will unto the true Prophets The grand question propounded how it may be known when predictions express Gods decrees and when only the series of causes For the first several rules laid down 1. When the prediction is confirmed by a present miracle 2. When the things foretold exceed the probability of second causes 3. When confirmed by Gods oath 4. When the blâ—ssings fore-told are purely spiritual Three rules for interpreting the Prophâ—cyes which respect the state of things under the Gâ—spel 5. When all circumstances are foretold 6. When many Prophets in several ages agree in the same predictions Predictions do not express Gods unalterable purposes when they only contain comminations of judgments or are predictions of temporal blâ—ssings The case of the Ninivites Hezekiah and others opened Of repentance in God what it implyes The jewish objâ—ctions â—bout predictions of temporal blâ—ssings answered In what cases miracles were expected from the Prophets when they were to confirm the truth of their religion Instanced in the Prophet at Bethel Elijah Elishah and of Moses himself Whose divine authority that it was proved by miracles is demonstrated against the modern Iews and their pretences answered p. 177 CHAP. VII The eternity of the Law of Moses discussed The second case wherein miracles may be expected when a Divine positive Law is to be repealed and another way of worship established in stead of it The possibility in general of a repeal of a Divine Law asserted the particular case of the Law of Moses disputed against the Iews the matter of that Law proved not to be immutably obligatory because the ceremonial precepts were required not for themselves but for some further end that proved from Maimonides his confession the precepts of the Ceremonial Law frequently dispensed with while the Law was in force Of the Passover of Hezekiah and several other instances It is not inconsistent with the wisdom of God to repeal such an established Law Abravanels arguments answered Of the perfection of the Law of Moses compared with the Gospel Whether God hath ever declared he would never repeal the Law of Moses Of adding to the precepts Of the expressions seeming to imply the perpetuity of the Law of Moses Reasons assigned why those expressions are used though perpetuity be not implyed The Law of Moses not built upon immutable reason because many particular precepts were founded upon particular occasions as the customs of the Zabii many ceremonial precepts thence deduced out of Maimonides and because such a state of things was foretold with which the observation of the Ceremonial Law would be inconsistent That largely discovered from the Prophecies of the old Testament CHAP. VIII General Hypotheses concerning the Truth of the Doctrine of Christ. The great prejudice against our Saviour among Iews and Heathens was the meaness of his appearance The difference of the miracles at the delivery of the Law and Gospel Some general Hypotheses to clear the subserviency of miracles to the Doctrine of Christ. 1. That where the truth of a doctrine depends not on evidence but authority the only way to prove the truth of the Doctrine is to prove the Testimony of the revealer to be infallible Things may be true which depend not on evidence of the things What that is and on what it depends The uncertainty of natural knowledge The existence of God the foundation of all certainty The certainty of matters of faith proved from the same principle Our knowledge of any thing supposeth something incomprehensible The certainty of faith as great as that of knowledge the grounds of it stronger The consistency of rational evidence with faith Yet objects of faith exceed reason the absurdities following the contrary opinion The uncertainty of that which is called reason Philosophical dictates no standard of reason Of transubstantiation and ubiquity c. why rejected as contrary to reason The foundation of faith in matters above reason Which is infallible Testimony that there are wayes to know which is infallible proved 2. Hypoth A Divine Testimony the most infallible The resolution of faith into Gods veracity as its formal object 3. Hypoth A Divine Testimony may be known though God speak not immediatly Of inspiration among the Iews and Divination among the Heathens 4. Hyp. The evidences of a Divine Testimony must be clear and certain Of the common motives of faith and the obligation to faith arising from them The original of Infidelity CHAP. IX The rational evidence of the Truth of Christian Religion from Miracles The possibility of miracles appears from God and providence the evidence of a Divine Testimony by them God alone can really alter the course of nature The Devils power of working miracles considered Of Simon Magus Apollonius The cures in the Temple of Aeseulapius at Rome c. God never works miracles but for some particular end The particular reasons of the miracles of Christ. The repealing the Law of Moses which had been setled by miracles Why Christ checked the Pharisees for demanding a sign when himself appeals to his miracles The power of Christs miracles on many who did not throughly believâ— Christs miracles made it evident that he was the Messias because the predictions were fulfilled in him Why John Baptist wrought no miracles Christs miracles necessary for the everthrow of the Devils Kingdom Of the Daemoniaeks and Lunaticks in the Gospel and in the Primitive Church The power of the name of Christ over them largely proved by several Testimonies The evidence thence of a Divine power in Christ. Of counterfeit dispossessions Of miracles wrought among Infidels Of the future state of the Church The necessity of the miracles of Christ as to the propagation of Christian Religion that proved from the condition of the publishers and the success of the Doctrine The Apostles knew the hazard of their imployment before they entred on it The boldness and resolution of the Apostles notwithstanding this compared with heathen Philosophers No motive could carry the Apostles through their imployment but the truth of their Doctrine not seeking the honour profit or pleasure of the world The Apostles evidence of the truth of their doctrine lay in being eye-witnesses of our Saviours miracles and resurrâ—ction That attested by themselves their sufficiency thence for preaching the Gospel Of the nature of the doctrine of the Gospel contrariety of it to natural inclinations Strange success of it notwithstanding it came not with humane power No Christian Emperour till the Gospel universally preached The weakness and simplicity of the instruments which preached the Gospel From all which the great evidence of the power of miracles is proved pag. 252 CHAP. X. The difference of true miracles from false The unreasonableness of rejecting the evidence from miracles because of impostures That there are certain rules of distinguishing true miracles from false and Divine from diabolical proved from Gods intention in giving a power of miracles and the providence of God in the world The inconvenience of taking
though with all imaginable evidence that it was undoubtedly his especially when they were engaged to the observation of some Laws or customs already by which their Commonwealth had been established And with all these Laws of Moses seeming so much against the interest and good husbandry of a Nation as all the neighbour Nations thought who for that accused them to be an iâ—le and slothful people as they judged by their resting wholly one day in seven the great and many solemn feasts they had the repairing of all the males to Jerusalem thrice a year the Sabbatical years years of Iubilee c. These things were apparently against the interest of such a Nation whose great subsistence was upon pasturage and agriculture So that it is evident these Laws respected not the outward interest of the Nation and so could not be the contrivance of any Politicians among them but did immediately aim at the honour of the God whom they served for whom they were to part even with their civil interests The doing of which by a people generally taken notice of for a particular Love of their own concernments is an impregnable argument these Laws could not take place among them had they not been given by Moses at the time of their unsettlement and that their future settlement did depend upon their present observation of them which is an evidence too that they could be of no less then divine original Which was more then I was to prove at present 4. Were not these writings undoubtedly Moses's whence should the neighbour Nations about the Iews notwithstanding the hatred of the Iewish religion retain so venerable an opinion of the Wisdom of Moses The Aegyptians accounted him one of their Priests which notes the esteem they had of his learning as appears by the testimonies produced out of Chaeremon and Manâ—tho by Iosephus Diodorus Siculus speaks of him with great respect among the famous Legislatours and so doth Strabo who speaks in commendation of the Religion established by him The testimony of Longinus is sufficiently known that Moses was no man of any vulgar wit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chalcidius calls him sapientissimus Moses although I must not dissemble that Chalcidius hath been I think undeservedly reckoned among heathen writers though he comments on Plato's Timaeus it being most probable that he was a Christian Platonist which might more probably make Vaninus call him circumforaneum blateronem but though we exempt Chalcidius out of the number of those Heathens who have born testimony to the wisdom of Moses yet there are number enough besides him produced by Iustin Martyr Cyrill and others whose evidence is clear and full to make us undoubtedly believe that there could never have been so universal and uninterrupted a tradition concerning the writings and Laws of Moses had they not been certainly his and conveyed down in a continual succession from his time to our present age Which will be yet more clear if we consider in the second place that the national Constitution and setlement of the Iews did depend on the truth of the Laws and writings of Moses Can we have more undoubted evidence that there were such persons as Solon Lyâ—urgus and Numa and that the Laws bearing their names were theirs then the History of the several Commonwealths of Athâ—ns Sparta and Rome who were governed by those Laws When writings are not of general concernment they may be more easily counterfeited but when they concern the rights priviledges and government of a Nation there will be enough whose interest will lead them to prevent impostures It is no easie matter to forge a Magna Charta and to invent Laws mens caution and prudence is never so quick sighted as in matters which concern their estates and freeholds The general interest lyes contrary to such impostures and therefore they will prevent their obtaining among them Now the Laws of Moses are incorporated into the very Republick of the Iews and their subsistence and Government depends upon them their Religion and Laws are so interwoven one with the other that one cannot be broken off from the other Their right to their temporal possessions in the land of Canaan depends on their owning the Soveraignty of God who gave them to them and on the truth of the History recorded by Moses concerning the promises made to the Patriarchs So that on that account it was impossible those Laws should be counterfeit on which the welfare of a Nation depended and according to which they were governed ever since they were a Nation So that I shall now take it to be sufficiently proved that the writings under the name of Moses were undoubtedly his for none who acknowledge the Laws to have been his can have the face to deny the History there being so necessary a connexion between them and the book of Genesis being nothing else but a general and very necessary introduction to that which sollows CHAP. II. Moses his certain knowledge of what he writ The third Hypothesis concerns the certainty of the matter of Moses his History that gradually proved First Moses his knowledge cleared by his education and experience and certain information His education in the wisdom of Aegypt what that was The old Egyptian learning enquired into the conveniences for it of the Egyptian Priests Moses reckoned among them for his knowledge The Mathematical Natural Divine and Moral learning of Egypt their Political wisdom most considerable The advantage of Moses above the Greek Philosophers as to wisdom and reason Moses himself an eye-witness of most of his history the certain uninterrupted tradition of the other part among the Iews manifested by rational evidence HAving thus far cleared our way we come to the third Hypothesis which is There are as manifest proofs of the undoubted truth and certainty of the History recorded by Moses as any can be given concerning any thing which we yeild the firmest assent unto Here it must be considered that we proceed in a way of rational evidence to prove the truth of the thing in hand as to which if in the judgement of impartial persons the arguments produced be strong enough to convince an unbiassed mind It is not material whether every rangling Atheist will sit down contented with them For usually persons of that inclination rather then judgement are more resolved against light then inquisitive after it and rather seek to stop the chinks at which any light might come in then open the windows for the free and chearfull entertainment of it It will certainly be sufficient to make it appear that no man can deny the truth of that part of Scripture which we are now speaking of without offering manifest violence to his own faculties and making it appear to the world that he is one wholly forsaken of his own reason which will be satisfactorily done if we can clear these things First that it was morally impossible Moses should be ignorant of the things he
it to attest the truth of such things by any real miracles For so it would invalidate the great force of the evidences of the truth of Christianity if the same argument should be used for the proving of that which in the judgement of any impartial person was not delivered when the truth of the doctriâ—e of Christ was confirmed by so many and uncontrouled miracles But hereby we see what unconceivable prejudice hath been done to the true primitive doctrine of the Gospel and what stumbling-blocks have been laid in the way of considerative persons to keep them from embracing the truly Christian faith by those who would be thought the infallible directors of men in it by making use of the broad-seal of Heaven set only to the truth of the Scriptures to confirm their unwritten and superstitious ways of worship For if I once see that which I looked on as an undoubted evidence of divine power brought to attest any thing directly contrary to divine revelation I must either conclude that God may contradict himself by sealing both parts of a contradiction which is both blasphemous and impossible or that that society of men which own such things is not at all tender of the honour of Christain doctrine but seeks to set up an interest contrary to it and matters not what disadvantage is done to the grounds of Râ—ligion by such unworthy pretences and which of these two is more rational and true let every ones conscience judge And therefore it is much the interest of the Christian world to have all such frauds and impostures discovered which do so much disservice to the Christian faith and are such secret fomenters of Atheism and Infidelity But how far that promise of our Saviour that they which believe in his name shall cast out Devils and do many miracles may extend even in these last ages of the world to such generous and primitive-spirited Christians who out of a great and deep sense of the truth of Christianity and tenderness to the souls of men should go among Heathens and Infidels to convert them only to Christ and not to a secular interest under pretence of an infallible head is not here a place fully to enquire I confess I cannot see any reason why God may not yet for the conviction of Infidels employ such a power of miracles although there be not such necessity of it as there was in the first propagation of the Gospel there being some evidences of the power of Christianity now which were not so clear then as the overthrowing the Kingdom of Satan in the world the prevailing of Christianity notwithstanding force used against it the recovâ—ry of it from amidst all the corruptions which were mixed with it the consent of those parties in the common foundations of Christianity which yet disagreâ— froâ— each other with great bitternâ—ss of spirit though I say it be not of that necessity now when the Scriptures are convâ—yed to us in a certain uninterrupted manner yet God may please out of his abundant provision for the satisfaction of the minds of men concerning the truth of Christian doctrine to employ good men to do something which may manifest the power of Christ to be above the Dâ—vils whom they worship And therefore I should far sooner believe the relation of the miracles of Xaverius and his Brethren employed in the conversion of Infidels then Lipsius his Virgo Hallensis and Asprecollis could it but be made evident to me that the design of those persons had more of Christianity then Popery in it that is that they went more upon a design to bring the souls of the Infidels to heaven then to enlarge the authority and jurisdiction of the Roman Church But whatever the truth of those miracles or the design of those persons were we have certain and undoubted evidence of the truth of those miracles whereby Christianity was first propagated and the Kingdom of Satan overthrown in the world Christ thereby making it appear that his power was greater then the Devils who had possession because he overcame him took from him all his armour wherein he trusted and divided his spoils i. e. dispossâ—ssed him of mens bodies and his Idolatrous Temples silenced his Oracles nonplust his Magicians and at last when Christianity had overcome by suffering wrested the worldly power and Empire out of the Devils hands and employed it against himself Neither may we think because since that time the Devil hath got some ground in the world again by the large spread of Mahometism the general corruptions in the Christian world that therefore the other was no argument of divine power because the truth of Christianity is not tyed to any particular places because such a falling away hath been foretold in Scripture and therefore the truth of them is proved by it and because God himself hath threatned that those who will not receive the truth in the love of it shall be given up to strong de'usions Doth not this then in stead of abating the strength of the argument confirm it more and that nothing is fallen out in the Christian world but what was foretold by those whom God employed in the converting of it But we are neither without some fair hopes even from that divine revelation which was sealed by uncontrouled evidence that there may be yet a time to come when Christ will recover his Churches to their pristine purity and simplicity but withall I think we are not to measure the future felicity of the Church by outward splendor and greatness which too many so strongly fancy but by a recovery of that true spirit of Christianity which breathed in the first ages of the Church whatever the outward condition of the Church may be For if worldly greatness and ease and riches were the first impairers of the purity of Christian Religion it is hard to conceive how the restoring of the Church of Christ to its true glory can be by the advancing of that which gives so great an occasion to pride and sensuality which are so contrary to the design of Christian Religion unless we suppose men free from those corruptions which continual experience still tells the world the Rulers as well as members of the Christian society are subject to Neither may that be wonderd at when such uneveness of parts is now discovered in the great Luminaries of the world and the Sun himself is found to have his maculae as though the Sun had a purple feaver or as Kiroher expresseth it Ipse Phoebus qui rerum omnium in universo naturae Theatro aspectabilium longè pulcherrimus omnium opinione est habitus hoc seculo tandem fumosa facie ac infecto vultu maculis prodiit diceres eum variolis laborare senescentem I speak not this as though an outward flourishing condition of the Church were inconsistent with its purity for then the way to refine it were to throw it into the flames of persecution but that
