A
DEFENCE
OF
THE
DISCOURSE
Concerning
the
EARTH
Before
the
Flood
.
The
Introduction
.
WHen
in
my
Exceptions
I
discoursed
so
largely
against
the
Theory
of
the
Earth
,
I
did
not
intend
to
ingage
with
it
again
;
nor
should
I
have
done
it
but
for
very
good
Reasons
;
the
principal
of
which
are
these
four
.
First
,
To
vindicate
GOD's
Veracity
.
To
the
doing
of
which
,
by
speaking
,
or
writing
,
upon
just
and
necessary
occasions
or
accounts
;
I
Take
my
very
having
of
a
Tongue
and
Hand
,
to
be
sufficient
Obligations
.
And
truly
,
what
is
more
fit
,
and
what
can
be
more
needful
,
than
to
vindicate
this
Attribute
(
one
of
the
chief
of
GOD's
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
or
Divine
Properties
)
and
assert
the
Perfection
and
Inviolableness
of
it
?
For
upon
it
depends
no
less
than
our
future
Welfare
,
or
everlasting
Happiness
.
Take
away
this
Veracity
,
and
the
Gospel
(
according
to
Pope
Leo
the
Tenths
expression
)
is
but
Fabula
Christi
,
a
piece
of
meer
Forgery
.
And
should
Scripture
be
Fabulous
,
where
's
our
secutity
for
a
better
Life
?
Then
our
Faith
is
vain
,
and
our
Hope
without
foundation
,
and
we
can
lay
no
claim
to
the
high
Felicities
of
the
Eternal
World
.
And
yet
,
if
all
that
the
Great
GOD
has
said
,
be
not
firm
and
true
,
in
every
punctilio
or
tittle
of
it
,
this
Veracity
of
His
is
not
Inviolable
;
and
so
,
what
have
Mankind
left
them
to
trust
to
?
For
should
GOD
deceive
them
in
one
case
,
he
might
do
it
in
more
;
and
if
he
does
it
in
many
,
he
may
do
it
in
all
:
and
then
,
what
shall
support
them
as
to
their
noblest
Interests
?
The
first
reason
,
therefore
,
of
this
second
sally
of
my
Pen
here
,
is
farther
to
defend
the
truth
of
GOD
,
and
to
rescue
some
Texts
of
the
Holy
Bible
from
such
imputations
of
falshood
,
as
the
Doctrine
of
the
Theory
involves
them
in
.
And
indeed
,
if
such
imputations
could
be
justly
fastned
upon
any
part
of
the
inspired
Volume
,
they
would
bid
fair
towards
cancelling
the
whole
.
Do
we
not
plainly
see
,
that
if
one
single
link
breaks
or
drops
off
,
the
continuity
of
the
Chain
is
quite
dissolved
?
So
if
the
least
single
passage
of
GOD's
Word
be
false
,
it
certainly
shews
the
rest
to
be
fallible
;
and
a
failure
of
truth
in
any
one
of
its
periods
,
overthrows
the
credibility
of
all
the
other
.
And
then
,
in
short
,
we
have
neither
proofs
,
nor
hopes
,
nor
any
manner
of
assurance
of
blessed
Immortality
;
that
unspeakably
excellent
and
glorious
thing
,
to
which
we
all
do
,
or
should
aspire
.
Our
title
to
that
is
for
ever
blasted
,
because
then
the
authentick
Charter
which
contains
it
,
proves
counterfeit
Evidence
,
and
a
specious
Nullity
.
Secondly
,
To
maintain
the
honour
of
Moses
.
Who
,
if
he
had
not
been
dignify'd
with
the
high
Privilege
of
Divine
Inspiration
,
ought
upon
his
own
account
,
to
have
been
above
all
suspicion
of
fiction
or
falshood
.
And
to
charge
him
with
either
,
tho
but
indirectly
,
and
even
in
his
naked
Personal
capacity
,
must
seem
too
insufferable
a
diminution
or
disparagement
of
his
Greatness
and
Worthiness
.
For
according
to
Philo
,
as
in
his
Offices
he
was
high
;
being
[
*
](A67683-e10600-b)
*
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
De
Vit.
Mos.
lib.
2.
by
the
Providence
of
GOD
,
both
a
King
,
and
a
Law-giver
,
and
a
Prophet
,
and
an
High
Priest
,
and
incomparable
in
every
one
of
the
Functions
:
And
as
in
his
Affections
he
was
holy
,
being
[
†
](A67683-e10660-b)
†
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Id.
de
Nomin.
Mutatione
.
a
most
pure
Mind
,
and
[
‖
](A67683-e10710-b)
‖
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Id.
de
vita
Mos.
lib.
3.
the
greatest
Saint
,
and
Lover
of
GOD
that
ever
lived
:
So
in
his
Writings
he
was
True
;
as
[
§
](A67683-e10780-b)
§
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Id.
de
Sacrif
.
Abel
.
&
Cain
.
not
taking
up
with
things
probable
,
or
credible
,
but
following
after
sincere
,
or
exactest
verity
.
Yet
this
most
excellent
and
admirable
Author
,
as
he
was
sufficiently
disregarded
by
the
Theorist
before
;
so
by
his
defending
his
Anti-Mosaic
assertions
,
he
is
little
less
than
despised
now
.
For
by
making
some
Passages
in
his
famous
Cosmopoeia
,
untrue
;
he
degrades
it
into
the
rank
of
meer
fabulous
or
conjectural
Writings
.
Thirdly
,
To
pay
respect
to
the
Answerer
.
Who
having
favour'd
me
above
others
,
with
an
Answer
,
as
he
calls
it
,
to
my
Exceptions
;
I
had
no
reason
,
I
thought
,
to
be
behind
hand
with
him
in
Civility
of
the
like
Nature
.
Fourthly
,
To
defend
and
right
my self
.
For
besides
such
blows
as
are
proper
,
and
becoming
an
Antagonist
to
give
;
and
so
ought
to
be
born
,
or
returned
with
Fairness
;
I
am
very
sensible
,
that
in
this
Answer
,
several
Attaques
are
made
upon
me
,
from
another
force
than
that
of
Reason
and
Philosophy
;
and
according
to
other
measures
,
than
those
of
Learning
and
Ingenuity
.
And
truly
in
repelling
these
,
my
stile
might
well
have
been
very
cutting
,
considering
what
the
Answerer
has
done
to
whet
it
.
But
as
Truth
may
be
defended
without
Railery
;
so
I
understand
not
the
Wisdom
of
mens
sharping
their
Pens
,
to
scratch
one
another
with
them
till
the
blood
comes
,
meerly
to
make
the
By-standers
sport
.
Yet
he
having
been
pleas'd
to
throw
Dirt
upon
me
,
he
must
give
me
leave
to
brush
it
off
again
;
and
if
any
of
it
chances
to
fly
in
his
Eyes
,
he
may
thank
himself
for
it
.
I
thought
I
had
had
to
with
a
genteel
Platonist
,
and
a
Person
above
all
Cynical
Reflections
.
But
he
having
made
them
in
so
great
Plenty
,
I
can
do
no
less
than
take
notice
of
some
of
them
.
In
a
word
;
as
the
Answerer
has
thought
fit
to
speak
freely
,
so
the
Replicant
is
forc'd
to
speak
plainly
.
For
some
he
perceives
,
cannot
,
or
will
not
hear
,
unless
men
shout
or
hallow
to
them
;
and
to
be
mealy-mouth'd
is
a
great
fault
,
where
to
speak
out
is
absolutely
necessary
.
And
necessary
it
is
,
where
the
cause
will
bear
it
,
and
the
Truth
requires
it
.
But
before
we
enter
upon
our
Work
,
it
must
be
noted
,
by
the
way
;
that
to
facilitate
his
Answer
,
our
Author
makes
use
of
Two
pretty
odd
and
inallowable
Expedients
.
As
First
,
he
betakes
himself
too
often
to
Extraordinary
Providence
.
Where
he
is
brought
to
Straits
,
and
(
otherwise
insuperable
)
Difficulties
;
he
runs
directly
to
Extraordinary
Providence
,
to
free
him
from
the
same
.
And
as
if
that
were
to
patronize
his
extravagant
Phantasies
,
he
makes
it
a
common
Refuge
for
them
.
He
readily
ascribes
strange
Phaenomenaes
to
it
,
and
thrusts
them
for
shelter
under
its
Tutelage
.
And
give
any
man
but
this
sure
Clue
in
his
Hand
,
and
how
can
he
be
lost
in
the
Labyrinth
of
Philosophy
?
Tho
his
Principles
,
Hypotheses
,
or
the
ways
he
goes
in
,
be
very
winding
,
cross
,
and
intricate
;
it
will
guide
him
quickly
,
and
easily
out
them
.
The
Second
Expedient
,
whereby
he
shortens
his
work
and
makes
it
easy
,
is
this
.
Where
Objections
are
made
that
ought
to
be
answered
;
he
frequently
passes
them
by
with
Silence
:
and
sometimes
justifies
his
so
doing
,
by
saying
the
Theory
is
not
concerned
in
them
.
As
if
slighting
Arguments
,
or
neglecting
of
them
;
were
a
sufficient
confuting
them
.
A
Practice
agreeable
to
the
Country
mans
purpose
.
Who
being
resolved
to
argue
with
a
disputacious
Quaker
;
to
his
Friends
disswading
him
,
said
,
hold
your
Tongues
,
for
I
will
have
a
bout
with
him
;
and
if
he
speaks
any
thing
that
I
cannot
answer
,
I
'll
either
say
nothing
at
all
to
it
,
or
else
face
him
down
that
't
is
nothing
to
me
.
Besides
these
two
Shifts
that
he
makes
;
he
tells
such
Vntruths
;
and
falls
into
such
Mistakes
;
and
is
guilty
of
such
flat
Contradictions
to
himself
,
as
will
yield
no
Honour
to
a
Son
of
Philosophy
.
Lest
this
charge
,
which
may
seem
heavy
,
should
be
suspected
to
be
false
;
in
proof
of
its
truth
,
the
particulars
are
noted
in
the
Margent
of
the
Reply
.
As
to
his
complaint
of
the
Excepters
Vnfairness
,
first
Edition
of
the
Theory
for
such
things
as
are
left
out
of
the
Second
;
it
is
of
no
weight
.
For
first
,
the
Excepter
never
heard
,
nor
knew
the
least
of
a
Second
Edition
of
any
part
of
the
Latin
Theory
,
out
of
which
any
things
were
left
,
that
were
in
the
First
;
till
the
answer
to
his
Exceptions
told
him
of
it
;
Secondly
,
for
a
Writer
to
leave
some
very
false
things
out
of
a
Second
Edition
of
his
Book
,
which
he
taught
in
the
First
;
is
not
sufficient
.
To
leave
them
all
out
,
is
the
least
he
can
do
,
even
to
make
the
very
lowest
amends
possible
for
the
wrong
done
to
Truth
.
But
especially
if
he
injured
Divine
Truths
,
by
confronting
the
Doctrine
of
the
sacred
Bible
,
or
by
clashing
with
its
History
.
And
this
is
that
which
makes
what
the
Theorist
has
done
in
this
Case
,
to
be
short
and
imperfect
.
All
the
things
of
this
Nature
and
Tendency
,
are
not
left
out
of
his
Second
Edition
.
And
they
who
print
things
that
derogate
from
Scripture
,
or
are
repugnant
to
it
;
will
hardly
make
good
men
believe
,
that
they
do
GOD
right
,
by
leaving
some
of
those
Derogations
or
evil
Repugnancies
out
of
a
Second
Impression
,
while
they
keep
in
others
that
are
as
bad
.
The
Subject
that
libels
his
Princes
Declaration
highly
to
day
,
makes
no
satisfaction
by
sending
out
a
lower
Libel
of
it
to
morrow
.
No
,
his
second
Act
is
an
aggravation
of
his
first
;
and
as
he
is
chargeable
with
,
and
answerable
for
either
,
so
in
point
of
Duty
he
is
bound
to
most
serious
acknowledgments
of
both
.
And
so
is
the
Answerer
to
disown
all
these
notions
(
instead
of
defending
them
)
which
reflect
upon
Scripture
.
And
truly
should
the
Replicant
go
on
to
tax
him
with
those
notions
,
as
the
Exceptor
did
;
he
would
have
no
great
cause
to
blame
him
for
the
procedure
.
For
notwithstanding
that
he
has
left
them
out
of
his
Book
,
his
Rejection
of
them
is
not
so
express
,
but
they
seem
yet
to
stand
,
as
true
,
in
his
Judgment
.
For
thus
he
openly
declares
,
I
have
not
from
these
Exceptions
,
found
reason
to
change
any
part
of
the
Theory
,
or
to
alter
my
opinion
as
to
any
particular
in
it
.
And
if
his
opinion
of
those
particulars
,
which
we
excepted
against
,
and
he
has
left
out
,
be
still
the
same
;
the
same
Exceptions
might
,
without
Vnfairness
,
be
urged
against
him
.
Yea
,
his
telling
the
Excepter
,
that
his
opinion
as
to
the
Theory
is
not
alter'd
,
more
confirmed
by
his
Exceptions
;
makes
his
answering
Exceptions
against
it
,
by
saying
,
they
are
left
out
;
to
be
a
meer
Shift
.
Yet
the
Replicant
takes
but
little
farther
notice
of
these
things
,
as
mentioning
them
but
seldom
,
and
on
special
Occasion
.
That
this
Reply
came
out
no
sooner
,
is
owing
partly
to
the
Fulness
of
it
.
I
was
willing
to
say
what
I
had
to
say
to
this
Answer
(
and
so
to
the
Theory
)
once
for
all
;
that
then
I
might
finally
have
done
with
it
.
And
partly
to
those
many
interruptions
and
frequent
avocations
that
attend
my
Circumstances
.
But
chiefly
to
those
indispositions
of
health
,
which
happened
to
me
,
and
hindred
me
,
as
to
writing
,
for
near
a
quarter
of
a
Year
together
.
And
now
if
in
some
things
,
or
places
,
it
be
less
pleasing
,
or
profitable
,
than
the
Reader
would
have
it
;
he
must
consider
this
one
thing
.
That
we
do
not
here
chuse
the
Paths
we
go
in
;
but
are
fain
to
trace
another's
Phansy
,
and
to
follow
his
humour
who
leads
the
way
.
CHAP.
I.
IN
this
Chapter
there
is
nothing
remarkable
,
but
the
Squib
which
he
throws
at
the
End
of
it
.
Where
he
tells
the
Excepter
,
that
his
looking
upon
his
Discourse
as
a
Collection
of
Notes
&c.
is
a
severe
Censure
.
but
every
man
best
understands
his
own
Works
.
Which
without
doubt
must
be
true
of
himself
;
else
he
could
never
understand
a
late
Work
of
his
own
,
a
true
piece
of
Natural
History
,
and
the
greatest
and
most
remarkable
that
hath
yet
been
since
the
beginning
of
the
World
.
1
Kings
.
4.33
.
Tractavit
Historiam
Plantarum
&c.
Grot.
in
loc.
As
for
Solomon's
,
it
was
nothing
to
it
.
Joy
to
him
of
the
honour
he
here
does
himself
,
in
taking
place
of
all
of
his
own
Order
.
'T
is
an
high
Complement
that
he
makes
to
his
Pen
,
may
it
prove
as
happy
a
one
to
his
Person
.
But
having
cast
the
Die
,
he
must
take
his
chance
.
And
by
this
one
Throw
,
he
is
either
the
best
Natural
Historian
in
the
World
;
or
a
man
that
understands
not
his
own
Works
.
He
is
wiser
,
that
is
,
than
Solomon
in
his
way
;
or
else
not
right
in
his
Understanding
.
But
the
latter
,
we
may
guess
,
is
the
likeliest
of
the
two
.
For
tho
the
King
of
Israel's
ran
upon
things
of
another
kind
,
yet
surely
it
was
as
true
,
and
withal
as
great
and
remarkable
a
piece
of
Natural
History
;
as
the
Theory
of
the
Earth
.
CHAP.
II.
IN
the
Second
Chapter
,
to
the
First
Exception
against
the
Formation
of
the
Earth
,
That
it
would
have
taken
too
much
time
,
the
World
being
made
in
six
Days
:
The
general
answer
is
this
.
Either
you
take
the
Hypothesis
of
an
ordinary
Providence
,
or
of
an
extraordinary
,
as
to
the
time
allowed
for
the
Formation
of
the
Earth
;
If
you
proceed
according
to
an
ordinary
Providence
,
the
Formation
of
the
Earth
would
require
much
more
time
than
six
days
.
But
if
according
to
an
extraordinary
,
you
may
suppose
it
made
in
six
Minutes
,
if
you
please
.
But
the
Excepter
had
noted
,
a
good
whiles
work
;
and
that
it
was
to
become
dry
by
degrees
,
after
it
had
done
growing
;
and
that
the
Body
or
new
Concretion
of
it
was
increased
DAILY
,
being
fed
and
supplied
both
from
above
and
below
.
And
can
an
Habitable
Earth
which
is
a
good
while
in
making
,
and
the
body
of
which
must
be
DAILY
increased
;
be
made
in
six
Minutes
,
even
by
Extraordinary
Providence
it self
?
What
made
the
Answerer
start
out
of
the
way
of
ordinary
Providence
,
which
he
went
in
,
as
to
the
Earth's
Formation
;
into
this
extraordinary
one
,
to
stumble
into
such
a
Contradiction
of
himself
?
But
so
it
is
,
undue
protraction
of
the
time
of
the
Earth's
Formation
(
which
protraction
is
made
necessary
by
the
Theorist's
Hypothesis
,
left
to
the
Author
and
his
Readers
,
the
Theory
being
not
concerned
in
them
.
And
so
they
are
answered
by
his
Last
Expedient
.
But
before
I
go
farther
,
I
must
tell
our
Answerer
,
that
in
allowing
this
extraordinary
Providence
,
he
condemns
his
Hypothesis
of
extraordinary
Impertinence
.
For
what
Need
,
or
what
Vse
can
there
be
of
his
New
Hypothesis
,
as
to
solving
the
Phaenomenaes
of
the
Flood
;
when
by
this
Concession
,
the
old
one
will
be
inabled
to
the
Solution
of
them
all
,
for
which
his
was
invented
?
Thus
,
for
example
,
was
that
World
to
be
drowned
,
and
the
Flood
to
surmount
the
highest
Hills
,
fifteen
Cubits
?
Why
,
extraordinary
Providence
,
in
six
Minutes
,
could
create
water
enough
to
do
it
.
Was
that
work
done
by
such
a
prodigious
Flood
,
and
the
Mass
of
Water
to
be
dried
up
again
?
Extraordinary
Providence
could
as
soon
annihilate
it
.
Was
the
frame
of
the
World
to
be
inlarged
upon
the
coming
of
so
vast
a
quantity
of
new
matter
into
it
?
And
to
be
contracted
again
upon
its
going
out
?
Extraordinary
Providence
could
sufficiently
provide
both
against
the
one
and
the
other
inconvenience
.
Were
men
to
live
a
thousand
years
before
the
Flood
?
The
same
Providence
could
effect
this
,
without
a
continual
Equinox
,
or
an
Earth
universally
paradisiacal
.
And
thus
the
Theory
,
instead
of
making
any
Figure
here
,
is
by
its
own
Author
made
to
dwindle
into
a
Cypher
and
meer
superfluity
.
We
hope
that
henceforward
the
old
method
of
explaining
Noah's
Flood
,
shall
be
allowed
to
be
rational
and
intelligible
:
for
that
proceeded
upon
extraordinary
Providence
,
and
our
Answerer
is
fain
to
make
use
of
that
kind
of
Providence
in
reference
to
his
own
Hypothesis
at
last
.
Yea
,
the
truth
is
,
he
is
now
glad
,
we
see
,
to
take
up
with
it
at
first
,
and
even
to
form
his
Earth
by
it
.
And
yet
he
tells
us
,
in
the
sixth
Chapter
of
the
first
Book
of
his
Latin
Theory
(
Edit.
2.
)
that
this
Earth
was
formed
,
solo
ductu
,
by
the
sole
conduct
of
the
most
known
Laws
of
Gravity
and
Levity
.
And
so
this
Natural
History
.
the
Theory
,
is
in
good
part
,
a
Natural
History
of
what
was
done
by
Divine
Power
;
or
an
History
of
an
effect
wrought
by
Extraordinary
Providence
,
which
was
done
by
the
sole
conduct
of
Natures
Laws
and
Principles
.
And
therefore
how
true
this
piece
of
Natural
History
is
,
and
also
how
great
,
let
the
World
judge
;
but
if
it
be
not
extremely
remarkable
,
I
am
much
mistaken
.
But
tho
our
Answerer
,
as
he
pretends
in
this
Chapter
,
be
such
a
friend
to
extraordinary
Providence
;
yet
it
is
evident
,
that
the
Theorist
otherwhiles
was
not
.
For
tho
now
his
Earth
(
as
he
grants
)
might
be
made
in
six
minutes
;
yet
heretofore
it
was
to
be
increased
daily
,
and
to
be
dried
by
degrees
,
before
it
could
be
habitable
:
that
is
,
it
was
to
be
formed
in
way
of
ordinary
Providence
.
And
in
the
second
Chap.
of
the
first
Book
of
his
English
Theory
,
he
tells
the
World
plainly
;
that
if
we
come
to
reflect
seriously
upon
it
,
we
shall
find
it
extreamly
difficult
,
if
not
impossible
,
to
give
an
account
of
the
Waters
that
compos'd
the
Deluge
,
whence
they
came
and
whether
they
went
.
And
adds
,
to
find
Water
sufficient
for
this
Effect
as
it
is
generally
explained
and
understood
,
I
think
is
impossible
.
But
had
he
been
hearty
for
Extraordinary
Providence
,
here
would
have
appeared
no
difficulty
,
I
am
sure
;
much
less
,
extreme
difficulty
,
and
least
of
all
,
impossibility
.
For
such
a
Providence
could
have
created
Waters
to
compose
the
Deluge
,
and
then
have
annihilated
them
again
:
and
as
the
quantity
of
them
would
thus
have
been
sufficient
,
so
the
account
whence
they
came
,
and
whither
they
went
;
would
have
been
as
easie
.
That
this
was
one
way
in
which
some
went
,
as
to
explaining
the
Deluge
,
according
to
the
general
or
common
Notion
of
it
;
the
Theorist
observed
in
his
third
Chapter
.
They
say
in
short
,
says
he
,
God
ALMIGHTY
created
waters
on
purpose
to
make
the
Deluge
,
and
then
annihilated
them
again
,
when
the
Deluge
was
to
cease
.
But
how
did
he
approve
of
this
way
?
That
will
appear
from
what
follows
.
Where
he
presently
complains
,
show
us
the
naked
arm
of
Omnipotency
.
A
sight
which
he
could
not
well
brook
in
this
case
.
And
why
?
Why
,
this
is
to
cut
the
knot
when
we
cannot
loose
it
.
Yet
see
the
change
;
he
is
now
fain
to
show
the
naked
Arm
of
Omnipotency
himself
;
and
to
make
use
of
the
Knife
of
Extraordinary
Providence
,
tho
with
it
he
cuts
his
own
Fingers
,
as
well
as
several
knots
of
his
Hypothesis
;
as
we
shall
see
afterward
.
And
thus
we
have
gained
one
extraordinary
Point
.
An
Earth
that
before
was
to
increase
DAILY
,
in
the
Body
or
Concretion
of
it
;
and
so
might
be
six
Days
,
or
six
Weeks
,
or
as
many
Months
,
or
Years
in
forming
;
might
now
by
Extraordinary
Providence
,
be
made
in
six
Minutes
.
That
is
,
our
Author
is
brought
to
Cross
his
Hypothesis
in
this
Matter
.
For
now
he
supposes
that
his
Earth
might
be
formed
in
six
Minutes
by
extraordinary
Providence
;
whereas
the
Theory
(
as
is
plain
from
the
cited
Expressions
)
carries
on
its
formation
in
way
of
ordinary
Providence
;
according
to
which
,
the
Formation
of
it
would
require
much
more
time
than
six
days
,
as
he
confesses
,
Answ.
p.
2.
CHAP.
III.
THat
the
Moon
was
in
the
Heavens
,
and
in
our
neighbourhood
,
will
be
of
no
force
,
unless
he
can
prove
that
the
Fourth
days
Creation
was
before
the
Third
.
No
?
Who
shall
be
Judge
?
Why
one
that
the
Answerer
fairly
appeals
to
,
and
one
it
seems
of
the
Excepter's
own
chusing
,
namely
Scripture
.
(
I
and
let
the
same
Judge
,
says
the
Excepter
,
decide
the
whole
Controversie
betwixt
us
.
)
And
what
says
this
Judge
to
the
case
before
him
?
Let
all
Philosophers
who
please
to
be
of
the
Jury
,
mind
his
sentence
,
and
also
the
Appellant's
Argument
from
it
.
