forsan frequentius hoc accidit quam saepè creditur Although the Devil may by Divine permission Possess men without any Morbid Disposition yet doth he usually intermingle himself with Bodily Diseases and especially those of Melancholy and perhaps this cometh to pass ostner than is commonly believed or suspected The other in his De Abditis rerum Causis where having attributed real Effects upon the bodies of men to Witchcraft and Enchantment he addeth Neque solum morbos verum etiam Daemonas scelerati homines in corpora immittunt Hi quidem visuntur Furoris quadam specie distorti hoc uno tamen à Simplici Furore distant quod summè ardua obloquantur praeterita occulta renuntient assidentiúmque arcana reserent Neither do these wicked Magicians only inflict Diseases upon mens Bodies but also send Devils into them By means whereof they appear distorted with a kind of fury and madness which yet differs from a Simple Madness or the Disease so called in this that they speak of very high and difficult matters declare things past unknown and discover the Secrets of those that sit by Of which he subjoyns two Notable Instances of Persons well known to himself that were plainly Demoniacal Possessed or Acted by an Evil Demon one whereof shall be afterwards mentioned But when Maniacal Persons do not only discover Secrets and declare things Past but Future also besides this speak in Languages which they had never learnt this puts it out of all doubt and question that they are not meer Mad men or Maniaci but Demoniacks or Energumeni And that since the time of our Saviour Christ there have been often
where of that being Indistant and Vnextended To the same purpose Porphyrius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We ought therefore in our Disquisitions concerning Corporeal and Incorporeal Beings to conserve the Property of each and not to confound their Natures But especially to take heed that our Phancy and Imagination do not so far impose upon our judgments as to make us attribute to Incorporeals what properly belongeth to Bodies only For we are all accustomed to Bodies but as for Incorporeals scarcely any one reaches to the knowledge of them men alwaies fluctuating about them and diffiding them so long as they are held under the Power of their Imagination Where afterwards he propoundeth a Form for this How we should think of Incorporeals so as not to Confound their Natures with Corporeals 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the Indistant and Vnextended Deity is the Whole of it present in Infinite Parts of the Distant World neither Divided as applying part to part nor yet Multiplied into many Wholes according to the multiplicity of those things that partake thereof But the whole of it One and the same in Number is present to all the Parts of the Bulkie World and to every one of those many things in it Vndividedly and Vnmultipliedly that in the mean time partaking thereof Dividedly It was granted therefore by these Ancients that this Vnextended and Indistant Nature of Incorporeals is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a thing altogether Vnimaginable and this was concluded by them to be the only Reason why so many have pronounced it to be Impossible because they attended only to Sense and Imagination and made them the only Measure of Things and Truth it having been accordingly maintained by divers of them as Porphyrius tells us that Imagination and Intellection are but Two different Names for one and the same thing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There is a difference of Names only and no more betwixt Mind and Phancy Phancy and Imagination in Rational Animals seeming to be the same thing with Intellection But there are many things which no man can have any Phantasm or Imagination of and yet are they notwithstanding by all Unquestionably acknowledged for Entities or Realities from whence it is plain that we must have some other Faculties in us which Extend beyond Phansie and Imagination Reason indeed dictates that whatsoever can either Do or Suffer any thing must therefore be undoubtedly Something but that whatsoever is Vnextended and hath no Distant Parts one without another must therefore needs be Nothing is no Common Notion but the Spurious Suggestion of Imagination only and a Vulgar Errour There need to be no fear at all Lest a Being Infinitely Wise and Powerful which Acts upon the whole world and all the Parts thereof in Framing and Governing the same should prove a Non-Entity meerly for want of Bulk and Extension or because it Swells not out into Space and Distance as Bodies do therefore Vanish into Nothing Nor does Active Force and Power as such depend upon Bulk and Extension because then whatsoever had the greater Bulk would have the greater Activity There are therefore Two kinds of Substances in the Universe the First Corporeal which are Nothing but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bulks or Tumours devoid of all Self-Active Power the Second