was the great Seal of our Saviours being the Son of God therefore we find the Apostles so frequently attesting the truth of the resurrection of Christ and that themselves were eye-witnesses of it This Iesus saith Peter hath God raised up whereof we all are witnesses And again And killed the Prince of life whom God hath raised up from the dead whereof we are witnesses and both Peter and Iohn to the Sanhedrin For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard And the whole Colledge of Apostles afterwards And we are his witnesses of these things and so is also the Holy Ghost whom God hath given to them that obey him In which words they give them that twofold rational evidence which did manifest the undoubted truth of what they spake for they delivered nothing but what themselves were witnesses of and withall was declared to be true by the power of the Holy Ghost in the miracles which were wrought by and upon believers Afterwards we read the sum oâ— the Apostles Preaching and the manner used by them to perswade men of the truth of it in the words of Peter to Cernâ—lius and his company How God annointed Iesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power who went about doing good and healing all that were oppressed of the Devil for God was with him And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Iews and in Hierusalem whom they stew and hanged on a tree Him God raised up the third day and shewed him openly not to all the people but unto witnesses chosen before of God even to us who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead And he comâ—anded us to â—reach unto the people that it is be which was ordained of God to be the Iudge of quick and dead By all which we see what care God was pleased to take for the satisfaction of the world in point of rational evidence as to the truth of the matters which were discovered concerning our Saviour Christ because he made choice of such persons to be the preachers and writers of these things who were the best abâ—e to satisfie the world about them viz. such as had been eye witnesses of them Now in order to the making it more fully evident what strength there was in this Testimony given by the Apostles to the miracles of Christ we shall more fully manifest the rational evidence which attended it in these following propositions Where the truth of a doctrine depends upon a matter of fact the truth of the doctrine is sufficiently manifested if the matter of fact be evidently proved in the highest way it is capable of Thus it is in reference to the doctrine of Christ for the truth of that is so interwoven with the truth of the story of Christ that if the relations concerning Christ be true his doctrine must needs be Divine and infallible For if it be undoubtedly true that there was such a person as Christ born at Bethlehem who did so many miracles and at last suffered the death of the Cross and after he had lain three dayes in the grave rose again from the dead what reason imaginable can I have to question but that the Testimony of this person was certainly Divine and consequently what ever he preached to the world was most certain and undoubted truth So that if we have clear evidence as to the truth of these passages concerning our Saviour we must likewise believe his doctrine which came attested with such pregnant evidences of a Divine commission which he had from God to the world No Prince can think he hath any reason to refuse audience to an Embassador when he finds his Credentials such as he may rely upon although himself doth not see the sealing of them much less reason have we to question the truth of the doctrine of the Gospel if we have sufficient evidence of the truth of the matters of fact concerning Christ in such a way as those things are capable of being proved The greatest evidence which can be given to a matter of fact is the attesting of it by those persons who were eye-witnesses of it This is the Foundation whereon the firmest assent is built as to any matter of fact for although we conceive we have reason to suspect the truth of a story as long as it is conveyed only in a general way by an uncertain fame and tradition yet when it comes to be attested by a sufficient number of credible persons who profess themselves the cye-witnesses of it it is accounted an unreasonable thing to distrust any longer the truth of it especially in these two cases 1. When the matter they bear witness to is a thing which they might easily and clearly perceive 2. When many witnesses exactly agree in the same Testimony 1. When the matter it self is of that nature that it may be fully perceived by those who saw it i. e. if it be a common object of sense And thus it certainly was as to the person and actions of Iesus Christ. For he was of the same nature with mankind and they had as great evidence that they conversed with Iesus Christ in the flesh as we can have that we converse one with another The miracles of Christ were real and visible miracles they could be no illusions of senses nor deceits of their eyes the man who was born blind and cured by our Saviour was known to have been born blind through all the Countrey and his cure was after as publike as his blindness before and acknowledged by the greatest enemies of Christ at the time of its being done When Christ raised up the dead man at Naim it was before much people and such persons in probability who were many of them present at his death But least there might be any suspition as to him that he was not really dead the case is plain and beyond all dispute in Lazarus who had been to the knowledge of all persons thereabouts dead four dayes here could be no deceit at all when the stone was rowled away and Lazarus came forth in the presence of them all And yet further the death and passion of our Saviour was a plain object of sense done in presence of his greatest adversaries The souldiers themselves were sufficient witnesses of his being really dead when they came to break his bones and spared him because they saw he was dead already At his resurrection the stone was rowled away from the Sepulchre and no body found therein although the Sepulchre was guarded by souldiers and the Disciples of Christ all so fearful that they were dispersed up and down in several places And that it was the same real body which he rose withall and no aëreall vehicle appears by Thomas his serupulosity and unbelief who would not believe unless â—e might put his hands into the hole of his sides and see
aut sine Deo corum tantas animorum ficri conversiones ut cum carnisices unci aliique innumeri cruciatus quemadmodum diximus impendeant credituris vâ—luti quadam dulcedine atque omnium virtutum amore correpti cognitas accipiant rationes atque mundi omnibus rebus praeponant amicitias Christi That no fears penalties or torments were able to mâ—ke a Christian alter his profession but he would rather bid adiâ—u to his life then to his Saviour This Origen likewise frequently takes notice of when Celsus had objected the novelty of Christianity the more wonderful it is saith Origen that in so short a time it should so largely spread its self in the world for if the cure of mens bodies be not wrought without Divine Providence how much less the cure of so many thousands of souls which have been converted at once to humanity and Christianity especially when all the powâ—rs of the world were from the first engaged to hinder the progress of this doctrine and yet notwithstanding all this opposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Word of God prâ—vailed as not being able to be stopt by men and became master over all its enemies and not only spread its self quite through Greece but through a great part of the world besides and converted an innumerable company of souls to the true worship and service of God Thus we have now manifested from all the circumstances of the propagation of the doctrine of Christ what evidence there was of a divine power accompanying of it and how useful the first miracles were in order to it CHAP. X. The difference of true miracles from false The unreasonableness of rejecting the evidence from miracles because of impostures That there are certain rules of distinguishing true miracles from false and Divine from diabolical proved from Gods intention in giving a power of miracles and the providence of God in the world The inconvenience of taking away the rational grounds of faith and placing it on self-evidence Of the self-evidence of the Scriptures and the insufficiency of that for resolving the question about the authority of the Scriptures Of the pretended miracles of Impostors and false Christs as Barchochelas David el-David and others The rules whereby to judge true miracles from false 1. True Divine miracles are wrought to confirm a Divine testimony No miracles necessary for the certain conveyance of a Divine testimony proved from the evidences that the Scriptures could not be corrupted 2. No miracles Divine which contradict Divine revelation Of Popish miracles 3. Divine miracles leave Divine effects on those who believe them Of the miracles of Simon Magus 4. Divine miracles tend to the overthrow of the devils power in the world the antipathy of the doctrine of Christ to the devils designs in the world 5. The distinction of true miracles from others from the circumstances and manner of their operation The miracles of Christ compared with those of the Heathen Gods 6. God makes it evident to all impartial judgements that Divine miracles exceed created power This manifested from the unparalleld miracles of Moses and our Saviour From all which the rational evidence of Divine revelation is manifested as to the persons whom God imployes to teach the world HAving thus far stated the cases wherein miracles may justly be expected as a rational evidence of Divine authority in the persons whom God imployes by way of peculiar message to the world and in the prosecution of this discourse manifested the evidences of Divine authority in Moses and the Prophets and in our Saviour and his Apostles the only remaining question concerning this subject is how we may certainly distinguish true and real miracles from such as are only pretended and counterfeit For it being as evident that there have been impostures and delusions in the world as real miracles the minds of men will be wholly to seek when to rely upon the evidence of miracles as an argument of Divine authority in those persons who do them unless a way be found out to distinguish them from each other But if we can make it appear that unless men through weakness of judgement or incogitancy deceive themselves they may have certain evidence of the truth of miracles then there can be nothing wanting as to the establishment of their minds in the truth of that doctrine which is confirmed by them There hath been nothing which hath made men of better affections then understandings so ready to suspect the strength of the evidence from miracles concerning Divine testimony as the multitude of impostures in the world under the name of miracles and that the Scripture its self tells us we must not hearken to such as come with lying wonders But may we not therefore safely rely on such miracles which we have certain evidence could not be wrought but by Divine power because forsooth the Devil may sometimes abuse the ignorance and credulity of unwary men or is it because the Scripture forbids us to believe such as should come with a pretence of miracles therefore we cannot rely on the miracles of Christ himself which is as much as to say because the Scripture tells us that we must not believe every spirit therefore we must believe none at all or because we must not entertain any other doctrine besides the Gospel therefore we have no reason to believe that For the ground whereby we are assured by the Scriptures that the testimony of Christ was Divine and therefore his doctrine true is because it was confirmed by such miracles as he did now if that argument were insufficient which the Scriptures tell us was the great evidence of Christs being sent from God we cannot give our selves a sufficient account in point of evidence on which we believe the doctrine of the Gospel to be true and Divine But the only rational pretence of any scruple in this case must be a supposed uncertainty in our rules of judging concerning the nature of miracles for if there be no certain 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or notes of difference whereby to know Divine miracles from delusions of senses and the impostures of the Devil I must confess that there is an apparent insufficiency in the evidence from miracles but if there be any certain rules of proceeding in this case we are to blame nothing but our incredulity if we be not satisfied by them For the full clearing of this I shall first make it appear that there may be certain evidence found out whereby we may know true miracles from false and Divine from diabolical And Secondly Enquire into those things which are the main notes of difference between them First That there may be certain evidence whereby to know the truth of miracles I speak not of the difference ex parte râ—i between miracles and those called wonders as that the one exceed the power of created agents and the other doth not for this leaves the enquirer as far to
to be deceived I grant the imperfection of our minds in this present state is very great which makes us so obnoxious to errour and mistake but then that imperfection lies in the prâ—neness in mans mind to be led by interest and prejudice in the judgement of things but in such things as are purely speculative and rational if the mind cannot be certain it is not deceived in them it can have no certainty at all of any Mathematical demonstrations Now we find in our own minds a clear and convâ—ncing evidence in some things as soon as they are propounded to our understandings as that a thing cannot be and not be at the same time that a non-entity can have no proper attributes that while I reason and discourse I am these are so clear that no man doth suspect himself deceived at all in them Besides if we had no ground of certainty at all in our judging things to what purpose is there an Idea of true and false in our minds if it be impossible to know the one from the other But I say not that in all perceptions of the mind we have certain evidence of truth but only in such as are clear and distinct that is when upon the greatest consideration of the nature of a thing there appears no ground or reason at all to doubt concerning it and this must suppose the minds abstraction wholly from the senses for we plainly find that while we attend to them we may judge our selves very certain and yet be deceived as those who have an Icterism in their eyes may judge with much confidence that they see things as clearly and distinctly as any other doth Besides there are many things taken for granted by men which have no evidence of reason at all in them Now if men will judge of the truth of things by such principles no wonder if they be deceived But when we speak of clear and distinct perception we suppose the mind to proceed upon evident principles of reason or to have such notions of things which as far as we can perceive by the light of reason do agree with the natures of the things we apprehend if in such things then there be no ground of certainty it is as much as to say our Faculties are to no purpose which highly reflects either upon God or nature It is a noble question as any is in Philosophy What is the certain 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the truth of things or what ground of certainty the mind hath to proceed upon in its judgement of the truth of such objects as are represented to it Nothing can render the Philosophy of Epicurus more justly suspected to any â—ational and inquisitive mind then his making the senses the only certain conveyers of the truth of things to the mind The senses I grant do not in themselves deceive any but if I make the impressions of sense to be the only rule for the mind to judge by of the truth of things I make way for the greatest impostures and the most erring judgements For if my mind affirms every thing to be in its proper nature according to that Idea which the imagination hath received from the impressions upon the Organs of sense it will be impossible for me ever to understand the right natures of things Because the natures of things may remain the same when all those things in them which affect the Organs of sense may be altered and because the various motion and configuration of the particles of matter may make such an impression upon the senses which may cause an Idea in us of that in the things themselves which yet may be only in the manner of sensation As some Philosophers suppose it to be in heat and cold Now if the mind judgeth of the nature of things according to those Idea's which come from the impressions made upon the Organs of sense how is it possible it should ever come to a right judgement of the natures of things So that in reference even to the grossest material beings it must be the perception only of the mind which can truly inform us of their proper nature and essence Besides there are many Idea's of things in the mind of man which are capable to have properties demonstrated of them which never owed their original to our senses and were never imported to the mind at the Keyes of the senses Such are most Mathematical figures which have their peculiar properties and demonstrations such are all the mutual respects of things to each other which may be as certain and evident to the mind as its self is now it is plain by this that all certainty of knowledge is not conveyed by the senses but our truest way of certain understanding the nature of any thing is by the clear and distinct perception of the mind which is founded on the Truth of our faculties and that however we may be deceived when we do not make a right use of our reason because of the imperfection of our present state yet if we say our mind may be deceived when things are evident and clear to them upon plain principles of reason it is highly to reslect upon that God who gave men rational faculties and made them capable of discerning Truth from falshood 2. That we have clear and distinct perception that necessity of existence doth belong to the nature of God For which we are to consider the vast difference which there is in our notion of the nature of God and of the nature of any other being In all other beings I grant we may abstract essence and existance from each other now if I can make it appear that there is evident reason ex parte rei why I cannot do it in the notion of God then it will be more plain that necessity of existence doth immutably belong to his nature It is manifest to our reason that in all other beings which we apprehend the natures of nothing else can be implyed in the natures of them beyond bare possibility of existence no although the things which do apprehend do really exist because in forming an Idea of a thing we abstract from every thing which is not implyed in the very nature of the thing now existence being only contingent and possible as to any other being it cannot be any ingredient of its Idea because it doth not belong to its essence for we may fully apprehend the nature of the thing without attributing existence to it But now in our conception of a Being absolutely perfect bare possibility or contingency of existence speaks a direct repugnancy to the Idea of kim for how can we conceive that Being absolutely perfect which may want that which gives life to all other perfections which is existence The only scruple which mens minds are subject to in apprehending the force of this argument lies in this Whether this necessary existence doth really belong to the nature of that being whose Idea it is or else
unavoidable on the Stoical Hypothesis of Gods being corporeal and confined to the world as his proper place And so much for this second Hypothesis concerning the Origine of the Universe which supposeth the eternity of matter as coexisting with God I come now to that which makes most noise in the world which is the Atomical or Epicurean Hypothesis but will appear to be as irrational as either of the foregoing as far as it concerns the giving an account of the Origine of the Universe For otherwise supposing a Deity which produced the world and put it into the order it is now in and supremely governs all things in the world that many of the Phaenomena of the Universe are far more intelligibly explained by matter and motion then by substantial forms and real qualities few free and unprejudiced minds do now scruple But because these little particles of matter may give a tolerable account of many appearances of nature that therefore there should be nothing else but matter and motion in the world and that the Origine of the Universe should be from no wiser principle then the casual concourse of these Atoms is one of the evidences of the proneness of mens minds to be intoxicated with those opinions they are once in love with When they are not content to allow an Hypothesis its due place and subserviency to God and providence but think these Atoms have no force at all in them unless they can extrude a Deity quite out of the world For it is most evident that it was not so much the truth as the serviceableness of this Hypothesis which hath given it entertainment among men of Atheistical spirits Epicurus himself in his Epistle to Pythocles urgeth that as a considerable circumstance in his opinion that he brought no God down upon the stage to put things in order 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which his Paraphrast Lucretius hath thus rendered Nequaquam nobis divinitus esse paratam Naturam rerum If this opinion then be true the history of the Creation quite falls to the ground on which account we are obliged more particularly to consider the reason of it The Hypothesis then of Epicurus is that before the world was brought into that form and order it is now in there was an infinite empty space in which were an innumerable company of solid particles or Atoms of different sizes and shapes which by their weight were in continual motion and that by the various occursions of these all the bodies of the Universe were framed into that order they now are in Which is fully expressed by Dionysius in Eusebius and very agreeably to the sense of Epicurus in his Epistles to Herodotus and Pythocles and to what Plutarch reports of the sense of Epicurus though he names him not if at least that book be his which Muretus denyes the words of Dionysius are these concerning the Epicureans 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So that according to this opinion all the account we have of the Origine of the world is from this general Rendes-vous of Atoms in this infinite space in which after many encounters and facings about they fell into their several troops and made up that ordered Battalia which now the world is the Scheme of It was not imprudently done of Epicurus to make the worlds infinite as well as his space and Atoms for by the same reason that his Atoms would make one world they might make a thousand and who would spare for worlds when he might make them so easily Lucretius gives us in so exact an account of the several courses the Atoms took up in disposing themselves into bodyes as though he had been Muster-Master-General at that great Rendes-vous for thus he speaks of his Atoms Quae quia multimodis multis mutata per omne Ex Infinito vexantur percita plagis Omne genus motus caetus experiundo Tandem deveniunt in taleis disposituras Qualibus haec rebus consistit summa creata And more particularly afterwards Sed quia multa modis multis primordia rerum Ex infinito jam tempore percita plagis Ponderibusque suis consuërunt concita ferri Omnimodisque coire atque omnia pertentare Quaecunque inter se possunt congressa creare Ut non sit mirum si in taleis disposituras Deciderunt queque in taleis venere meatus Qualibus haec rerum â—enitur nunc summa novando Thus we see the substance of the Epicurean Hypothesis that there were an Infinite number of Atoms which by their frequent occursions did at last meet with those of the same nature with them and these being conjoyned together made up those bodyes which we see so that all the account we are able to give according to this Hypothesis of all the Phaenomena of the Universe is from the fortuitous concourse of the Atoms in the first forming of the world and the different contexture of them in bodies And this was delivered by the ancient Epicureans not with any doubt or hesitation but with the greatest confidence imaginable So Tully observes of Velleius the Epicurean beginning his discourse fidenter sane ut solent isti nihil tam verens quam ne dubitare de aliqua re videretur tanquam modo ex Deorum concilio ex Epicuri intermundiis descendisset Confidence was the peculiar genius of that sect which we shall see in them to be accompanied with very little reason For those two things which make any principles in Philosophy to be rejected this Atomical Hypothesis is unavoidably charged with and those are If the principles be taken up without sufficient ground in reason for them and if they cannot give any sufficient account of the Phaenomena of the world I shall therefore make it appear that this Hypothesis as to the Origine of the Universe is first meerly precarious and built on no sufficient grounds of reason Secondly That it cannot give any satisfactory account of the Origine of things 1. That it is a precarious Hypothesis and hath no evidence of reason on which it should be taken up and that will be proved by two things 1. It is such an Hypothesis as the Epicureans themselves could have no certainty of according to their own principles 2. That the main principles of the Hypothesis its self are repugnant to those Catholick Laws of nature which are observed in the Universe 1. The Epicureans according to their own principles could have no certainty of the truth of this Hypothesis And that 1. Because they could have no certain evidence of its truth 2. Because their way of proving it was insufficient 1. That they could have no certain evidence of the truth of it I prove from those criteria which Epicurus lays down as the only certain rules of judging the truth of things by and those were sense Anticipation and Passion Let sense be never so infallible a ruie of judgement yet it is impossible there should be any evidence to