The
Moon
was
made
the
fourth
day
,
and
the
Earth
was
formed
the
third
.
So
says
the
Judge
,
and
very
truly
.
Therefore
unless
the
fourth
day
was
before
the
third
,
the
Moon
could
not
hinder
the
Formation
of
the
Earth
.
So
concludes
the
Appellant
,
and
very
falsely
in
the
case
depending
.
For
the
Earth
formed
the
third
day
,
was
Moses's
Earth
;
which
the
Excepter
contends
for
,
and
could
not
possibly
think
that
the
Moon
should
hinder
the
Formation
of
that
.
But
the
Earth
he
disputes
against
,
is
the
Theorist's
,
which
could
not
be
form'd
the
third
day
.
For
,
according
to
him
,
it
was
not
only
to
grow
out
of
a
Chaos
,
by
the
rising
of
Oyl
out
of
an
Abyss
,
and
the
falling
of
Particles
out
of
the
Air
;
but
moreover
was
to
be
increast
daily
.
And
therefore
had
the
Moon
been
made
the
fifth
,
or
sixth
day
,
or
after
;
it
might
have
been
made
time
enough
to
hinder
the
Formation
of
this
Earth
.
But
however
he
intimates
here
,
that
his
Earth
was
form'd
the
third
day
.
And
that
's
mighty
well
;
for
now
it
's
to
be
hop'd
,
that
Moses
and
he
will
agree
better
.
Here
's
one
step
towards
an
accommodation
.
But
then
the
mischief
on
't
is
,
't
is
a
step
backwards
on
our
Author's
part
,
and
I
'm
afraid
will
do
him
but
little
Service
.
For
while
he
thus
endeavours
to
shun
Charybdis
,
he
falls
unluckily
into
Scylla
;
is
reduc'd
to
such
an
exigence
,
that
let
him
choose
which
way
he
pleases
of
these
two
,
he
is
sure
to
go
in
contradiction
to
himself
.
Third
day
,
according
to
Scripture
;
he
then
contradicts
himself
in
his
Theory
,
which
teaches
it
was
daily
increased
.
And
if
he
says
it
was
daily
increased
,
according
to
his
Theory
;
then
he
contradicts
himself
in
his
appeal
to
Scripture
,
which
(
as
he
now
owns
)
tells
us
it
was
formed
the
third
day
.
The
Excepter
had
suggested
,
Disc.
p.
74
,
75
,
76.
that
the
Moon
being
present
,
and
causing
Tides
and
Fluctuations
in
the
waters
of
the
Chaos
;
that
would
have
hindred
the
Formation
of
the
Earth
upon
them
.
This
,
says
the
Answerer
,
we
have
no
reason
to
believe
,
according
to
the
Experiences
we
have
now
.
For
Tides
hinder
not
the
Formation
of
Ice
in
cold
Regions
upon
the
Surface
of
the
Sea
:
therefore
why
should
they
have
hindred
the
Formation
of
the
Earth
,
upon
the
surface
of
the
Chaos
?
Some
Seas
indeed
do
freeze
in
some
measure
;
but
then
their
waters
are
pretty
still
.
And
so
the
most
that
can
be
inferred
from
thence
is
but
this
;
that
if
the
waters
of
the
Chaos
were
any
where
so
quiet
;
some
Earth
might
there
have
been
formed
upon
them
.
Tho
this
Inference
withal
is
far
short
of
being
an
evidence
of
the
thing
;
inasmuch
as
there
is
more
reason
for
Ice
to
be
formed
upon
the
Sea
,
than
there
was
for
Earth
to
be
formed
upon
the
Chaos
.
For
our
Seas
have
Shoars
,
where
Ice
does
usually
begin
its
Formation
,
spreading
wider
or
farther
by
a
continued
or
progressive
Concretion
.
Which
may
be
one
chief
reason
why
our
Creeks
or
Harbours
are
oft
frozen
up
(
when
Seas
that
feed
or
flow
into
them
,
are
not
)
even
because
they
are
bounded
with
no
far
distant
Banks
,
where
Ice
can
more
easily
grow
from
the
Sides
till
it
meets
in
the
Middle
.
But
the
waters
of
the
Chaos
had
no
Shoars
,
Ice
also
is
lighter
than
water
,
and
so
swims
upon
it
;
and
therefore
if
fit
chances
to
be
broken
in
its
first
Formation
,
and
while
it
is
thin
;
it
may
unite
and
grow
together
again
,
by
a
new
congelement
.
But
earth
is
heavier
than
water
,
and
apt
to
sink
;
and
therefore
if
broken
when
spread
upon
it
in
a
thin
Covering
,
it
immediatly
dives
and
goes
down
to
the
bottom
.
And
upon
this
account
,
the
same
degrees
of
Fluctuation
that
permit
Ice
to
gather
upon
Seas
;
would
have
prevented
an
Earth's
being
formed
upon
the
Chaos
.
But
we
must
go
on
.
The
Theorist
thought
that
the
presence
of
the
Moon
was
less
needful
in
the
first
World
.
there
were
no
long
Winter
nights
.
To
which
the
Excepter
opposed
,
witty
,
does
not
reach
the
point
.
And
pray
,
a
great
Inconvenience
attends
long
nights
,
when
they
fall
upon
the
hours
of
travel
,
or
the
hours
of
work
and
business
.
But
then
at
the
same
time
that
business
and
journeys
are
hindred
in
some
places
by
long
Nights
;
in
other
places
they
are
helped
forward
as
much
by
short
ones
.
And
therefore
set
but
the
business
and
travellings
of
the
Inhabitants
of
some
parts
of
the
Earth
,
against
the
like
Concerns
of
the
Inhabitants
of
other
parts
of
it
;
and
the
Excepter's
Observation
will
reach
the
point
.
And
truly
where
can
the
presence
of
a
Moon
be
more
needful
,
than
in
that
World
where
half
the
time
was
still
to
be
Night
;
and
12
of
every
24
hours
,
was
continually
dark
all
over
it
at
once
?
that
is
,
all
over
its
habitable
Regions
.
For
then
the
Earth
standing
in
a
Right
Position
to
the
Sun
,
and
having
none
of
its
motion
of
Inclination
,
as
Astronomy
calls
it
;
and
the
Sun
always
rising
and
setting
in
the
Aequinoctial
,
and
so
in
the
same
points
of
the
Heavens
,
without
any
Latitude
:
as
the
days
would
constantly
be
twelve
hours
in
length
,
so
the
nights
,
by
this
means
must
be
as
long
;
but
the
Crepusculum
or
Twilight
in
the
praediluvian
World
would
be
very
short
,
and
so
its
Inhabitants
immers'd
in
the
deeper
darkness
,
and
consequently
could
very
ill
spare
the
Moon
.
In
the
next
place
the
Answerer
notes
,
that
Oily
Particles
in
the
Chaos
,
D.
Cartes
,
who
supposes
there
were
Original
Salt
Particles
,
and
therefore
why
may
there
not
be
Original
Oily
Particles
?
But
if
D.
Cartes's
authority
must
determine
the
Question
,
it
will
go
clearly
on
our
side
:
the
vast
Quantity
of
Oleagineous
matter
that
is
disperst
every
where
;
in
Vegetables
,
in
Animals
,
and
many
sorts
of
Earths
.
But
this
matter
may
be
bred
in
them
respectively
.
Thus
we
see
living
Creatures
grow
fat
by
Nourishment
.
And
many
Plants
turn
the
sap
they
draw
,
into
very
Oil
it self
;
so
that
we
need
but
extract
it
out
of
their
Leaves
or
fruits
.
(
As
other
Animals
again
breed
Milk
;
and
other
Vegetables
,
Wine
,
Cyder
,
&c.
)
And
so
in
some
Earths
,
oleagineous
Particles
may
be
generated
;
as
others
again
are
impregnated
with
Particles
of
a
Sulphureous
,
Nitrous
,
or
Aluminous
Nature
.
And
Chymists
find
other
sorts
of
Particles
disperst
every
where
,
which
I
believe
the
Answerer
will
scarce
yield
to
have
been
Original
in
his
Chaos
.
Thirdly
,
it
is
alledged
that
these
Oyly
particles
were
Original
,
principles
of
Fertility
to
the
New
World
,
and
so
could
not
be
extracted
from
the
Inferior
Regions
in
time
,
forasmuch
as
that
would
require
a
process
of
many
Ages
.
Why
,
therefore
it
is
the
more
likely
that
the
Fatness
necessary
to
the
Earth's
Fruitfulness
,
was
innate
or
bred
in
it
.
And
we
may
justly
look
upon
it
as
a
gracious
effect
of
that
Divine
Benediction
pronounced
upon
the
Earth
,
Gen.
1.11
.
by
virtue
of
which
,
it
could
not
but
be
indued
with
all
the
principles
necessary
to
Fertility
.
And
yet
were
it
needful
,
this
Oleagineous
matter
might
be
both
easily
and
quickly
setcht
up
from
the
Inferior
Regions
.
For
tho
in
a
natural
Course
,
it
could
not
be
derived
thence
without
Difficulty
,
and
a
process
of
many
ages
;
yet
by
extraordinary
Providence
it
might
be
drawn
up
with
greatest
Expedition
,
as
well
as
Facility
:
even
in
a
very
few
Hours
,
or
(
as
we
are
taught
a
great
Work
might
be
done
in
another
case
)
in
a
very
few
Minutes
.
Lastly
,
He
argues
that
Oily
particles
might
be
Original
,
because
,
according
to
D.
Cartes
,
they
were
tenuious
and
branchy
,
too
gross
to
be
Air
,
and
too
light
for
Water
.
It
shall
not
be
said
that
they
are
therefore
a
Compound
of
both
;
tho
it
may
happen
so
in
other
Cases
.
For
some
Bodies
seem
to
be
made
of
a
middle
Constitution
betwixt
those
which
on
both
sides
stand
next
them
,
in
nearest
degrees
of
Physical
approximation
.
And
consequently
their
Nature
is
but
a
medium
participationis
,
or
a
composition
of
such
things
as
border
closest
upon
them
,
and
have
the
truest
Affinity
to
them
,
as
approaching
nighest
them
in
a
kind
of
congenial
likeness
of
Substance
and
Qualities
.
And
certain
it
is
,
that
some
Oyls
,
by
keeping
,
dissolve
into
Liquors
so
thin
and
watry
,
that
they
will
not
burn
;
if
that
will
give
any
countenance
to
the
thought
that
water
may
be
an
Ingredient
of
Oyl
.
Tho
it
is
worth
noting
,
D.
Cartes
in
the
very
Section
which
the
Answerer
cites
,
gives
an
account
how
,
and
out
of
what
,
Oyl
is
made
;
and
so
is
against
its
being
Orginal
.
And
since
the
Answerer
refers
to
him
twice
in
this
point
,
let
Him
(
till
we
can
find
a
fitter
Judge
)
decide
the
Controversie
.
And
indeed
the
very
figure
of
Oily
Particles
offers
it self
as
an
Argument
against
their
Primaevity
.
For
they
are
supposed
to
be
branchy
;
and
whither
can
their
Ramosity
be
so
well
imputed
,
as
to
the
Pores
of
that
Matter
wherein
they
were
generated
;
which
being
of
such
a
Shape
,
cast
them
(
as
Molds
in
which
they
were
formed
)
into
the
like
fashion
?
Of
this
Opinion
is
that
ingenious
Philosopher
Mr.
Rohault
;
The
Second
thing
which
the
Answerer
observes
to
be
charged
with
Precariousness
,
is
the
Separation
of
this
Oily
Matter
,
in
due
time
,
so
as
to
make
a
mixture
and
concretion
with
the
Terrestial
Particles
which
fell
from
above
.
And
this
Objection
,
he
adds
,
was
both
made
and
answered
by
the
Theorist
.
58
,
59.
Now
the
Substance
of
his
Answer
was
this
.
That
the
Mass
of
the
Air
was
many
thousand
times
greater
than
the
Water
,
and
would
proportionably
require
a
greater
time
to
be
purify'd
;
the
Particles
in
the
Air
having
a
far
longer
way
to
come
to
the
watry
Mass
,
than
the
Oily
Particles
had
to
rise
to
the
Surface
of
it
.
That
there
might
be
Degrees
of
littleness
and
lightness
in
the
Earthy
Particles
,
so
as
many
of
them
might
float
in
the
Air
a
good
while
.
And
lastly
,
that
the
Air
and
the
Water
might
begin
to
purify
at
the
same
time
.
But
this
Answer
is
short
and
insufficient
;
and
therefore
no
notice
was
taken
of
it
formerly
.
But
since
we
are
urged
with
it
now
;
to
shew
its
lightness
and
incompetency
,
we
Reply
to
it
as
follows
.
First
,
That
the
Air
being
a
Finer
Element
than
the
Water
;
would
begin
its
Purgation
sooner
than
That
.
Secondly
,
Tho
the
Air
was
far
greater
than
the
Water
;
yet
the
Terrestial
Particles
in
it
might
sooner
reach
the
Water
,
than
the
Oily
ones
in
the
Water
could
rise
to
the
Surface
of
that
,
for
sundry
Reasons
.
As
1st
,
because
the
Earthy
Particles
moved
downward
,
and
the
Oily
ones
upward
;
and
(
caeteris
paribus
)
the
motion
downward
would
be
the
swiftest
.
2ly
,
Because
the
Earthy
Particles
were
more
dry
and
less
clammy
than
the
Oily
ones
;
and
their
unctious
moisture
by
rendring
them
slimy
,
would
make
them
sluggish
,
and
slacken
their
ascent
.
3ly
,
Because
the
Air
was
a
thin
and
yielding
Medium
,
through
which
the
Earthy
Particles
would
more
nimbly
sift
down
,
than
the
Oily
ones
could
wriggle
up
through
the
Water
,
which
was
more
thick
and
gross
.
4ly
,
Because
the
very
Make
of
the
Oily
and
Watry
Particles
is
such
,
that
it
would
help
towards
their
mutual
Complication
,
which
would
retard
their
separating
;
and
consequently
the
Aeral
Mass
,
would
begin
to
refine
before
the
Liquid
one
;
and
the
Terrestial
Particles
would
have
reacht
the
Water
,
before
the
Oily
matter
was
risen
.
For
the
Particles
of
Oil
are
of
a
ramous
Figure
,
and
therefore
about
them
the
long
and
flexible
Particles
of
Water
would
[
*
](A67683-e14500-b)
*
That
Watry
Particles
are
naturally
apt
to
lay
hold
of
Oily
ones
,
appears
from
the
way
of
cleansing
Vessels
,
into
the
Pores
of
which
the
Particles
of
Oil
have
in
sinuated
or
soaked
.
For
out
of
those
their
lurking
holes
,
or
little
fastnesses
,
there
is
no
fetching
them
but
by
the
help
of
Water
.
And
the
same
is
clear
from
the
Chymists
Method
of
distilling
Oils
out
of
dry
Bodies
.
For
in
order
to
that
,
they
first
steep
and
macerate
them
in
Water
;
without
which
Preparative
,
there
would
be
no
extracting
the
Oily
Matter
fairly
,
by
any
force
of
Elicitation
.
But
when
through
heat
,
the
Water
ascends
;
in
its
fumes
it
snatches
up
the
Particles
of
Oil
,
and
makes
that
evaporate
together
with
it self
.
be
apt
in
some
measure
to
twine
and
wind
themselves
.
Especially
at
that
time
,
when
they
both
(
upon
the
Secretion
of
the
Chaos
)
met
and
encountred
one
another
in
single
naked
Particles
,
before
ever
they
were
once
united
in
Bodies
,
or
at
all
incorporated
in
their
respective
Masses
.
And
altho
by
reason
of
their
mutual
Lubricity
,
the
Watry
Particles
could
not
long
keep
fast
the
Oily
ones
,
about
which
they
cling'd
with
tortuous
flexures
;
yet
they
might
considerably
check
and
protract
their
separation
and
ascent
;
it
requiring
some
time
for
the
Oily
Particles
to
extricate
themselves
,
and
get
loose
from
those
little
watry
Wreaths
wherewith
they
were
involv'd
and
hampered
.
Eng.
Theor.
p.
55
,
56
,
57.
Thirdly
,
the
liquid
Mass
of
the
Chaos
being
a
Collection
of
all
Liquors
that
belong
to
the
Earth
;
every
one
of
these
would
at
first
be
foul
and
muddy
,
and
their
respective
Impurities
must
be
discharged
.
Particularly
the
Water
being
a
vast
Body
,
would
have
sent
down
its
grosser
parts
in
great
abundance
of
Sedimental
Stuff
.
Now
this
Plenty
of
Sediment
was
thrown
off
by
the
Water
,
either
before
,
or
after
the
Oily
Matter
was
risen
,
or
in
the
very
Rising
of
it
.
Not
after
it
was
risen
;
for
this
Sediment
being
more
earthy
,
and
so
more
heavy
than
the
Oil
;
it
must
be
allowed
to
separate
as
soon
as
that
,
or
rather
somewhat
before
it
.
And
yet
if
it
were
discharged
and
sank
before
the
Oily
matter
was
risen
,
or
when
it
was
rising
how
could
it
chuse
but
sweep
away
that
,
and
carry
it
down
together
with
it self
to
the
Bottom
of
the
Abyss
?
Or
say
,
these
Dreggs
should
have
been
too
weak
or
too
light
,
to
have
overpowred
the
Oil
alone
,
and
to
have
sunk
it
with
its
self
;
yet
it
would
certainly
have
arrested
its
motion
upwards
.
By
which
means
the
Terrestrial
Particles
above
,
taking
the
advantage
thus
given
,
would
have
come
poudring
down
a
main
(
fastest
at
first
,
and
also
the
heaviest
of
them
)
into
the
bare
Waters
;
and
so
joining
their
inconceivable
Luggage
,
to
the
sedimental
Clog
already
hang'd
upon
the
Oily
Matter
,
would
have
quite
over-set
it
,
and
weighed
it
down
to
the
Interior
Earth
.
And
this
piece
of
work
will
appear
the
more
fecible
and
easy
to
be
done
,
if
we
consider
that
it
might
be
half
,
or
better
than
half
effected
before
.
For
all
the
Bodies
or
Elements
of
the
Chaos
,
being
of
an
Original
or
Primaeval
Nature
;
and
not
one
compounded
or
made
out
of
another
:
we
must
suppose
that
before
the
very
first
resolution
of
it
,
they
did
coexist
in
the
Chaos
in
their
several
Principles
or
Particles
;
tho
they
were
not
locally
severed
,
and
made
into
distinct
and
specifick
Masses
till
its
Separation
.
So
that
at
the
same
time
that
there
were
Earthy
Particles
,
there
were
Oily
ones
too
,
disperst
throughout
them
whole
Capacity
of
the
Chaos
.
And
consequently
when
the
grosser
earthy
Particles
gathered
towards
the
Center
of
the
Chaos
;
They
falling
through
the
whole
Mass
(
even
through
every
little
point
or
line
of
it
,
from
its
Superficies
downward
)
where
these
Oily
Particles
were
diffused
and
lay
in
their
way
;
they
must
needs
catch
hold
of
the
greatest
part
of
them
(
the
rather
for
their
being
of
a
viscuous
quality
)
and
bear
them
down
with
themselves
:
Especially
they
descending
in
so
vast
a
Quantity
,
as
to
be
able
to
constitute
a
central
Earth
.
Lastly
,
in
case
the
Terrestrial
Principle
of
the
Chaos
,
would
not
thus
have
hindred
the
Oily
Principle
,
from
doing
its
part
towards
the
Formation
of
the
Theory's
Earth
;
yet
then
the
Liquid
Part
of
the
Chaos
would
have
hindred
the
Terrestrial
one
in
the
same
Work
.
For
how
is
it
possible
that
an
Ocean
of
Water
and
Oil
,
should
strain
through
the
whole
Circumference
of
the
Chaos
,
settling
down
towards
the
middle
of
it
;
and
leave
earthy
Particles
behind
,
floating
in
the
Air
,
and
that
in
measures
sufficient
,
upon
their
Descent
,
to
compose
so
immense
an
Earth
as
ours
?
Let
the
Air
be
filled
never
so
full
of
dust
,
yet
a
thin
Mist
presently
lays
it
all
.
And
such
a
prodigious
Sea
of
Water
falling
through
the
entire
space
of
the
Chaos
;
could
not
miss
of
the
like
effect
upon
the
Earthy
Particles
then
in
the
Air
;
especially
that
Water
containing
so
much
Oil
in
it
.
For
by
the
Virtue
of
its
Unctiousness
in
conjunction
with
its
Gravity
,
it
would
have
cleansed
the
Air
of
Earthy
Particles
(
tho
very
throughly
incorporate
with
it
)
as
Izing-glass
clarifies
faeculent
Liquors
,
by
carrying
their
Dregs
to
the
bottoms
of
their
Vessels
.
And
therefore
,
whereas
it
is
alledged
in
the
pretended
Answer
,
that
through
degrees
of
Littleness
and
Lightness
in
the
Earthy
Particles
,
many
of
them
might
float
in
the
Air
a
good
while
:
very
few
of
them
,
if
any
at
all
,
left
there
.
And
then
where
would
have
been
matter
for
the
first
Earth
,
suppos'd
to
be
form'd
upon
the
Surface
of
the
Abyss
?
So
we
pass
to
the
Third
Precariousness
.
Which
is
concerning
the
Quantity
and
Proportion
of
these
Particles
,
Liquors
Gag'd
,
and
just
Measures
and
Proportions
of
each
accounted
for
?
But
then
it
may
be
demanded
again
,
what
Theory
or
Hypothesis
has
so
much
need
of
just
Measures
and
Proportions
of
these
,
as
his
;
and
consequently
so
much
reason
to
account
for
them
?
has
the
great
Philosopher
(
meaning
D.
Cartes
)
in
his
Hypothesis
of
3
Elements
,
Or
in
his
several
Regions
of
the
Vnform'd
Earth
,
defin'd
the
Quantity
and
Dimensions
of
each
?
Or
in
the
Mineral
Particles
and
Juices
—
does
he
determine
the
Quantity
of
them
?
Nor
is
there
the
like
reason
why
he
should
.
For
that
great
Philosophers
Hypothesis
,
and
this
little
ones
,
are
not
of
the
like
Nature
,
they
stand
not
upon
the
like
Foundations
.
D.
Cartes
publickly
owns
his
Hypothesis
,
to
be
a
meer
Hypothesis
indeed
.
And
tho
for
the
better
[
*
](A67683-e15090-b)
*
Quinimo
etiam
,
ad
res
naturales
melius
explicandas
,
earum
.
Causas
altius
hic
repetam
,
quam
ipsas
unquam
extitisse
existimem
.
Non
enim
dubium
est
,
quin
Mundas
ab
initio
fuerit
creatus
cum
omni
sua
perfectione
,
ita
ut
in
eo
,
&
Sol
,
&
Terra
,
&
Lana
,
&
Stellae
extiterint
.
Prin.
Par.
3.
Sect.
45.
explaining
of
effects
in
Nature
,
he
searcht
deeper
for
their
Causes
than
they
ever
lay
;
yet
he
declares
that
he
did
not
doubt
,
but
the
World
was
at
first
created
with
all
its
Perfection
;
so
that
in
it
there
was
a
Sun
,
and
Earth
,
and
Moon
,
and
Stars
.
And
therefore
here
was
no
need
of
having
his
3
Elements
apportion'd
in
their
Quantity
,
or
accurately
adjusted
to
one
another
;
because
,
by
his
own
Confession
,
there
was
no
World
to
be
form'd
out
of
them
.
a
Reality
as
its
Author
tells
us
.
And
it
must
needs
be
so
according
to
his
following
Expressions
,
To
speak
the
truth
,
this
Theory
is
something
more
than
a
bare
Hypothesis
.
The
Theory
riseth
above
the
Character
of
a
bare
Hypothesis
.
We
must
in
equity
give
more
than
a
moral
certitude
to
this
Theory
.
The
Theory
carries
its
own
light
and
proof
with
it
.
And
most
fit
it
is
therefore
,
that
this
Theory
,
being
brought
to
the
Test
,
should
approve
it self
far
beyond
others
.
And
an
Earth
being
formed
out
of
a
strange
Chaos
,
(
the
Creature
of
this
Theory
)
and
according
to
the
Laws
of
its
Hypothesis
;
as
fit
it
is
that
the
Ingredients
of
this
Chaos
,
should
,
upon
enquiry
,
be
found
well
proportion'd
to
one
another
;
beyond
the
Elements
of
D.
Cartes's
Hypothesis
,
which
arrogates
no
such
certainty
to
it self
,
but
openly
renounces
it
.
Yet
if
we
compare
D.
Cartes's
Hypothesis
,
in
the
principal
Instance
here
alledged
;
with
that
of
the
Theorist
;
we
shall
find
it
will
acquit
it self
much
better
than
his
.
For
suppose
the
World
had
been
really
to
have
been
form'd
out
of
the
Cartesian
Elements
.