Incorporeal which are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Substantial Powers Vigours and Activities which though they act upon Bulk and Extension yet are themselves Vnbulkie and devoid of Quantity and Dimensions however they have a certain 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in them in another sense an Essential Profundity according to this of Simplicius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All Corporeal Substance is simply Divisible some Parts of it being here and some there but Intellectual Substance is Indivisible and without Dimensions though it hath much of Depth ond Profundity in it in another Sense But that there is some thing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vnimaginable even in Body it self is evident whether you will suppose it to be Infinitely Divisible or Not as you must of necessity suppose one or other of these And that we ought not always to pronounce of Corporeal Things themselves according to Imagination is manifest from hence because though Astronomical Reasons assure us that the Sun is really more than a Hundred Times bigger than the whole Earth yet can we not possibly for all that Imagine the Sun of such a Bigness nor indeed the Earth it self half so big as we know it to be The reason whereof is partly because we never had a Sense or Sight of any such Vast Bigness at once as that of either of them and partly because our Sense always representing the Sun to us but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as of a Foot Diameter and we being accustomed always to Imagine the same according to the Appearance of Sense are not able to frame any Imagination of it as very much Bigger Wherefore if Imagination be not to be Trusted nor made the Criterion or Measure of Truth as to Sensible things themselves much less ought it to be as to Things Insensible Besides all which the Ancient Incorporealists argued after this manner that it is as Difficult for us to conceive a Substance whose Duration is Vnextended or Vnstretched out in Time into Past Present and Future and therefore without Beginning as that which is Vnextended as to Parts Place or Space in Length Breadth and Thickness yet does Reason pronounce that there must needs be not only a Duration without Beginning but also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Timeless Eternity or a Permanent Duration differing from that Successive Flux of Time which is one of Plato's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Things Generated or that had a Beginning This Parity of Reason is by Plotinus thus insisted on 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For the same reason that we deny Local Extension to the Deity must we also deny Temporal Distance to the same and affirm that God is not in Time but above Time in Eternity For as much as Time is alwaies Scattered and Stretched out in Length and Distance one moment following after another but Eternity remaineth in the same without any Flux and yet nevertheless outgoeth Time and transcendeth the Flux thereof though seeming to be stretched and spun out more into Length Now the reason why we cannot frame a Conception of such a Timeless Eternity is only because our selves are Essentially Involved in Time and accordingly are our Conceptions Chained Fettered and Confined to that narrow and dark Dungeon that our selves are Imprisoned in Notwithstanding which our Freer Faculties assuring us of the Existence of a Being which far transcendeth our selves to wit one that is Infinitely Perfect we have by means hereof 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a certain Vaticination of such a Standing Timeless Eternity as its Duration But as for that Conceit of Immaterial or Incorporeal Bodies or that God and Humane Souls are no otherwise Incorporeal then as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Thin and
Know Man according to this Rule That he is such a thing as hath Nothing to do with Absolute Truth and again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We know nothing Absolutely concerning any thing and all our Knowledge is Opinion Agreeably to which he determined that mens Knowledge was diversified by the Temper of their Bodies and the Things without them And Aristotle Judiciously observing both these Doctrines That there is no Errour or False Judgment but every Opinion True and again That Nothing is Absolutely True but Relatively only to be Really and Fundamentally One and the same imputeth them both together to Democritus in these words of his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Democritus held that there was Nothing Absolutely True but because he thought Knowledge or Vnderstanding to be Sense therefore did he conclude that whatsoever Seemed according to Sense must of necessity be True not Absolutely but Relatively to whom it so Seemed These Gross Absurdities did the Atheistick Atomists plunge themselves into whilst they endeavoured to Salve the Phaenomenon of Cogitation