the general defect for want of timely records among Heathen Nations the reason of it shewed from the first Plantations of the World The manner of them discovered The Original of Civil Government Of Hieroglyphicks The use of letters among the Greeks no elder then Cadmus his time enquired into no elder then Joshua the learning brought into Greece by him ENquiries after truth have that peculiar commendation above all other designs that they come on purpose to gratifie the most noble faculty of our souls and do most immediately tend to re-advance the highest perfection of our rational beings For all our most laudable endeavours after knowledge now are only the gathering up some scattered fragments of what was once an entire Fabrick and the recovery of some precious Iewels which were lost out of sight and sunk in the shipwrack of humane nature That saying of Plato that all knowledge is remembrance and all ignorance forgetfulness is a certain and undoubted truth if by forgetfulness be meant the loss and by remembrance the recovery of those notions and conceptions of things which the mind of man once had in its pure and primitive state wherein the understanding was the truest Microcosm in which all the beings of the inferiour world were faithfully represented according to their true native and genuine perfections God created the soul of man not only capable of finding out the truth of things but furnished him with a sufficient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or touchstone to discover truth from falshood by a light set up in his understanding which if he had attended to he might have secured himself from all impostures and deceits As all other beings were created in the full possession of the agreeable perfections of their several natures so was man too else God would have never closed the work of Creation with those words And God saw all that he had made and behold it was very good that is endued with all those perfections which were suitable to their several beings Which man had been most defective in if his understanding had not been endowed with a large stock of intellectual knowledge which is the most natural and genuine perfection belonging to his rational being For reason being the most raised faculty of humane nature if that had been defective in its discoveries of truth which is its proper object it would have argued the greatest maim and imperfection in the being it self For if it belongs to the perfection of the sensitive faculties to discern what is pleasant from what is hurtful it must needs be the perfection of the rational to find out the difference of truth from falshood Not as though the soul could then have had any more then now an actual notion of all the beings in the world ocexisting at the same time but that it would have been free from all deceits in its conceptions of things which were not caused through inadvertency Which will appear from the several aspects mans knowledge ledge hath which are either upwards towards his Maker or abroad on his fellow-creatures If we consider that contemplation of the soul which fixes its self on that infinite being which was the cause of it and is properly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it will be found necessary for the soul to be created in a clear and distinct knowledge of him because of mans immediate obligation to obedience unto him Which must necessarily suppose the knowledge of him whose will must be his rule for if man were not fully convinced in the first moment after his creation of the being of him whom he was to obey his first work and duty would not have been actual obedience but a search whether there was any supreme infinite and eternal being or no and whereon his duty to him was founded and what might be sufficient declaration of his Will and Laws according to which he must regulate his obedience The taking off all which doubts and scruples from the soul of man must suppose him fully satisfied upon the first free use of reason that there was an Infinite Power and Being which produced him and on that account had a right to command him in whatsoever he pleased and that those commands of his were declared to him in so certain a way that he could not be deceived in the judging of them The clear knowledge of God will further appear most necessary to man in his first creation if we consider that God created him for this end and purpose to enjoy converse and an humble familiarity with himself he had then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the language of Clemens Alexandrinus Converse with God was as natural to him as his being was For man as he came first out of Gods hands was the reflection of God himself on a dark Cloud the Iris of the Deity the Similitude was the same but the substance different Thence he is said to be created after the Image of God His knowledge then had been more intellectual then discursive not so much imploying his faculties in the operose deductions of reason the pleasant toyl of the rational faculties since the Fall but had immediately imployed them about the sublimest objects not about quiddities and formalities but about him who was the fountain of his being and the center of his happiness There was not then so vast a difference between the Angelical and humane life The Angels and men both fed on the same dainties all the difference was they were in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the upper room in heaven and man in the Summer Parlour in Paradise If we take a view of mans knowledge as it respects his fellow-creatures we shall find these were so fully known to him on his first creation that he needed not to go to School to the wide world to gather up his conceptions of them For the right exercise of that Dominion which he was instated in over the inferiour world doth imply a particular knowledge of the nature being and properties of those things which he was to make use of without which he could not have improved them for their peculiar ends And from this knowledge did proceed the giving the creatures those proper and peculiar names which were expressive of their several natures For as Plato tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The imposition of names on things belongs not to every one but only to him that hath a full prospect into their several natures For it is most agreeable to reason that names should carry in them a suitableness to the things they express for words being for no other end but to express our conceptions of things and our conceptions being but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the same Philosopher speaks the resemblances and representations of the things it must needs follow that where there was a true knowledge the conceptions must agree with the things and words being to express our conceptions none are so fit to do it as those which
of God which they owned in opposition to all heathen worship Which I find not in the least pretended to by any of the forementioned persons nor any thing of any different way of Religion asserted but only a destruction of that in use among them And although the case of Anaxagoras Clazomenius and the rest of the Ionicke Philosophers might seem very different from Diagoras Theodorus and those beforementioned because although they denied the Gods in vulgar repute to be such as they were thought to be as Anaxagor as call'd the Sun 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a meer globe of fire for which he was condemned at Athens to banishment and sined five talents yet the learned Vossius puts in this plea in his behalf that he was one that asserted the creation of the world to flow from an eternal mind although therefore I say the case of the Ionick Philosophers may seem far different from the others because of their asserting the production of the world which from Thales Milesius was conveyed by Anaeximander and Anaximenes to Anoxagoras yet to one that throughly considers what they understood by their eternal mind they may be sooner cleared from the imputation of Atheism then irreligion Which two certainly ought in this case to be distinguished for it is very possible for men meeting with such insuperable difficulties about the casual concourse of Atoms for the production of the world or the eternal existences of matter to assert some eternal mind as the first cause of these things which yet they may imbrace only as an hypothesis in Philosophy to solve the phoenomena of nature with but yet not to make this eternal mind the object of adoration And so their asserting a Deity was only on the same account as the Tragedians used to bring in their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when their Fables were brought to such an issue and perplexed with so many difficulties that they saw no way to clear them again but to make some God come down upon the Stage to selve the difficulties they were engaged in or as Seneca saith of many great Families when they had run up their Genealogies so high that they could go no further they then fetched their pedegree from the Gods So when these Philosophers saw such incongruities in asserting an infinite and eternal series of matter they might by this be brought to acknowledge some active principle which produced the world though they were far enough from giving any religious worship to that eternal mind Thus even Epicurus and his followers would not stick to assert the being of a God so they might but circumscribe him within the heavens and let him have nothing to do with things that were done on earth And how uncertain the most dogmatical of them all were as to their opinions concerning the being and nature of their geds doth fully appear from the large discourses of Tully upon that subject where is fully manifested their variety of opinions and mutual repugnancies their self contradictions and inconstancy in their own assertions which hath made me somewhat inclinable to think that the reason why many of them did to the world own a Deity was that they might not be Martyrsâ—or â—or Atheism Which Tully likewise seems to acknowledge when speaking of the punishment of Protagoras for that speech of his De diis neque ut sint neque ut non sint habeo dicere Ex quo equidem existimo tardiores ad hanc sententiam profitendam multos esse factos quippe cum poenam ne dubitatio quidem effugere potuisset So that for all the verbal asserting of a Deity among them we have no certain evidence of their firm belief of it and much less of any worship and service they owed unto it And though it may be they could not totally excuss the notions of a Deity out of their minds partly through that natural sense which is engraven on the souls of men partly as being unable to solve the difficulties of nature without a Deity yet the observing the notorious vanities of Heathen Worship might make them look upon it as a meer Philosophical speculation and not any thing that had an influence upon the government of mens lives For as in nature the observing the great mixture of falshood and truth made the Academicks deny any certain 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or rule of judging truth and the Scepticks take away all certain assent so the same consequence was nnavoidable here upon the same principle and that made even Plato himself so ambiguous and uncertain in his discourses of a Deity sometimes making him an eternal mind sometimes asserting the whole world Sun Moon Stars Earth Souls and all to be Gods and even those that were worshipped among the heathens as Tully tells us out of his Timaeus and de Legibus which as Velleius the Epicurean there speaks Et per se sunt falsa sibi invicem repugnantia This is the first inconvenience following the mixture of truth and falshood for the sake of the falshood to question the truth its self it was joyned with The other is as great which follows when truth and falshood are mixed for the sake of the truth to embrace the falshood Which is a mistake as common as the other because men are apt to think that things so vastly different as truth and falshood could never blend or be incorporate together therefore when they are certain they have some truth they conclude no falshood to be joyned with it And this I suppose to have been the case of the more credulous and vulgar Heathen as the other was of the Philosphers for they finding mankind to agree in this not only that there is a God but that he must be worship'd did without scruple make use of the way of worship among them as knowing there must be some and they were ignorant of any else And from hence they grew to be as confident believers of all those fables and traditions on which their Idolatry was founded as of those first principles and notions from which the necessity of divine worship did arise And being thus habituated to the belief of these things when truth it self was divulged among them they suspected it to be only a corruption of some of their Fables This Celsus the Epicurean on all occasions in his Books against the Christians did fly to Thus he saith the building of the Tower of Babel and the confusion of Tongues was taken from the fable of the Aloadae in Homers Odysses the story of the Flood from Deucalion Paradise from Alcinous his gardens the burning of Sodom and Gomorrah from the story of Phaeton Which Origen well resutes from the far greater antiquity of those relations among the Iewes then any among the Greeks and therefore the corruption of the tradition was in them and not the Iews Which must be our only way for finding out which was the Original and which the corruption by
by Scaliger out of the Phoenician Annals this Abibalus is the first who occurs and is co-temporary with David Sanchoniathon then is of no great antiquity if this were the time he lived in But Bochartus well observes that it is not spoken of Abibalus King of Tyre but of Abibalus King of Berytus whom we may allow to be somewhat nearer the time of Moses then the other Abibalus as the Phoenician Annals make it appear as Porphyry tells us but yet we find his antiquity is not so great as to be able to contest with Moses as Porphyry himself confesseth although we may freely acknowledge him to be far older then any of the Greek Historians which is all Vossius contends for and sufficiently proves but we are far from yielding him co-temporary with Semiramis as Porphyry would have him and yet makes him junior to Moses and to live about the time of the Trojan war which is to reconcile the distance of near 800 years such miserable confusion was there in the best learned Heathens in their computation of ancient times Having thus cleared the antiquity of Sanchoniathon and the Phoenician History we are next to consider the fidelity of it This Sanchoniathon is highly commended for both by Porphyry and his Translator into Greek Philo Byblius who lived in Adrians time and Theodoret thinks his name in the Phoenician language signifies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Bochartus endeavours to fetch from thence and conceives the name to be given him when he set himself to write his History and he wisheth and so do we that he had been then vir sui nominis and made it appear by his writing that he had been a Lover of truth Philo saith he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a very learned and inquisitive man but either he was not so diligent to enquire after or not so happy to light on any certain records or if he did he was not overmuch a Lover of truth in delivering them to the world How faithful he was in transcribing his history from his records we cannot be sufficient Iudges of unless we had those books of Taautus and the sacred Inscriptions and the records of Cities which he pretends to take his history from to compare them together But by what remains of his history which is only the first book concerning the Phoenician Theology extant in Eusebius we have little reason to believe his history of the world and eldest times without further proof then he gives of it there being so much obscurity and confusion in it when he makes a Chaos to be the first beginning of all things and the Gods to come after makes the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the son of Chryser or Vulcan and again the man born of earth to be several generations after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who were the first mortal men and yet from the two brethren 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 came two Gods whereof one was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and this latter was worshipped with as much veneration as any of their Gods Yet from these things as foolish and ridiculous as they are it is very probable the Gnosticks and the several subdivisions of them might take the rise of their several Aeones and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for here we find 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 made two of the number of the Gods but the rest of the names they according to their several Sects took a liberty of altering according to their several fancies This is far more probable to me then that either Hesiods 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be the ground of them or the opinion of a late German Divine who conceives that Philo Byblius did in imitation of the Gnosticks form this whole story of the Phoenician Theology For although I am far from believing what Kircher somewhere tells us that he had once got a sight of Sanchoniathons Original History it being not the first thing that learned man hath been deceived in yet I see no ground of so much Peevishness as because this history pretends to so much antiquity we should therefore presently condemn it as a figment of the Translator of it For had it been so the Antagonists of Porphyry Methodius Apollinaris but especially Eusebius so well versed in antiquities would have found out so great a cheat Although I must confess they were oft-times deceived with piae fraudes but then it was when they made for the Christians and not against them as this did But besides a fabulous confusion of things together we have some things delivered concerning their Gods which are both contrary to all natural notions of a Deity and to those very common principles of humanity which all acknowledge As when 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Saturn suspecting his son Sadidus destroyed him with his own hands and warred against his Father Uranus and after destroyed him likewise buried his brother Atlas alive in the earth which being taken as Philo Byblius contends they ought to be in the literal sense are such incongruities to all notions of a divine nature that it is the greatest wonder there should be any that should believe there was any God and believe these were Gods together But although there be so many gross fables and inconsistencies in this Phoenician Theology that are so far from meriting belief in themselves that it were a sufficient forfeiture of reason to say they were credible yet when we have a greater light in our hands of divine revelation we may in this dungâ—on find out many excellent remainders of the ancient tradition though miserably corrupted as concerning the Creation the Original of Idolatry the invention of Arts the foundation of Cities the story of Abraham of which in their due place That which of all seems the clearest in this Theology is the open owning the original of Idolatry to have been from the consecration of some eminent persons after their death who have found out some useful things for the world while they were living Which the subtiller Greeks would not admit of viz. that the persons they worshipped were once men which made them turn all into Allegories and Mystical senses to blind that Idolatry they were guilty of the better among the ignorant which makes Philo Byblius so very angry with the Neoterick Graecians as he calls them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That with a great deal of force and straining they turned all the stories of the Gods into Allegories and Physical discourses Which is all the Ingenuity that I know is to be found in this Phoenician Theology that therein we find a free acknowledgement of the beginning of the Heathen Idolatry and therefore Sanchoniathon was as far from advancing Porphyries Religion as he was in the least from overthrowing the credibility of Christianity The next we come