Yet
,
upon
examination
,
it
will
appear
,
that
they
were
less
liable
to
just
Exceptions
,
upon
account
of
their
possible
Disproportionateness
;
than
the
Chaos
of
the
Theory
,
upon
the
same
account
,
in
regard
of
its
Ingredients
.
For
of
these
3
Elements
the
entire
Vniverse
was
to
be
composed
.
So
that
if
they
had
all
of
them
been
more
,
or
less
in
quantity
;
the
Universe
would
only
have
had
the
larger
,
or
straiter
Bounds
.
And
if
any
of
them
singly
had
been
excessive
,
or
defective
;
nothing
worse
would
have
followed
upon
this
,
but
that
the
several
Bodies
made
out
of
them
respectively
,
must
then
have
been
proportion'd
accordingly
.
Thus
,
if
there
had
been
more
,
or
less
of
the
1st
Element
,
there
must
have
been
more
,
or
greater
;
or
fewer
,
or
lesser
Suns
.
If
there
had
been
more
,
or
less
of
the
2d
Element
;
there
must
have
been
bigger
,
or
lesser
Vortices
.
If
more
or
less
of
the
3d
Element
;
there
must
have
been
more
,
or
less
of
Terrestrial
Matter
in
being
.
So
that
the
worst
result
from
an
excessive
quantity
of
any
one
of
the
three
Elements
aforesaid
;
would
have
been
but
an
alteration
in
the
Great
World
,
or
at
most
but
an
inconvenience
here
and
there
in
some
parts
of
it
;
no
way
detrimental
or
pernicious
to
the
whole
.
But
as
to
this
Earth
of
ours
,
the
case
would
have
been
quite
otherwise
.
For
had
not
the
Materials
of
that
been
duly
proportion'd
,
but
one
left
to
exceed
and
predominate
over
the
other
;
this
redundance
,
or
inequality
in
measure
,
would
have
been
of
very
fatal
Consequence
.
That
is
,
it
would
have
caused
a
miscarriage
in
the
production
of
the
Earth
,
and
have
ruin'd
the
whole
work
which
Nature
was
about
.
And
therefore
in
making
the
Chaos
into
an
Earth
,
there
was
absolute
necessity
,
as
of
Regularity
of
Process
in
its
Formation
;
so
of
due
proportion
in
the
Ingredients
of
its
Constitution
:
otherwise
it
could
never
have
been
brought
to
Perfection
.
From
D.
Cartes
the
Answerer
turns
to
the
Excepter
,
and
thinks
to
choak
him
with
an
example
of
his
own
.
Does
the
Animadverter
in
his
new
Hypothesis
concerning
the
Deluge
,
give
us
the
just
Proportions
of
his
Rock-water
,
and
the
just
Proportions
of
his
Rain-water
,
that
concurred
to
make
the
Deluge
?
And
does
the
Answerer
think
,
that
the
like
accurate
Proportion
of
things
,
is
needful
to
destroy
a
World
,
that
is
necessary
to
form
or
rear
one
?
Yet
here
a
World
was
to
be
destroyed
only
;
to
be
destroyed
by
being
drowned
.
Now
supposing
the
destructive
Flood
was
to
rise
out
of
Rock-water
,
and
Rain-water
;
it
mattered
not
,
as
to
the
Destruction
they
were
to
bring
on
,
if
both
were
of
equal
Quantity
,
or
which
,
and
how
much
one
exceeded
the
other
,
so
they
were
together
sufficient
for
the
Work
.
But
what
says
the
Answerer
farther
?
I
find
no
Calculations
there
(
that
is
in
the
Animadverter's
Hypothesis
)
but
general
Expressions
,
that
one
(
sort
of
Water
)
was
far
greater
than
the
other
:
and
that
may
be
easily
presumed
concerning
the
Oily
Substance
and
the
Watry
in
the
Chaos
.
Here
he
must
be
minded
of
one
of
these
two
things
:
that
is
to
say
,
either
of
Shuffling
,
or
of
Mistaking
.
First
,
of
Shuffling
.
For
he
instanceth
only
in
the
Oily
Substance
and
the
Watry
in
the
Chaos
,
which
he
thought
might
shift
pretty
well
together
,
tho
the
one
in
Quantity
exceeded
the
other
.
But
he
knows
there
was
a
Terrestrial
Substance
too
;
and
what
would
have
become
of
his
Paradisiacal
Earth
which
was
to
rise
out
of
that
,
if
the
Oil
had
not
been
fitly
proportion'd
to
it
?
If
it
had
not
been
just
enough
,
that
is
,
to
mix
with
the
Earthy
Particles
,
and
to
make
them
into
a
good
Soil
.
For
if
it
had
been
more
than
was
sufficient
to
that
purpose
,
Earthy
Substance
is
taken
no
notice
of
,
but
rather
slily
shuffled
out
of
the
way
.
Unless
he
intended
that
what
he
said
of
the
Oily
and
Watry
Substances
,
in
the
Chaos
,
should
be
meant
of
the
Earthy
one
too
.
And
then
Secondly
,
he
must
be
put
in
mind
of
a
gross
Mistake
.
For
tho
in
our
Waters
that
Drowned
the
Earth
,
one
sort
may
easily
be
allowed
to
be
greater
than
the
other
:
yet
the
same
thing
cannot
be
easily
presumed
concerning
his
Materials
supposed
to
form
it
.
For
Rock-water
and
Rain
water
were
both
alike
for
Drowning
,
and
so
equally
fitted
to
serve
that
End
whereunto
they
were
appointed
;
and
the
Excess
of
one
above
the
other
,
could
be
no
hindrance
of
the
Effect
they
were
design'd
to
produce
.
Yea
,
without
such
an
Excess
,
the
Effect
intended
,
could
never
have
been
wrought
;
according
to
our
Hypothesis
of
the
Flood
.
But
Oily
Liquor
and
Earthy
Particles
,
are
very
different
things
;
out
of
a
well
proportion'd
mixture
of
which
the
Earth
it self
was
to
be
made
.
And
therefore
to
presume
the
[
*
](A67683-e15880-b)
*
The
Oil
,
that
is
,
far
greater
than
the
Earthy
substance
;
or
that
unduly
proportion'd
to
the
Oil.
one
was
far
greater
than
the
other
,
is
to
presume
they
were
not
duly
proportion'd
or
mixt
together
;
and
consequently
that
the
Earth
could
not
be
raised
out
of
them
.
But
we
must
not
forget
the
Close
of
this
Paragraph
,
which
runs
in
these
Words
.
What
Scruples
therefore
he
raises
in
reference
to
the
Chaos
,
against
the
Theorist
,
for
not
having
demonstrated
the
proportions
of
the
Liquors
of
the
Abyss
,
fall
upon
his
own
Hypothesis
,
for
the
same
or
greater
reasons
.
And
you
know
what
the
old
verse
says
;
Turpe
est
Doctori
,
cùm
culpa
redarguit
ipsum
.
Here
he
goes
on
in
his
shuffling
or
mistaking
Way
still
.
For
he
speaks
of
Scruples
raised
in
reference
to
the
chaos
only
;
whereas
this
refers
as
well
to
the
Formation
of
the
Earth
.
Proportions
of
the
liquors
of
the
Abyss
only
;
whereas
our
Scruples
referred
as
well
to
the
Earthy
Matter
.
Let
that
be
included
therefore
,
as
it
ought
;
and
then
what
he
says
,
will
in
plain
terms
amount
to
thus
much
.
That
tho
the
Rain-water
were
far
greater
than
the
Rock-water
;
yet
there
would
have
been
greater
reason
why
the
Earth
should
not
have
been
drowned
:
than
there
would
have
been
why
the
Earth
should
not
have
been
formed
,
tho
the
Oily
substance
had
been
far
greater
than
the
Earthy
.
For
the
Scruples
against
the
Theorist's
Formation
of
the
Earth
,
can
never
,
for
greater
reason
,
fall
upon
the
Animadverter's
Hypothesis
concerning
the
Flood
;
unless
there
be
greater
reason
why
vastly
disproportionate
Quantities
of
Oily
and
Earthy
Substance
should
make
an
Earth
;
than
there
is
why
the
like
disproportion'd
Quantities
of
Rock-water
and
Rain-water
should
make
a
Flood
.
Now
have
we
greater
reason
to
think
that
a
little
Terrestial
Matter
,
mixt
with
a
vast
deal
of
Oily
matter
,
should
compose
the
first
Earth
:
than
we
have
to
think
that
a
little
Rock-water
mixt
with
a
vast
deal
of
Rain-water
,
should
drown
it
?
There
is
great
reason
why
one
Tun
of
Rock-water
,
mingled
with
an
hundred
thousand
Tuns
of
Rain-water
,
should
drown
a
good
Garden
.
But
is
there
greater
reason
why
one
Tun
of
Earthy
matter
,
mingled
with
an
hundred
thousand
Tuns
of
Oily
matter
,
should
make
a
good
Garden
Soil
?
I
hope
,
tho
our
Answerer
be
too
great
a
Favourer
of
many
Absurdities
,
he
will
not
be
forward
to
assert
this
.
Rock-water
and
Rain-water
were
similar
Causes
,
and
could
not
but
with
equal
readiness
of
natural
Disposition
,
conspire
to
the
effect
of
Drowning
.
And
tho
the
one
,
in
measure
,
was
much
inferior
to
the
other
;
yet
if
both
of
them
in
conjunction
,
were
but
sufficient
for
the
Inundation
;
that
was
enough
:
for
the
Deluge
depended
chiefly
upon
the
quantity
of
Water
in
general
,
and
not
upon
the
Proportion
of
this
or
that
kind
of
it
in
Particular
.
But
Oily
matter
and
Earthy
matter
are
Heterogeneal
Substances
,
and
therefore
could
not
so
readily
and
immediately
conspire
to
the
Earth's
Formation
.
Some
other
Helps
conducive
thereunto
,
were
to
come
betwixt
them
and
that
;
and
Concretion
for
one
.
But
then
Concretion
depending
upon
the
due
proportion
of
Ingredients
;
Due
Proportions
of
Oily
,
and
Earthy
matter
,
must
be
more
needful
in
forming
the
Earth
,
and
so
ought
to
be
better
demonstrated
;
than
the
Proportions
of
Rock
,
and
Rain-waters
in
raising
the
Flood
.
And
thus
it
is
manifest
,
that
the
Scruples
raised
against
the
Theorist
by
the
Animadverter
;
fall
not
upon
his
own
Hypothesis
,
for
the
same
or
greater
reasons
.
He
might
well
therefore
have
spared
his
old
verse
;
which
as
appli'd
here
,
was
as
insignificant
as
an
old
Almanack
.
But
since
,
in
Civility
to
the
Excepter
,
he
would
needs
send
him
it
;
he
cannot
,
but
in
kindness
,
give
him
a
piece
of
it
back
again
:
Letting
him
know
,
that
to
reason
,
or
answer
at
such
a
rate
as
this
,
Turpe
est
Doctori
.
To
make
an
end
of
this
point
of
Precariousness
.
The
Excepter
alledged
,
That
all
these
things
,
that
is
to
say
,
The
Ingredients
of
the
Chaos
,
and
the
Proportions
of
those
Ingredients
,
and
the
right
timing
of
their
Separations
;
should
have
been
more
fully
explained
and
clearly
made
out
,
for
a
Personal
reason
which
the
Theorist
made
peculiar
to
himself
.
Namely
because
he
declared
it
to
be
his
Judgment
,
that
things
of
moment
(
of
which
nature
was
the
Formation
of
his
Earth
)
are
to
be
founded
in
aliquâ
clarâ
&
invictâ
evidentiâ
,
on
some
clear
and
invincible
evidence
.
And
what
says
he
to
this
?
To
it
he
gives
a
double
Answer
.
in
opposition
to
such
incertain
Arguments
as
are
taken
from
the
interpretation
of
Fables
and
Symbols
:
or
from
Etymologies
and
Grammatical
Criticisms
.
But
is
there
nothing
then
of
a
middle
nature
betwixt
Incertainties
,
and
invincible
evidence
?
No
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
or
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
Probable
,
or
Credible
things
to
come
between
them
;
that
he
must
needs
over-strain
himself
by
taking
such
a
Leap
,
not
over
,
but
into
a
Ditch
?
For
thus
he
plunges
into
this
deep
absurdity
,
of
tying
himself
up
to
such
an
evidence
,
as
he
is
not
able
to
produce
.
But
therefore
he
gives
in
a
Second
Answer
,
more
to
the
purpose
.
That
this
Sentence
,
because
it
might
be
taken
in
too
great
an
extent
,
is
left
out
in
the
Second
Edition
of
the
Theory
.
It
seems
then
it
was
not
taken
in
a
worse
sence
than
it
might
be
taken
.
Having
done
with
the
Precariousness
,
he
comes
next
to
the
Vnphilosophicalness
wherewith
the
Theory
was
charged
.
why
does
not
the
Moon
come
down
now
?
the
same
reason
which
keeps
her
up
now
,
kept
her
up
then
.
But
this
Answer
,
is
no
Answer
:
for
that
which
kept
the
Moon
up
then
,
would
have
kept
up
these
Particles
too
.
And
so
either
there
must
have
been
no
Earth
composed
;
or
else
the
Moon
as
an
overplus
must
have
dropt
into
its
composition
.
I
think
I
have
read
of
a
Bullet
shot
up
so
high
,
that
it
never
came
down
upon
the
Earth
more
.
And
then
how
could
those
terrestrial
Particles
descend
,
that
were
disperst
in
all
that
vast
space
,
contain'd
between
the
heighth
of
the
Bullets
ascent
,
and
the
orb
of
the
Moon
?
The
Last
Charge
upon
the
Theory
in
this
part
,
was
its
being
Anti-scriptural
.
That
is
,
in
making
the
Chaos
Dark
,
whereas
the
Scripture
says
,
there
was
light
the
first
day
.
He
answers
to
this
sence
.
That
the
Scripture
does
not
say
the
Chaos
was
throughly
illuminated
the
first
Day
:
That
the
light
then
was
faint
and
feeble
:
and
yet
might
be
sufficient
to
make
some
distinction
of
day
and
night
in
the
Skies
.
A
fair
Concession
,
and
enough
to
end
this
part
of
our
Controversy
.
Only
we
must
observe
that
the
Theorist
in
this
matter
has
changed
his
Mind
,
and
now
plainly
retracts
his
former
Doctrine
.
For
how
could
he
think
there
was
any
light
in
the
Skies
the
first
Day
;
when
he
taught
that
the
Matter
whereof
the
whole
Earth
was
to
be
made
,
was
diffused
in
Particles
through
the
Air
;
Discourse
Chap.
3.
Parag.
last
.
Vid.
Lat.
Theor.
Edit.
2.
p.
229.
and
that
after
the
grossest
of
these
Particles
were
sunk
down
,
the
Air
was
yet
thick
,
gross
,
and
dark
;
and
that
darkness
was
lasting
Darkness
?
Not
that
I
reflect
upon
the
Doctor
for
his
Retractation
here
;
I
note
it
rather
in
his
commendation
.
And
the
more
any
man
does
of
this
nature
(
where
there
is
cause
for
it
)
and
the
farther
he
goes
in
this
way
;
the
more
laudable
will
his
action
and
procedure
be
.
Having
done
with
the
Chapter
,
he
must
now
take
the
Excepter
to
task
.
And
it
seems
he
was
in
a
great
fault
,
where
he
little
thought
of
being
so
.
The
Theorist
doubted
whether
the
Moon
was
in
our
Neighbourhood
before
the
Flood
,
and
he
argued
in
Defence
of
this
Doubt
.
too
bold
an
Affront
to
Scripture
.
But
,
says
the
Answerer
,
a
discreet
man
is
not
forward
to
call
every
cross
word
an
affront
.
so
cross
to
Scripture
,
as
his
spoken
in
the
case
mention'd
,
deserves
to
be
so
called
.
It
is
said
in
the
Inspired
Writings
,
Solomon
made
two
Chapiters
of
Brass
.
Now
should
any
man
doubt
and
dispute
this
,
and
offer
to
prove
that
he
made
but
one
;
surely
here
would
be
too
bold
an
affront
to
Scripture
,
tho
the
things
were
little
and
of
low
consideration
.
The
same
Writings
assure
us
,
that
GOD
,
upon
the
4th
Day
,
made
two
great
Lights
(
things
of
an
higher
Nature
and
Use
)
for
they
were
to
give
Light
upon
the
Earth
;
the
one
for
the
benefit
of
Mankind
,
ruling
the
Day
;
and
the
other
,
the
night
.
)
The
Theorist
questions
this
,
disputes
against
it
,
and
offers
to
prove
that
instead
of
two
Lights
,
GOD
made
but
one
.
And
must
not
the
words
spoken
by
him
here
,
be
too
bold
an
affront
to
Scripture
?
And
if
they
be
so
,
discreet
men
may
be
allowed
to
call
things
as
they
are
.
Besides
,
the
Excepter
had
never
ingag'd
with
the
Theorist
,
but
to
shew
how
cross
his
Assertions
lie
to
Scripture
;
and
had
he
not
pointed
out
what
was
too
bold
and
affronting
that
way
,
he
must
net
have
been
discreet
indeed
,
as
neglecting
what
was
most
proper
for
his
purpose
.
And
lastly
,
who
must
be
most
indiscreet
of
the
two
,
he
that
puts
the
affront
upon
Scripture
,
or
he
that
minds
him
of
it
?
But
he
has
somewhat
more
against
us
yet
,
for
minding
him
of
the
Affront
he
put
upon
Scripture
.
And
it
is
this
.
Suppose
a
man
should
say
boldly
,
GOD
Almighty
has
no
right
hand
.
Oh
might
the
Animadverter
cry
,
that
's
a
bold
affront
to
Scripture
:
for
I
can
show
you
many
and
plain
Texts
of
Scripture
,
where
express
mention
is
made
of
GOD's
right
hand
.
But
let
him
show
us
one
plain
Text
of
Scripture
which
means
that
God
has
a
real
right
hand
:
That
he
has
as
really
a
right
hand
,
as
he
did
really
make
two
great
Lights
.
But
because
he
cannot
possibly
do
this
,
the
Animadverter
must
needs
cry
,
Oh
how
the
Answerer
here
trifles
.
As
if
there
were
no
difference
betwixt
Literal
and
Allusive
Expressions
in
the
Bible
.
In
passing
to
the
next
Chapter
,
he
throws
an
Observation
in
our
way
.
Viz.
Weak
reasons
commonly
produce
strong
Passions
.
Which
serves
to
inform
,
why
the
Answerer's
Passions
are
sometimes
so
strong
against
the
Excepter
:
even
because
his
reasons
are
weak
.
Where
they
fail
,
out
come
indiscreet
,
rude
,
injudicious
,
uncharitable
,
and
the
like
Brats
of
Passion
;
to
supply
the
place
of
Arguments
.
And
yet
as
to
any
thing
of
this
Nature
,
the
Replicant
durst
not
twit
the
Answerer
,
as
he
does
the
Excepter
(
in
this
Chapter
)
by
saying
it
is
Wit
and
Scolding
.
CHAP.
IV.
IN
this
Chapter
he
answers
nothing
as
to
what
the
Excepter
objected
against
the
Central
fire
of
the
Earth
,
Disc.
Ch.
4.
and
the
Origin
of
the
Chaos
.
And
his
reason
is
,
because
he
had
declared
he
would
not
treat
of
them
.
Central
fire
,
very
reasonable
.
But
when
he
has
given
so
fair
occasion
for
Objections
to
be
made
against
it
;
if
then
he
will
not
defend
what
he
so
highly
approves
,
and
what
is
so
nearly
related
to
his
Hypothesis
;
who
can
help
it
?
His
not
treating
of
the
Origin
of
the
Chaos
,
the
Excepter
said
,
When
a
man
declares
that
he
will
write
only
the
Roman
History
,
will
you
say
his
Work
's
Imperfect
,
because
it
does
not
take
in
the
Persian
and
Assyrian
?
By
no
means
.
But
if
a
man
undertakes
to
write
the
Roman
History
,
and
begins
at
the
Middle
,
or
leaves
out
the
Beginning
of
it
;
his
Work
will
have
a
scurvy
Defect
in
it
.
And
the
very
same
he
may
imagine
it
will
be
in
a
Natural
History
;
especially
if
it
be
the
greatest
and
most
remarkable
in
the
World
.
speaking
freely
of
the
Excepter
.
And
he
is
so
free
as
to
tell
him
first
,
that
his
fourth
Chapter
seems
to
him
in
a
great
measure
Impertinent
.
But
he
is
not
to
determine
that
alone
:
let
it
stand
or
fall
as
the
Candid
shall
judge
.
Yet
if
it
were
impertinent
but
in
a
great
measure
,
that
implies
it
was
not
wholly
so
:
but
he
answers
to
nothing
in
it
.
Secondly
,
he
reflects
upon
the
Excepter
for
dabbling
in
Philosophy
.
And
when
he
will
be
dabbling
against
Moses
,
why
may
not
the
Excepter
dabble
against
him
?
Thirdly
,
he
condemns
him
of
Scepticism
.
And
he
had
much
rather
be
too
doubtful
in
some
things
,
than
a
Sir
positive
at
all
.
He
does
not
pretend
that
all
he
writes
,
is
true
Natural
History
.
Nor
will
he
leave
out
in
a
second
Edition
,
what
is
in
his
first
.
Fourthly
,
he
lets
fly
at
him
for
rambling
.
But
he
rambled
after
him
and
his
notions
,
as
any
Reader
may
see
.
Lastly
,
he
says
,
he
ends
in
nothing
as
to
the
formation
of
the
Earth
.
How
can
that
be
,
when
he
bestows
the
greatest
part
of
that
Chapter
in
disproving
the
Chaos
,
out
of
which
the
Earth
was
to
be
formed
?
by
showing
that
such
a
Chaos
was
not
created
,
nor
could
it
be
produced
in
the
Cartesian
way
;
or
if
it
could
,
yet
it
was
not
for
the
Theory
to
allow
of
that
method
of
its
production
,
as
being
enough
to
subvert
its
own
hypothesis
.
This
is
some
of
that
freeness
of
Speech
which
the
Answerer
is
pleas'd
to
use
towards
the
Excepter
.
And
therefore
he
must
not
wonder
to
see
some
freeness
used
towards
himself
,
upon
more
just
occasions
.
But
the
Excepter
in
his
fourth
Chapter
encountred
Two
other
Notions
,
Earthly
Chaos
.
And
that
when
he
speaks
of
the
Coelestial
parts
of
the
Universe
(
the
Luminaries
;
left
out
of
the
second
Edition
of
the
Latin
Theory
.
A
farther
Evidence
that
what
he
wrote
,
was
true
and
remarkable
Natural
History
.
And
also
plain
Demonstration
in
the
case
too
.
But
then
't
is
of
the
weakness
(
to
speak
freely
)
not
of
the
truth
or
validity
of
his
Assertions
.
And
withal
here
's
some
proof
,
that
notwithstanding
the
great
impertinence
of
this
Chapter
,
it
reached
the
Theory
in
some
things
,
which
ought
to
be
taken
notice
of
,
and
spoken
against
;
for
they
were
so
very
culpable
it
seems
,
that
they
deserv'd
to
be
cashier'd
,
or
left
out
.
CHAP.
V.
HEre
the
Answerer
observes
the
Form
of
the
Earth
to
be
Excepted
against
,
upon
the
account
that
it
would
have
wanted
Waters
,
or
Rivers
to
Water
it
;
in
that
there
would
either
be
no
Rivers
at
all
;
or
none
,
at
least
,
in
due
time
.
But
before
he
opposes
these
Reasons
,
he
gives
a
short
account
of
the
state
of
the
Waters
in
his
primeval
Earth
;
and
then
declares
(
p.
13.
)
This
,
I
believe
,
is
an
Idea
more
easily
conceiv'd
,
than
any
we
could
form
concerning
the
Waters
and
Rivers
of
this
present
Earth
,
if
we
had
not
experience
of
them
.
On
the
other
side
,
I
believe
the
contrary
so
easie
to
be
conceived
,
that
I
shall
not
spend
time
in
making
it
out
.
I
only
say
thus
much
.
In
case
his
Idea
were
most
easie
to
be
conceived
;
yet
what
is
most
fair
and
easie
in
the
Idea
,
or
speculation
of
a
thing
,
is
not
always
most
true
,
but
may
be
most
false
in
Nature
.
Look
to
the
constitution
or
posture
of
the
Heavens
.
There
the
Aequator
and
Ecliptick
intersect
each
other
in
an
angle
of
twenty
three
Degrees
and
better
.
But
the
Philosophers
Idea
represents
a
Parallelism
in
the
axes
of
these
two
Circles
,
and
a
Coincidence
in
their
Plains
,
most
easie
and
natural
.
Yet
this
angular
intersection
holds
,
tho
,
it
is
thought
,
some
Mechanic
or
Physical
Causes
would
bring
them
nearer
to
the
site
we
speak
of
.