Mind or Vnderstanding agreeably to their own Hypothesis And it is certain that all of them Democritus himself not excepted were but meer Blunderers in that Atomick Physiology which they so much pretended to and never rightly Understood the Same For as much as that with Equal Clearness teaches these Two things at once That Sense indeed is Phantastical and Relative to the Sentient But that there is a Higher Faculty of Vnderstanding and Reason in us which thus discovers the Phantastry of Sense and reaches to the Absoluteness of Truth or is the Criterion thereof But the Democritick and Epicurean Atheists will further Conclude that the only Things or Objects of the Mind are Singular Sensibles or Bodies Existing without it which therefore must needs be in Order of Nature before all Knowledge Mind and Vnderstanding whatsoever this being but a Phantastick Image or Representation of them From whence they Infer that the Corporeal World and these Sensible things could not possibly be Made by any Mind or Vnderstanding because Essentially Junior to them and the very Image and Creature of them Thus does Aristotle Observe concerning both Democritus and Protagoras that they did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Suppose the only Things or Objects of the Mind to be Sensibles and that this was the Reason why they made Knowledge to be Sense and therefore Relative and Phantastical But we have already Proved that Mind and Vnderstanding is not the Phantastick Image of Sensibles or Bodies and that it is in its own Nature not Ectypal but Archetypal and Architectonical of all That it is Senior to the World and all Sensible Things it not looking abroad for its Objects any where without but containing them within it self The first Original Mind being an Absolutely perfect Being Comprehending it self and the Extent of its own Omnipotence or all Possibilities of things together with the Best Platform of the whole and poducing the same accordingly But it being plain that there are besides Singulars other Objects of the Mind Vniversal from whence it seems to follow that Sensibles are not the only Things some Modern Atheistick Wits have therefore invented this further device to maintain the Cause and carry the Business on That Vniversals are nothing else but Names or Words by which Singular Bodies are called and Consequently that in all Axioms and Propositions Sententious Affirmations and Negations in which the Predicate at least is Vniversal we do but Add or Substract Affirm or Deny Names of Singular Bodies and that Reason or Syllogism is Nothing but the Reckoning or Computing the Consequences of these Names or Words Neither do they want the Impudence to Affirm that besides those Passions or Phansies which we have from things by Sense we know Nâ—â—hing at all oâ— any thing but only the Names by which it is calâ—â—d Then which there cannot be a greater Sottishness or Madness For if Geometry were nothing but the Knowledge of Names by which Singular Bodies are called as it self could not deserve that Name of a Science so neither could its Truths be the same in Greek and in Latine and Geometricians in all the several distant Ages and Places of the World must be supposed to have had the same Singular Bodies before them of which they Affirmed and Denied those Vniversal Names In the Last place the Epicurean and Anaximandrian Atheists agreeably to the Premised Principles and the Tenor of their Hypothesis do both of them endeavour to Depreciate and Undervalue Knowledge or Vnderstanding as a thing which hath not any Higher Degree of Perfection or Entity in it than is in Dead and Sensless Matter It being according to them but a Passion from Singular Bodies Existing without and therefore both Junior and Inferior to them a Tumult raised in the Brain by Motions made upon it from the Objects of Sense That which Essentially includeth in it Dependence upon Something else at best but a Thin and Evanid Image of Sensibles or rather an Image of those Images of Sense a meer Whifling and Phantastick thing upon which account they conclude it not fit to be attributed to that which is the First Root and Sourse of all things which therefore is to them no other than Grave and Solid Sensless Matter the only Substantial Self-Existent Independent thing and Consequently the most Perfect and Divine Life and Vnderstanding Soul and Mind are to them no Simple and Primitive Natures but Secondary and Derivative or Syllables and Complexions of things which Sprung up afterwards from certain Combinations of Magnitudes Figures Sites and Motions or Contemperations of Qualities Contextures either of Similar or Dissimilar Atoms And as themselves are Juniors to Sensless Matter and Motion and to those Inanimate Elements Fire Water Air and Earth the First and most Real Productions of Nature and Chance so are their Effects and the Things that belong to them comparatively with those other Real Things of Nature but Slight Ludicrous and Vmbratil as Landskip in Picture compared