real learning or truth at all in them For this though he be sharply censured by Strabo in his first Book who undertakes to vindicate the Geography of Homer from the exceptions of Eratosthenes yet himself cannot but confess that there is a â—very great mixture of Fables in all their Poets which is saith he partly to delight the people and partly to awe them For the minds of men being always desirous of novelties such things do hugely please the natural humours of weak people especially if there be something in them that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 very strange and wonderful it increaseth the delight in hearing it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which draws them on to a desire of hearing more of it And by this means saith he are children first brought on to learning and all ignorant persons are kept in awe nay and the more learned themselves partly for want of reason and judgement and partly from the remainder of those impressions which these things made upon them when they were children cannot shake off that former credulity which they had as to these things By which discourse of Strabo though intended wholly by him in vindication of Poetick Fables it is plain and evident what great disservice hath been done to truth by them by reason they had no other Records to preserve their ancient history but these fabulous Writers and therefore supposing a mixture of truth and falshood together which Strabo contends for yet what way should be taken to distinguish the true from the false when they had no other certain Records and besides he himself acknowledgeth how hard a matter it is even for wise men to excuss those fabulous narrations out of their minds which were insinuated into them by all the advantages which prejudice custome and education could work upon them Granting then there may be some truth at the bottom of their fabulous narrations 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which may be gilded over with some pleasing tales as himself compares it yet how shall those come to know that it is only gilded that never saw any pure mettal and did always believe that it was what it seemed to be Had there been any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or touchstone to have differenced between the one and the other there might have been some way for a separation of them but there being none such we must conclude that the fabulous Narrations of Poets in stead of making Truth more pleasant by their fictions have so adulterated it that we cannot find any credibility at all in their narrations of elder times where the truth of the story hath had no other way of conveyance but through their fictions But though Poets may be allowed their liberty for representing things with the greatest advantage to the palats of their Readers yet we may justly expect when men profess to be historical they should deliver us nothing but what upon strictest examination may prove undoubted truth Yet even this were the Greeks far from for Strabo himself confesseth of their eldest Historians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their first Historians both of persens and things were fabulous Diodorus particularly instanceth in their eldest Historians as Cadmus Milesius Hecataeus and Hellanicus and condemns them for fabulousness Strabo condemns Damastes Sigeensis for vanity and falshood and wonders at Eratosthenes for making use of him yet this man is of great antiquity among them and his testimony used by Authors of good credit as Dionys Halycarnassius Plutarch and others Nay Pliny professeth to follow him and so he doth Aristeus Procennesius in his Arimaspia which may render the credit of his History very suspicious with whom it was a sufficient ground of credibility to any story that he found it in some Greek Authors Strabo reckons Damastes with Euëmerus Messenius and Antiphanes Bergeus which latter was so noted a lyar that from him as Stephanus tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was used as a proverb for to speak never a word of truth Aristeus Proconnesius lived in the time of Cyrus and writ a History of the Arimaspi in three Books who seems to have been the Sir Iohn Maridevil of Greece from his Stories of the Arimaspi with one eye in their foreheads and their continual fighting with the Gryphens for gold yet the story was taken upon trust by Herodotus Pliny and many others though the experience of all who have visited those Northern Climats do sufficiently refute these follies Strabo saith of this Aristeus that he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one inferiour to none for juggling which cenfure was probably occasioned by the common story of him that he could let his soul out of his body when he pleased and bring it again yet this Juggler did Celsus pitch on to confront with our blessed Saviour as Herocles did on Apollinus so much have those been to seek for reason who have fought to oppose the doctrine of faith But further what credit can we give to those Historians who have striven to confute each other and lay open one anothers falshood to the world Where was there ever any such dissonancy in the sacred History of Scripture doth the Writer of one Book discover the weakness of another do not all the parts so exactly agree that the most probable suspicion could ever fall into the heart of an Infidel is that they were all written by the same person which yet the series of times manifests to have been impossible But now if we look into the ancient Greek Historians we need no other testimony then themselves to take away their credibility The Genealogies of Hesiod are corrected by Acusiddus Acusiddus is condemned by Hellanicus Hellanicus accused of falshood by Ephorus Ephorus by Timaeus Timaeus by such who followed him as Iosephus fully shews Where must we then fix our belief upon all in common that is the ready way to believe contradictions for they condemn one another of falshood Must we believe one and reject the rest but what evidence doth that one give why he should be credited more then the rest And which is a most irrefragable argument against the Graecian history their eldest historians are ackowledged to be the most fabulous for our only recourse for deciding the controversies among the younger historians must be to the elder And here we are further to seek then ever for the first ages are confessed to be Poetical and to have no certainty of truth in them So that it is impossible to find out any undoubted certainty of ancient times among the Greek Historians which will be yet more evident when we add this that there are very few extant of those Historians who did carry the greatest name for Antiquity The highest antiquity of the Greek Historians doth not much exceed the time of Cyrus and Cambyses as Vossius hath fully demonstrated in his learned book De Historiâ—is Graecis and therefore I shall spare particular enquiries into their
so great uncertainty and confusion so much partiality and inconsistency with each other It remains now that I proceed to demonstrate the credibility of that account of ancient times which is reported in the Sacred Scriptures which will be the second part of our Task BOOK II. CHAP. I. The certainty of the Writings of Moses In order to the proving the truth of Scripture-history several Hypotheses laid down The first concerns the reasonableness of preserving the ancient History of the world in some certain Records from the importance of the things and the inconveniences of meer tradition or constant Revelation The second concerns the certainty that the Records under Moses his name were undoubtedly his The certainty of a matter of fact enquired into in general and proved as to this particular by universal consent and settling a Common-wealth upon his Laws The impossibility of an Imposture as to the writings of Moses demonstrated The plea's to the contrary largely answered HAving sufficiently demonstrated the want of credibility in the account of ancient times given by those Nations who have made the greatest pretence to Learning and Antiquity in the world we now proceed to evince the credibility and certainty of that account which is given us in sacred Screptures In order to which I shall premise these following Hypotheses It stands to the greatest reason that an account of things so concerning and remarkable should not be always left to the uncertainty of an oral tradition but should be timely entred into certain Records to be preserved to the memory of posterity For it being of concernment to the world in order to the establishment of belief as to future things to be fully setled in the belief that all things past were managed by Divine providence there must be some certain Records of former ages or else the mind of man will be perpetually hovering in the greatest uncertainties Especially where there is such a mutual dependence and concatenation of one thing with another as there is in all the Scripture-history For take away but any one of the main foundations of the Mosaical history all the superstructure will be exceedingly weakened if it doth not fall quite to the ground For mans obligation to obedience unto God doth necessarily suppose his original to be from him his hearkening to any proposals of favour from God doth suppose his Apostacy and fall Gods designing to shew mercy and favour to fallen man doth suppose that there must be some way whereby the Great Creator must reveal himself as to the conditions on which fallen man may expect a recovery the revealing of these conditions in such a way whereon a suspicious because guilty creature may firmly rely doth suppose so certain a recording of them as may be least liable to any suspicion of imposture or deceit For although nothing else be in its self necessary from God to man in order to his salvation but the bare revealing in a certain way the terms on which he must expect it yet considering the unbounded nature of Divine goodness respecting not only the good of some particular persons but of the whole society of mankind it stands to the greatest reason that such a revelation should be so propounded as might be with equal certainty conveyed to the community of mankind Which could not with any such evidence of credibility be done by private and particular revelations which give satisfaction only to the inward senses of the partakers of them as by a publick recording of the matters of Divine revelation by such a person who is enabled to give the world all reasonable satisfaction that what he did was not of any private design of his own head but that he was deputed to it by no less then Divine authority And therefore it stands to the highest reason that where Divine revelation is necessary for the certain requiring of assent the matter to be believed should have a certain uniform conveyance to mens minds rather then that perpetually New revelations should be required for the making known of those things which being once recorded are not lyable to so many impostures as the other way might have been under pretended Revelations For then men are not put to a continual tryal of every person pretending Divine revelation as to the evidences which he brings of Divine authority but the great matters of concernment being already recorded and attested by all rational evidence as to the truth of the things their minds therein rest satisfied without being under a continual hesitancy lest the Revelation of one should contradict another For supposing that God had left the matters of Divine revelation unrecorded at all but left them to be discovered in every age by a spirit of prophecy by such a multitude as might be sufficient to inform the world of the truth of the things We cannot but conceive that an innumerable company of croaking Enthusiasts would be continually pretending commissions from heaven by which the minds of men would be left in continual distraction because they would have no certain infallible rules given them whereby to difference the good and evil spirit from each other But now supposing God to inspire some particular persons not only to reveal but to record Divine truths then what ever evidences can be brought attesting a Divine revelation in them will likewise prove the undoubted certainty and infallibility of those writings it being impossible that persons employed by a God of truth should make it their design to impose upon the world which gives us a rational account why the wise God did not suffer the History of the world to lye still unrecorded but made choice of such a person to record it who gave abundant evidence to the world that he acted no private design but was peculiarly employed by God himself for the doing of it as will appear afterwards Besides we finde by our former discourse how lyable the most certain tradition is to be corrupted in progress of time where there are no standing records though it were at first delivered by persons of undoubted credit For we have no reason to doubt but that the tradition of the old world the flood and the consequences of it with the nature and worship of the true God were at first spread over the greatest part of the world in its first plantations yet we see how soon for want of certain conveyance all the antient tradition was corrupted and abused into the greatest Idolatry Which might be less wondered at had it been only in those parts which were furthest remote from the seat of those grand transactions but thus we finde it was even among those families who had the nearest residence to the place of them and among those persons who were not far off in a lineal descent from the persons mainly concerned in them as is most evident in the family out of which Abraham came who was himself the tenth from Noah yet of them it is said that they
a Crocodile for impudence and all to express this venerable Apothegm O ye that come into the world and that go out of it God hates impudence And therefore certainly this kind of Learning deserves the highest form among the difficiles Nugae and all these Hieroglyphicks put together will make but one good one and that should be for Labour lost There is yet one part of Learning more among them which the Aegyptians are esteemed for which is the Political and civil part of it which may better be called wisdom then most of the fore-going two things speak much the wisdom of a Nation good Laws and a prudent management of them their Laws are highly commended by Strabo and Diodorus and it is none of the least commendations of them that Solon and Lycurgus borrowed so many of their constitutions from them and for the prudent management of their government as the continuance of their state so long in peace and quietness is an invincible demonstration of it so the report given of them in Scripture adds a further testimony to it for therein the King of Aegypt is called the Son of the wise as well as the son of ancient Kings and his counsellors are called wise counsellors of Pharaoh and the wise men whereby a more then ordinary prudence and policy must be understood Can we now imagine such a person as Moses was bred up in all the ingenucus literature of Aegypt conversant among their wisest persons in Pharaohs Court having thereby all advantages to improve himself and to understand the utmost of all that they knew should not be able to pass a judgement between a meer prâ—tence and imposture and real and important Tâ—uths Can we think that one who had interest in so great a Court all advantages of raising himself therein should willingly forsake all the pleasures and delights at present all his hopes and advantages for the future were he not fully perswaded of the certain and undoubted truth of all those things which are recorded in his books Is it possible a man of ordinary wisdom should venture himself upon so hazardous unlikely and dangerous employment â—s that was Moses undertook which could have no probability of success but only upon the belief that that God who appeared unto him was greater then all the Gods of Aegypt and could carry on his own design by his own power maugre all the opposition which the Princes of the world could make against it And what possible ground can we have to think that such a person who did verily believe the truth of what God revealed unto him should dare to write any otherwise then as it was revealed unto him If there had been any thing repugnant to common reason in the history of the Creation the fall of man the universal deluge the propagation of the world by the sons of Noah the history of the Patriarchs had not Moses rational faculties as well as we nay had he them not far better improved then any of ours are and was not he then able to judge what was suitable to reason and what not and can we think he would then deliver any thing inconsistent with reason or undoubted tradition then when the Aegyptian Priests might so readily and plainly have triumphed over him by discovering the falshood of what he wrote Thus we see that Moses was as highly qualified as any of the acutest Heathen Philosophers could be for discerning truth from falshood nay in all probability he far excelled the most renowned of the Graecian Philosophers in that very kind of learning wherewith they made so great noise in the world which was originally Aegyptian as is evident in the whole series of the Graecian Philosphers who went age after age to Aegypt to get some scraps of that learning there which Moses could not have but full meals of because of his high place great interest and power in Aegypt And must those hungry Philosophers then become the only Masters of our reason and their dictates be received as the sâ—nse and voice of nature which they either received from uncertain tradition or else delivered in opposition to it that they might be more taken notice of in the world Must an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be confronted with Thus saith the Lord and a few pitiful symbols vye authority with divine commands and Ex nihilo nihil fit be sooner believed then In the beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth What irrefragable evidence of reason is that so confident a presumption built upon when it can signifie nothing without this hypothesis that there is nothing but matter in the world and let this first be proved and we will never stick to grant the other I may confidently say the great gullery of the world hath been taking philosophical dictates for the standard of reason and unproved hypotheses for certain foundations for our discourse to rely upon And the seeking to reconcile the mysteries of our faith to these hath been that whith hath almost destroyed it and turned our Religion into a meer philosophical speculation But of this elsewhere We see then that insisting meerly on the accomplishments and rational perfections of the persons who speak we have more reason to yield credit to Moses in his history then to any Philosophers in their speculations And that which in the next place speaks Moses to be a person of wisdom and judgement and ability to finde out truth was his age and experience when he delivered these things to the world He vented no crude and indigested conceptions no sudden and temerarious fancies the usual issues of teeming and juvenile wits he lived long enough to have experience to try and judgement to distinguish a meer outside and varnish from what was solid and substantial We cannot then have the least ground of suspition that Moses was any wayes unfit to discern truth from falshood and therefore was capable of judging the one from the other But though persons be never so highly accomplisht for parts learning and experience yet if they want due information of the certainty of the things they deliver they may be still decâ—iving themselves and if they preserve it for posterity be guilty of deceiving others Let us now therefore see whether Moses had not as great advantages for understanding the truth of his History as he had judgement to discern it And concerning all those things contained in the four last books of his to his own death it was impossible any should have greater then himself writing nothing but what he was pars magna himself of what he saw and heard and did and can any testimony be desired greater then his whose actions they were or who was present at the doing of them and that not in any private way but in the most publick capacity For although private persons may be present at great actions yet they may be guilty of misrepresenting them for want of understanding all circumstances precedent and