And
this
very
position
,
tho
it
seems
to
be
forc'd
and
violent
,
and
that
as
well
to
the
Course
of
Nature
,
as
the
Philosophers
Conception
or
Idea
;
is
yet
the
most
convenient
that
possibly
can
be
for
the
Earths
Inhabitants
;
and
by
its
lasting
continuance
,
becomes
a
choice
argument
to
confute
the
Atheist
,
and
evince
a
Providence
.
The
Reason
why
there
would
be
no
Rivers
at
all
,
because
the
Regions
towards
the
Poles
where
the
Rains
are
supposed
to
fall
,
and
the
Rivers
to
rise
,
would
have
been
all
frozen
and
congeal'd
.
And
he
goes
on
;
Why
we
should
think
those
Regions
would
be
frozen
,
and
the
Rains
that
fell
in
them
;
he
(
the
Excepter
)
gives
two
reasons
,
the
Distance
,
and
the
Obliquity
of
the
Sun
.
As
also
the
Experience
we
have
now
,
of
the
Coldness
and
Frozenness
of
those
parts
of
the
Earth
.
And
what
says
he
to
these
our
Reasons
?
As
to
the
Distance
of
the
Sun
,
he
would
make
the
Excepter
answer
that
Himself
,
bringing
him
in
thus
.
He
confesses
,
That
is
not
the
thing
that
does
only
or
chiefly
make
a
climate
cold
.
Ay
,
and
that
Confession
he
keeps
to
still
,
supposing
the
Suns
Distance
be
Perpendicular
,
which
was
the
Distance
he
spake
of
.
As
to
the
Obliquity
of
the
Sun
,
the
Answerer
says
it
was
neither
so
great
nor
so
considerable
in
the
first
Earth
as
in
the
Present
.
Discourse
c.
5.
§
4.
than
if
it
had
been
Round
or
Globular
.
And
so
the
Raining
Regions
then
,
must
be
much
colder
than
our
Climate
is
now
,
in
the
dead
of
Winter
.
For
as
it
is
not
the
Distance
of
the
Sun
alone
,
that
makes
a
Climate
vehemently
cold
;
so
it
is
not
his
Obliquity
alone
,
that
does
it
neither
;
but
a
great
oblique
Distance
.
And
so
great
and
considerable
must
the
Sun's
Distance
of
this
Nature
be
,
from
the
Raining
Regions
in
the
Primitive
Earth
;
as
to
leave
them
in
a
very
freezing
Condition
.
Especially
if
the
Experiences
alledged
by
the
Excepter
be
well
considered
:
if
the
Excepter
had
well
consider'd
the
differences
betwixt
the
present
and
the
primitive
Earth
;
as
to
Obliquity
of
Position
,
and
that
which
follows
from
it
,
length
of
nights
:
he
would
have
found
no
reason
to
have
charg'd
that
Earth
with
nipping
and
freezing
Cold
;
where
there
was
not
,
I
believe
,
one
morsel
of
Ice
,
from
one
Pole
to
another
.
As
to
his
belief
,
who
can
regard
it
?
It
comprehends
such
things
,
as
no
Christian
Philosopher
ever
yet
did
,
nor
ever
can
,
or
will
put
into
his
Creed
.
And
as
for
the
Fxcepter
,
he
has
well
consider'd
the
things
he
speaks
of
;
and
still
finds
he
has
sufficient
reason
,
to
charge
the
primitive
Earth
in
its
Rainy
Regions
,
with
Nipping
and
freezing
Cold
:
even
with
a
Cold
more
nipping
and
freezing
,
than
is
felt
in
our
Climate
in
the
Winter
Season
.
Indeed
he
instances
in
one
thing
in
this
present
Earth
,
which
he
thinks
should
cast
the
Advantage
,
for
Coldness
,
on
our
Climate's
side
;
that
is
,
the
Length
of
Nights
.
First
,
upon
supposition
that
That
Earth
was
Oval
,
the
Wet
Regions
in
it
,
must
have
been
several
hundreds
of
Miles
farther
removed
from
the
Sun
,
than
our
Climate
is
;
and
so
the
Cold
there
must
have
been
proportionably
stronger
.
Secondly
,
in
the
primitive
Earth
there
was
no
Clouds
;
which
contribute
much
towards
warming
the
Air.
That
is
,
as
they
reverberate
or
beat
back
the
Beams
of
the
Sun
,
reflected
from
the
Earth
:
As
they
straiten
and
compress
Vapours
in
their
Motion
and
agitation
:
And
as
,
(
at
some
times
,
and
in
some
measure
)
they
transmit
the
Coelestial
Rays
,
not
altogether
unlike
to
Burning-glasses
.
Thirdly
,
in
the
first
Earth
there
was
no
open
Seas
;
which
fill
the
Air
with
Mists
,
and
Foggs
,
and
great
store
of
Vapours
,
that
do
mightily
thicken
it
,
and
consequently
mitigate
the
sharpness
of
it
.
Fourthly
,
There
was
no
Hills
nor
Valleys
,
Ruggednesses
nor
Inequalities
upon
the
Surface
of
that
Earth
;
which
cause
Heat
again
by
confus'd
and
irregular
Reflections
of
the
Sun-beams
.
Now
put
but
these
Four
Causes
of
Cold
(
extant
in
the
first
World
)
into
the
Scales
,
against
the
Length
of
Nights
in
the
Second
,
which
the
Answerer
insists
upon
;
and
they
will
not
fail
to
weigh
it
down
sufficiently
.
Especially
if
we
add
,
that
in
our
Nights
,
shorter
,
by
near
Four
hours
,
than
those
before
the
Flood
;
we
have
sometimes
very
brisk
kind
of
Frosts
.
In
the
Beginning
,
that
is
to
say
,
or
in
the
Middle
of
May
;
when
the
Sun
is
far
advanc'd
on
our
side
of
the
Equator
,
in
a
World
that
has
Clouds
,
and
Seas
,
and
Hills
.
other
part
of
the
Exception
,
These
Rivers
could
not
have
been
made
in
due
time
:
He
answers
thus
.
That
's
wholly
according
to
the
Process
you
take
;
if
you
take
a
meer
natural
Process
,
the
Rivers
could
not
flow
throughout
the
Earth
,
all
on
a
sudden
:
but
you
may
accelerate
that
process
,
as
much
as
you
please
,
by
a
Divine
Hand
,
And
so
this
is
answered
by
the
first
Expedient
;
Extraordinary
Providence
:
which
is
here
at
a
Pinch
,
brought
in
again
,
to
serve
this
Extraordinary
Hypothesis
.
And
thus
indeed
there
might
be
Rivers
for
Fishes
,
and
a
River
in
Paradise
;
and
the
one
as
soon
,
and
the
other
as
great
,
as
needed
to
be
;
even
as
big
as
Euphrates
it
self
.
Here
therefore
this
Controversie
must
end
,
for
who
can
stand
out
against
such
an
Answer
?
Only
,
we
must
say
,
it
is
a
very
Philosophical
one
;
and
't
is
pitty
he
made
not
shorter
Work
in
the
Case
.
For
he
might
have
told
us
,
that
Men
,
and
Animals
,
and
all
kind
of
Plants
,
by
the
power
of
a
Divine
Hand
,
lived
without
water
before
the
Flood
;
and
then
he
had
sav'd
himself
the
whole
trouble
,
as
well
of
raising
,
as
of
propagating
his
Rivers
.
And
truly
so
difficult
a
Work
is
the
latter
of
these
,
derivations
of
the
waters
,
at
first
would
be
very
irregular
and
diffuse
,
till
the
Channels
were
a
little
worn
and
hollowed
.
And
(
p.
229.
)
that
the
Current
would
be
easie
and
gentle
all
along
,
and
if
it
chanc'd
in
some
places
to
rest
or
be
stopt
,
it
would
spread
it self
into
a
pleasant
Lake
,
till
by
fresh
supplies
it
had
raised
its
waters
so
high
,
as
to
overflow
and
break
loose
again
.
Now
when
at
first
there
were
no
Rivers
,
but
diffused
waters
;
and
afterwards
they
were
to
flow
in
Channels
worn
and
hollowed
by
themselves
:
When
their
Currents
were
to
be
easie
and
gentle
all
along
,
and
to
rest
,
and
stop
,
and
spread
at
places
,
till
they
waxed
strong
enough
to
run
forward
:
Were
these
waters
accelerated
by
a
divine
hand
?
No
more
than
what
is
natural
,
is
at
the
same
time
miraculous
:
No
more
than
what
is
slow
,
is
at
the
same
time
swift
:
Or
than
flat
Contradictions
can
fall
in
with
truth
.
CHAP.
VI.
PART
of
the
Theorist's
Design
,
in
explaining
the
Deluge
his
way
,
was
to
silence
the
Cavils
of
Atheists
.
the
Design
of
his
Treatise
is
to
show
a
way
of
making
the
Deluge
fairly
intelligible
,
and
accountable
without
creating
of
new
waters
.
And
in
another
place
,
explaining
the
Deluge
in
a
natural
way
,
or
by
natural
Causes
;
he
makes
these
Causes
to
be
Vapours
within
the
Earth
,
and
Rains
without
it
,
and
Cracks
and
Chasms
made
by
the
Sun
in
the
Arch
of
it
.
All
which
natural
Causes
together
,
brought
on
the
Disruption
of
that
Earth
,
and
this
Disruption
occasion'd
the
Innundation
.
But
if
his
Hypothesis
which
takes
off
one
Miracle
,
brings
on
another
;
or
(
as
the
event
of
things
might
prove
)
makes
it
necessary
to
suppose
another
Miracle
interwoven
with
the
Contexture
of
it
:
it
will
then
contribute
just
nothing
towards
silencing
the
Atheist
,
who
cannot
possibly
be
reconciled
to
Miracle
,
as
professing
principles
most
repugnant
to
it
.
Now
the
great
Flood
being
made
,
by
the
Theory
,
an
Effect
of
Natural
Causes
;
it
must
needs
have
come
on
in
a
Course
of
Nature
.
Yea
,
tho
it
was
to
come
as
a
Judgment
upon
obstinate
Sinners
;
yet
it
must
have
hapned
inevitably
tho
Mankind
had
been
Innocent
,
or
truly
Penitent
:
unless
the
power
of
a
miraculous
hand
,
had
forcibly
stopt
the
Course
of
Nature
,
and
held
her
from
running
on
into
this
otherwise
certain
and
inavoidable
issue
.
And
when
it
is
as
necessary
to
admit
Miracle
into
this
new
Hypothesis
;
as
it
was
to
allow
it
in
the
Old
;
how
is
the
Atheist
silenced
by
it
?
Yea
,
when
he
sees
this
Hypothesis
making
Ruine
the
Lot
,
either
of
a
righteous
,
or
repenting
World
;
this
must
open
his
mouth
,
instead
of
silencing
his
tongue
,
and
make
him
more
fierce
and
clamorous
than
ever
.
This
is
the
Substance
of
the
Excepter's
Sixth
Chapter
,
which
runs
upon
what
the
Cavilling
Athiest
would
be
apt
to
alledge
,
against
the
Theory
of
the
Flood
.
It
is
answered
thus
.
What
the
Excepter
suggests
concerning
Athiests
,
and
their
presum'd
Cavils
at
such
an
explication
of
the
Deluge
,
is
a
thing
only
said
at
random
and
without
grounds
.
And
why
so
?
Surely
it
must
be
because
of
something
the
Answerer
had
said
before
.
GOD's
Praescience
is
infallible
,
and
God
is
the
Author
and
Governour
of
the
Natural
World
,
as
well
as
of
the
Moral
:
and
he
sees
thorough
the
Futuritions
of
both
,
and
hath
so
dispos'd
the
one
,
as
to
serve
him
in
his
just
Judgments
upon
the
other
.
But
is
this
to
satisfy
or
silence
the
Athiest
?
Can
the
Answerer
think
,
that
he
who
denies
the
being
of
a
GOD
,
should
acknowledge
his
Attribute
?
and
consent
to
a
Providence
directed
by
Proescience
?
This
is
as
much
as
to
say
,
let
an
Atheist
become
no
Atheist
,
and
then
he
will
silence
this
Athiest's
Cavils
The
Two
Questions
he
puts
in
the
Beginning
of
his
Chapter
,
touching
GOD's
Praescience
;
are
little
to
the
purpose
.
Inasmuch
as
the
Athiest
,
whom
the
Excepter
justly
brings
in
(
the
silencing
of
his
Cavils
being
the
aim
of
the
Theory
)
does
absolutely
disown
and
disavow
the
Property
,
together
with
the
Essence
of
the
GLORIOUS
DEITY
.
However
let
us
reply
to
these
Questions
;
that
nothing
may
seem
to
be
pass'd
over
,
which
but
looks
as
if
it
required
an
Answer
.
The
first
Question
is
this
.
Suppose
Adam
had
not
sinn'd
,
what
would
have
become
of
the
Messiah
,
and
the
Dispensation
of
the
Gospel
?
Why
,
then
the
Messiah
need
not
have
been
born
,
nor
need
the
Gospel
have
been
dispensed
.
And
truly
both
the
Incarnation
of
the
one
,
and
the
Dispensation
of
the
other
,
might
have
been
prevented
or
put
by
;
without
any
stop
or
interruption
in
the
Course
of
nature
,
made
by
the
intervention
of
a
miraculous
Power
.
But
the
like
cannot
be
affirmed
of
the
Deluge
.
For
had
that
been
put
off
,
the
order
of
Nature
must
thereby
have
been
broken
;
and
the
hand
of
Omnipotence
must
have
supported
the
Earth
by
the
strength
of
Miracle
.
Else
in
a
certain
period
of
time
,
(
in
that
Juncture
suppose
,
when
the
Flood
,
according
to
the
Theory
,
fell
out
)
it
must
have
suffered
Disruption
;
and
have
sunk
into
the
Abyss
.
But
it
is
farther
urged
,
that
the
Dispensation
of
the
Gospel
is
said
to
be
very
early
determin'd
:
had
not
eaten
the
forbidden
Fruit
;
how
could
he
,
and
all
his
Posterity
have
liv'd
in
Paradise
?
A
few
Generations
would
have
fill'd
that
place
,
and
should
the
rest
have
been
turn'd
out
into
the
wide
World
,
without
any
sin
or
fault
of
theirs
?
To
it
we
Reply
,
First
;
that
if
Adam
had
not
eaten
the
foibidden
fruit
;
yet
it
does
not
appear
that
he
and
all
his
Posterity
were
to
have
liv'd
in
Paradise
.
For
That
,
in
a
few
ages
,
might
not
only
have
been
sufficiently
replenisht
,
but
overcharg'd
with
Inhabitants
.
Secondly
;
when
that
place
had
been
filled
,
and
the
rest
,
(
as
the
Answerer
expresses
it
)
must
have
been
turn'd
out
into
the
wide
World
:
yet
they
(
being
without
sin
)
should
not
have
felt
the
Inconveniences
which
we
do
.
For
as
the
Barrenness
of
the
Earth
;
so
,
many
Inconveniences
(
perhaps
secondary
Causes
of
it
)
might
proceed
from
the
Curse
of
GOD
,
pull'd
down
upon
the
Ground
by
the
sin
of
man
.
And
thus
much
Moses
has
left
upon
record
;
that
as
the
Earth
by
GOD's
blessing
brought
forth
useful
Products
,
while
man
stood
,
Gen.
1.12
.
so
Thorns
and
Thistles
were
the
just
effect
or
punishment
of
his
Fall
,
Gen.
3.18
.
But
then
as
the
Answerer
has
noted
,
that
a
Supernatural
curse
might
have
its
effect
in
any
position
of
the
Earth
:
so
it
is
as
certain
,
can
make
a
Land
barren
,
if
he
think
fit
,
in
spite
of
the
Course
of
Nature
:
then
in
spite
of
the
Course
of
nature
,
he
can
as
well
make
it
fruitful
and
pleasant
.
And
therefore
so
he
might
have
made
the
Praediluvian
earth
(
had
not
Adam
eat
the
forbidden
fruit
)
notwithstanding
its
oblique
Position
to
the
Sun
.
Then
,
as
there
should
have
been
no
Death
amongst
men
;
so
there
should
have
been
nothing
like
it
,
or
tending
to
it
.
No
such
excessive
heat
and
cold
,
as
now
rage
in
several
Climates
:
No
such
noxious
Vapours
and
Exhalations
,
as
now
rise
from
,
or
breath
out
of
the
Earth
:
No
such
impurities
and
unwholsom
corruptions
,
as
now
breed
in
,
and
distemper
the
Air
:
No
such
blustring
Storms
and
violent
Tempests
,
as
now
disquiet
,
and
toss
,
and
cause
Breaches
by
the
Sea
:
No
such
mighty
Floods
and
dreadful
Earthquakes
,
as
now
do
unspeakable
Mischiefs
at
Land
.
But
mens
Souls
being
upright
and
clear
from
sin
;
their
Bodies
should
have
been
safe
from
dangers
,
and
free
from
sufferings
;
and
the
security
and
pleasure
of
their
outward
Condition
,
would
have
been
answerable
to
their
inward
Peace
and
Purity
.
When
Israel
pass'd
through
the
Arabian
Desert
,
because
they
were
a
chosen
and
peculiar
People
,
and
dear
unto
his
MAJESTY
;
the
ALMIGHTY
sav'd
them
from
the
great
Inconveniences
of
that
desolate
Region
,
by
ministring
to
their
Wants
,
most
sutable
and
seasonable
Defensatives
and
Supplies
.
Thus
,
the
Drieness
of
the
place
,
and
the
lack
of
Waters
;
he
supplied
by
the
streams
from
Rocks
,
Its
Barrenness
,
or
lack
of
Food
;
by
Quails
and
Manna
.
It
s
heat
and
lack
of
shades
;
by
a
Cloudy
Canopy
.
It
s
Wildness
,
and
lack
of
Roads
and
Way-marks
;
by
the
Pillar
of
a
Cloud
,
guiding
them
by
day
,
when
their
Camp
moved
;
and
by
a
Pillar
of
fire
leading
them
by
night
.
The
lack
of
new
Cloaths
,
and
the
lack
of
new
shooes
;
by
the
lastingness
of
their
old
ones
,
and
by
their
not
wearing
out
.
And
when
the
Good
GOD
had
such
care
and
kindness
for
a
sinful
People
;
yea
,
for
a
stubborn
,
perverse
,
and
provoking
Generation
;
as
thus
to
sence
and
furnish
them
against
the
most
grievous
external
Inconveniences
,
that
could
readily
beset
them
:
we
may
well
conclude
how
tender
he
would
have
been
of
an
Innocent
World
,
and
how
inconceivably
gracious
and
indulgent
to
them
,
in
the
like
Nature
.
The
wide
World
therefore
should
not
have
been
inconvenient
to
Adam
and
his
Posterity
(
as
this
World
now
is
to
us
)
if
he
had
not
eaten
the
forbidden
fruit
.
The
supernatural
Blessing
of
Heaven
,
would
then
have
made
their
Circumstances
happy
upon
Earth
.
Nor
should
they
ever
have
overstockt
it
,
tho
they
had
multiply'd
never
so
fast
.
For
still
as
they
grew
aged
,
that
they
might
not
grow
too
numerous
,
they
might
,
in
due
time
,
have
been
translated
hence
,
as
Enoch
was
,
to
the
higher
State
of
bliss
and
felicity
.
Nor
is
there
any
thing
here
overstrain'd
in
the
least
.
For
tho
we
must
not
be
too
bold
with
Extraordinary
Providence
in
the
Philosophic
Schools
;
it
was
ever
a
standing
Hypothesis
in
the
Church
.
And
upon
the
principle
of
it
,
the
most
glorious
Phaenomenaes
of
heavens
kindness
,
that
have
been
,
or
can
appear
,
are
properly
to
be
solved
.
CHAP.
VII
.
HEre
the
Answerer
applies
himself
to
vindicate
those
Texts
of
Scripture
,
which
being
alledged
in
confirmation
of
the
Theory
;
were
excepted
against
.
The
first
is
that
in
the
Second
Epistle
of
S.
Peter
.
C.
3.
v.
5.
For
this
they
willingly
are
ignorant
of
,
&c.
But
he
quarrels
with
the
Excepter
for
rendring
it
generally
Wilfully
ignorant
.
lays
a
great
stress
upon
the
word
,
Wilfully
:
That
he
did
not
do
,
nor
was
there
any
need
of
it
.
For
whether
they
were
willingly
,
or
wilfully
ignorant
,
it
matters
not
;
because
they
could
in
neither
sense
be
blameably
ignorant
of
such
things
,
as
the
Theorist
presumes
they
were
;
inasmuch
as
they
were
in
no
capacity
of
acquiring
the
Knowledge
of
them
,
supposing
they
had
been
Real
.
This
the
Excepter
fairly
made
out
.
To
have
proved
them
culpably
ignorant
therefore
,
in
either
of
these
senses
;
128.
129.
&c.
the
Answerer
should
have
taken
off
what
the
Excepter
objected
against
the
likelihood
of
their
attaining
to
the
knowledge
of
those
Matters
:
and
should
have
shown
that
the
Pseudo-Christians
reproved
by
St.
Peter
,
might
by
the
use
of
such
means
as
they
had
,
have
come
to
a
competent
understanding
of
those
Phaenomenaes
,
which
he
believes
the
Apostle
chid
them
for
being
unacquainted
with
.
But
the
doing
of
this
,
he
either
willingly
,
or
wilfully
omitted
;
it
being
much
easier
to
run
out
into
an
empty
debate
about
a
word
;
than
(
as
he
should
have
done
)
to
pursue
the
proper
and
material
things
.
He
says
indeed
(
p.
20.
)
The
mutability
and
changes
of
the
World
,
which
these
Pseudo-Christians
would
not
allow
of
,
was
a
knowable
thing
,
taking
all
the
means
which
they
might
and
ought
to
have
attended
to
.
Great
news
this
,
that
the
Changes
of
the
World
,
which
they
were
checked
for
being
ignorant
of
,
were
knowable
by
the
means
which
they
injoyed
.
Did
GOD
ever
blame
ignorance
,
but
in
such
Circumstances
?
But
let
him
prove
that
the
first
Constitution
of
the
Heavens
and
the
Earth
,
and
the
changes
and
dissolution
which
happened
to
them
at
the
Deluge
;
were
knowable
things
to
them
,
according
to
his
Notions
of
them
;
let
him
prove
that
they
had
means
to
bring
them
to
the
knowledge
of
these
,
as
he
represents
them
;
and
then
he
does
something
.
But
he
must
first
prove
that
there
ever
were
such
things
.
And
because
he
is
for
Instances
out
of
Scripture
,
where
the
Phrase
(
used
by
S.
Peter
signifies
wilful
and
obstinate
ignorance
;
let
him
take
these
that
follow
,
he
would
not
,
S.
Mat.
18.30
.
The
Inhabitants
of
Jerusalem
,
obstinately
refusing
to
come
under
GOD's
Protection
;
it
is
said
of
them
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
ye
would
not
,
S.
Mat.
23.37
.
And
so
again
,
S.
Luke
.
13.34
.
Now
if
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
with
a
negative
Particle
before
it
,
signifies
a
Wilful
and
obstinate
Refusal
of
a
thing
;
then
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
without
a
Negative
,
may
signify
a
wilful
and
obstinate
Consent
to
a
thing
,
or
Compliance
with
it
.
And
so
the
Phrase
here
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
might
signify
a
wilful
and
obstinate
ignorance
.
And
because
he
is
for
Proofs
out
of
Greek
Authors
;
The
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
seems
here
to
be
taken
in
a
sense
,
not
ordinary
in
other
places
,
for
being
of
opinion
,
or
affirming
,
perhaps
with
this
addition
of
asserting
it
magisterially
,
without
any
reason
rendred
for
it
,
but
a
sic
volo
&c.
So
I
will
,
I
command
,
my
Will
is
my
reason
.
And
according
to
this
excellent
Annotator
,
the
word
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
imports
extraordinary
Wilfulness
here
.
Nor
let
him
think
that
he
gains
any
thing
,
by
noting
,
it
was
not
their
ignorance
that
S.
Peter
chiefly
reproves
,
but
their
deriding
and
scoffing
at
the
Doctrine
of
the
coming
of
our
Saviour
.
For
if
he
reproved
them
as
Scoffers
;
yet
in
the
words
considered
,
he
reproves
them
chiefly
for
their
Ignorance
,
and
in
all
likelihood
,
for
their
Wilful
Ignorance
.
quickly
by
the
help
of
a
Particle
and
a
Figure
.
But
if
arguments
be
so
weak
that
they
will
fall
with
a
Fillip
,
why
should
greater
force
be
used
to
beat
them
down
?
The
fault
is
in
him
that
should
have
brought
stronger
.
To
draw
a
Rapier
to
stab
a
Fly
;
or
to
charge
a
Pistol
,
to
kill
a
Spider
;
I
think
would
be
preposterous
.