with the Real Prospect of High Mountains and Low Valleys Winding or Meandrous Rivers Towering Steeples and the Shady Tops of Trees and Groves as they are accordingly commonly disparaged under those Names of Notional and Artificial And thus was the Sence of the Ancient Atheists represented by Plato 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They say that the Greatest and most Excellent Things of all were made by Sensless Nature and Chance but all the Smaller and more Inconsiderable by Art Mind and Vnderstanding which taking from Nature those First and Greater Things as its Ground-work to Act upon doth Frame and Fabricate all the other Lesser Things which are therefore Commonly called Artificial And the Mind of these Atheists is there also further declared by that Philosopher after this manner The First most Real Solid and Substantial things in the whole World are those Elements Fire Water Air and Earth made by Senslâ—ss Nature and Chance without
or Image Worship The Latter of which accounted by the Jews the greatest Enormity of the Pagans as is proved from Philo and this the Reason why their Polytheism called also Idolatry Plainly declared by S. Paul that the Pagan Superstition consisted not in worshipping Many Independent Gods and Creators but in joyning Creature-worship some way or other with the worship of the Creator 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 How to be Vnderstood and in what Sense the Pagans though acknowledging the Creator might be said to have Worshipped the Creature beyond him Page 471 472 Again from S. Pauls Oration to the Athenians where their Unknown God is said to be that same God whom S. Paul Preached Who made the World and all things in it And these Athenian Pagans are affirmed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Religiously and Devoutly to Worship this True God Page 473 474 Lastly that Aratus his Zeus was the True God whose Offspring our Souls are Proved not onely from the Context of that Poet himself undeniably and from the Scholiast upon him but also from S. Pauls Positive Affirmation Nor was Aratus Singular in this That Ancient Prayer of the Athenians Commended by M. Antoninus for its Simplicity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rain Rain O Gracious Jupiter c. no otherwise to be understood And how that other Passage of S. Paul That in the Wisedom of God the World by Wisedom knew not God does not at all Clash herewith Page 475 476 XXXII In order to a Fuller Explication of the Pagan Theology and makeing it the better appear that the Polytheism thereof was not Contradictions to the acknowledgment of One Supreme Omnipotent Numen Three Things to be Considered First That much of their Polytheism was but Seeming and Phantasticall onely and really nothing but the Polyonymy of One God Secondly That their Reall and Naturall Polytheism consisted onely in Religiously Worshipping besides this One Supreme Universall Numen Many other Particular and Inferiour Created Beings as Animated Stars Demons and Hero's Thirdly That they Worshipping both the Supreme and Inferiour Gods in Statues Images and Symbols these were also sometimes Abusively called Gods To one or other of which Three Heads all the Pagan Polytheism Referrible Page 477 For the better perswading That much of the Pagan Polytheism was Really nothing but the Polyonymy of One Supreme God or the Worshipping him under severall Personall Names to be Remembred again what was before Suggested That the Pagan Nations Generally besides their Vulgar had another more Arcane Theology which was the Theology of Wise men and of Truth That is besides both their Fabulous and Poeticall their Politicall and Civil Theology they had another Natural and Philosophick one This Distinction of the Vulgar and Civil Theology from the Nataral and Reall owned by the Greeks Generally and amongst the Latins by Scaevola the Pontifex Varro Cicero Seneca and others ibid. That the Civil Theology of the Pagans differed from the Natural and Reall by a certain Mixture of Fabulosity in it Of the Romans suffering the Statue of Jupiters Nurse to be kept in the very Capitol as a Religious Monument Jupiters Nativity or his having a Father and a Mother Atheistically Fabulous Poets themselves acknowledging so much of the Natural and True Teology That Jupiter being the Father of Gods and Men the Maker of the whole World was himself Eternall and Unmade Page 478 That the Civil as well as Poeticall Theology had some appearance of Many Independent Deities also they making Severall Supreme in their severall Territories and Functions One Chief for one thing and another for another But according to the Naturall and Philosophick Theology the Theology of Wise men and of Truth all these but Poeticall Commentitious Fictitious and Phantastick Gods such as had no distinct Substantiall Essences of their own and therefore Really to be accounted nothing else but severall Names or Notions of One Supreme God Page 478 479 Certain that the Egyptians