is in the work of Grace So that according to this opinion there must be immediate inspiration as to that act of faith whereby we believe any one to have been divinely inspired and consequently to that whereby we believe the Scriptures to be the Word of God Secondly Doth not this make the fairest plea for mens unbelief For I demand Is it the duty of those who want that immediate illumination to believe or no If it be not their duty unbelief can be no sin to them if it be a duty it must be made known to be a duty and how can that be made known to them to be a duty when they want the only and necessary means of instruction in order to it Will God condemn them for that which it was impossible they should have unless God gave it them And how can they be left inexcuseable who want so much as rational inducements to faith for of these I now speak and not of efficacious perswasions of the mind when there are rational arguments for faith propounded But lastly I suppose the case will be cleared when we take notice what course God hath alwayes taken to give all rational satisfaction to the minds of men concerning the persons whom he hath imployed in either of the fore-mentioned cases First for those who have been imployed upon some special message and service for God he hath sent them forth sufficiently provided with manifestations of the Divine power whereby they acted As is most clear and evident in the present case of Moses Exodus 4. 1 2 3 4 5. where Moses puts the case to God which we are now debating of Supposing saith he that I should go to the Israelites and tell them God had appeared to me and sent me to deliver them and they should say God had not appeared unto me how should I satisfie them God doth not reject this objection of Moses as favouring of unbelief but presently shews him how he should satisfie them by causing a miracle before his face turning his rod into a Serpent and God gives this as the reason of it vers 5. That they may believe that the Lord God of their Fathers the God of Abraham the God of Isaac the God of Jacob hath appeared unto thee It seems God himself thought this would be the most pregnant evidence of Gods appearing to him if he wrought miracles before their faces Nay lest they should think one single miracle was not sufficient God in the immediate following verses adjoyns two more which he should do in order to their satisfaction and further verse 21. God gave him a charge to do all those wonders before Pharoah which he had put into his hand And accordingly we find Pharoah presently demanding a miracle of Moses Exodus 7. 9. which accordingly Moses did in his presence though he might suppose Pharoahs demand not to proceed from desire of satisfaction but from some hopes that for want of it he might have rendred his credit suspected among the Israelites Indeed after God had delivered his people and had setled them in a way of serving him according to the Laws delivered by Moses which he had confirmed by unquestionable miracles among them we find a caution laid in by Moses himself against those which should pretend signs and wonders to draw them off from the Religion established by the Law of Moses And so likewise under the Gospel after that was established by the unparallel'd miracles of our Saviour and his Apostles we find frequent cautions against being deceived by those who came with pretences of doing great miracles But this is so far from infringing the credibility of such a Testimony which is confirmed by miracles that it yields a strong confirmation to the truth of what I now assert For the doctrine is supposed to be already established by miracles according to which we are to judge of the spirits of such pretenders Now it stands to the greatest reason that when a Religion is once established by uncontrouled miracles we should not hearken to every whiffling Conjurer that will pretend to do great feats to draw us off from the truth established In which case the surest way to discover the imposture is to compare his pretended miracles with those true and real ones which were done by Moses and Christ and the ground of it is because every person is no competent judge of the truth of a miracle for the Devil by his power and subtilty may easily deceive all such as will be led by the nose by him in expectation of some wonders to be done by him And therefore as long as we have no ground to question the oertainty of those miracles which were wrought by Christ or Moses I am bound to adhere to the doctrine established by those miracles and to make them my rule of judging all persons who shall pretend to work miracles Because 1. I do not know how far God may give men over to be deceived by lying wonders who will not receive the truth in the love of it i. e. those that think not the Christian Religion sufficiently confirmed by the miracles wrought at the first promulgation of it God in justice may permit the Devil to go further then otherwise he could and leave such persons to their own credulity to believe every imposture and illusion of their senses for true miracles 2. That doctrine which was confirmed by undoubted miracles hath assured us of the coming of lying wonders whereby many should be deceived Now this part of the doctrine of the Gospel is as certainly true as any of the rest for it was confirmed by the same miracles that the other was and besides that the very coming of such miracles is an evidence of the truth of it it falling out so exactly according to what was foretold so many hundred years since Now if this doctrine be true then am I certain the intent of these miracles is to deceive and that those are deceived who hearken to them and what reason then have I to believe them 3. To what end do these miracles serve Are they to confirm the truths contained in Scripture But what need they any confirmation now when we are assured by the miracles wrought by Christ and his Apostles that the doctrine by them preached came from God and so hath been received upon the credit of those miracles ever since Were these truths sufficiently proved to be from God before or no If not then all former ages have believed without sufficient ground for faith if they were then what ground can there be to confirm us in them now certainly God who never doth anything but for very great purposes will never alter the course of nature meerly for satisfaction of mens vain curiosities But it may be it will be said It was something not fully revealed in Scripture which is thus confirmed by miracles but where hath the Scripture told us that anything not fully revealed
them but Astronomers by the help of their Optick tubes and Telescopes do easily discern the just magnitude of them so the Iews ordinarily thought there was no more in those types and shadows then was visibly represented to them but such as had the help of the Divine Spirit the best Telescope to discern the day-star from on high with could easily look through those prospectives into the most glorious mysteries of the Gospel of Iesus Christ. These types being like triangâ—lar Prismes that must be set in a due light and posture before they can represent that great variety of spiritual mysteries which was contained in them Now the great office of the Prophets was to administer this light to the people and to direct them in those excellent pieces of Perspective wherein by the help of a Prophetick glass they might see the Son of God fully represented to their view Besides this the Prophetical office was a kind of Chancery to the Mosaick Law wherein the Prophets did interpret the Pandects of the Law ex aequo bono and frequently shewed in what cases God did dispence with the outward letter of it to exalt the more the inward sense and reason of it Hence the Prophets seem many times to speak contemptibly of the outward prescribed Cerâ—monies when their intent is not to condemn the observation of them but to tell the people there were greater things which God looked at then the outward observation of some Ceremonial precepts and that God would never accept of that by way of commutation for real and internal goodness Hence the Prophets by their own practice did frequently shew that the Law of Moses did not so indispensably oblige men but that God would accept of those actions which were performed without the regularity required by the Law of Moses and thus he did of sacrificing upon high places not only before the building of the Temple but sometimes after as he accepted of the sacrifice of Elijah on Mount Carmel even when high places were for bidden Which the Iews are become so sensible of that they grant that a true Prophet may sometimes command something to be done in violation of the Law of Moses so he doth not draw people to Idolatry nor destroy the obligation of Moses his Law But this they restrain to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 something done in case of necessity and that it should not pass into a precedent or a perpetual Law and therefore their rule is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Prophet was to be hearkened to in every thing he commanded in a case of necessity But by this it is clear that the Prophets were not to be tryed by the letter of the Law of Moses but by the end and the reason of it Thus much I suppose will make it clear what rules the people had to try the Prophets doctrine by without miracles CHAP. VI. The tryal of Prophetical Predictions and Miracles The great difficulty of the trying the truth of Prophetical predictions from Jerem. 18. 7 8 c. Some general Hypoâ—heses premised for the clearing of it The first concerns the grounds why predictions are accounted an evidence of divine revelation Three Consectaries drawn thence The second the manner of Gods revelation of his will to the minds of the Prophets Of the several degrees of prophecy The third is that God did not alwayes reveal the internal purposes of his will unto the true Prophets The grand question propounded â—ow it may be known when predictions express Gods decrees and when only the series of causes For the first several rules laid down 1. When the prediction is confirmed by â— present miracle 2. When the things foretold exceed the probability of second causes 3. When confirmed by Gods oath 4. When the blessings fore-told are purely spiritual Three rules for interpreting the prophecyes which respect the state of things under the Gospel 5. When all circumstances are foretold 6. When many Prophets in several ages agree in the same predictions Predictions do not express Gods unalterable purposes when they only contain comminations of judgements or are predictions of temporal blessings The case of the Ninivites Hezekiah and others opened Of repentance in God what it implyes The Iewish objections about predictions of temporal blessings answered In what cases miracles were expected from the Prophets when they were to confirm the truth of their religion Instanced in the Prophet at Bethel Elijah Elishah and of Moses himself Whose divine authority that it was proved by miracles is demonstrated against the modern Iews and their pretences answered THe next thing which the rules of tryal concerned was the predictions of the Prophets Concerning which God himself hath laid down this general rule Deut. 18. 22. When a Prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord if the thing follow not nor come to pass that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken but the Prophet hath spoken it presumptuously thou shalt not be afraid of him Grotius understands this place of the Prophets telling the people he would do some miracles to confirm his doctrine but saith he if those miracles were not done as he said it was an evident demonstration of a false Prophet It is certain it was so for then his own mouth told him he was a lying Prophet but these words seem to referr rather to something future then present and are therefore generally understood concerning the truth of predictions which was a matter of very difficult tryal in regard of the goodness or the justice of God so frequently interposing between the prediction and the event That place which makes it so difficult to discern the truth of a prediction by the event is Ierem. 18. 7 8 9 10. At what instant I shall speak concerning a Nation and concerning a Kingdom to pluck up and to pull down and destroy it If that Nation against whom I have pronounced turn from evil I will repent of the evil I had thought to do unto them And at what instant I shall speak concerning a Nation and concerning a Kingdom to build and to plant it if it do evil in my sight that it obey not my voice then will I repent of the good wherewith I said I would benefit them By which place it seems clear that even after the predictions of Prophets God doth reserve a liberty to himself either to repent of the evil or the good that was foretold concerning any people how then can the fidelity of a Prophet be discovered by the event when God may alter the event and yet the Prophet be a true Prophet This being a case very intricate and obscure will call for the more diligence in the unfolding of it In order to which we shall first premise some general Hypotheses and then come to the particular resolution of it The general Hypotheses will be concerning the way and method of Gods revealing future contingencies to the Prophets without which it will be impossible to
they might be delivered from the Tyranny of the Roman Power The Heathens as appears by Celsus and others thought it very strange that the Son of God should appear in the world with so little grandeur and have no greater Train then twelve such obscure persons as the Apostles were For saith Celsus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As the Sun which inlightens all other things dâ—th first discover himself so it was fitting the Son of God should do when he appeared to the world And so we say he did to all such whose minds were not blinded through obstinacy and willfull ignorance For although this Sun of righteousness was pleased for the better carrying on his design in the world to wrap up himself in a cloud yet his glory could not be confined within it but did break through that dark vail of his humane nature and did discover its self in a most clear and convincing manner His appearances indeed were not like those upon Mount Sinai because his design was not to amuse men with the glory of his Majesty and to terrifie them from Idolatry which was a great reason of those dreadful phaenomena at the delivery of the Law but he came to draw all men to him by the power and energy of his Grace and therefore afforded them all rational convictions in order to it And therefore the quality of our Saviours miracles was considerable as well as the greatness of them The intent of them all was to do good and thereby to bring the world off from its sin and folly to the embracing of that holy doctrine which he came to publish to the world Now that such a power of miracles in our Saviour had the greatest subserviency to the giving full and convincing evidence that he was the person he declared himself to be and that his doctrine was thereby so clearly attested that it was nothing but obstinacy which could withhold assent will appear by these following Hypotheses which I lay down in order to the proving it Where the truth of a doctrine depends not on the evidence of the things themselves but on the authority of him that reveals it there the only way to prove the doctrine to be true is to prove the Testimony of him that revealed it to be infallible Several things are necessary to be proved for the clearing this proposition 1. That it is not repugnant to reason that a doctrine should be true which depends not upon the evidence of the thing its self By evidence of the thing I understand so clear and distinct a perception of it that every one who hath the use of his rational faculties cannot but upon the first apprehension of the terms yeild a certain assent to it as that the whole is greater then a part that if we take away equal things from equal the remainder must be equal Now we are to observe that as to all these common notices of humane nature which carry such evidence with them the certainty of them lyes in the proposition as it is an act of the mind abstracted from the things themselves for these do not suppose the existence of the things but whether there be any such things in the world or no as whole or parts the understanding is assured that the Idea of the whole carryes more in its representation then that of a part does This is the great reason of the certainty and evidence of Mathematical truths not as some imagine because men have no interest or design in those things and therefore they never question them but because they proceed not upon sensible but abstracted matter which is not lyable to so many doubts as the other is for that a Triangle hath three Angles no man questions but whether such sensible parts of matter make a Triangle may be very questionable Now that the truth of beings or the certainty of existence of things cannot be so certain as Mathematical demonstrations appears from hence because the manner of conveyance of these things to my mind cannot be so clear and certain as in purely intellectual operations abstracted from existent matter For the highest evidences of the existence of things must be either the judgement of sense or clear and distinct perception of the mind now proceeding in a meer natural way there can be no infallible certainty in either of these For the perception of the mind in reference to the existence of things being caused so much through those Idea's or Phantasmes which are conveyed to the understanding through the impressions of sense if these may be demonstrated to be fallacious I may well question the certainty of that which I am certain I have been deceived by supposing then I should question the truth of every thing which is conveyed in an uncertain way to my mind I may soon out-go even Pyrrho himself in real Scepticism Neither can I conceive how clear and distinct perception of any thing though not coming through the senses doth necessarily infer the existence of the thing for it only implyes a non-repugnancy of it to our natural faculties and consequently the bare possibility of it For otherwise it were impossible for us to have a clear perception of any thing any longer then it exists nay then we know it to exist for existence or non-existence is all one to the understanding while it is not assured of either And it is withall evident that things imaginary may clearly affect the mind as well as real for I may have as real and distinct perception of a Phoenix in my mind as of a Partridge doth it therefore follow that the one is really existent as well as the other and it will be a very hard matter to assign a certain difference between imagination and pure intellection in such things which though not actually existent yet imply no repugnancy at all to the faculties of mens minds It is evident then that there cannot be so great certainty of the existence of things as there may be of Mathematical demonstrations And if that principle be supposed as the foundation of all Physical certainty as to the being of things viz. that there is a God who being infinitely good will not suffer the minds of men to be deceived in those things which they have a clear and distinct perception of without which supposition we cannot be assured of the certainty of any operations of the mind because we cannot know but we were so made that we might be then most deceived when we thought our selves most sure If this principle I say be supposed as the foundation of all certain knowledge then from it I infer many things which are very much advantagious to our certainty in matters of faith That the foundation of all certainty lies in the necessary existence of a being absolutely perfect So that unless I know that there is a God I cannot be assured that I know any thing in a certain manner and if I know there is a