He
goes
on
next
,
to
Psal.
33.7
.
He
gathereth
the
waters
of
the
Sea
,
as
in
a
Bagg
:
He
layeth
up
the
Abysses
in
Store-houses
.
Which
,
according
to
the
Theory
,
hints
that
the
Sea
or
Abyss
before
the
Deluge
,
was
inclosed
within
the
Vault
of
the
Earth
.
In
confutation
of
this
Phantsy
,
Psal.
33.7
.
as
in
a
bag
.
the
Excepter
brought
in
that
Passage
,
Psal.
78.13
.
He
set
the
waters
as
in
a
Bag.
Which
proves
(
according
to
the
known
Rule
of
Expounding
one
Scripture
by
another
)
that
by
the
waters
being
as
in
a
bag
,
Psal.
33.7
.
could
not
be
meant
their
being
inclosed
within
the
vault
of
the
Earth
.
Because
this
Text
,
which
says
the
same
thing
,
speaks
of
an
open
Sea
,
viz.
the
Red
Sea
;
Disc.
p.
139
,
140.
and
that
when
it
was
so
open
,
that
Moses
and
the
Israelites
marched
through
it
.
How
does
the
Answerer
take
off
this
Objection
?
Why
,
because
the
Excepter
had
said
,
that
as
in
a
Bag
,
Psal.
33.7
.
Should
be
rendred
,
as
on
an
heap
;
and
proved
it
by
Authorities
:
he
gives
him
leave
to
render
this
place
so
,
as
on
an
heap
.
For
,
says
he
,
it
was
done
by
a
miracle
.
But
if
when
by
miracle
the
waters
in
an
open
Sea
stood
on
an
heap
,
they
were
said
to
be
in
a
Bag
:
then
this
shows
more
plainly
still
,
that
that
Expression
,
He
gathereth
the
waters
of
ahe
Sea
as
in
a
bagg
,
can
be
no
manner
of
proof
that
they
were
ever
inclos'd
within
the
Vault
of
the
Earth
.
And
at
last
indeed
he
in
effect
confesses
that
he
mis-interpreted
the
Psalmist's
words
.
For
he
declares
now
,
that
that
other
place
(
Psal.
33.7
.
speaks
of
the
ordinary
posture
and
constitution
of
the
Waters
;
which
is
not
on
an
heap
,
but
in
a
level
or
spherical
convexity
with
the
rest
of
the
Earth
.
And
thus
he
catches
himself
in
a
trap
.
For
if
the
Text
speaks
of
the
Ordinary
posture
of
the
waters
,
lying
in
a
Level
with
the
rest
of
the
earth
;
But
the
Excepter
must
not
escape
here
neither
.
unfair
citation
of
a
Paragraph
of
the
Theory
,
which
he
applies
peculiarly
to
this
Text
of
Psal.
33.7
.
whereas
it
belongs
to
all
the
Texts
alledg'd
out
of
the
Psalms
,
and
is
a
modest
reflection
upon
the
explication
of
them
.
Now
if
the
Paragraph
belonging
to
all
those
Texts
did
agree
properly
with
none
,
and
with
one
less
than
with
the
rest
;
surely
the
Excepter
might
,
without
unfairness
,
cite
and
apply
it
to
that
one
,
without
meddling
with
the
rest
.
And
so
the
Complaint
is
frivolous
.
Tho
how
modest
the
Reflection
he
speaks
of
,
was
,
he
may
consider
;
when
it
backs
such
an
explication
of
Scripture
,
as
would
make
Moses
and
the
Hebrews
pass
thorow
a
Sea
,
Disc.
p.
140.
which
at
the
time
of
their
passing
,
was
inclos'd
within
the
Vault
of
the
Earth
.
He
proceeds
next
to
Job
26.7
.
He
stretcheth
out
the
North
over
the
empty
place
,
and
hangeth
the
Earth
upon
nothing
.
But
how
can
this
most
aptly
agree
to
the
structure
of
the
Theory's
first
Earth
?
when
(
as
the
Excepter
noted
)
the
Theory
it self
testifies
concerning
rise
upon
the
face
of
the
Chaos
:
And
could
not
have
been
formed
unless
by
a
Concretion
upon
the
face
of
the
Waters
:
And
that
it
had
the
mass
of
the
waters
as
a
basis
or
foundation
to
rest
upon
.
And
so
was
no
more
stretcht
out
upon
emptiness
,
and
hang'd
upon
nothing
,
than
an
Arch
when
built
upon
its
Center
.
And
but
just
before
,
the
Theory
contended
,
from
Psal.
24.2
.
that
it
was
founded
upon
the
Seas
,
and
establisht
upon
the
Floods
.
What
says
the
Answerer
to
this
?
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Not
one
Syllable
.
We
must
take
it
to
be
answered
by
the
last
Expedient
.
The
next
place
is
Job
38.4
,
5
,
6.
Where
wast
thou
,
when
I
laid
the
foundations
of
the
Earth
?
—
Who
hath
laid
the
Measures
thereof
?
—
Who
hath
stretched
the
line
upon
it
?
—
Who
laid
the
corner-stone
thereof
.
Where
Measures
and
Line
,
said
the
Excepter
imply
only
that
the
Earth
was
made
of
a
fitting
Accuracy
.
And
he
affirmed
that
this
Earth
of
ours
,
may
be
compared
with
,
and
be
thought
to
outgo
the
imaginary
first
Earth
of
the
Theorist's
inventing
,
in
Two
things
;
Comeliness
,
and
Vsefulness
.
But
because
under
the
first
Head
of
Comeliness
,
the
Excepter
makes
Hills
and
Mountains
to
be
a
piece
of
the
Earth's
Beauty
;
Dis.
p.
144.
and
146.
and
Rudenesses
,
and
void
of
Exactness
and
Order
;
and
calls
them
the
most
horrid
visible
pieces
of
Nature
,
and
hideously
amazing
,
&c.
Only
they
conduce
to
the
natural
Pulchritude
of
the
Earth
,
because
it
consists
in
Asymetries
and
a
Wild
Variety
.
Yet
in
respect
of
these
the
Earth
is
more
comely
,
than
if
it
were
one
vast
plain
,
or
lay
every
where
in
a
smooth
and
regular
sphaerical
Convexity
.
high
Hills
:
which
,
if
they
had
been
nothing
but
monstrous
Scarrs
or
deformities
in
the
Earthly
Body
,
or
the
Rubbish
or
Ruines
of
a
decayed
Building
;
he
would
scarce
have
done
so
solemnly
.
But
as
to
making
the
Theorist
admire
the
Beauty
of
Mountains
;
it
was
never
in
the
Excepter's
thoughts
.
mightily
pleased
and
raised
by
the
sight
and
contemplation
of
them
.
But
between
the
Beauty
of
an
Object
,
and
the
Pleasure
of
seeing
and
contemplating
it
,
there
is
great
Difference
.
And
(
to
turn
the
Answerers
Complement
upon
himself
)
he
that
hath
not
sense
and
,
judgment
enough
to
see
the
difference
,
it
would
be
very
tedious
to
beat
it
into
him
by
multitude
of
words
.
The
Vsefulness
of
the
Earth
in
its
present
Form
and
State
,
beyond
that
of
the
Theory
:
the
Excepter
noted
in
Three
Particulars
.
First
,
in
that
it
had
Seas
for
Traffick
and
Navigation
.
Secondly
,
in
that
it
had
Mountains
,
for
Bounding
Nations
,
for
Dividing
Kingdoms
,
for
Deriving
Rivers
,
for
Yielding
Minerals
,
&c.
Thirdly
,
in
that
it
had
Rains
and
seasonable
Showres
.
And
that
Rains
and
Showres
were
proper
Rules
whereby
to
measure
the
Vsefulness
of
the
Earth
,
and
to
show
that
it
excells
that
of
the
Theory
;
is
manifest
from
GOD's
making
use
of
the
same
,
in
a
Case
not
unlike
,
said
the
Excepter
.
water'd
with
the
foot
as
a
Garden
of
Herbs
:
but
Palestine
was
a
Land
of
hills
and
valleys
,
and
drank
water
of
the
Rain
of
heaven
,
Deut.
11.10
,
11.
Here
the
Answerer
at
lasts
chops
in
,
and
tells
the
Excepter
how
unluckily
it
falls
out
for
him
,
that
a
Country
,
that
had
no
Rain
,
should
be
compared
in
Scripture
,
or
join'd
in
privilege
,
with
Paradise
it self
,
and
the
Garden
of
GOD.
For
so
is
this
very
Egypt
,
Gen.
13.10
.
tho
it
had
no
Rain
,
but
was
water'd
by
Rivers
.
And
Lot
lifted
up
his
eyes
,
and
beheld
the
plain
of
Jordan
,
that
it
was
well
watered
every
where
,
(
before
the
LORD
destroyed
Sodom
and
Gomorrha
)
even
as
the
Garden
of
the
LORD
,
like
the
Land
of
Egypt
.
Therefore
,
says
he
,
the
greatest
commendation
of
a
Land
,
for
pleasure
and
fertility
,
according
to
Scripture
,
is
its
being
well
watered
with
Rivers
.
But
that
's
more
than
the
cited
Scripture
speaks
,
and
more
than
it
means
;
as
will
appear
if
we
consider
the
Occasion
of
the
Words
,
which
is
this
.
Abraham
and
Lot
were
both
very
rich
in
Cattel
.
Their
Stocks
were
so
numerous
,
that
the
Tract
of
land
where
they
abode
together
,
was
not
able
sufficiently
to
feed
them
:
for
their
Shepherds
strove
one
with
another
for
pasture
.
This
made
it
necessary
that
they
should
separate
;
and
accordingly
they
agreed
to
do
.
Lot
having
liberty
to
chuse
his
station
,
or
the
place
where
to
settle
himself
;
takes
a
view
of
the
Plain
of
Jordan
,
and
makes
choice
of
that
.
And
the
chief
reason
why
he
chose
it
,
was
upon
the
account
of
its
being
well
water'd
.
And
how
well
watered
was
it
?
Why
,
every
where
very
well
for
the
nourishing
of
Cattel
,
it
being
as
well
supply'd
with
River-waters
,
as
a
pleasant
Garden
,
or
Egypt
.
I
say
,
as
a
pleasant
Garden
.
For
were
the
true
Paradise
meant
here
;
Egypt
,
by
being
comparable
to
that
(
which
was
certainly
the
sweetest
place
in
the
World
)
would
have
been
preferable
to
Palestine
.
Whereas
't
is
evident
that
GOD
prefers
Palestine
to
Egypt
,
Deut.
11.10
.
But
therefore
there
is
no
necessity
that
this
Garden
of
the
LORD
,
should
be
the
real
Paradise
.
For
the
word
Lord
,
or
God
,
is
commonly
joined
to
several
things
in
Scripture
,
in
way
of
amplification
,
or
to
show
the
greatness
and
extraordinariness
of
them
.
Thus
we
read
of
the
Terror
of
GOD
,
Gen.
35.
5.
that
is
,
an
extraordinary
terror
.
And
of
the
Sleep
of
the
LORD
,
1
Sam.
26.12
.
that
is
,
an
extraordinary
Sleep
.
And
of
the
Trees
of
GOD
,
Psal.
104.16
.
that
is
,
extraordinary
Trees
.
So
here
the
Garden
of
the
LORD
,
signifies
no
more
than
a
pleasant
garden
extraordinarily
watered
.
And
therefore
,
says
the
Interlineary
Gloss
,
it
was
hortus
deliciosus
&
irriguus
;
a
delicate
and
well
watered
Garden
.
But
still
notwithstanding
this
,
a
Land
watered
with
Rivers
and
Showres
at
once
,
may
excel
a
Land
watred
with
Rivers
only
.
And
upon
this
account
Scripture
commends
Palestine
above
,
and
prefers
it
much
before
Egypt
.
Even
because
it
being
happy
in
Rains
,
as
well
as
in
Rivers
;
it
was
free
from
that
great
trouble
and
slavery
of
watering
with
the
foot
,
to
which
Egypt
,
through
want
of
Rain
,
was
subject
.
Thus
the
hard
task
which
the
Answerer
conceited
he
put
upon
the
Excepter
,
consider
how
he
would
interpret
and
apply
his
place
in
Deuteronomy
,
and
make
it
consistent
with
this
in
Genesis
;
is
done
with
ease
.
For
albeit
Egypt
was
as
well
water'd
as
a
pleasant
garden
,
in
respect
of
River-water
(
it
being
water'd
by
the
overflowing
of
Nilus
)
yet
it
was
not
so
well
water'd
as
Palestine
;
which
besides
a
sufficiency
of
Rivers
,
had
moreover
the
benefit
of
seasonable
showres
superseding
the
trouble
,
of
watering
with
the
foot
.
Tho
withal
we
must
here
note
,
that
he
would
have
put
a
trick
upon
us
.
For
whereas
he
says
,
Egypt
,
a
Country
that
had
no
Rain
,
is
compared
or
join'd
in
priviledge
with
Paradise
;
it
is
not
so
.
For
the
whole
Country
of
Egypt
is
not
brought
into
this
Comparison
or
Privilege
;
but
only
a
Part
of
it
leading
to
Zoar
,
better
water'd
than
the
Rest
.
But
these
words
,
as
thou
comest
unto
Zoar
,
he
left
out
of
the
Quotation
;
which
should
have
been
in
it
,
not
only
to
perfect
the
Clause
,
but
to
clear
the
sense
.
So
that
Palestine
had
still
more
reason
to
be
prefer'd
before
Egypt
in
general
,
because
it
was
but
one
particular
Part
of
it
,
which
was
resembled
to
a
fine
garden
;
and
that
but
in
one
particular
thing
neither
,
its
being
water'd
by
Rivers
.
Which
tho
they
suted
Cattel
best
,
were
not
so
convenient
for
Corn
,
as
Rains
:
Which
where
they
do
not
fall
;
the
seed
sown
requires
manual
waterings
.
And
thus
at
last
,
the
thing
is
fairly
come
about
again
,
and
we
are
just
where
we
were
at
first
,
and
so
is
Egypt
too
.
For
GOD
,
in
Deuteronomy
,
compar'd
it
to
a
Garden
of
herbs
,
where
the
seed
sown
was
to
be
watered
with
the
foot
:
and
here
in
Genesis
,
to
a
pleasant
Garden
,
which
by
reason
of
its
Rivers
,
could
want
no
water
convenient
for
that
use
.
But
still
't
was
short
of
Palestine
.
And
as
for
his
Interpretation
of
the
place
in
Deuteronomy
,
which
he
likes
so
very
well
,
(
Namely
,
that
they
were
not
to
expect
such
a
land
as
Egypt
,
that
was
a
Plain
naturally
fruitful
,
as
being
well
water'd
;
but
the
land
they
were
to
possess
depended
upon
the
Benediction
of
Heaven
;
and
therefore
they
might
expect
more
or
less
fertility
,
according
as
they
kept
God's
Commandments
:
)
it
is
improper
,
and
ill
grounded
.
For
it
supposes
the
fruitfulness
of
a
Land
,
caused
by
Rains
,
to
be
less
natural
,
than
that
caused
by
Rivers
,
and
it
supposes
the
overflow
of
Rivers
,
to
depend
less
upon
GOD's
Blessing
,
than
the
Downfal
of
Rains
.
Whereas
they
being
both
alike
natural
,
and
their
Dependence
upon
GOD's
Benediction
,
equal
;
the
Hebrews
had
as
much
reason
,
and
as
great
obligation
upon
them
,
to
keep
GOD's
Commandments
in
Egypt
,
as
in
Canaan
,
whither
they
were
going
.
Yea
,
(
if
a
comparison
must
be
made
)
all
things
considered
,
they
might
seem
to
have
better
grounds
for
expecting
fertility
in
Canaan
,
upon
their
obedience
;
than
they
could
have
in
Egypt
.
For
rains
depend
solely
upon
Providence
.
(
And
therefore
the
giving
of
Rain
,
is
all
along
ascrib'd
to
GOD
,
in
Scripture
:
And
of
the
four
Keys
which
the
Rabbies
put
into
the
ALMIGHTY's
hand
,
the
Key
of
the
Clouds
is
one
.
)
But
the
regular
and
fruitful
Overflowing
of
the
Nile
,
depends
not
only
upon
the
providence
of
GOD
,
but
upon
the
pleasure
of
a
great
man
,
Heylyn
,
Cosmog
.
in
his
Description
of
Aethiopia
Superior
.
the
Abassine
Emperour
.
For
to
him
,
as
one
tells
us
,
the
Egyptians
pay
tribute
,
to
have
the
Flooding
Nile
kept
within
compass
.
And
tho
Providence
can
easily
over-rule
Emperors
,
yet
it
must
be
allow'd
,
that
they
may
well
be
more
refractory
than
the
Clouds
.
And
thus
again
Palestine
has
another
Advantage
of
Egypt
,
that
it
pays
no
Fees
for
any
Rivers
or
fruitful
Showres
.
It
is
generally
attended
with
that
privilege
,
which
Caleb
gave
his
Daughter
,
as
an
accession
to
her
Fortune
:
the
upper
and
the
nether
Springs
.
That
is
,
according
to
Bochart
,
Rains
above
,
and
Rivers
and
Fountains
below
.
And
where
these
meet
,
ei
solo
nihil
deest
,
says
he
;
there
is
nothing
wanting
to
make
that
Soil
fruitful
.
So
that
if
there
be
any
unluckiness
in
this
Case
,
it
lights
upon
the
Answerer
.
To
the
objected
Impropriety
of
Foundations
and
a
Corner-stone
in
the
Circle
or
sphaerical
Arch
of
his
Primitive
Earth
:
he
answers
,
those
Expressions
seem
an
Elegancy
to
him
.
Whether
understood
as
an
Allusion
to
our
manner
of
building
;
or
as
an
Ironical
Interrogation
,
implying
that
there
was
no
Foundation
(
strictly
so
call'd
)
nor
corner
stone
,
in
that
great
work
.
Ib.
p.
21.
l.
16.17
.
It
was
but
just
three
Pages
before
,
that
he
flung
at
the
Excepter
for
saying
some
Texts
of
Scripture
(
of
which
this
is
one
)
were
Figurative
.
And
now
,
we
see
,
he
is
fain
to
fetch
in
a
Figure
himself
,
to
help
to
explain
this
very
Text.
So
that
't
is
evident
he
will
do
any
thing
(
even
what
he
openly
condemns
)
to
support
(
as
he
thinks
)
his
tottering
Hypothesis
;
which
when
he
has
done
all
that
he
can
,
will
fall
at
last
.
Who
shut
up
the
Sea
with
doors
,
when
it
brake
forth
as
if
it
had
issued
out
of
a
womb
?
&c.
Here
the
Excepter
gave
reasons
why
these
words
must
refer
to
what
was
done
in
the
Beginning
of
the
World
.
Disc.
p.
150.
p.
150.
151.
(
As
also
reasons
why
by
the
Womb
here
mentioned
,
could
not
be
meant
the
inclosure
of
the
Abyss
,
as
the
Theory
would
have
it
.
)
And
none
of
them
being
answered
(
but
by
the
Expedient
,
of
passing
them
by
)
they
(
both
)
stand
good
.
Now
if
the
HOLY
GHOST
speaks
here
,
of
the
Sea
when
it
first
brake
forth
into
being
(
which
all
but
the
Theorist
allow
he
does
)
what
Womb
could
it
issue
out
of
,
but
the
Womb
of
Nothing
?
But
instead
of
removing
our
Objections
,
the
Answerer
brings
in
two
of
his
own
;
which
the
Replicant
will
not
answer
,
as
he
does
the
Excepter's
.
The
first
is
this
.
If
you
understand
the
Womb
of
Non-entity
;
the
Sea
broke
out
of
that
womb
the
first
day
,
and
had
no
bars
or
doors
set
to
it
,
but
flow'd
over
all
the
Earth
without
check
or
controul
.
Therefore
that
could
not
be
the
time
or
state
here
spoken
of
.
And
to
refer
that
restraint
,
or
those
bars
and
doors
,
to
another
time
,
which
are
spoken
of
here
in
the
same
verse
,
would
be
very
inexcusable
in
the
Excepter
:
seeing
he
will
not
allow
the
Theorist
to
suppose
those
things
that
are
spoken
of
in
different
Verses
,
to
be
understood
of
different
times
.
Now
pray
,
what
is
the
difference
betwixt
the
time
of
the
Sea
's
breaking
forth
of
the
womb
,
and
the
time
of
its
being
restrain'd
with
doors
;
that
the
Excepter
should
be
so
very
inexcusable
,
for
allowing
that
difference
?
It
was
but
the
space
of
one
poor
day
.
And
truly
if
he
had
not
allowed
of
this
difference
;
when
GOD
Himself
signifies
,
that
he
made
the
breaking
forth
of
the
waters
into
being
,
part
of
his
first
day's
work
;
and
the
gathering
them
together
into
one
place
(
the
decreed
place
)
where
they
were
shut
up
with
bars
and
doors
,
his
Third
days
work
:
he
must
have
been
very
inexcusable
indeed
.
O
but
therefore
the
Excepter
is
very
inexcusable
,
because
he
will
not
allow
the
Theorist
to
suppose
those
things
that
are
spoken
of
in
different
verses
,
to
be
understood
of
different
times
.
Be
it
so
.
But
were
the
different
times
of
the
Theorist
then
no
more
distant
,
than
the
different
times
of
the
Excepter
?
The
space
between
the
Excepter's
times
,
was
one
single
day
:
that
between
the
Theorist's
times
,
was
more
than
sixteen
hundred
years
.
And
yet
let
him
bring
but
as
good
authority
for
the
Different
times
which
he
contends
for
,
as
the
Excepter
does
for
his
different
times
(
which
GOD
has
clearly
distinguisht
by
different
works
;
his
creating
Waters
on
one
of
the
times
,
and
his
collecting
and
confining
them
on
the
other
:
)
and
his
different
times
will
by
all
be
allowed
.
But
because
he
can
bring
no
such
authority
,
nor
any
at
all
besides
his
own
;
not
the
Excepter
,
but
he
himself
,
must
be
the
very
inexcusable
person
in
this
Matter
.
His
second
Objection
runs
thus
.
This
Metaphysical
notion
of
the
womb
of
nothing
,
is
altogether
impertinent
,
at
least
in
this
case
:
for
the
Text
is
plainly
speaking
of
things
local
and
corporeal
,
and
this
prison
of
the
Sea
must
be
understood
as
such
.
Must
it
so
?
What
necessity
is
there
for
it
?
None
at
all
but
to
support
the
Theorist's
sinking
Hypothesis
.
And
for
him
to
say
it
must
be
so
understood
in
favour
of
that
;
is
to
beg
the
Question
.
And
however
that
may
be
less
metaphysical
,
it
will
be
more
impertinent
,
than
our
Notion
is
.
For
that
we
can
presently
make
very
pertinent
,
by
a
way
which
himself
just
now
cut
out
.
Foundations
and
Corner-stones
are
as
local
and
corporeal
things
,
as
the
rest
which
the
Text
speaks
of
.
Yet
these
,
he
told
us
,
in
the
immediately
fore-going
Page
,
same
way
,
(
as
it
ever
was
)
and
then
the
Notion
will
be
pertinent
enough
.
But
who
is
impertinent
for
suggesting
it
was
not
so
?
The
last
place
is
Prov.
8.27
,
28.
When
he
prepared
the
Heavens
,
I
was
there
;
when
he
set
a
compass
upon
the
face
of
the
deep
,
&c.
That
by
the
word
,
Compass
here
,
could
not
be
meant
the
first
habitable
Earth
,
as
a
Sphaere
,
Orb
,
or
Arch
in
the
beginning
set
round
the
Abyss
,
according
to
the
Theory
:
the
Excepter
shewed
very
plainly
.
Disc.
p.
153
,
154
,
155.
But
what
he
alledged
of
that
nature
,
is
answered
only
by
the
Second
Expedient
(
which
is
made
great
use
of
)
that
is
,
it
is
passed
by
with
silence
.
Yet
that
the
Answerer
might
seem
to
say
something
;
he
sets
up
a
shadow
or
phantsy
of
his
own
,
The
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
which
we
render
compass
,
he
(
the
Excepter
)
says
,
signifies
no
more
than
the
rotundity
or
spherical
figure
of
the
Abyss
.
Let
the
Answerer
show
where
the
Excepter
says
thus
.
In
this
he
charges
him
falsly
.
Disc.
p.
154.
He
only
said
,
that
by
the
word
compass
,
might
be
meant
,
either
Earthly
bounds
about
the
open
Waters
;
or
the
Firmament
of
Heaven
,
as
a
Sphaere
,
Orb
,
or
Arch
,
set
upon
the
face
of
the
Deep
.
And
are
either
of
these
,
the
Rotundity
or
Sphaerical
figure
of
the
Abyss
?