had severall Proper and Personal Names for that One Supreme Universal Numen that Comprehends the whole World according to several Notions of it or its several Powers as Ammon Phtha Osiris Neith Cneph to which may be added Serapis and Isis too Besides Iamblichus Damascius his Testimony also to this purpose concerning the Egyptian Theology This the Pattern of the other especially European Theologies the Greek and Roman Page 479 480 That the Greeks and Romans also often Made More Gods of One or affected a Polyonymy of the Same Gods Evident from those many Proper and Personal Names bestowed First upon the Sun of which Macrobius who therefore had this Epithet of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 given to him and then upon the Moon Styled also Polyonymous as well as her Brother the Sun and Lastly upon the Earth famous likewise for her Many Names as Vesta Cybele Ceres Proserpina Ops c. Wherefore not at all to be Doubted but that the Supreme God or Sovereign Numen of the whole World was much more Polyonymous This Title given to him also as well as to Apollo in Hesychius He thus Invoked by Cleanthes Zeno the Writer De Mundo Seneca Macrobius clearly confirm the same Maximus Madaurensis in S. Austin his full acknowledgment thereof Page 480 481 The First Instances of the Polyonymy of the Supreme God amongst the Pagans in such Names as these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. And amongst the Latins Victor Invictus Opitulus Stator Tigillus Centupeda Almus Ruminus c. Again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all several Names of the One Supreme God as likewise were Clotho Lachesis and Atropos in the Writer De Mundo And amongst the Latins not onely Fate but also Nature and Fortune too as Cicero and Seneca affirm Page 482 But besides these there were other Proper Names of the Supreme God which had a greater shew and appearance of so many Several Gods they having their Peculiar Temples and several Appropriated Rites of Worship And First such as signifie the Deity according to its more Universal Nature As for example Pan which not the Corporeal World Inanimate or endued with a Sensless Nature onely but a Rational or Intellectual Principle displaying it self in Matter framing the World Harmoniously and being in a manner All things This also the Universal Pastor and Shepherd of all Mankind Page 483 Again Janus First Invoked by the Romans in their Sacrifices and never omitted The most Ancient God and First Beginning of all things Described by Ovid Martial and others as a Universal Numen Concluded by S. Austin to be the Same with Jupiter the Soul or Mind of the whole World The word Janus probably derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Aetolian Jupiter Page 483 484 Genius also one of the Twenty Select Roman Gods according to Festus a Universal Numen that God who is the Begetter of All things And according to Varro in S. Austine the same with Jupiter Page 484 485 That Chronos or Saturn no particular Deity but a Universal Numen
of Vectius Valens and the Sibyls Thus Balaam Divinely assisted to Predict our Saviour Page 712 713 Scriptures Triumphing over Pagan Oracles Predictions concerning our Saviour Christ and the Conversion of the Gentiles Amongst which that remarkable one of the Seventy Weeks Page 713 714 Other Predictions concerning the Fates of Kingdoms and of the Church Daniel's Fourth Ten-Horned Beast the Roman Empire This Prophecy of Daniel's carried on further in the Apocalyps Both of them Prophetick Calendars of Times to the End of the World ibid. That this Phaenomenon of Scripture-Prophecies cannot Possibly be Imputed by Atheists as some others to Fear or Ignorance of Causes or to the Fiction of Politicians They not onely Evince a Deity but also the Truth of Christianity To this Purpose of more Vse to us who now live then the Miracles themselves Recorded in Scripture Page 714 715 These Five Extraordinary Phaenomena all of them evince Spirits to be no Fancies but Substantiall Inhabitants of the World from whence a God may be Inferred Some of them Immediately prove a Deity ibid. Here have we not onely fully Confuted all the Atheistick Pretences from the Idea of God but also by the way already Proposed several Substantiall Arguments for a Deity The Existence whereof will now be further proved from its very Idea ibid. True That some of the Ancient Theists themselves Declare God Not to be Demonstrable Thus Alexander Aphrodis Clemens Alexand. But their meaning therein no more then this That God cannot be Demonstrated à Priori from any Antecedent Necessary Cause Not follow from hence That therefore no Certainty or Knowledge of the Existence of a God but onely Conjectural Probability Faith and Opinion We may have a Certain Knowledge of things the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereof cannot be Demonstrated à Priori as That there was Something or other Eternal without Beginning Whensoever a thing is Necessarily Inferred from what is altogether