mysteries our faith stands upon this twofold bottom First that the being understanding and power of God doth infinitely transcend ours and therefore he may reveal to us matters above our reach and capacity Secondly that whatever God doth reveal is undoubtedly true though we may not fully understand it for this is a most undoubted principle that God cannot and will not deceive any in those things which he reveals to men Thus our first supposition is cleared that it is not repugnant to reason that a doctrine may be true which depends not on the evidence of the thing it self The second is That in matters whose truth depends not on the evidence of the things themselves infallible testimony is the fullest demonstration of them For these things not being of Mathematical evidence there must be some other way found out for demonstrating the truth of them And in all those things whose truth depends on Testimony the more creditable the Testimony is the higher evidence is given to them but that testimony which may deceive cannot give so pregnant an evidence as that which cannot for then all imaginable objections are taken off This is so clear that it needs no further proof and therefore the third follows That there are certain ways whereby to know that a Testimony delivered is infallible and that is fully proved by these two Arguments 1. That it is the duty of all those to whom it is propounded to believe it now how could that be a duty in them to believe which they had no ways to know whether it were a Testimony to be believed or no. 2. Because God will condemn the world for unbelief In which the Justice of Gods proceedings doth necessarily suppose that there were sufficient arguments to induce them to believe which could not be unless there were some certain way supposed whereby a Testimony may be known to be infallible These three things now being supposed viz. that a doctrine may be true which depends not on evidonce of reason that the greatest demonstration of the truth of such a doctrine is its being delivered by infallible Testimony and that there are certain ways whereby a Testimony may be known to be infallible Our first principle is fully confirmed which was that where the truth of a doctrine depends not on evidence of reason but on the authority of him that reveals it the only way to prove the doctrine to be true is to prove the Testimony of him that reveals it to be infallible The next principle or Hypothesis which I lay down is That there can be no greater evidence that a Testimony is infallible then that it is the Testimony of God himself The truth of this depends upon a common notion of humane nature which is the veracity of God in whatever way he discovers himself to men and therefore the ultimate resolution of our faith as to its formal object must be alone into the veracity of God revealing things unto us for the principium certitudinis or foundation of all certain assent can be fetched no higher neither will it stand any lower then the infallible verity of God himself and the principium patefactionis or the ground of discovery of spiritual truth to our minds must be resolved into Divine Testimony or revelation These two then not taken asunder but joyntly God who cannot lye hath revealed these things is the only certain foundation for a divine faith to rest its self upon But now the particular exercise of a Divine faith lies in a firm assent to such a particular thing as Divinely revealed and herein lyes not so much the Testimony as the peculiar energy of the Spirit of God in inclining the soul to believe peculiar objects of faith as of Divine revelation But the general ground of faith which they call the formal object or the ratio propter quam credimus is the general infallibility of a Divine Testimony For in a matter concerning divine revelation there are two great questions to be resolved The first is Why I believe a Divine Testimony with a firm assent The answer to that is because I am assured that what ever God speaks is true the other is upon what grounds do I believe this to be a Divine Testimony the resolution of which as far as I can understand must be fetched from those rational evidences whereby a Divine Testimony must be distinguished from one meerly humane and fallible For the Spirit of God in its workings upon the mind doth not carry it on by a brutish impulse but draws it by a spiritual discovery of such strong and perswasive grounds to assent to what is revealed that the mind doth readily give a firm assent to that which it sees such convincing reason to believe Now the strongest reason to believe is the manifestation of a divine Testimony which the Spirit of God so clearly discovers to a true believer that he not only firmly assents to the general foundation of faith the veracity of God but to the particular object propounded as a matter of Divine Revelation But this latter question is not here the matter of our discourse our proposition only concerns the general foundation of faith which appears to be so rational and evident as no principle in nature can be more For if the Testimony on which I am to rely be only Gods and I be assured from natural reason that his Testimony can be no other then infallible wherein doth the certainty of the foundation of faith fall short of that in any Mathematical demonstration Upon which account a Divine Testimony hath been regarded with so much veneration among all who have owned a Deity although they have been unacquainted with any certain way of Divine revelation And the reason why any rejected such a Testimony among the Heathens was either because they believed not a Deity or else that the particular Testimonies produced were meer frauds and impostures and therefore no Divine Testimony as it was given out to be But the principle still remained indisputable that on supposition the Testimony were what it pretended to be there was the greatest reason to believe it although it came not in such a way of probation as their sciences proceeded in From which principle arose that speech of Tully which he hath translated out of Plato's Timaeus Ac difficillimum factu à Diis ortis sidem non haber◠quanquam nec argumentis nec rationibus certis eorum oratio confirmetur By which we see what a presumption there was of Truth where there was any evidence of a Divine Testimony And no doubt upon the advantage of this principle it was the Devil gained so great credit to his oracles for therein he did the most imitate Divine revelation From hence then we see what a firm bottom faith in the general stands upon which is nothing short of an Infallible Divine Testimony other things may conduce by way of subserviency for the discovery of this but nothing
as a certain Truth and therefore they hope the danger is not so great in neglecting the salvation promised by the Gospel I cannot conceive that men otherwise learned and sober should with so much confidence assert that the rational evidences of a Divine Testimony are insufficient to prove a doctrine true unless it be from hence that they find that notwithstanding the strongest evidences many persons continue in unbelief For say they if these arguments were scientifical and demonstrative as they speak of the truth of the doctrine attested by them then all persons to whom they are propounded must certainly believe But this is very easily answered for we speak not of internal but outward evidence not of that in the subject but of the object or more fully of the reason of the thing and not the event in us for doubtless there may be undoubted truth and evidence in many things which some persons either cannot or will not understand If Epicurus should contend still that the Sun and stars are no bigger then they seem to be will it hence follow that there can be no rational demonstration of the contrary Nay if the way of demonstration be offered him and Telescopes put into his hands yet if he be resolved to maintain his credit and therefore his opinion and will not use the Telescopes or suspect still they are intended only to deceive his sight what possible way will there be of convincing such a person though the thing be in its self demonstrable Now if the strength of prejudice or maintaining of credit can prevail so much in matters of Mathematical evidence to withhold assent what power may we think a corrupt interest may have upon the understanding as to the arguments which tend to prove the truth of that doctrine which is so repugnant to that carnal interest which the heart is already devoted to Our Blessed Saviour hath himself given us so full an account of the original and causes of unbelief in the persons he conversed with that that may yield us a sufficient answer to this objection He tels us the ground of it was not want of light nay there was light sufficient to convince any but that those to whom the light came loved darkness rather then it because their deeds were evil That they could not believe while they received honour one of another and sought not the honour which was of God only i. e. That they were so greedy of applause from each other that they would not impartially search into the truth of that doctrine which did touch their sores so to the quick that they had rather have them fester upon them then go to the trouble of so sharp a cure That the reason so few followed him was because the way was narrow and the gate straight which men must go in at and therefore no wonder so few of the rich and proud pharisees could get in at it they were partly so sweld with a high opinion of themselves and partly so loaden with their riches that they thought it was to no purpose for them to think of going in at so straight a gate while they were resolved to part with neither That the final ground of the rejection of any was not want of evidence to bring them to believe nor want of readiness in Christ to receive them if they did but it was a peevish wilful obstinate malicious spirit that they would not come to Christ nor believe his Doctrine for those import the same but when the most convincing miracles were used they would rather attribute them to the Prince of Devils then to the power of God And though our Saviour presently by rational and demonstrative arguments did prove the contrary to their faces yet we see thereby it was a resolution not to be convinced or yield to the Truth which was the cause why they did not believe Now from this very instance of our Saviours proceedings with the Pharisees by rational arguments I demand whether these arguments of our Saviour were sufficient foundations for a divine assent to that truth that our Saviour did not his miracles by any Diabolical but by Divine power or no If they were then it is evident that rational evidence may be a foundation for Divine faith or that some motives to believe may be so strong as to be sufficient evidence of the truth and certainty of the Doctrine If these arguments were not sufficient proofs of what our Saviour spake then well fare the Pharisees it seems they said nothing but what might be thus far justified that the contrary to it could not be demonstrated And if the evidence of our Sâ—viours miracles were so great as some suppose that the Pharisees could not but be convinced that they were divine but out of their malice and envy they uttered this blasphemy against the Holy Ghost to keep the people from following Christ then we hence infer two things First how strong an evidence there was in the miracles of Christ when it convinced his most resolute enemies that they were divine Secondly what power a corrupt will may have over a convinced understanding For although the will may not hinder conviction yet it may soon stifle it by suggesting those things to the mind which may divert it from those convictions of Truth and seek to find out any ways to disgrace it It would be no difficult task to discover in all those instances wherein the unbelief of men is discovered in the New Tâ—stament that the persons guilty of it did not proceed like rational men or such as desired Truth but were wholly carried away through passion interest prejudice disaffection or some other cause of that nature which may give us a sufficient account why those persons did not believe although there might be clear and undoubted evidence to perswâ—de them to it But although I assert that these rational evidences are sufficient arguments of the truth of the doctrine they come to manifest yet I would not be so understood that I thereby resolve all Religion into a meer act of reason and knowledge and that no more power is required in the understanding to believe the Gospel then to believe a Mathematical demonstration which is another objection some lay in the way of this opinion but it isâ— ot difficult getting over it For the sufficiency which I attribute to rational evidence is not absolute and simple but in suo genere as an objective evidence Notwithstanding this the whole work of the Spirit of God in its peculiar energy and way of operation upon the soul is left entire to its self But then when the spirit works as to the planting of a truly divine faith I do not think that it only perswades the soul of the Truth of a Divine Testimony but withall represents the Truths revealed by that Testimony with all that excellency and suitableness that there is in them that by the most agreeable yet effectual influence
the advancement of the flourishing condition of the Church is not meerly by outward pomp and grandeur and that the purity of the Church is not inconsistent with a state of outward difficulties which the experience oâ— the Primitive Church gives an irrefragable demonstration of Thus much may serve to shew the necessity of a power of miracles conjoyned with the Christian Doctrine to manifest the truth of it by overthrowing the Kingdom of that great Antichrist the Devil who had usurped so much Tyranny over the world The last reason why a power of miracles was so necessary for confirming the truth of the Gospel is because the Gospel was to be propagated over the world without any other rational evidence then was contained in the miracles wrought for the confirmation of it Now the admirable success which this doctrine found in the world considering all the circumstances of it doth make it clear what certainty there was that the miracles which were wrought were true and they were certain evidences that the doctrine attested by them was from God Now this will appear from these two things That no rational account can be given why the Apostles should undertake to publish such a doctrine unless they had been undoubtedly certain that the Doctrine was true and they had sufficient evidence to perswade others to beleeve it That no satisfactory account can be given considering the nature of the doctrine of Christ and the manner of its propagation why it should meet with so great acceptance in the world had there not been such convincing evidence as might fully perswade men of the truth of it I begin with the first from the publishers of this doctrine in the world All that I here require by way of a Postulatum or supposition are onlythese two things which no man right in his wits I suppose will deny 1. That men are so far rational agents that they will not set upon any work of moment and difficulty without sufficient grounds inducing them to it and by so much the greater the work is the more sure and stedfast had the grounds need to be which they proceed upon 2. That the Apostles or first Publishers of the Christian doctrine were not men distracted or bereft of their wits but acted by principles of common sense reason and understanding as other men in the world do Which if any one should be so far beside his wits as to question if he have but patience and understanding enough to read and consider those admirable writings of theirs which are conveyed to us by as certain uninterrupted a Tradition as any thing in the world hath been and by that time he will see cause to alter his judgement and to say that they are not mad but speak the words of the greatest truth and soberness These things supposed I now proceed to the proving of the thing in hand which will be done by these three things First That the Apostles could not but know how hâ—zardous an employment the preaching of the Gospel would be to them Secondly that no motive can be conceived sufficient for them to undertake such an employment but the infallible truth of the doctrine which they preached Thirdly that the greatest assurance they had themselves of the truth of their Doctrine was by being eye-witnesses of the miracles of Christ. First That the Apostles could not but understand the hazard of their employment notwithstanding which they cheerfully undertook it That men armed with no external power nor cried up for their wit and learning and carrying a doctrine with them so contraâ—y to the general inclinations of the world having nothing in it to recommend it to mankind but the Truth of it should go about to perswade the world to part with the Religion they owned and was setled by their laws and to embrace such a religion as called them off from all the things they loved in this world and to prepare themselves by mortification self-denial for another world is a thing to humane reason incredible unless we suppose them acted by a higher spirit then mankind is ordinarily acted by For what is there so desirable in continual reproaches contumelies what delight is there in racks and prisons what agreeableness in flames and martyrdoms to make men undergo some nay all of these rather then disown that doctrine which they came to publish Yet these did the Apostles cheerfully undergo in order to the conversion of the world to the truth of that doctrine which they delivered to it And not only so but though they did foresee them they were not discouraged from this undertaking by it I confess when men are upon hopes of profit and interest in the world engaged upon a design which they promise themselves impunity in having power on their side though afterwards things should fall out contrary to their expectation such persons may die in such a cause because they must and some may carry it out with more resolution partly through an innate fortitude of spirit heightened with the advantages of Religion or an Enthusiastick temper But it is hard to conceive that such persons would have undertaken so hazardous an employment if beforehand they had foreseen what they must have undergone for it But now the Apostles did foreknow that bonds and imprisonment nay death its self must be undergone in a violent manner for the sake of the doctrine which they preached yet not withstanding all this they go boldly and with resolution on with their work and give not over because of any hardships and persecutions they met withall One of the chiesest of them S. Peter and as forward as any in Preaching the Gospel had the very manner of his death foretold him by Christ himself before his Ascension yet soon after we find him preaching Christ in the midst of those who had crucified him and telling them to their faces the greatness of their sin in it and appealing to the miracles which Christ had done among them and bidding them repent and believe in him whom they had crucified if ever they would be saved And this he did not only among the people who gave their consent to the crucifying of Christ but soon after being conventedâ—ogether â—ogether with Iohn before the Court of Sanbedrin probably the very same which not long before had sentenced Christ to death for a miracle wrought by them with what incredible boldness doth he to their faces tell them of their murdering Christ and withall that there was no other way to salvation but by him whom they had crucified Be it known unto you all saith Peter to the Sanhedrin and to all the people of Israel that by the name of Iesus Christ whom ye have crucified whom God raised from the dead even by him doth this man stand here before you whole Neither is there salvation in any other for there is none other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved What
was converted from Plato to Christ and then found that true which he speaks of in his Dialogue with Trypho that after all his enquiries into Philosophy speaking of the doctrine of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I found this at last to be the only sure and profitable Philosophy And when Trypho after derides him as a man of very easie faith who would leave the doctrine of Plato for that of Christ for it seems by him the Iews then had a more favourable opinion of the state of Platonists then Christians Iustin is so far from being moved with such reproaches that he tells him he would undertake to demonstrate to him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the Christians did not give credit to empty fables and unprovable assertions but to such a doctrine as was full of a Divine spirit and power and flourished with grace The proving of which is the subject of that discourse At Alexandria we meet with a succession of excellent persons all which were not only embracers themselves but defenders of the Christian faith for setting aside there Abilius Iustus Cerdo Eumenes Marcus Celadion Agrippinus Iulianus Demetrius and others who flourished about the second Century I shall only fix on those persons who were famous enquirers after truth and noted for excellency in Heathen learning yet these persons after all their inquiries found nothing to fix on but the Christian faith and valued no other discovery of truth in comparison with that Such was Pantaenus who as Eusebius tells us was an excellent Stoick before he became a Christian and was after so eminent a one that in imitation of the Apostles he wenâ— into India to convert the inhabitants to the Christian faith and at his return was made Rector of the School at Alexandria which as the same author tells us was much frequented by such who were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 well skild in humane as well as Divine learning How excellent Pantaenus was in humane learning may appear in that Origen and Hierome both make his example their plea for the studying of it After him succeeded Clemens Alexandrinus Pantaenus his Schollar a person of great depth of learning and exquisitly skild in all Heathen Antiquities as appears by his remaining writings The Learning of Origen is sufficiently known which was in such great reputation in his own time that not only Christians but Philosophers flocked to his Lectures at Alexandria as Eusebius tells us wherein he read the Mathematicks and other parts of Philosophy as well as the Scriptures and the same author informs us that the Philosophers did dedicate their books to him and sometimes chose him as arbitrator between them in matters of dispute and Porphyrie himself in his books against the Christians vouchsafed a high encomium of Origen for his excellent learning In Origens time Heraclas a Presbyter of Alexandria for five years together frequented the Schools of the Philosophers and put on the Philosophick pallium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and was very conversant in the books of the Grecian Learning Besides these we read of Pierius and Achillas two Presbyters of Alexandria who were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Nicephorus Callistus speaks persons well skild in the Grecian learning and Philosophy If from Alexandria we go to Caesarea there we not only meet with a School of learning among the Christians but with persons very eminent in all kinds of learning such were the famous Pamphilus and Eusebius so great an admirer of him that ever since he is called Eusebius Pamphili At Antioch was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Nicephorus speaks a person versed in all kind of ingenuous literature Anatclius Bishop of Laodicea one versed in Geometry Astronomy and all kind of Philosophy as well as in the doctrine of Christ. Thus we see how in those early dayes of the Greek Church what excellent persons many of those were who were zealous Professors of Christianity and concerning those of the Latin Church I shall only mention that speech of St. Austin who was himself an instance of the same nature and a star of the first magnitude among them Nonne aspicimus quanto auro argento vâ—ste sâ—ffarcinatus exierit de Aegypto Cyprianâ—s Doctor suavissimus Martyr beatissimus quanto Lactantius quanto Victorinus Optatus Hilarius ut de vivis taceam quanto innumerabiles Graeci quod prior ipse fidelissimus Dei servus Moses fecerat de quo Scriptum est quod eruditus fuerit omni sapientia Aegyptiorum To whose catalogue of learned persons among the Latin Christians Tertullian Arnobius and several others may be deservedly added But as St. Austin there well observes though the Israclites went rich out of Aegypt yet it was their eating the Passover which saved them from destruction so though these were accomplished with those perfections and riches of the soul the ornaments of learning yet it was their eating the true Passover which was Christ by their adhering to his doctrine was that which would be of more advantage to them then all their accomplishments would be Now then since in the first ages of the Christian Church we find not only innumerable multitudes of persons of great integrity and sobriety in their lives embracing the doctrine of Christ but so many persons that were curious enquirers after the truth of things we can certainly have no reason to distrust such a Testimony which was received in so unanimous a manner by persons as able to judge of the truth of things and as fearful of being deceived in reference to them as any now in the world can be 2. As this testimony was received by persons inâ—uisitive after the truth of things so the doctrine conveyed by it was a matter of the highest moment in the world and therefore we cannot conceive but persons ordinarily inquisitive about other things would be more then ordinarily so about this because their eternal welfare and happiness did depend upon it All persons that are truly religious must at least be allowed to be persons very inquisitive after the state and condition of their souls when they shall be dislodged from their bodyes And if we do but grant this can we in any reason think that such a multitude of persons in so many ages should continue venturing their souls upon a Testimony which they had no assurance of the truth of And that none of all these persons though men otherwise rational and judicious should be able to discover the falsity of that doctrine they went upon if at least any upon consideration of it can imagine it to be so It is not reconcileable with the general presumption of humane nature concerning Divine providence and the care God takes of the welfare of men to suffer so many persons who sincerely desire to serve God in the way which is most pleasing to him to go on in such a continual delusion and never have it at all discovered to them If all then who