Yet
if
they
are
not
,
(
as
they
cannot
be
;
)
has
not
the
Answerer
done
manifest
wrong
to
the
Excepter
,
by
suggesting
a
vain
Phantsy
or
Notion
of
his
own
,
and
fathering
it
upon
him
,
as
his
?
This
,
to
speak
freely
,
is
fencing
with
an
unlawful
Weapon
,
which
never
commends
either
the
Skill
or
Ingenuity
of
them
that
use
it
.
He
might
therefore
as
well
have
wav'd
the
false
charge
here
,
by
which
he
would
turn
the
point
of
non-sense
upon
the
Excepter
.
For
what
can
be
more
highly
nonsensical
,
than
to
say
that
the
banks
about
the
sides
,
or
the
Air
about
the
Surface
of
the
Sea
,
are
but
the
shape
or
meer
figure
of
it
?
This
Gentleman
in
this
very
Chapter
complains
of
unfairness
.
And
is
it
possible
?
He
that
does
this
wrong
,
in
the
very
next
paragraph
cries
out
of
injury
.
an
injustice
which
the
Excepter
hath
done
the
Theory
—
by
a
false
accusation
.
For
he
says
,
the
Theory
makes
the
Construction
of
the
first
Earth
to
have
been
meerly
Mechanical
.
And
did
it
not
make
it
so
?
Proferte
tabulas
.
How
read
we
in
the
beginning
of
the
Sixth
Chapter
of
the
Latin
Theory
?
vidimus
massam
illam
primigeniam
—
pervenisse
tandem
in
formam
stabilem
regionis
terrae
.
I
have
followed
the
most
known
laws
of
gravity
and
levity
,
and
by
the
sole
leading
of
them
we
have
seen
that
primigenial
Mass
to
have
come
at
length
into
the
steddy
form
of
a
Region
of
earth
.
Now
that
Body
which
is
led
into
its
form
by
the
laws
of
Gravity
and
Levity
,
must
certainly
be
made
Mechanically
.
And
the
Earth
being
brought
into
its
form
,
by
the
sole
guidance
of
those
Laws
,
its
formation
must
be
meerly
Mechanical
.
And
then
upon
whom
rests
the
Injustice
here
,
and
the
guilt
of
raising
a
false
accusation
?
That
the
Construction
of
the
Earth
was
not
meerly
Mechanical
,
in
the
opinion
of
the
Theorist
,
you
may
see
,
Eng.
Theor.
p.
65.
That
is
,
he
says
and
unsays
;
and
is
so
like
a
Proteus
in
his
Philosophy
,
that
't
is
hard
to
discern
his
shape
and
colour
.
Then
he
brings
two
other
Complaints
against
the
Excepter
.
One
,
for
citing
the
first
Edition
of
the
Theory
;
for
things
left
out
in
the
Second
.
The
other
,
defective
Citations
.
The
first
,
And
whereas
to
shew
that
the
aforesaid
Places
of
Scripture
,
cited
by
the
Theory
,
were
but
figurative
;
the
Excepter
confronted
them
with
that
one
Text
(
instead
of
many
)
who
shaketh
the
Earth
out
of
her
place
,
and
the
Pillars
thereof
tremble
;
which
cannot
be
literally
interpreted
:
The
Answerer
will
not
allow
Pillars
there
to
be
understood
literally
,
for
this
worthy
reason
.
Even
because
there
are
no
such
Pillars
of
the
Earth
upon
any
Hypothesis
.
CHAP.
VIII
.
THis
Chapter
treats
of
the
perpetual
Equinox
of
the
Theory
,
before
the
Flood
.
And
the
Answerer
would
fain
make
the
World
believe
,
that
the
Excepter
thinks
that
the
Earth
(
when
it
changed
its
supposed
Situation
or
Right
Position
to
the
Sun
)
was
translated
from
the
Equator
into
the
Ecliptick
:
and
that
before
the
change
,
in
the
Antediluvian
state
,
it
mov'd
directly
under
the
Equator
.
A
pretty
Mistake
indeed
,
had
it
been
really
thus
.
But
we
shall
see
it
proved
,
just
as
some
other
false
Charges
have
been
.
However
to
show
that
his
Will
is
good
,
he
endeavours
to
squeeze
Evidence
out
of
these
(
the
Excepter's
)
words
.
So
that
in
her
annual
motion
about
the
Sun
,
she
was
carried
directly
under
the
Equinoctial
,
without
any
manner
of
obliquity
in
her
site
,
or
declination
towards
either
of
the
Tropics
,
in
her
course
:
And
therefore
could
never
cut
the
Equinoctial
,
by
passing
(
as
now
she
is
presum'd
to
do
)
from
one
Tropic
to
the
other
.
Now
pray
,
was
not
the
Ecliptic
,
the
Equinoctial
in
the
Theorist's
first
World
?
And
was
not
the
Earth
carried
directly
under
the
Equinoctial
?
And
was
not
that
World
without
Tropics
?
And
must
it
not
be
true
then
that
the
Earth
never
cut
the
Equinoctial
,
by
passing
(
as
she
is
now
presum'd
to
do
)
from
one
Tropic
to
the
other
?
But
where
does
the
Excepter
speak
a
word
here
,
of
her
being
translated
from
the
Equator
,
at
the
change
of
her
position
?
or
of
her
moving
directly
under
it
,
in
the
Antediluvian
state
?
So
far
was
he
from
that
,
that
what
he
says
,
is
of
the
quite
contrary
Importance
.
As
shewing
that
the
Earth
moved
always
under
the
Equinoctial
of
the
Praediluvian
World
,
which
was
the
Ecliptick
;
and
could
not
possibly
have
an
Excursion
to
the
Tropics
,
as
now
she
has
:
For
in
that
State
there
were
no
such
things
.
And
besides
that
the
words
cited
carry
this
sense
most
plainly
in
them
,
the
Excepter
,
right
situation
to
the
Sun
,
is
meant
that
the
axis
of
the
Earth
was
always
kept
in
a
Parallelism
to
that
of
the
Ecliptick
.
And
could
it
then
in
the
Antediluvian
state
,
move
directly
under
the
Equator
?
Or
could
the
Answerer
perceive
(
as
his
word
is
)
that
the
Excepter
thought
it
did
so
?
Then
his
Perception
was
more
quick
than
true
.
And
now
it
is
to
be
hop'd
that
he
will
better
perceive
,
that
he
might
have
spar'd
those
Leavers
and
Pullies
,
But
that
the
Earth
had
a
Direct
Situation
to
the
Sun
,
causing
a
perpetual
Equinox
;
is
very
unlikely
,
said
the
Excepter
,
a
more
full
account
of
the
Change
thereof
.
To
this
the
Answerer
opposes
,
that
other
things
are
lost
out
of
memory
.
Age
of
the
World
,
and
the
place
of
Paradise
.
But
Time
and
Place
are
but
Circumstances
of
things
,
and
so
might
sooner
and
more
easily
slip
out
of
mind
.
Whereas
the
Loss
of
the
Equinox
,
by
the
variation
of
the
Earth's
Position
would
not
only
have
been
a
real
,
but
a
mighty
thing
.
For
it
must
have
been
attended
not
only
with
a
strange
Alteration
as
to
Seasons
of
the
year
,
as
to
the
Temperature
of
the
Air
,
and
as
to
the
condition
of
the
Earth
;
but
also
with
sensible
Effects
upon
the
Bodies
of
men
,
as
Heat
,
Cold
,
&c.
Which
Effects
would
not
only
have
caused
Noah
and
his
Family
to
Observe
this
Change
,
(
so
mighty
in
its
Consequences
as
well
as
in
it self
)
but
likewise
would
have
so
far
imprinted
,
and
set
home
the
Observation
upon
them
;
as
to
have
given
occasion
to
a
lasting
traditional
Remembrance
of
the
same
.
And
what
if
the
just
Age
of
the
World
be
lost
,
(
the
Hebrews
,
Greeks
,
and
Latins
differing
about
it
;
)
and
Chronology
being
a
difficult
thing
,
subject
to
innumerable
intricacies
and
entanglements
?
)
Yet
't
is
clear
enough
that
the
World
had
a
Beginning
.
And
what
if
we
be
at
a
loss
for
the
true
Place
of
Paradise
,
which
was
known
to
none
but
Adam
and
Eve
;
and
which
GOD
perhaps
design'd
to
bury
out
of
the
memory
of
men
,
as
he
did
Moses's
Body
out
of
Israel's
knowledge
,
to
prevent
Superstition
?
Yet
still
that
there
was
a
Paradise
,
is
most
certain
.
But
this
is
that
which
the
pretended
Equinox
fails
in
;
in
the
truth
or
certainty
of
its
Existence
.
We
have
no
Evidence
,
no
clear
and
convincing
Evidence
to
prove
that
it
ever
was
in
Nature
.
The
Excepter
farther
objected
,
While
the
Earth
remaineth
,
seed
time
and
harvest
,
and
cold
and
heat
,
and
summer
and
winter
,
and
night
and
day
shall
not
cease
.
Which
place
the
Answerer
owns
,
may
be
understood
of
the
restauration
of
a
former
order
in
the
Seasons
of
the
year
;
and
so
by
his
own
Confession
,
it
is
good
evidence
on
our
side
.
the
Theorist
set
down
,
to
make
it
probable
,
that
the
words
ought
to
be
understood
as
a
Declaration
of
such
an
Order
for
the
Seasons
of
the
Year
,
as
was
brought
in
at
that
time
;
which
Reasons
the
Excepter
hath
not
thought
fit
to
take
notice
of
,
or
refute
:
These
Reasons
seem
to
be
the
perpetual
Equinox
,
the
Longaevity
of
the
Antediluvians
,
and
the
Appearance
of
the
Rainbow
,
first
in
the
new
World
.
But
before
such
Phaenomonaes
can
be
offered
as
good
Reasons
to
prove
other
things
,
they
must
be
better
establisht
themselves
.
To
go
about
to
prove
one
part
of
an
Hypothesis
,
by
another
part
of
it
,
when
the
whole
is
questioned
,
and
lies
under
debate
;
is
no
allowable
way
of
proceeding
.
Yet
these
Reasons
the
Excepter
did
take
sufficient
notice
of
.
But
the
Answerer's
finding
fault
with
the
Excepter
here
,
for
not
taking
notice
of
Reasons
;
puts
him
upon
a
more
just
,
and
most
seasonable
Recrimination
.
For
five
Instances
heing
alledg'd
by
the
Excepter
,
Disc.
p.
166
,
167
,
168.
in
proof
of
what
he
affirmed
of
the
Scripture
;
viz.
that
it
rather
discountenances
the
Equinox
than
favours
it
:
He
answers
three
of
them
,
only
by
his
last
Expedient
;
that
is
,
by
passing
them
by
.
To
the
Fourth
,
being
the
Barrenness
of
the
Earth
,
from
the
divine
Malediction
denounc'd
against
it
for
Adam's
sin
;
which
Barrenness
is
utterly
inconsistent
with
the
Doctrine
of
the
Equinox
:
his
Answer
is
this
.
That
Curse
was
supernatural
,
and
might
have
its
effect
in
any
Position
of
the
Earth
.
But
then
this
Effect
overthrows
his
Hypothesis
,
which
maintains
a
perpetual
Spring
to
all
the
World
,
and
a
continual
verdure
of
the
Earth
.
Eng.
Theor.
p.
196.
the
Intemperature
of
the
Air
in
Paradise
,
inferred
from
the
Coats
of
Skins
,
made
by
GOD
,
to
cloth
the
Protoplasts
with
,
and
defend
them
from
cold
;
was
brought
in
as
an
Instance
to
show
that
Scripture
does
not
favour
the
Equinox
but
discountenance
it
.
And
to
this
it
is
answered
thus
.
must
tell
us
in
what
Climate
he
supposes
Paradise
to
have
stood
:
and
which
way
and
how
far
,
Adam
and
Eve
were
banisht
from
it
.
When
those
things
are
determin'd
,
we
shall
know
what
to
Judge
of
his
Argument
,
and
of
Coats
of
skins
.
In
the
mean
time
he
may
please
to
consider
these
Four
things
.
Disc.
p.
169
,
170
First
,
that
it
has
been
already
shewed
,
that
in
all
likelihood
these
coats
of
skins
were
made
to
defend
our
first
Parents
from
Cold.
Secondly
,
that
for
ought
appears
in
the
sacred
Story
,
they
were
clothed
with
these
Coats
,
before
they
were
turned
out
of
Paradise
,
Thirdly
,
that
they
could
not
be
banisht
far
from
it
,
because
when
they
were
thrown
out
of
it
,
Cherubim
were
set
to
guard
the
Entrance
,
lest
they
should
return
into
it
again
.
And
therefore
if
Paradise
stood
in
a
pleasant
and
temperate
Region
of
the
Earth
(
as
who
can
think
otherwise
?
)
they
may
be
supposed
(
for
a
great
while
)
to
abide
in
the
Neighbourhood
of
it
.
Fourthly
,
Suppose
them
banisht
which
way
you
will
,
and
as
far
from
it
as
you
please
;
yet
they
could
have
needed
no
Coats
to
defend
them
from
Cold
,
in
case
the
Theory's
Hypothesis
were
true
.
Eng.
Theor.
p.
251
:
For
according
to
that
,
in
the
primaeval
Earth
,
we
have
every
where
through
the
temperate
Climates
,
all
the
general
Characters
of
Paradise
,
so
that
the
trouble
will
be
rather
in
that
competition
,
what
part
or
Region
to
pitch
upon
in
particular
:
than
to
find
a
seat
that
had
all
those
beauties
and
conveniences
.
And
therefore
had
Adam
and
Eve
been
banisht
never
so
far
from
Paradise
into
any
temperate
Climates
(
and
none
were
then
intemperate
but
those
that
were
also
uninhabitable
)
yet
they
must
still
have
been
in
Paradisiacal
Regions
and
circumstances
;
and
so
could
have
needed
no
Coats
of
Skins
.
But
GOD
being
pleased
to
make
them
such
Coats
to
defend
them
from
the
Cold
,
this
subverts
the
General
Paradisiacalness
of
the
primitive
Earth
,
and
consequently
its
Equinox
;
by
implying
there
was
a
cold
or
intemperate
air
,
in
the
habitable
parts
of
it
.
The
Answerer
proceeds
thus
in
the
next
Paragraph
.
After
Lastly
,
I
expected
no
more
:
but
he
hath
two
or
three
Reasons
after
the
Last
.
Thus
he
cannot
forbear
playing
upon
the
Excepter
,
tho
he
does
it
with
the
worst
luck
that
ever
man
had
.
For
even
by
this
Reflection
(
intended
to
disparage
him
)
he
only
exposes
himself
,
by
betraying
and
proclaiming
his
own
Inadvertency
.
For
the
Lastly
he
notes
,
plainly
belongs
(
as
any
one
may
see
)
to
the
Last
of
the
Instances
shewing
that
Scripture
does
not
favour
the
Equinox
.
The
next
Argument
of
the
Excepter's
against
the
Equinox
,
is
,
Torrid
Zone
,
such
was
the
fiery
heat
thereof
,
that
neither
he
nor
his
could
have
gone
through
it
to
the
other
side
.
And
here
the
Answerer
is
so
put
to
it
,
that
he
is
forc'd
to
betake
himself
to
his
first
Expedient
to
solve
the
Objection
by
Extraordinary
Providence
.
the
Theorist
never
excluded
the
Ministery
of
Angels
;
and
they
could
as
easily
carry
them
through
the
Torrid
Zone
,
as
over
the
Ocean
.
As
for
Angels
carrying
men
over
the
Ocean
,
let
him
blame
those
that
assert
it
:
he
knows
the
Excepter
to
be
very
clear
from
it
.
Disc.
ch
.
11.
§
7.
But
if
he
will
have
them
carried
through
the
Torrid
Zone
by
their
miraculous
Ministery
;
he
must
remember
,
that
this
is
to
show
us
the
arm
of
Omnipotency
,
Eng.
Theor.
p.
18.
and
to
cut
the
knot
when
we
cannot
loose
it
.
Tho
had
Providence
shown
this
signal
favour
to
Mankind
,
we
need
not
question
but
it
would
have
been
entred
in
the
Records
of
Heaven
.
But
the
inspired
Writings
remember
nothing
of
it
.
Another
Reason
brought
by
the
Excepter
why
there
could
be
no
Equinox
,
put
by
the
Rains
which
help'd
to
raise
the
Flood
.
And
here
the
Philosopher
is
fain
to
run
to
his
old
Refuge
again
,
and
to
answer
(
by
the
same
Expedient
)
That
those
rains
that
made
the
Flood
were
Extraordinary
,
and
out
of
the
course
of
Nature
.
But
this
is
little
less
than
giving
up
his
Hypothesis
;
at
least
it
is
condemning
it
as
weak
and
insufficient
.
And
truly
what
Hypothesis
,
tho
never
so
mean
and
full
of
Defects
,
would
not
support
it self
under
all
its
flaws
and
imperfections
,
by
such
a
lawless
liberty
as
this
?
A
liberty
of
recourse
to
Extraordinary
Providence
,
and
of
bringing
in
Miracles
,
and
the
Ministery
of
Angels
,
to
help
to
take
off
and
solve
those
Difficulties
,
which
puzzle
its
Author
,
and
baffle
its
Principles
.
To
what
purpose
did
he
invent
a
Theory
,
and
write
a
Treatise
with
design
to
shut
out
one
Extraordinary
Providence
,
33
,
34.
the
creating
of
new
Waters
to
make
the
Deluge
;
when
in
this
Treatise
,
and
to
uphold
that
Theory
,
he
is
constrain'd
to
let
in
thus
many
?
But
here
the
Answerer
is
plainly
for
shifting
,
to
avoid
a
blow
;
which
,
for
that
,
falls
but
the
heavier
upon
him
.
The
Theory
,
said
the
Excepter
,
I
do
not
suppose
the
Abyss
broken
open
till
after
the
forty
days
rain
.
But
then
,
adds
the
Excepter
,
this
is
most
directly
against
Scripture
;
for
that
plainly
affirms
,
that
the
Fountains
of
the
great
Deep
,
and
the
windows
of
Heaven
were
both
open'd
on
one
day
,
Gen.
7.11
.
Now
to
salve
this
repugnancy
to
Scripture
,
the
Answerer
here
declares
,
that
he
does
not
suppose
the
Cataracts
of
Heaven
to
have
been
open'd
before
,
which
made
the
Grand
rains
.
grand
rains
)
without
a
new
Creation
of
Waters
,
which
the
Theory
designedly
opposes
?
And
then
the
LORD
said
unto
Noah
,
Gen.
7.4
.
Yet
seven
days
,
and
I
will
cause
it
to
rain
upon
the
Earth
forty
days
and
forty
nights
.
And
is
it
likely
that
GOD
would
have
given
that
Preserver
of
the
World
notice
,
that
Rains
to
make
the
Flood
,
should
begin
a
Week
after
;
if
it
had
already
rained
for
three
and
thirty
days
before
,
or
for
above
a
Month
past
?
Lastly
,
against
the
Equinox
it
was
suggested
,
that
Authors
of
all
sorts
have
disputed
,
what
Season
of
the
year
the
Flood
came
in
,
and
the
World
had
its
beginning
.
Which
hints
that
there
was
not
any
one
Season
through
all
the
Earth
at
once
.
But
the
Answerer
intimates
,
that
upon
Supposition
of
an
Equinox
according
to
the
Theory
,
And
why
,
says
he
,
may
not
that
have
given
occasion
to
the
general
belief
,
that
the
World
began
in
the
Spring
?
Did
he
insist
upon
that
Belief
,
he
must
prove
it
to
be
general
,
and
to
be
occasion'd
by
the
Equinox
;
and
not
take
it
for
granted
.
not
depend
upon
it
,
we
need
not
reply
to
it
any
farther
neither
.
In
the
next
place
the
Excepter
considered
the
Authorities
,
call'd
in
to
establish
the
Doctrine
of
the
Equinox
.
That
is
,
by
proving
that
the
Earth
had
suffered
a
change
as
to
its
Position
,
and
thereby
had
lost
its
former
Right
Situation
.
But
these
Authorities
were
not
found
clear
enough
to
do
the
Theory's
business
;
as
will
best
appear
to
them
that
shall
peruse
the
Examination
of
the
same
.
Disc.
Ch.
8.
§
7.
And
here
the
Answerer
is
much
offended
,
as
if
his
Witnesses
were
not
fairly
heard
,
because
they
were
unskilful
in
giving
the
Causes
or
Reasons
of
a
matter
of
fact
.
We
reply
.
All
Testimonies
must
be
taken
as
they
are
.
And
where
evidence
is
not
clear
,
for
the
same
reason
it
is
not
certain
,
nor
can
it
be
valid
.
And
when
Witnesses
give
it
in
,
if
they
trip
and
faulter
in
any
part
of
it
;
we
have
good
reason
to
suspect
the
whole
.
And
as
improbable
Circumstances
in
their
Allegations
,
will
invalidate
them
in
matter
of
fact
:
so
impossible
ones
,
if
mingled
with
them
,
will
quite
overthrow
them
.
The
true
case
of
the
Testimonies
before
us
.
They
contain
such
improbable
and
impossible
things
,
as
do
not
only
weaken
,
but
destroy
them
.
Should
twenty
Mariners
confidently
affirm
,
that
they
sailed
in
a
Ship
from
Dover
to
Calice
,
by
a
brisk
Gale
out
of
a
pair
of
Bellows
:
tho
this
be
a
matter
of
fact
,
must
they
not
be
reckoned
notorious
Lyars
?
Or
if
forty
Engineers
should
positively
swear
,
that
the
Powder-mill
near
London
,
was
lately
blown
up
,
by
a
Mine
then
sprung
at
Great
Waradin
in
Hungary
;
must
they
not
be
grievously
perjur'd
Persons
?
And
the
Philosophers
attesting
the
Earth's
Inclination
,
having
charged
their
Evidence
with
as
great
Impossibilities
;
the
Reports
they
make
,
must
be
as
little
credible
.
Or
let
us
take
the
Instance
which
the
Answerer
gives
,
the
Peloponesian
War
.
single
Currants
which
grew
thereabouts
;
and
that
hundreds
and
thousands
were
stabb'd
with
the
one
,
and
knockt
on
the
head
with
the
other
:
who
would
believe
that
ever
there
were
such
Weapons
in
that
war
;
that
ever
there
was
such
a
fatal
War
in
that
Country
?
Yet
as
possible
it
was
for
multitudes
of
men
to
be
kill'd
by
these
Instruments
;
as
for
the
Position
of
the
Earth
to
be
chang'd
by
those
Causes
,
which
were
assign'd
by
the
Theory's
Philosophic
Witnesses
.
For
how
could
the
Southern
Pole
of
the
Earth
dip
into
the
Air
,
through
excess
of
heat
,
or
excess
of
Fruits
thereabouts
;
when
at
both
Poles
the
heat
of
the
Sun
was
equal
,
and
so
was
the
fatness
and
fertility
of
the
Soil
?
(
See
Disc.
p.
180
,
181.
)
Or
if
these
were
the
Causes
of
that
great
Effect
,
why
then
was
it
not
wrought
sooner
,
than
at
the
end
of
above
sixteen
hundred
and
fifty
years
?
And
yet
these
very
Causes
being
not
only
brought
into
their
Evidence
,
but
made
as
true
and
express
a
part
thereof
,
as
the
Inclination
of
the
Earth
it self
;
their
Testimonies
must
extend
to
both
alike
:
and
in
case
the
one
be
of
doubtful
credit
,
the
other
must
be
the
same
.
Yea
,
the
one
,
according
to
their
Allegations
,
being
Causes
,
and
the
other
but
an
effect
of
them
;
if
they
be
false
witnesses
as
to
the
Causes
upon
which
the
Effect
,
according
to
their
evidence
,
had
its
whole
dependence
;
their
Testimonies
,
as
to
the
Effect
,
must
needs
fail
and
be
nothing
worth
.
For
they
plainly
ascribing
it
to
causes
that
were
not
,
Disc.
p.
179
,
189
,
&c.
and
so
could
not
produce
it
;
at
the
same
time
,
and
by
the
same
words
that
they
attest
there
was
such
an
Effect
;
they
witness
withal
that
it
could
not
be
.
And
so
their
Evidence
is
as
far
from
being
valid
and
authentic
;
as
contradiction
is
from
truth
.
But
what
ill
has
the
Excepter
said
of
Anaxagoras
;
that
the
Answerer
taxes
him
not
only
with
a
Groundless
,
Rude
Censure
of
that
famous
man
?
Why
,
a
man
as
like
to
be
Heterodox
,
as
any
of
the
Learned
Ancients
.
And
this
Censure
is
neither
Groundless
,
nor
Rude
.
Not
Groundless
.
For
as
his
Assertion
was
most
wild
,
and
childish
,
and
ridiculous
,
and
false
;
so
it
was
as
absurd
,
unreasonable
,
and
extravagantly
Heterodox
as
could
readily
be
invented
in
Astronomy
.