Undeniable this may be called a Demonstration Many Geometricall Demonstrations such or of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 onely Page 715 716 A Sceptical Position of Cartesius That there can be no Certainty of any thing no not of Geometrical Theorems nor Common Notions before we be Certain of the Existence of a God Essentially Good who therefore cannot Deceive From whence it would follow That neither Atheists nor such Theists as assert an Arbitrary Deity can ever be certain of anything as That Two and Two are Four Page 716 717 However some appearance of Piety in this Assertion yet is it a Foundation of Eternal Scepticism both as to all other things and the Existence of a God That Cartesius here went Round in a Circle proving the Existence of a God from our Faculties and then the Truth of our Faculties from the Existence of a God and consequently Proved nothing If it be possible that our Faculties might be False then must we confess it possible that there may be no God and Consequently remain for ever Sceptical about it ibid. Wherefore a Necessity of Exploding and Confuting this New Sceptical Hypothesis of the Possibility of our Faculties being so made as to Deceive us in all our Clearest Perceptions Omnipotence it self cannot make any thing to be Indifferently True or False Truth not Factitious As to the Universal Theorems of Abstract Science the Measure of Truth no Forrein or Extraneous thing but onely our own Clear and Distinct Perception Here whatsoever is Clearly Perceived Is. The very Essence of Truth Perceptibility Granted by all That there can be no False Knowledge or Understanding The Perception of the Understanding never False but onely Obscure Not Nature that Erreth in us but We Our selves in Assenting to things not Clearly Perceived Conclusion That Omnipotence cannot Create any Understanding Faculties so as to have as Clear and Distinct Conceptions of all Falshoods and Non-Entities as of Truths because whatsoever is Clearly and Distinctly Perceived hath therefore an Entity and Omnipotence it self to speak with Reverence cannot make Nothing to be Something or Something Nothing This no more then That it cannot doe Things Contradictious Conception the Measure of Power Page 717 719 True That Sense as such is but Phantastical and Relative and were there no other Perception all Truth would be Private Relative and Seeming none Absolute This probably the Reason why some have suspected the same of Knowledge also But Mind and Understanding reaches beyond Phancy and Appearance to the Absoluteness of Things It hath the Criterion of Truth within it self Page 719 720 Objected That this an Arrogance for Creatures to Pretend to an Absolute Certainty of any thing Answer That God alone is Ignorant of Nothing and Infallible in All things but no Derogation from the Deity to suppose that he should make Created Minds such as to have a Certainty of Something as the Whole to be Greater then the Part and the like since otherwise they would be but a meer Mockery Congruous to think that God hath made Men so as that they may Possibly attain to some Certainty of his own Existence Origen That Knowledge is the onely thing that hath Certainty in it Page 720 721 Having now some Firm Ground or Footing to stand upon a Certainty of Common Notions without which nothing could be proved by Reason we shall endeavour by means hereof to Demonstrate the Existence of a God from his Idea ibid. Cartesius his Vndertaking to doe this with Mathematical Evidence as this Idea includeth in it Necessary Existence This Argument hitherto not so Successfull it being by many concluded to be a Sophism That we shall impartially set down all that we can both For it and Against it leaving others to make a Judgment Page 721 First Against the Cartesian Demonstration of a God That because we can frame an Idea of a Necessarily Existent Being it does not at all follow that It Is since we can frame Idea's of things that Never Were nor Will be Nothing to be gathered from hence but onely that it is Not Impossible Again from this Idea Including Necessary Existence nothing else Inferrible but That what hath no Necessary â—xistence is not Perfect and That if there be a Perfect Being its Existence always was and will be Necessary but not Absolutely That it doth Exist A Fallacy when from the Necessity of Existence affirmed onely Hypothetically the Conclusion is made Absolutely Though a Perfect Beâ—ng Must Exist Necessarily yet not therefore follow that it Must and Doth Exist The Latter a thing Indemonstrable Page 721 723 For the Cartesian Demonstration of a God As from the Notion of a thing Impossible we conclude That it never Was nor Will be and of that which hath a Contingent Schesis to Existence That it Might be or Might not be so from that which hath Necessary Existence in its Nature That it Actually Is. The force of the Argumentation not meerly Hypotheticall If there be a Perfect Being then is its Existence Necessary because this supposes that a Necessary