convictions should stick so fast in the minds of those who would fain pull out those pierâ—ing arrows but that there is a greater power in them then they are mnsters of and they cannot stand against the force whereby they come upon them nor find any salve to cure the wounds which are made within them but by those weapons which were the causes of them And therefore when wicked persons under conflicts of conscience cannot ease themselves by direct Atheism or finding reasons to cast off such convictions by discerning any invalidity in the Testimony whereon the truth of these things depends it is a certain argument that there is abundant truth in that Testimony when men would fain perswade themselves to believe the contrary and yet cannot 5. The truth of this consent appears from the unanimity of it among those persons who have yet strangely differed from each other in many controversies in Religion We see thereby this unanimity is no forced or designed thing because we see the persons agreeing in this do very much disagree from each other in other things And the same grounds and reasons whereon they disagree as to other things would have held as to these too were there not greater evidence of the certainty of these things then of those they fall out about It hath not yet become a question among those who differ so much about the sense of Scripture whether the Scripture its self be the Word of God although the very accounts on which we are to believe it to be so hath been the subject of no mean Controversies All the divided parts of the Christian world do yet fully agree in the matters of fact viz. that there was such a person as Iesus Christ and that he did many great miracles that he dyed on the Cross at Jerusalem and rose again from the dead now these contain the great foundations of Christian faith and therefore the multitude of other controversies in the world ought to be so far from weakning our faith as to the truth of the doctrine of Christ which men of weak judgements and Atheistical spirits preâ—end that it ought to be a strong confirmation of it when we see persons which so peevishly quarrel with each other about some inferiour and less weighty parts of Religion do yet unanimously consent in the principal foundations of Christian faith and such whereon the necessity of faith and obedience as the way to salvation doth more immediately depend And this may be one great reason why the infinitely wise God may suffer such lamentable contentions and divisions to be in the Christian world that thereby inquisitive persons may see that if Religion had been a meer design of some few politick persons the quarrelsom world where it is not held in by force would never have consented so long in the owning such common principles which all the other controversies are built upon And although it be continually seen that in divided parties one is apt to run from any thing which is received by the other and men generally think they can never run far enough from them whose errours they have discovered that yet this principle hath not carryed any considerable party of the Christian world out of their indignation against those great corruptions which have crept into the world under a pretence of Religion to the disowning the foundation of Christian Faith must be â—artly imputed to the signal hand of divine providence and partly to those strong â—vidences which there are of the truth of that Testimony which conveyes to uâ— the foundations of Christian Faith Thus we see now how great and uncontrouled this consent is as to the matters of fact delivered down from the eye-witnesses of them concerning the actions and miracles of our blessed Saviour which are contained in the Scriptures as authentical records of them and what a sure foundation there is for a firm assent to the truth of the things from so universal and uninterrupted a tradition Thus far we have now manifested the necessity of the miracles of Christ in order to the propagation of Christianity in the world from the consideration of the persons who were to propagate it in the world the next thing we are to considâ—r is the admirable success which the Gospel met with in the world upon its being preached to it Of whâ—ch no rational account can be given unless the actions and miracles of our Saviour were most undoubtedly true That the Gospel of Christ had very strange and wonderful success upon its first preaching hath been partly discovered already and is withall so plain from the long continuance of it in these European parts that none any wayes conversant in the history of former ages can have any ground to question it But that this strange and admirable success of the doctrine of Christ should be an evidence of the Truth of it and the miracles wrought in confirmation of it will appear from these two considerations 1. That the doctrine its self was so directly contrary to the general inclinations of the world 2. That the propagation of it was so much opposed by all worldly power 1. That the doctrine its self was so opposite to the general inclinations of the world The doctrine may be considered either as to its credenda or matters of faith or as to its agenda or matters of life and practice both these were contrary to the inclinations of the world the former seemed hard and incredible the latter harsh and impossible 1. The matters of faith which were to be believed by the world were not such things which we may imagine the vulgar sort of men would be very forward to run after nor very greedy to imbrace 1. Because contrary to the principles of their education and the Religion they were brought up in the generality of mankind is very tenacious of those principles and prejudices which are sucked in in the time of Infancy There are some Religions one would think it were impossible that any rational men should believe them but only on this account because they are bred up under them It is a very great advantage any Religion hath against another that it comes to speak first and thereby insinuates such an apprehension of its self to the mind that it is very hard removing it afterwards The understanding seems to be of the nature of those things which are communis juris and therefore primi sunt possidentis when an opinion hath once got possession of the mind it usually keeps out whatever comes to disturb it Now we cannot otherwise conceive but all those persons who had been bred up under Paganism and the most gross Idolatry must needs have a very potent prejudice against such a doctrine which was wholly irreconcileable with that Religion which they had been devoted to Now the stronger the prejudice is which is conveyed into mens minds by the force of education the greater strength and power must there needs be in
whom it was very frequent who worshipped the devils instead of Gods 2. Because of the general dispersion of Copies in the world upon the first publishing of them We cannot otherwise coâ—ceive but that records containing so weighty and important things would be transcribed by all those Churches which believed the truth of the things contained in them We see how far curiosity will carry men as to the care of transcribing antient MSS. of old Authors which contain only some history of things past that are of no great concernment to us Can we then imagine those who ventured estates and lives upon the truth of the things revealed in Scripture would not be very careful to preserve the authentick instrument whereby they are revealed in a certain way to the whole world And besides this for a long time the originals themselves of the Apostolical writings were preserved in the Church which makes Tertullian in his time appeal to them Age jam qui voles curiositatem melius exercere in negotio salutis tuae percurre Ecclesias Apostolicas apud quasipsae adhuc cathedrae Apostolorum suis locis praesidentur apud quas ipsae authenticae corum literae recitantur sonantes vocem representantes faciem uniuscujusque Now how was it possible that in that time the Scriptures could be corrupted when in some of the Churches the original writings of the Apostles were preserved in a continual succession of persons from the Apostles themselves and from these originals so many Copies were transcribed as were conveyed almost all the world over through the large spread of the Christian Churches at that time and therefore it is impossible to conceive that a Copy should be corrupted in one Church when it would so speedily be discovered by another especially considering these three circumstances 1. The innumerable multitude of Copies wh ch would speedily be taken both considering the moment of the thing and the easiness of doing it God probably for that very end not loading the world with Pandâ—cts and Codes of his Laws but contriving the whole instrument of mans salvation in so narrow a compass that it might be easily preserved and transcribed by such who were passionate admirers of the Scriptures 2. The great number of learned and inquisitive men who soon sprung up in the Christian Church whose great care was to explain and vindicate the sacred Scriptures can we then think that all these Watch-men should be asleep together when the â—vil one came to sow his Tares which it is most unreasonable to imagine when in the writings of all these learned men which were very many and voluminous so much of the Scripture was inserted that had there been corruption in the Copies themselves yet comparing them with those writings the corruptions would be soon discovered 3. The great venâ—ration which all Christians had of the Scripture that they placed the hopes of their eternal happiness upon the truth of the things contained in the Scriptures Can we then think these would suffer any material alteration to creep into these records without their observing and discovering it Can we now think when all persons are so exceeding careful of their Deeds and the Records whereon their estates depend that the Christians who valued not this world in comparison of that to come should suffer the Magna Charta of that to be lost corrupted or imbezzeled away Especially considering what care and industry was used by many primitive Christians to compare Copies together as is evident in Pantaenus who brought the Hebrew Copy of Matthew out of the Indies to Alexandria as Eusebius tells us in Pamphilus and the Library he errected at Caesarâ—a but especially in Origens admirable Hexapla which were mainly intended for this end 3. It is impossible to conceive a corruption of the copy of the Scriptures because of the great differences which were all along the several ages of the Church between those who acknowledged the Scriptures to be Divine So that if one party of them had foisted in or taken out any thing another party was ready to take notice of it and would be sure to tell the world of it And this might be one great reason why God in his wise providence might permit such an increase of heresies in the Infancy of the Church viz. that thereby Christians might be forced to stand upon their guard and to have a special eye to the Scriptures which were alwayes the great eye-sores of hereticks And from this great wariness of the Church it was that some of the Epistles were so long abroad before they found general entertainment in all the Churches of Christ because in those Epistles which were doubted for some tâ—me there were some passages which seemed to favour some of the heresies then abroad but when upon severe enquiry they are found to be what they pretended they were received in all the Christian Churches 4. Because of the agreement between the Old Tâ—stament and the New the Prophesies of the Old Testament appear with their full accomplishment in the New which we have so that it is impossible to think the New should be corrupted unless the old were too which is most unreasonable to imagine when the Iews who have been the great conservators of the Old Testament have been all along the most inveterate enemies of the Christians So that we cannot at all conceive it possible that any material corruptions or alterations should creep into the Scriptures much less that the true copy should be lost and a new one forged Supposing then that we have the same authentick records preserved and handed down to us by the care of all Christian Churches which were written in the first ages of the Church of Christ what necessity can we imagine that God should work new miracles to confirm that dâ—ctrine which is conveyed down in a certain uninterrupted way to us as being seâ—led by miracles undoubtedly Divine in the first promulgation and penning of it And this is the first reason why the truth of the Scriptures need not now be sealed by new miracles 2. Another may be because God in the Scripture hath appointed other things to continue in his Church to be as seals to his people of the truth of the things contained in Scriptures Such are outwardly the Sacraments of the Gospel baptism and the Lords Supper which are set apart to be as seals to confirm the truth of the Covenant on Gods part towards us in reference to the great promises contained in it in reference to pardon of sin and the ground of our acceptance with God by Iesus Christ and inwardly God hath promised his Spirit to be as a witness within them that by its working and strengthning grace in the hearts of believers it may confirm to them the truth of the records of Scripture when they finde the counter part of them written in their hearts by the singer of the Spirit of God It cannot then be with any reason at all supposed
from eternity together with matter it must necessarily exist as matter doth and so evil will be invincible and unavoidable in the world which if once granted renders Religion useless makes Gods commands unrighteous and destroyes the foundation of Gods proceedings in the day of judgment 3. This opinion makes God not to be the author of good while it denyes him to be the Author of evil For either there was nothing else but evil in this eternal matter or there was a mixture of good and evil if nothing else but evil which did necessarily exist it were as impossible for God to produce good out of it as to annihilate the necessarily existent matter If thâ—re were a mixture of good and evil they were both there either necessarily or contingently how could either of them be contingently in that which is supposed to be necessarily existent and no free agent If they be both there necessarily 1. It is hard conceâ—ving how two such contrary things as good and evil should both necessarily be in the same uniform matter 2. Then God is no more the Author of good then of evil in the world for he is said not to be the Authâ—r of evil because it comes from matter and so it appears good doth too and so God according to this opinion is no more the Author of good then he is of evil But if it be said that good is not in matter but God produced that out of nothing Then I reply 1. If God did produce good out of nothiâ—g why did he not produce matter out of nothing too iâ— he were so powerful as to do the one there could be no de ect of power as to the other What insufficiency is there in Gods nature for producing all things out of nothing if he can produce any thing out of nothing 2. If God did produce good out of evil why could he not have removed all evil out of matter for good could not be produced but by the removing of some evil which was before that good and so God might have removed all evil out of matter And so by not doing it when he might this opinion gives not the least satisfaction in point of reason for acquitting God from being the Author of sin nor for clearing the true Origine of evil Thus we have now compared the account given of it in Scripture with that given by the Heathen Philosophers and find it in every thing more clear rational and satisfactory then theirs is Which doubtless is the reason why the more modern Philosophers such as Hierocles Porphyrie Simplicius and others though otherwise great opposers of Christianity did yet in this side with the Scriptures and attribute the original of evil not to matter but to the Will of man And whoever is seriously conversant with the writings of those Philosophers who were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the sacred succâ—ssion out of the School of Ammonius at Alexandria such as Plotinus Porphyrius Iamblichus and Hierocles will find them wriâ—â— in a higher strain concerning many weighty and importan◠〈◊〉 as of the degeneracy of mens souls from God and tâ—e way of the souls returning to him then the most sublime of the ancient Philosophers had done Which speculations of theirs no doubt arose not so much from the School of Plato and Pythagoras as of that great restorer oâ— Philosophy Ammonius of Alexandria whose Sâ—bolars Herâ—nnius Origen and Plotinus were Who living and dying a â—hristian as Eusebius and Hierom assure us whateveâ— Porphyrius suggests to the contrary did communicate to his Sâ—holars the sublimer mysteries of Divine revâ—lâ—tion togeâ—her wâ—â—h the speculations of the ancienâ— Philoâ—ophers which Holstenius conceives he did with an adjuration oâ— secrecy which he tells us Porphyrius himself acknowledgeth that those three Scholars of Ammonius Herennius Origen and Plâ—tinus were under an obligation to each other not to reveal and discover though it were after violated by them It is an easie matter to conceive what an excellent improvement might be made of the ancient Platonick Philosophy by the advantage of the Scriptures by one who was so well versed in both of them as Ammonius is supposed to have been and how agreeable and becoming would that Philosophy seem which had only its rise from Plato but its height and improvement from those rich and truly divine Truths which were inlaid with them The want of observing this viz. whence it was that those excellent discourses in the later Platonists had their true original hath given occasion to several mistakes among learned men as first the over valuing of the Platonick Philosophy as though in many of the discourses and notions of it it seemed to some who were more in Love with Philosophy then the Scriptures to outgo what is discovered therein concerning the same things A most groundless and unworthy censure when it is more then probable and might be largely manifested were it here a fit opportunity that whatever is truly generous and noble in the sublimist discourses of the Platonists had not only its primitive rise but its accession and improvement from the Scriptures wherein it is still contained in its native lustre and beauty without those paintings and impure mixtures which the suâ—â—â—mest truths are corrupted with in the Platonick writiâ—â— The reason of which is though these Philosophers grew â—â—ddenly rich through the spoyles they had taken out of the Scriptures yet they were loth to be known from whence they had them and would seem to have had that out of their own gardens which was only transplanted from the Sacred writings Therefore we find them not mentioning the Scriptures and the Christian doctrine without some contempt of its meanness and simplicity what ever improvement they had gained by them they would have it less taken notice of by professing their opposition to the Christians as is notorious in those great Philosophers Porphyrius Iamblichus Hierocles Simplicius and oâ—hers It being their design to take so much and no more out of the Christian doctrine as they could well suite with their Platâ—nick notions by which means they so disguised the faces of the Truths they stole that it were hard for the right owners of them to know them again Which was the grand artifice of their great Master Plato who doubtless by means of his abode and acquaintance in Aegypt about the time when the Iews began to flock thither had more certain knowledge of many truths of grand importance concerning the Deity the nature of the soul the Origine of the world then many other Greek Philosophers had but yet therein lay his great fault that he wrapt up and disguised his notions in such a fabulous and ambiguous manner that partly it might be less known from whence he had them and that they might find better entertainment among the Greeks then they were ever like to do in their plain and native dress Which Plato himself seems somewhere to intimate when he saith that what