Nor
could
he
slip
into
this
Error
by
chance
,
nor
could
he
mean
any
thing
else
by
the
Assertion
,
than
what
he
expressed
;
because
it
agrees
so
well
(
as
the
Excepter
observed
)
to
the
strain
of
his
Philosophy
,
generating
Stars
out
of
Stones
.
Now
that
man
(
be
he
who
,
or
what
he
will
,
even
Anaxagoras
himself
)
who
is
guilty
of
one
so
abominably
gross
and
shameful
an
Heterodoxness
in
Astronomy
;
is
certainly
as
like
to
be
guilty
of
another
,
as
any
of
the
Learned
:
and
therefore
the
Censure
cannot
be
Groundless
.
Nor
is
it
Rude
.
For
first
,
as
we
see
,
it
is
well
grounded
.
Built
(
as
the
Excepter
said
before
)
upon
a
wretched
foundation
of
his
own
laying
.
that
Case
where
the
Excepter
was
concern'd
.
And
witnesses
,
we
know
,
may
be
canvass'd
and
lookt
into
,
as
well
as
what
they
say
.
They
may
be
sifted
,
and
explored
,
and
spoken
against
too
;
if
they
give
in
false
evidence
,
instead
of
true
.
Thirdly
,
it
was
spoken
with
this
Caution
,
not
to
disparage
Anaxagoras
,
but
only
to
signify
—
that
in
any
dark
or
doubtful
opinion
,
we
have
no
reason
—
to
lay
the
stress
of
our
belief
upon
his
Authority
,
—
contrary
to
the
whole
World
of
the
Learned
.
Fourthly
,
Pliny
pass'd
an
heavier
Censure
upon
him
,
which
hitherto
was
never
said
to
be
rude
.
For
speaking
of
Anaxagoras
,
and
this
stone
which
he
phantsied
fell
out
of
the
Sun
:
Farewel
the
knowledge
of
Natures
works
,
says
he
,
and
welcome
confusion
of
all
,
in
case
we
should
believe
it
.
And
how
could
he
possibly
reflect
more
highly
upon
an
eminent
Philosopher
,
than
to
make
him
the
Author
of
such
an
Assertion
,
or
to
make
him
the
Patron
of
such
an
opinion
;
as
if
People
had
believ'd
it
,
would
have
let
confusion
into
the
World
,
by
banishing
natural
Philosophy
out
of
it
?
Is
not
this
a
more
rugged
Censure
,
than
saying
he
was
a
man
as
like
to
be
Heterodox
,
as
any
of
the
learned
Ancients
?
Yet
who
ever
call'd
it
Rude
?
But
how
extravagant
soever
Pliny
thought
him
,
the
Answerer
takes
him
to
be
very
excusable
.
And
accordingly
offers
to
make
his
excuse
two
ways
.
First
,
by
saying
,
that
we
are
not
to
imagine
,
that
all
the
opinions
of
the
ancient
Philosophers
,
are
truly
conveyed
to
us
.
And
so
the
Earth's
Inclination
or
its
changed
Position
,
which
he
conceives
to
be
the
Opinion
of
several
Philosophers
;
may
be
nothing
but
a
falsity
,
or
misrepresented
Notion
of
theirs
.
Secondly
,
by
saying
,
that
his
Assertion
of
a
Stone
that
fell
from
the
Sun
,
cannot
be
literally
true
.
Incrustation
of
a
fixt
star
,
and
its
descent
into
the
lower
World
.
But
did
ever
any
star
come
down
so
low
,
as
to
rest
upon
the
Earth
?
Or
did
ever
any
star
lie
to
be
seen
and
wondred
at
by
a
Rivers
side
?
very
authors
out
of
whole
Books
he
cites
his
Testimonies
,
for
the
Earth's
changing
of
its
Position
.
And
we
only
bring
in
a
third
Person
,
telling
the
same
story
(
of
this
stony
fiery
fallen
star
)
for
a
literal
truth
;
namely
Pliny
.
And
his
Authority
cannot
but
help
much
to
confirm
the
thing
,
he
being
well
known
to
be
no
trivial
Writer
.
But
does
not
the
Answerer
forget
himself
in
this
case
?
Is
there
not
a
greater
than
Anaxagoras
here
?
What
thinks
he
of
Moses
?
We
might
fill
many
Pages
with
his
glorious
Character
,
and
yet
come
short
of
his
real
worth
.
Let
us
only
note
that
Encomium
therefore
which
the
H.
GHOST
bestows
upon
him
;
where
for
his
Excellency
,
he
compares
the
very
Messiah
to
him
,
Act.
3.22
.
A
Prophet
shall
the
LORD
your
GOD
raise
up
unto
you
,
like
unto
me
.
That
is
,
for
Wisdom
,
Miracles
,
&c.
Now
is
not
the
Theorist
more
rude
to
this
great
and
illustrious
Prophet
;
than
the
Excepter
was
to
the
aforesaid
Philosopher
?
The
Excepter
only
noted
Anaxagoras's
Doctrine
,
as
delivered
to
the
World
by
unexceptionable
Pens
;
and
made
a
just
Observation
upon
it
,
more
mild
,
or
less
severe
,
than
a
considerable
Author
(
upon
the
same
Passage
)
had
made
before
him
.
But
the
Theorist
confronted
the
inspired
Doctrine
of
Moses
;
and
that
not
only
by
implied
,
but
also
by
explicit
contradiction
,
in
sundry
instances
.
For
Moses
teaches
,
GOD
made
Two
great
Lights
.
The
Theorist
argues
that
he
made
but
one
,
the
Soul
of
man
,
Eng.
Theor.
p.
288.
Gen.
4.22
.
and
of
the
Host
of
the
Heavens
.
The
Theorist
averrs
,
that
the
Subject
of
his
Genesis
is
the
Chaos
,
and
that
most
confus'd
and
earthly
;
and
the
things
made
out
of
this
Chaos
and
related
to
it
as
a
Center
.
Moses
;
teaches
,
that
GOD
gave
Adam
Dominion
over
the
Fish
of
the
Sea
,
as
He
did
,
over
the
Fowl
of
the
Air
,
and
over
every
living
thing
that
moveth
upon
the
Earth
.
The
Theorist
makes
it
one
Vital
or
Primary
Assertion
of
his
Hypothesis
;
the
Primitive
Earth
was
without
Mountains
,
or
a
Sea
.
Moses
assures
us
,
that
Tubal
Cain
was
an
Instructer
of
every
Artificer
in
Brass
and
Iron
.
The
Theorist
says
,
that
in
the
first
Earth
they
had
no
Metals
nor
Minerals
,
as
he
believed
.
Are
not
these
plain
Contradictions
of
Moses
?
Yet
the
Replicant
does
not
say
that
they
were
Rude
ones
.
Tho
whether
they
are
not
more
Rude
and
Groundless
,
than
the
Excepter's
Censure
of
Anaxagoras
was
;
let
the
Ingenuous
and
Impartial
,
judge
.
And
besides
,
in
his
English
Theory
(
p.
288.
)
he
puts
this
amongst
the
Vital
Assertions
of
it
.
That
neither
Noah
's
flood
,
nor
the
present
Form
of
the
Earth
,
can
be
explain'd
in
any
other
method
that
is
rational
,
nor
by
any
other
causes
that
are
intelligible
.
And
speaking
of
the
Ancient
Earth
and
Abyss
(
p.
93.
)
he
delivers
himself
thus
.
If
they
were
in
no
other
Form
,
nor
other
state
than
what
they
are
under
now
,
the
expressions
of
the
Sacred
Writers
concerning
them
are
very
strange
and
inaccountable
,
without
any
sufficient
ground
,
or
any
just
occasion
for
such
uncouth
representations
.
Some
perhaps
may
see
as
much
rudeness
here
,
as
in
any
thing
that
the
Excepter
said
of
Anaxagoras
.
And
should
absolute
strangers
to
his
Religion
read
this
Author
:
they
might
possibly
be
apt
to
think
,
from
many
passages
in
his
books
,
that
instead
of
believing
these
sacred
Writers
in
several
Matters
;
he
designs
to
confute
them
.
And
should
they
at
the
same
time
be
strangers
to
these
Writers
too
,
they
might
be
apt
to
think
also
that
they
deserve
to
be
confuted
,
or
that
they
were
not
worth
confuting
.
For
to
say
that
their
representations
of
things
are
uncouth
,
and
that
their
Expressions
are
occasionless
and
groundless
,
and
very
strange
,
and
inaccountable
;
is
the
same
thing
as
to
say
that
they
writ
non-sense
.
These
are
our
Authors
words
:
and
if
we
will
believe
him
(
who
must
needs
know
best
)
he
finds
no
reason
to
alter
his
Opinion
in
any
one
particular
.
And
when
he
can
thus
express
himself
of
sacred
Writers
,
because
their
Doctrines
differ
from
his
Notions
:
is
he
not
like
to
be
thought
by
some
,
to
be
as
deep
in
the
dirt
of
rudeness
,
as
the
Excepter
is
in
the
mire
,
for
saying
what
he
did
of
an
heathen
Author
?
To
the
Philosophers
,
the
Answerer
says
,
he
might
have
added
the
Testimonies
of
Poets
,
who
tell
us
of
a
perpetual
Spring
.
And
particularly
he
quotes
Ovid
for
it
.
But
if
his
Evidence
must
be
admitted
,
it
is
but
reason
that
we
should
have
the
whole
of
it
.
And
if
we
take
it
in
its
full
latitude
,
there
is
nothing
more
contrary
to
the
Assertions
of
the
Theory
,
than
that
.
For
as
after
that
Testimony
of
his
,
ver
erat
Aeternum
,
there
was
a
perpetual
Spring
;
he
says
,
Flumina
jam
Lactis
,
jam
flumina
Nectaris
ibant
.
Sometimes
Rivers
flowed
with
Milk
,
sometimes
with
Nectar
:
so
before
it
,
he
speaks
many
things
,
Metamor
.
l.
1.
in
initio
.
perfectly
destructive
to
the
Doctrine
of
the
Theory
.
For
he
tells
,
that
in
the
Beginning
,
and
even
before
man
was
created
;
some
Deity
or
other
made
Seas
;
such
Seas
as
had
Shores
,
and
were
tossed
with
Winds
,
and
so
were
open
Seas
.
Tum
Freta
diffudit
,
rapidisque
tumescere
ventis
Jussit
,
&
ambitae
circundare
littora
terrae
.
Then
Seas
he
made
,
with
blustring
Storms
to
swell
;
And
Shores
to
th'
Earth
inclos'd
he
gave
as
well
.
Then
he
says
there
were
Valleys
,
and
Stony
Mountains
.
Jussit
&
extendi
campos
,
subsidere
Valles
,
Fronde
tegi
sylvas
,
lapidosos
surgere
montes
.
Next
Fields
came
forth
,
and
Valleys
sunk
below
,
And
leavy
Trees
,
and
stony
Hills
did
grow
.
And
tells
us
farther
,
that
at
the
same
time
,
there
were
two
Zones
of
the
five
,
covered
with
deep
Snows
.
And
that
there
were
not
only
Mists
but
Clouds
,
and
dreadful
Thunders
,
and
cold
Winds
,
with
Lightnings
.
Nix
tegit
alta
duas
.
—
Illic
&
nebulas
,
illic
consistere
nubes
Jussit
,
&
humanas
motura
tonitrua
mentes
,
Et
cum
fulminibus
facientes
frigora
ventos
.
With
pure
white
Snows
Two
Zones
were
covered
,
There
Mists
did
fall
,
and
Clouds
were
gathered
;
And
frightful
Thunders
dwelt
that
awe
mens
minds
,
And
flashing
Lightnings
,
with
most
nipping
Winds
.
So
that
if
he
spake
one
word
for
the
Theory
,
he
spake
many
against
it
.
And
therefore
it
had
been
better
that
he
had
said
nothing
;
and
that
the
Answerer
had
wav'd
this
Testimony
of
his
.
the
Christian
Father's
Character
of
Paradise
,
in
proof
of
his
perpetual
praediluvian
Equinox
.
And
this
Character
he
takes
from
Bella●mine
,
&c.
Paradise
is
so
describ'd
by
S.
Basil
,
in
his
Book
of
Paradise
;
by
John
Damascen
in
his
second
Book
of
the
Faith
,
and
the
eleventh
Chapter
;
By
S.
Austin
in
the
fourteenth
book
of
the
City
of
GOD
,
and
the
tenth
Chapter
;
by
Alchimus
Avitus
,
and
Claudius
Marius
Victor
,
and
others
above
cited
;
by
Isidore
in
his
fourteenth
book
of
Etymologys
,
and
third
Chapter
;
and
others
commonly
:
as
if
in
it
there
were
a
perpetual
Spring
,
no
colds
,
no
heats
,
no
rains
,
snows
,
hails
,
also
no
clouds
;
which
very
thing
the
Scripture
signifies
,
when
it
says
the
first
of
mankind
were
naked
in
Paradise
.
We
reply
.
First
,
that
the
Cardinal
who
here
summs
up
the
Evidence
of
these
Witnesses
,
as
a
Judge
;
did
himself
pronounce
Extravagant
things
in
the
Case
.
And
therefore
no
wonder
if
he
picks
up
,
and
brings
in
such
kind
of
Testimonies
,
as
may
be
somewhat
sutable
to
his
own
[
*
](A67683-e31560-b)
*
He
believed
that
the
waters
of
the
Flood
came
not
into
Paradise
;
But
that
Enoch
was
kept
alive
there
when
the
Earth
was
drowned
;
and
that
he
and
Elias
do
dwell
together
there
now
,
and
shall
continue
to
do
so
,
till
such
time
as
they
come
from
thence
to
oppose
Antichrist
.
vid.
Cap.
14.
De
Grat.
prim
.
hom.
De
grat
.
prim
.
hom.
Cap.
12.
Answ.
p.
37.
Notions
.
Secondly
,
the
Testimonies
brought
in
by
his
own
Pen
,
he
blots
out
again
with
his
own
hand
.
For
speaking
of
Bede's
opinion
,
that
Paradise
was
a
place
as
high
as
the
Moon
;
(
which
he
makes
the
opinion
of
Bridefert
rather
,
who
glossed
upon
Bede
)
he
says
,
that
the
Author
of
that
opinion
,
was
pleased
to
make
use
of
an
Hyperbole
;
that
by
the
heighth
of
that
,
Paradisi
excellentiam
demonstraret
,
he
might
set
forth
the
excellency
of
Paradise
.
Quemidmodum
intelligimus
verba
Sancti
Basilii
,
&c.
After
the
same
manner
that
we
understand
the
words
of
S.
Basil
—
of
John
Damascen
,
—
of
Alchimus
Avitus
,
&c.
And
when
what
they
said
was
Hyperbolical
;
to
the
Theory's
purpose
it
cannot
be
material
.
After
this
he
attaques
the
two
Queries
made
by
the
Excepter
against
the
praediluvian
Equinox
.
The
First
was
this
.
Would
it
(
in
likelihood
)
have
continued
till
the
Flood
?
For
the
water
of
the
Abyss
being
in
process
of
time
exhausted
,
and
the
exterior
Earth
hanging
hollow
over
an
empty
space
round
it
;
by
being
pendulous
and
oblong
,
the
waters
upon
that
Earth
abounding
(
for
some
reasons
given
)
more
at
one
Pole
of
it
,
the
Waters
were
not
more
rarifi'd
towards
one
Pole
,
than
towards
another
.
And
we
never
said
or
thought
they
were
.
But
in
his
English
Theory
we
read
(
p.
229.
)
that
the
Current
(
of
the
waters
from
the
Poles
)
might
in
some
places
rest
and
be
stopt
;
and
then
it
would
spread
it self
into
Lakes
,
and
rise
till
it
grew
to
such
an
heighth
,
as
to
be
able
by
its
force
or
weight
,
to
overflow
and
break
loose
again
,
before
it
could
pass
farther
.
Now
in
case
the
Current
might
thue
be
stopt
,
and
the
obstruction
be
so
great
as
to
cause
the
Waters
to
swell
into
Lakes
;
how
easily
might
there
be
more
or
greater
Lakes
near
to
one
of
the
Poles
than
the
other
?
And
so
how
easily
would
the
overweight
of
water
have
sunk
the
Earth
down
at
the
praeponderating
Pole
,
tho
the
Waters
were
no
more
rarify'd
there
than
at
the
other
?
That
therefore
being
wide
of
the
Mark
he
should
have
hit
;
he
sends
another
Arrow
after
it
,
taken
out
of
the
Quiver
of
Philosophy
.
The
empty
space
betwixt
the
exterior
Region
of
the
Earth
,
and
the
Abyss
below
,
would
be
fill'd
with
such
gross
vapors
,
that
it
would
be
little
purer
than
water
:
and
would
stick
to
the
Earth
much
closer
than
its
Atmosphaere
that
is
carried
about
with
it
.
But
this
shaft
also
,
tho
levell'd
more
directly
at
it
,
misses
the
intended
Scope
.
For
if
those
Vapours
were
but
a
little
purer
than
water
,
yet
look
how
much
they
were
so
,
and
so
much
the
weaker
they
would
be
,
and
less
able
to
keep
the
pendulous
Earth
in
its
Aequilibrious
or
even
posture
.
And
that
grossest
Vapours
are
very
much
purer
or
thinner
than
water
,
is
evident
from
hence
;
that
they
cannot
sustain
or
buoy
up
a
piece
of
light
Cork
;
whereas
upon
waters
,
ships
of
greatest
Burthen
float
and
swim
.
And
tho
the
Atmosphaere
be
carried
about
with
the
Earth
;
yet
if
that
were
inclosed
with
an
oblong
or
Oval
Orb
of
Earth
;
this
Orb
would
not
sit
half
so
fast
and
steddy
upon
that
Sphaere
of
Vapours
,
as
it
would
do
upon
a
Sphaere
of
Waters
:
the
Consistency
of
Water
being
many
times
as
thick
again
,
as
any
Mass
of
Vapours
can
be
,
in
their
natural
Constitution
.
The
Second
Query
is
this
.
Granting
there
was
such
an
Equinox
in
the
first
World
,
Would
not
the
natural
day
,
towards
the
latter
end
of
that
World
,
have
been
longer
,
than
in
the
former
periods
of
the
same
?
Yet
that
the
days
just
before
the
Flood
were
of
no
unusual
length
,
is
evident
in
the
very
Story
of
the
Flood
;
the
Duration
of
which
we
find
computed
by
Months
consisting
of
Thirty
days
apiece
.
Whereas
,
says
the
Excepter
,
had
Days
been
grown
longer
,
fewer
of
them
would
have
made
a
Month.
This
,
says
the
Answerer
,
is
a
meer
Blunder
.
And
he
proves
it
thus
.
If
thirty
days
were
to
go
to
a
Month
,
whether
the
days
were
longer
or
shorter
,
there
must
be
thirty
of
them
;
and
the
Scripture
does
not
determine
the
length
if
the
days
.
Tho
Scripture
does
not
limit
or
account
for
the
length
of
days
expresly
,
yet
it
does
it
implicitly
,
and
withal
very
plainly
and
intelligibly
.
For
it
gives
us
to
understand
,
that
days
before
the
flood
,
were
of
the
same
length
that
they
are
of
now
;
by
informing
us
that
months
and
years
which
were
of
the
same
length
then
,
that
they
are
of
at
present
,
were
made
up
of
the
same
numbers
of
days
.
For
how
could
there
be
just
twelve
Months
in
the
Year
,
at
the
time
of
the
Deluge
,
and
thirty
days
in
each
of
those
Months
;
if
days
then
had
not
consisted
,
as
they
do
now
,
of
four
and
twenty
hours
a
piece
?
And
as
Providence
has
so
ordered
Nature
,
that
days
(
which
depend
upon
its
Diurnal
motion
)
should
be
measured
by
Circumgyrations
of
the
Earth
:
So
it
has
order'd
likewise
that
Months
(
which
depend
upon
its
Annual
Motion
)
should
be
measured
by
its
progress
in
the
Heavens
.
And
as
it
has
so
suted
these
Motions
,
that
the
Earth
,
while
it
makes
a
Month
,
by
running
from
one
Sign
in
the
Zodiack
to
another
;
should
turn
about
thirty
times
upon
its
own
Axis
,
and
thereby
make
so
many
Days
:
So
it
has
taken
care
,
that
each
of
these
Circumrotations
should
be
perform'd
in
four
and
twenty
hours
,
and
consequently
that
every
day
should
be
just
so
long
;
that
thirty
of
them
(
in
way
of
round
reckoning
)
might
compleat
a
Month.
But
now
had
the
Circumgyrations
of
the
Earth
grown
more
slow
towards
the
Deluge
(
by
such
causes
as
the
Excepter
suggested
)
so
that
every
day
had
consisted
of
thirty
hours
,
suppose
:
it
is
manifest
that
fewer
than
thirty
days
(
they
being
longer
than
formerly
)
must
have
made
a
Month.
Because
then
before
the
Earth
could
have
turned
round
thirty
times
;
she
would
have
been
translated
,
by
her
progressive
motion
,
from
one
Celestial
Constellation
to
another
;
and
so
the
Month
would
have
been
consummated
.
But
to
talk
,
as
the
Answerer
does
,
that
the
Month
should
be
lengthened
by
the
days
being
so
;
is
a
fearful
Blunder
indeed
.
Tho
as
luck
will
have
it
still
,
it
falls
upon
himself
.
For
let
the
days
(
by
slackning
of
the
Earth's
Diurnal
motion
)
have
been
never
so
long
;
yet
(
its
Annual
motion
continuing
the
same
)
the
Month
must
needs
have
kept
its
usual
Length
;
only
fewer
days
would
have
made
it
up
;
the
very
thing
objected
.
The
Answerer
therefore
need
not
have
been
so
officious
,
as
to
undertake
to
teach
the
Excepter
to
speak
:
which
he
was
pleased
to
do
in
these
Words
.
I
suppose
that
which
he
would
have
said
,
and
which
he
had
confusedly
in
his
mind
,
was
this
;
That
the
Month
would
have
been
longer
at
the
Flood
,
than
it
was
before
.
The
Answerer
it
seems
,
had
such
a
confused
thought
in
his
mind
;
but
the
Excepter
(
't
is
plain
)
was
clear
from
it
.
And
truly
had
he
been
guilty
of
it
,
he
should
have
counted
it
a
Meer
Blunder
.
For
how
could
the
Month
be
longer
,
for
the
Earth's
Circumgyrations
being
slower
;
when
the
Month
was
measured
by
such
a
motion
of
the
Earth
,
as
would
have
continu'd
as
swift
as
ever
,
tho
its
Circumgyrations
had
been
never
so
slack
?
The
Moon
never
turns
circularly
upon
her
own
Center
,
to
make
days
and
nights
;
and
yet
she
makes
regular
Months
and
Years
by
her
Periodical
and
Synodical
Courses
.
And
had
the
Circumgyrations
of
the
Earth
been
never
so
swift
at
the
Deluge
,
or
had
they
been
never
so
slow
,
or
had
they
been
none
at
all
;
still
the
Months
would
have
been
the
same
that
they
were
;
and
neither
longer
nor
shorter
.
Tho
then
indeed
they
could
not
have
consisted
of
so
many
days
and
nights
,
following
each
other
in
an
orderly
succession
;
because
through
want
of
the
Earth's
Diurnal
motion
,
there
would
have
been
no
such
vicissitude
of
them
.
And
since
the
Answerer
took
upon
him
to
tell
the
Excepter
what
he
had
in
his
mind
,
as
he
supposed
:
the
Replicant
,
in
requital
of
his
kindness
,
as
well
as
in
imitation
of
his
Patern
;
may
suggest
to
him
what
he
should
have
had
in
his
thoughts
.
When
he
said
,
if
thirty
days
were
to
go
to
a
Month
,
whether
the
days
were
longer
or
shorter
,
there
must
be
thirty
of
them
:
he
should
have
considered
,
that
these
thirty
days
were
to
be
of
such
a
length
just
,
as
that
that
Number
of
them
might
make
a
Solar
Month.
For
supposing
them
either
longer
or
shorter
than
so
,
they
could
not
be
such
days
as
the
Scripture
speaks
of
;
because
thirty
of
them
still
made
such
a
Month.
Whereas
if
they
had
been
shorter
,
as
there
must
have
been
more
;
so
if
they
had
been
Longer
,
fewer
would
have
done
it
.
And
thus
the
Answerer's
design
of
throwing
a
Blunder
upon
the
Excepter
,
is
quite
defeated
:
and
while
he
made
an
awkward
Blow
at
him
,
he
only
struck
and
wounded
himself
.
Yet
the
Dust
he
here
raises
,
can
neither
hide
the
Objection
which
the
Excepter
made
;
nor
yet
so
blind
the
Reader
's
eyes
,
as
that
he
should
not
see
it
remains
unanswered
.