Ochus which saith Vossius was in the second year of 107. Olympiad This Manetho Gebenyta was High Priest of Heliopolis in the time of Ptolomaeus Philadelphus at whose request he writ his History which he digested into three Tomes the first containing the 11. Dynastyes of the Gods and Heroes the 2d 8. Dynasties the 3 d. 12. all containing according to his fabulous computation the sum of 53535. years These Dynasties are yet preserved being first epitomized by Iulius Africanus from him transcribed by Eusebius in his Chronica from Eusebius by Georgius Syncellus out of whom they are produced by Ios. Scaliger and may be seen both in Eusebius and his Canones Isagogici Now Manetho as appears by Eusebius voucheth this as the main testimony of his credibility that he took his History 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 From some pillars in the Land of Seriad in which they were inscribed in the sacred dialect by the first Mercury Tyth and after the stood were translated out of the sacred dialect into the Greek tongue in Hieroglyphick Characters and are laid up in books among the Revestryes of the Egyptian Temples by Agathodaemon the second Mercury the Father of Tat. Certainly this fabulous author could not in fewer words have more fully manifested his own Impostures nor blasted his own credit more then he hath done in these which it is a wonder so many Learned men have taken so little notice of which have found frequent occasion to speak of Manetho and his Dynastyes This I shall make appear by some great improbabilities and other plain impossibilities which are couched in them The improbabilities are first such pillars being in such a place as Seriad and that place no more spoken of either by himself or by any other Egyptians nor any use made of these insâ—riptions by any other but himself As to this terra Seriadica where it should be the very learned and inquisitive Ioseph Scaliger plainly gives out and ingenuously professeth his ignorance For in his notes on the fragments of Manetho in Eusebius when he comes to that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he only saith Quae nobis ignota quaerant Studiosi But Isaac Vossius in his late discourses de aetate mundi cries 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and confidently perswades himself that it is the same with Seirath mentioned Iudg. 3. 16. Indeed were there nothing else to be considered but affinity of names it might well be the same but that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we render the stone-quarries should signifie these pillars of Mercury is somewhat hard to conceive The Seventy render it as himself observes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by which they understand graven Images So the word is used 2 Chron. 33. 19. Deut. 7. 5. Isai. 10. 19. The vulgar Latine renders it ad locum Idolorum which were the certain interpretation if Chytraeus his conjecture were true that Eglon had lately set up Idols there but if it be meant of pillars I cannot but approve of Iunius his interpretation which I conceive bids fairest to be the genuine sense of the place viz. that these stones here were the 12 stones pitched by Ioshua in Gilgal after the Israelites passed over Iordan and these stones are said to be by Gilgal Iudg. 3. 19. So that notwithstanding this handsom conjecture we are as far to seek for the pillars of Mercury as ever we were and may be so to the worlds end Secondly the standing of these pillars during the stood which must be supposed certainly to have some singular vertue in them to resist such a torrent of waters which overthrew the strongest built houses and most compacted Cities the plain impossibilities are first that Manetho should transcribe his Dynastyes from the beginning of the History of Aegypt to almost the time of Alexander out of sacred Inscriptions of Thoyth who lived in the beginning of the very first Dynasty according to his own Computation Sure this Thoyth was an excellent Prophet to write an History for above 0000 years to come as Manetho reckons it Secondly it is as well still that this History after the flood should be translated into Hieroglyphick Characters what kind of translation is that we had thought Hieroglyphicks had been representations of things and not of sounds and letters or words How could this History have at first been written in any tongue when it was in Hieroglyphicks Do Hieroglyphicks speak in several Languages and are they capable of changing their tongues But thirdly it is as good still that the second Mercury or Agathodaemon did translate this History so soon after the Flood into Greek Was the Greek tongue so much in request so soon after the Flood that the Aegyptian History for the sake of the Greeks must be translated into their language Nay is it not evident from Herodotus and Diodorus that the Graecians were not permitted so much as any commerce with the Aegyptians till the time of Psammet hicus which sell out in the 26. Dynesty of Manetho and about a Century after the beginning of the Olympiads We see then how credible an Author Manetho is and what truth there is like to be in the account of ancient times given by the Aegyptian Historians when the chief of them so lamentably and ominously stumbles in his very entrance into it And yet as fabulous as this account is which Manetho gives of his taking his history from these pillars before the Flood I cannot but think that Iosephus an Author otherwise of good credit took his famous story of Seths pillars concerning Astronomical observations before the flood from this story of Manetho and therefore I cannot but look upon them with as jealous an eye as on the other although I know how fond the world hath been upon that most ancient monument as is pretended of learning in the world Du Bartas hath writ a whole Poem on these pillars and the truth is they are fitter subjects for Poets then any else as will appear on these considerations First how strangely improbable is it that the posterity of Seth who as is pretended did foreknow a destruction of the world to be by a flood should busie themselves to write Astronomical observations on pillars for the benefit of those who should live after it Could they think their pillars should have some peculiar exemption above stronger structures from the violence of the rough and furious waters If they believed the flood absolutely universal for whom did they intend their observations if not to what end did they make them when the persons surviving might communicate their inventions to them But secondly if either one or both these pillars remained whence comes it to pass that neither the Chaldeans nor any of the eldest pretenders to Astronomy should neither mention them nor make any use of them Nay thirdly whence came the study of Astronomy to be so lamentably defective in those ancient times if they had such certain observations of the heavenly bodies gathered
by so much experience of the persons who lived before the Flood Fourthly how comes Iosephus himself to neglect this remarkable testimony of the truth of Scripture-history in his books against Appion if he had thought it were such as might be relyed on Fifthly how comes Iosephus so carelesly to set down the place in Syria where these pillars stood that inquisitive persons might have satisfied themselves with the sight of the pillar at least and what kind of Characters those observations were preserved in But now if we compare this of Iosephus with Manetho his story we shall find them so exactly resemble each other that we may well judge all those pillars to have been taken out of the same quarry Two things make it yet more probable First the name of the place wherein they stood which Eustathius in Hexaemeron takes out of Iosephus and calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the very same place with that in Manetho The other is the common use of the name of Seth among the Aegyptians as not only appears by Plutarch de ◠side Osiride but by this very place of Manctho where it follows 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a book of his bearing the title which Vettius Valens Antiochenus tells us is not called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now therefore Iosephus who frequently useth the Testimony of Heathen Writers and frequently of this Manetho endeavoured to bring this fabulous relation of Manetho as near the truth as he could therefore in stead of Thoyth he puts Seth and the fabulous history of Aegypt the inventions of the Patriarchs and Syria in stead of Seriadica a Country too large to find these pillars in CHAP. III. Of the Chaldean History The contest of Antiquity among Heathen Nations and the ways of deciding it Of the Chaldean Astrology and the foundation of Iudicial Astrology Of the Zabii their Founder who they were no other then the old Chaldees Of Berosus and his History An account of the fabulous Dynastyes of Berosus and Manetho From the Translation of the Scripture history into Greek in the time of Ptolomy Of that translation and the time of it Of Demetrius Phalereus Scaligers arguments answered Manetho writ after the Septuagint proved against Kircher his arguments answered Of Rabbinical and Arabick Authors and their little credit in matter of history The time of Berosus enquired into his writing co-temporary with Philadelphus THe next whom our Enquiry leads us to are the Chaldeans a Nation of great and undoubted Antiquity being in probability the first formed into a National Government after the Flood and therefore the more capable of having these Arts and Sciences flourish among them which might preserve the memory of eldest times to the view of posterity And yet even among these who enjoyed all the advantages of ease quiet and a flourishing Empire we find no undoubted or credible records preserved but the same vanity as among the Aegyptians in arrogating antiquity to themselves beyond all proportion of reason or satisfaction from their own history to fill up that vast measure of time with which makes it most probable what Diodorus observes of them that in things pertaining to their arts they made use of Lunar years of 30 days so they had need when Tully tells us that they boasted of observations of the Stars for 470000 years which after Diodorus his computation and the vulgar account of years from the beginning of the world will fall near upon if not before the Creation It had been impossible for them to have been so extravagant in their accounts of themselves had they but preserved the history of their Nation in any certain records For want of which the tradition of the eldest times varying in the several families after their dispersion and being gradually corrupted by the policy of their Leaders and those corruptions readily embraced by the predominancy of self-love in the several Nations thence arose those vain and eager contests between the Chaldaeans Scythians Aegyptians and Aethiopians concerning the antiquity of their several Nations which may be seen in Diodorus and others by which it most evidently appears that they had no certain history of their own Nations for none of them insist upon any records but only upon several probabilities from the nature of their Country and the Climates they lived under Neither need Psammeticus have been put to that ridiculous way of deciding the controversie by his two infants bred up without any converse with men concluding the language they spake would manifest the great antiquity of the Nation it belonged to Whereas it is more then probable they had spoken none at all had they not learned the inarticulate voice of the goats they had more converse with then men The making use of such ways to decide this controversie doth not only argue the great weakness of those times as to natural knowledge but the absolute defect and insufficiency of them as to the giving any certain account of the state of ancient times Of which the Chaldaeans had advantages above all other Heathen Nations not only living in a setled Country but in or near that very place where the grand Ancestors of the world had their chief abode and residence Whereby we see how unfaithful a thing tradition is and how soon it is corrupted or fails where it hath no sure records to bottom its self upon But indeed it is the less wonder that there should be a confusion of histories where there had been before of tongues and that such whose design and memory God had blasted before should afterwards forget their own original But as if the Chaldaeans had retained something still of their old aspiring mind to reach up to heaven the only thing they were eminent for and which they were careful in preserving of was some Astronomical observations which Tully tells us they had a great conveniency for by the reason of the plain and even situation of their Country whereby they might have a larger prospect of the heavenly bodies then those who lived in mountainous Countries could have And yet even for this which they were so famous for that the name Chaldaeans passed for Astrologers in the Roman Empire we have no very great reason to admire their excellency in it considering how soon their skill in Astronomy dwindled into that which by a great Catachresis is called judicial Astrology The original of which is most evident among them as all other Heathen Nations to have been from the Divinity which they attributed to the Stars in which yet they were far more rational then those who now admire that Art For granting their hypothesis that the Stars were Gods it was but reasonable they should determine contingent effects but it is far from being so with them who take away the foundation of all those celestial houses and yet attribute the same effects to them which they did who believed a Divinity in them The Chaldaeans as
sense of the truth of this Hypothesis and let him extend his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as long as he please which was his great help for correcting the errors of sense viz. as it was in the Roman court when the case was not clear ampliandum est So Epicurus would have the object represented every way it could be before he past his judgement yet this prudent caution would do him no good for this Hypothesis unless he were so wise as to stay till this world were crumbled into Atoms again that by that he might judge of the Origine of it There is but one way left to finde out the truth of things inevident to sense as by Epicurus his own confession all these Atoms are which are now the component particles of bodyes much more those which by their fortuitous concourse gave Being to the world and that is if something evident to sense doth apparently prove it which is his way of proving a Vacuity in nature from motion but though that be easily answered by principles different from those of Epicurus and more rational yet that very way of probation fails him in his present Hypothesis For what is there evident to sense which proves a fortuitous concourse of Atoms for the production of things nay if we grant him that the composition of bodyes is nothing else but the contexture of these insensible particles yet this is far from being an evidence to sense that these particles without any wise and directing providence should make up such bodyes as we see in the world And here when we speak of the evidence of sense we may well ask as the Stoick in Tully doth whether ever Epicurus found a Poeme made by the casual throwing of letters together and if a concourse of Atoms did produce the world cur porticum cur templum cur domum cur urbem non potest why did it never produce a cloyster a temple a house a city which are far easier things then the world I know Epicurus will soon reply that things are otherwise in the world now then when it was first produced I grant it and from thence prove that because no such thing ever happens in the world now as a meerly casual concourse of Atoms to produce any thing Epicurus could have no evidence from sense at all to finde out the truth of his Hypothesis by And as little relief can he finde from his second Criterium viz. Anticipation for by his own acknowledgement all Anticipation depends on the senses and men have it only one of these four wayes 1. By incursion as the species of a man is preserved by the sight of him 2. By proportion as we can inlarge or contract that species of a man either into a Gyant or Pygmy 3. By similitude as we may fancy the image of a City by resemblance to one which we have seen 4. By composition whereby we may joyn different images together as of a horse and man to make a Centaure Now though it be very questionable how some of these wayes belong to a Criterium of truth yet none of them reach our case for there can be no incursion of insensible particles as such upon our senses we may indeed by proportion imagine the parvitude of them but what is this to the proving the truth of the Hypothesis Similitude can do no good unless Epicurus had ever seen a world made so the only relief must be from composition and that will prove the Origine of the world by Atoms to be as true as that there are Centaures in the world which we verily believe These are the only Criteria by which Epicurus would judge of the truth of natural things by for the third Passion relates wholly to things Moral and not Physical and now let any one judge whether the Hypothesis of the Origine of the Universe by Atoms can ever be proved true either by the judgement of sense or by Anticipation The way they had to prove this Hypothesis was insufficient and that was by proving that the bodyes of the world are compounded of such insensible particles Now granting the thing I deny the consequence for what though the composition of bodyes be from the contexture of Atoms doth it therefore follow that these particles did casually produce these bodyes nay doth it at all follow that because bodyes upon their resolution do fall into insensible particles of different size figure and motion therefore these particles must be praeexistent to all bodyes in the world For it is plain that there is now an Universal lump of matter out of which these insensible particles arise and whether they return on the dissolution of bodyes and all these various corpuscles may be of the same uniform substance only with the alteration of size shape and motion but what then doth this prove that because particular bodyes do now emerge out of the various configuration and motion of insensible paerticles of that matter which exists in the world that therefore this whole matter was produced by the casual occursions of these Atoms It will ask more time and pains then is usually taken by the Philosophers either ancient or modern to prove that those things whatsoever they are whether elements or particles out of which bodyes are supposed to be compounded do exist separately from such compounded bodyes and antecedently to them We finde no Aristotelian elements pure in the world nor any particles of matter destitute of such a size figure and motion as doth make some body or other From whence then can we infer either the existence of Aristotles materia prima without quiddity quantity or quality or the Epicurean Atoms without such a contexture as make up some bodyes in the world Our profound Naturalist Dr. Harvey after his most accurate search into the natures and Generation of things delivers this as his experience and judgement concerning the commonly reputed elements or principles of bodyes For speaking of the different opinions of Empedocles and Hippocrates and Democritus and Epicurus concerning the composition of bodyes he adds Ego vero neque in animalium productione nec omnino in ulla corporum similarium generatione sive ea partium animalium sive plantarum lapidum mineralium c. fuerit vel congregationem ejusmodi vel miscibilia diversa in generation is opere unienda praeexistere observare unquam potui And after explaining the way which he conceived most rational and consonant to experience in the Generation of things he concludes his discourse with these words Idemque in omni generatione furi crediderim adeo ut corpora similaria mista elementa sua tempore priora non habeant sed illa potius element is suis prius existant nempe Empedoclis atque Aristotel is igne aqua aëre terra vel Chymicorum sale sulphure Mercurio aut Democriti Atomis utpote natura quoque ipsis perfectiora Sunt inquam mista composita etiam tempore priora element is