For
after
all
,
if
the
Contiguity
of
the
Sphaere
of
the
Exterior
Earth
with
the
Abyss
,
ceased
;
by
reason
the
Waters
of
the
Abyss
were
exhaled
:
that
Sphaere
of
the
Earth
must
be
carried
about
with
less
Celerity
than
before
it
was
.
Especially
if
the
Moon
came
late
into
the
Earth's
Neighbourhood
;
which
being
an
heavy
Luggage
in
the
outward
part
of
the
Earth's
Vortex
;
like
a
Clog
hang'd
upon
the
Rim
of
a
Wheel
,
would
make
it
turn
more
slowly
,
as
the
Excepter
objected
.
But
because
we
have
hinted
,
that
Scripture
gives
us
to
understand
,
that
there
were
twelve
Months
in
the
Antediluvian
year
,
and
thirty
days
in
each
of
those
Months
;
it
will
not
be
amiss
to
conclude
this
Chapter
,
with
showing
how
Scripture
makes
the
things
out
.
In
the
eighth
of
Genesis
then
,
and
the
fifth
verse
,
it
informs
us
,
that
the
waters
decreased
until
the
tenth
Month.
And
after
this
,
that
at
the
end
of
forty
days
Noah
opened
the
window
of
the
ark
,
v.
6th
.
And
that
he
stayed
yet
other
seven
days
,
and
sent
forth
the
Dove
,
v.
10th
.
And
that
he
stayed
yet
other
seven
days
,
and
sent
forth
the
Dove
again
,
v.
12th
.
Which
fifty
four
days
following
the
first
day
of
the
tenth
Month
,
on
which
the
tops
of
the
Mountains
were
seen
,
v.
5th
.
show
that
there
must
be
twelve
months
in
the
year
;
and
indeed
they
make
them
up
so
many
,
bating
five
days
,
which
we
must
suppose
were
still
to
run
out
,
before
the
first
Month
of
the
next
year
came
in
,
v.
13th
.
And
then
it
shows
that
there
were
thirty
days
in
each
Month.
For
first
we
find
twenty
seven
days
in
one
Month
in
this
Chapter
,
v.
14th
.
And
as
we
read
in
the
Seventh
Chapter
,
the
Waters
prevailed
upon
the
Earth
one
hundred
and
fifty
days
,
v.
24th
.
Yet
they
began
to
come
in
,
the
seventeenth
day
of
the
second
month
,
v.
11th
.
and
they
began
to
decrease
by
the
seventeenth
day
of
the
seventh
month
.
Chap.
8th
.
v.
3d.
Whence
it
is
plain
that
the
hundred
and
fifty
days
made
just
five
months
,
during
which
the
Waters
prevailed
;
and
so
every
month
must
consist
of
thirty
days
.
CHAP.
IX
.
IN
the
beginning
of
this
Chapter
,
relating
to
the
Oval
Figure
of
the
first
Earth
;
he
goes
about
to
rectify
a
Principle
of
the
Excepter's
:
terrestrial
Bodies
have
a
nitency
inwards
or
downwards
towards
their
Central
point
.
But
let
this
be
understood
of
Self-centred
and
Quiescent
Earthly
Bodies
;
and
the
Assertion
will
need
no
Rectification
.
And
so
the
Excepter
really
meant
it
should
be
understood
.
For
he
was
not
yet
come
to
Consider
the
Mass
upon
which
the
Primitive
Earth
was
founded
,
as
turning
upon
its
own
Center
;
Disc.
p.
190.
but
was
going
on
towards
the
Consideration
.
The
Waters
of
that
Mass
(
Globular
at
first
)
rising
up
above
the
Aequator
,
by
its
gyration
upon
its
own
Axis
:
became
oval
(
and
so
made
the
Earth
of
that
Figure
)
defluendo
ad
latera
,
193
,
194.
Answ.
p.
39.
by
flowing
down
at
the
sides
of
the
Globe
.
So
the
Theorist
said
at
first
.
To
this
word
the
Excepter
spake
so
home
,
that
the
Answerer
,
we
see
,
was
almost
angry
,
by
the
Reflections
he
makes
.
We
will
therefore
touch
that
tender
place
no
more
,
for
fear
of
giving
farther
Provocation
.
And
we
the
rather
forbear
to
press
upon
it
,
because
the
Answerer
,
we
find
,
is
sensible
it
is
sore
,
by
the
Plaister
he
is
fain
to
apply
to
it
.
For
now
he
has
explain'd
that
word
by
another
,
as
he
tells
us
;
namely
,
Detrusione
.
little
triumphs
.
He
resolves
,
that
is
,
to
shoot
Powder
,
where
he
wants
Bullets
:
and
at
the
same
time
that
he
gives
Ground
,
he
will
be
as
fierce
as
if
he
gain'd
it
.
Very
pleasant
to
see
to
!
that
he
who
blamed
strong
Passions
as
producing
weak
Arguments
;
should
thus
,
by
his
Anger
,
show
his
Impotence
.
But
we
are
to
consider
the
Thing
.
And
here
the
Answerer
interrogates
;
May
not
waters
ascend
by
force
and
detrusion
;
when
it
is
the
easiest
way
they
can
take
to
free
themselves
from
that
force
,
and
persevere
in
their
motion
?
Without
all
Question
they
may
:
provided
that
force
and
detrusion
be
of
power
sufficient
to
compel
them
to
ascend
,
against
the
Principle
of
their
natural
Gravity
,
and
such
extrinsic
accidental
Obstacles
,
as
may
chance
to
lye
in
their
way
and
hinder
them
.
But
what
then
?
He
goes
on
:
This
is
the
case
we
are
speaking
to
.
They
were
impell'd
to
ascend
,
or
recede
from
the
Center
,
and
it
was
easier
for
them
to
ascend
laterally
,
than
to
ascend
directly
:
upon
an
inclin'd
Plain
,
than
upon
a
perpendicular
one
.
This
assertion
wants
a
great
deal
of
Proof
.
For
that
the
Waters
of
the
Chaos
,
should
,
through
the
Circumgyration
of
it
,
rise
or
ascend
any
way
,
is
very
improbable
:
as
being
bound
down
by
the
circumambient
Air
,
which
is
carried
about
therewith
.
Fill
a
sphaerical
Glass
with
water
,
and
then
turn
it
swiftly
upon
its
own
Center
.
However
the
water
in
this
Glass
,
may
have
a
strong
and
constant
Conatus
(
during
that
its
Motion
)
towards
rising
up
:
yet
certain
it
is
,
the
Glass
that
contains
it
,
would
keep
it
from
swelling
out
beyond
those
Bounds
to
which
it self
confines
it
.
In
like
manner
,
the
Body
of
the
Air
(
in
which
at
that
time
,
was
the
whole
matter
of
the
Exterior
Earth
diffused
,
surrounding
the
entire
Element
of
the
Water
;
would
have
kept
that
from
actual
receding
from
the
Center
;
tho
it
were
impregnated
with
a
conatus
that
way
.
'T
is
confess'd
,
if
we
take
a
Globe
and
turn
it
round
swiftly
;
Water
,
or
Sand
,
if
we
lay
either
upon
it
,
will
fly
off
it
violently
.
And
one
reason
is
,
because
the
ambient
Air
does
not
turn
with
this
Globe
:
but
gliding
close
upon
its
wheeling
Surface
,
by
a
renitency
against
it
,
sweeps
off
whatever
lies
loose
upon
it
.
But
were
the
Air
about
it
,
carried
round
with
it
;
the
lightest
things
,
that
lye
loosest
on
its
Superficies
,
would
rest
there
unmoved
;
supposing
it
the
proper
Center
of
their
Gravity
.
And
for
the
same
reason
,
finest
Dust
lies
undisturb'd
,
even
upon
the
tops
of
highest
Mountains
;
tho
they
whisk
about
with
such
celerity
,
as
no
humane
Art
and
strength
can
imitate
.
And
if
the
Earth's
Rotation
,
as
rapid
as
it
is
,
cannot
cause
small
Dust
to
rise
from
Hills
,
in
way
of
recession
from
the
Center
:
much
less
could
it
produce
that
great
effect
upon
the
Mass
of
Water
;
which
as
it
was
a
vast
and
ponderous
Body
,
so
it
couched
the
closer
to
the
Earth
under
it
.
And
the
truth
is
,
as
to
a
competent
or
sufficient
Cause
of
the
Wate
's
supposed
Rise
or
Ascent
;
we
are
yet
at
a
loss
.
For
the
Cause
assigned
,
is
Detrusion
;
Detrusion
made
by
the
superambient
Air.
Methinks
the
Observator
might
have
conceiv'd
this
Detrusion
of
waters
towards
the
Poles
,
by
the
resistance
of
the
superambient
Air.
But
now
if
this
Cause
fail'd
,
and
was
not
able
to
detrude
the
Waters
at
the
Equinoctial
,
where
they
were
to
be
thrust
down
:
Or
,
which
is
worse
,
if
it
be
sound
a
more
effectual
Cause
to
detrude
them
at
the
Poles
,
where
they
were
to
rise
up
:
what
then
becomes
of
this
Assertion
we
ore
upon
:
or
of
that
Essential
of
the
Theory
it
relates
to
;
the
Oval
form
of
the
Primitive
Earth
?
Yet
in
Reality
thus
it
was
.
The
Air
that
should
have
depress'd
or
thrust
down
the
Waters
,
at
the
Aequator
of
the
liquid
Globe
;
was
more
dispos'd
to
do
it
at
its
Polar
parts
.
For
the
Sun
moving
always
in
the
Equinoctial
of
that
Globe
;
the
Air
thereabouts
must
needs
be
very
hot
;
and
so
,
very
thin
;
and
so
,
very
yielding
;
and
so
,
less
able
to
resist
and
detrude
the
Waters
.
And
on
the
contrary
,
the
Sun
being
always
very
distant
from
the
Poles
;
the
Air
in
those
parts
must
needs
be
more
cold
:
and
so
,
more
thick
,
and
so
,
more
stiff
and
heavy
;
and
so
,
more
fit
to
make
Resistance
and
Detrusion
there
,
than
any
where
else
.
Yet
see
the
unluckiness
of
this
contrivance
:
the
Waters
were
to
rise
higher
there
,
much
higher
at
the
Poles
,
where
the
Air
would
most
resist
them
;
and
to
be
thrust
down
lowest
at
the
Aequator
,
by
the
Air
,
where
it
could
least
depress
them
.
And
if
by
the
Air
's
Resistance
,
be
meant
any
thing
else
,
but
a
meer
Detrusion
arising
from
its
natural
weight
(
which
,
as
is
said
,
had
most
force
to
keep
the
Waters
down
,
where
it
was
most
needful
they
should
have
risen
up
)
such
a
Resistance
cannot
be
conceived
;
considering
that
the
whole
Mass
of
the
Air
was
carried
about
in
Circumgyration
with
the
Globe
of
Water
.
The
Deserts
of
Biledulgerid
,
Lybia
,
&c.
lie
betwixt
the
Aequator
and
our
Northern
Tropic
;
and
so
within
the
compass
of
that
Latitude
,
where
the
Waters
of
the
liquid
Globe
,
should
have
felt
a
Resistance
of
the
Air.
But
what
reason
have
we
to
believe
they
did
so
,
when
the
light
or
running
Sands
there
,
are
no
more
ruffled
,
or
in
the
least
stirred
by
such
Resistance
;
than
if
they
were
a
crust
of
Flint
or
Adamant
?
and
the
like
may
by
said
of
Mare
del
Zur
.
It
lies
under
the
Line
,
and
so
in
the
Equinoctial
part
of
this
Terraqueous
Globe
.
Which
being
there
of
the
biggest
Circumference
,
it
must
turn
thereabouts
most
swiftly
,
and
so
cause
the
greater
resistance
of
the
Air
(
were
there
any
such
thing
)
and
that
would
produce
as
great
a
disturbance
in
the
Water
.
But
on
the
contrary
,
so
quiet
,
and
still
,
and
smooth
,
and
even
,
is
this
vast
Ocean
;
that
it
is
called
the
Pacific
Sea
.
And
if
these
spatious
Waters
,
so
exactly
fitted
for
this
Resistance
,
both
by
their
situation
,
and
immensely
wide
and
far
extended
Surface
;
feel
nothing
of
it
now
,
why
should
or
how
could
the
waters
of
the
Abyss
do
it
at
first
?
No
,
the
Air
resisted
and
detruded
then
,
but
as
it
does
now
:
That
is
,
so
far
as
its
own
Gravity
caused
a
Compression
.
Which
as
it
was
gentle
,
so
it
was
general
;
comparing
the
entire
Globe
at
once
with
a
soft
constringency
.
Only
there
was
reason
(
as
we
have
shewed
)
why
this
compression
should
be
lightest
at
the
Equinoctial
,
and
why
it
should
be
heaviest
at
the
Poles
of
the
Globe
;
and
why
it
could
not
make
such
Resistance
,
or
Detrusion
,
as
is
imputed
to
the
Air.
In
short
.
If
it
did
make
Resistance
;
either
it
was
gentle
,
and
would
only
have
rimpled
the
Surface
of
the
turning
Waters
(
as
the
Subsolanus
does
,
which
blows
constantly
about
the
Equator
)
and
so
would
not
have
been
of
force
sufficient
to
depress
them
into
an
oval
Figure
:
or
else
it
was
violent
;
and
so
would
have
discompos'd
the
Abyss
so
much
,
that
the
Earth
could
never
have
been
founded
upon
it
.
And
truly
what
less
than
such
a
violence
as
would
so
have
discompos'd
it
,
could
alter
the
Figure
of
it
?
But
yet
that
there
neither
was
,
nor
could
be
such
a
violent
resistance
made
by
the
Air
,
as
to
detrude
the
Waters
of
the
Chaotic
Mass
;
may
,
I
think
be
demonstrated
from
the
Motion
of
the
Moon
.
Her
Distance
from
hence
in
her
Perigee
,
or
nearest
approach
to
us
,
is
about
51
Semidiameters
of
the
Earth
:
in
her
Apogee
,
or
farthest
remove
from
us
,
about
65.
To
take
a
moderate
or
middling
Distance
therefore
betwixt
both
,
let
us
suppose
her
always
56
of
those
Semidiameters
off
us
.
And
then
let
us
suppose
again
,
that
she
performs
her
Periodical
Circuit
in
28
Days
;
tho
she
does
it
in
less
.
Now
she
absolving
her
Circuit
at
56
Semidiameters
distance
from
the
Earth
,
in
28
Days
;
in
case
She
were
but
28
Semidiameters
distant
,
which
is
but
half
the
Space
;
she
must
do
it
in
14
Days
,
which
is
but
half
the
time
.
And
so
were
she
distant
but
14
Semidiameters
;
she
must
do
it
consequently
in
7
Days
.
According
to
which
proportion
,
the
Air
towards
the
Earth
,
at
the
heighth
of
one
Semidiameter
above
it
,
must
wheel
about
as
fast
as
the
Earth
it self
does
,
to
the
space
of
half
a
Day
.
Now
every
Semidiameter
of
the
Earth
containing
,
says
Mr.
Rohault
(
Tract
.
Phys.
par.
2.
cap.
12.
)
near
1431
Leagues
;
or
4293
English
Miles
:
hence
it
will
follow
,
that
the
Air
at
the
heighth
of
2146
Miles
,
turns
about
as
fast
as
the
Earth
,
bating
but
6
Hours
.
And
at
the
heighth
of
1073
Miles
,
as
fast
as
that
,
bating
3
Hours
.
And
so
at
the
heighth
of
357
Miles
(
to
avoid
fractions
)
to
one
Hour
.
Which
divide
into
60
parts
,
because
in
an
Hour
there
are
60
Minutes
;
and
the
Air
at
the
heighth
of
6
Miles
,
must
turn
as
fast
as
the
Earth
(
in
round
reckoning
)
to
the
space
of
one
Minute
.
And
(
if
we
drive
down
the
Account
so
low
)
at
3
quarters
of
a
Miles
heighth
,
it
must
turn
as
fast
,
to
the
eighth
part
of
a
Minute
.
And
so
just
on
its
Surface
,
even
with
it
.
And
when
the
Air
encompassing
the
Earth
,
does
thus
conspire
and
circulate
with
it
in
its
Gyration
;
how
could
it
possibly
resist
the
Waters
of
the
turning
Abyss
,
so
as
to
change
their
figure
,
from
Sphaerical
,
to
Oval
?
Nor
will
the
Answerer's
Simile
help
here
,
unless
it
be
to
aggravate
the
thing
against
himself
.
He
thinks
this
Detrusion
of
the
Waters
may
be
conceived
,
as
well
as
their
flowing
towards
and
upon
the
Shores
,
by
the
pressure
of
the
Air
under
the
Moon
.
And
so
indeed
it
may
,
by
those
that
can
conceive
the
Air
alone
to
be
as
heavy
in
it self
;
as
that
and
the
Moon
are
both
together
.
But
who
in
reason
can
conceive
this
?
And
to
say
it
was
easier
for
waters
to
ascend
laterally
,
than
directly
;
to
ascend
upon
an
inclin'd
Plain
,
than
a
perpendicular
one
:
is
vain
in
this
case
.
For
what
real
Inclination
could
there
be
on
a
Globe
,
towards
the
Poles
,
more
than
at
the
Equator
;
every
point
of
whose
Superficies
is
Equidistant
from
the
Center
?
And
how
could
the
Ascent
of
Waters
at
the
Poles
of
a
Globe
,
be
other
than
Direct
and
perpendicular
;
when
its
Polar
parts
are
always
as
much
a
Plain
,
as
its
Aequinoctial
ones
can
possibly
be
?
So
that
to
suppose
waters
could
ascend
more
easily
at
the
Poles
,
than
at
the
Aequator
of
the
Chaotic
Abyss
;
is
in
effect
to
suppose
,
that
they
could
ascend
perpendicularly
more
easily
than
they
could
ascend
perpendicularly
.
For
at
the
Poles
they
were
to
ascend
as
directly
as
at
the
Aequinoctial
;
(
the
waters
being
exactly
globular
at
first
,
till
by
this
supposed
ascent
they
grew
oval
.
)
Only
there
they
must
have
met
with
these
two
Disadvantages
,
which
at
the
Equinoctial
they
were
free
from
.
First
,
(
as
we
have
hinted
already
)
a
more
cold
,
and
thick
and
stark
Air.
Which
we
may
be
sure
would
crowd
them
down
at
the
Poles
;
because
an
Air
more
warm
,
and
fine
,
and
soft
,
and
open
,
is
presum'd
to
do
it
at
the
Aequator
.
Secondly
,
a
weaker
Spring
or
power
to
impel
them
.
For
in
the
Middle
of
the
turning
Globe
,
there
was
a
Conatus
or
tendency
of
the
Waters
towards
receding
from
the
Center
;
but
at
the
Sides
of
it
,
none
at
all
.
So
that
at
the
sides
they
were
to
rise
,
by
that
Conatus
or
Nitency
in
the
Middle
.
And
if
a
thin
and
open
Air
could
prevail
against
that
force
,
in
its
direct
and
primary
efforts
at
the
Aequinoctial
;
how
much
more
would
a
thicker
,
closer
Air
have
overpowred
it
,
where
it
could
be
exerted
but
obliquely
,
remotely
,
and
as
it
were
at
second
hand
:
at
the
Poles
of
the
Abyss
?
From
what
has
been
said
,
it
will
follow
;
that
without
a
better
Defence
of
this
Vital
Assertion
of
the
Theory
,
its
whole
Hypothesis
will
fall
to
the
Ground
,
for
want
of
an
Oval
Earth
to
support
it
.
And
whereas
the
Answerer
in
the
Close
of
his
14th
.
Chapter
,
makes
this
Reflection
.
Some
men
,
they
say
,
though
of
no
great
valour
,
yet
will
fight
excellently
well
behind
a
Wall
:
So
the
Excepter
,
behind
a
Text
of
Scripture
,
is
very
fierce
and
rugged
:
He
may
please
to
take
notice
,
that
(
tho
it
be
much
better
fighting
behind
the
Wall
of
a
Text
,
than
against
it
)
the
Excepter
is
here
behind
no
such
Wall
:
but
ingages
him
in
the
open
field
of
Reason
and
Philosophy
,
and
doubts
not
but
to
keep
his
Post
.
That
is
,
if
he
does
not
run
to
his
First
Expedient
(
as
his
wont
is
)
and
turn
the
great
Artillery
of
Extraordinary
Providence
upon
him
,
before
which
there
is
no
standing
.
For
that
mows
down
the
best
Arguments
,
and
makes
a
Lane
through
them
;
as
Chain-shot
does
through
a
Company
of
the
bravest
Souldiers
,
tho
they
fight
never
so
well
,
and
have
all
imaginable
Right
on
their
side
.
But
then
he
must
desert
his
Hypothesis
again
(
as
he
has
often
done
;
)
and
the
World
knows
what
he
is
that
runs
from
his
Colours
:
One
,
they
say
,
of
no
great
Valour
.
But
truly
if
it
be
matter
of
reproach
to
a
man
,
to
fight
behind
a
Text
of
Scripture
;
the
Excepter
desires
that
it
may
always
stick
close
to
him
.
To
adhere
to
the
divine
and
holy
Word
,
and
to
oppose
error
by
revealed
truth
;
he
thinks
is
far
enough
from
Cowardise
.
Blessed
be
GOD
that
we
have
such
a
wall
as
His
Scripture
is
,
behind
which
,
to
fight
against
Truth
's
Enemies
.
Yet
in
this
very
Instance
of
forming
an
Oval
Earth
,
he
flies
to
the
help
of
Extraordinary
Providence
,
and
thereby
turns
this
necessary
and
indispensable
Notion
of
the
Air
's
resistance
or
detrusion
,
quite
out
of
doors
.
I
mean
by
a
certain
Dilemma
of
his
own
,
brought
in
in
the
second
Page
of
his
Answer
.
I
apply
it
to
him
in
his
own
words
.
Either
you
take
the
Hypothesis
of
an
ordinary
Providence
,
or
of
an
extraordinary
,
as
to
the
time
allowed
for
the
Formation
of
the
Earth
.
If
you
proceed
according
to
an
ordinary
Providence
,
the
formation
of
the
Earth
would
require
much
more
time
than
six
days
.
And
so
you
must
not
take
that
Hypothesis
,
because
as
you
your self
own
,
in
the
fifth
page
of
your
Answer
,
Scripture
tell
us
that
the
Earth
was
form'd
the
third
day
.
But
if
according
to
an
extraordinary
,
you
may
suppose
it
made
in
six
minutes
.
But
then
the
Resistance
or
Detrusion
of
the
Air
,
could
not
make
the
Waters
oval
,
that
the
Earth
might
be
so
.
For
that
being
an
ordinary
,
natural
Cause
(
supposing
it
could
be
a
cause
)
would
have
required
much
more
time
than
six
days
,
for
the
production
of
such
an
Effect
.
And
consequently
this
Resistance
,
or
Detrusion
,
is
made
vain
here
and
utterly
useless
by
your self
.
But
if
against
the
Answerer's
concession
of
an
extraordinary
or
miraculous
efficiency
here
,
we
should
suppose
an
oval
Earth
to
be
made
in
a
natural
way
;
and
that
in
order
thereunto
a
globular
Abyss
were
to
be
form'd
into
an
oval
figure
:
yet
how
could
this
be
done
according
to
the
rule
or
method
of
the
Theory
?
For
if
the
Waters
of
the
Chaos
,
by
receding
from
the
Center
,
did
rise
up
at
the
Equinoctial
part
of
it
,
and
above
fall
off
towards
the
Poles
:
then
underneath
there
must
be
a
draught
of
Waters
back
again
from
the
Poles
toward
the
Equinoctial
;
which
continuing
to
rise
there
,
might
push
or
drive
on
the
stream
towards
the
Poles
,
that
otherwise
would
not
hold
on
its
motion
;
forasmuch
as
it
flowed
on
a
true
Globe
,
the
surface
of
which
is
equivalent
to
a
Plain
,
where
Waters
never
flow
but
by
force
or
impulse
.
And
yet
if
such
counter-motions
as
these
be
allowed
to
those
Waters
,
they
might
thus
flow
and
reflow
for
ever
,
without
producing
the
design'd
effect
.
For
the
draught
of
Waters
below
towards
the
Equinoctial
,
would
draw
in
the
liquid
Mass
at
the
Poles
,
and
so
hinder
its
growing
into
an
oblong
or
oval
figure
;
as
much
as
the
Drift
of
them
above
towards
the
Poles
could
swell
them
out
there
,
and
so
help
towards
the
same
.
The
first
Argument
against
the
Oval
Figure
of
the
Earth
,
was
its
inconvenient
Position
,
which
would
have
followed
thereupon
.
For
then
it
must
have
lain
cross
the
vehicular
Stream
,
by
which
it
was
carried
round
the
Sun
;
and
have
been
directed
not
unlike
to
Ships
sailing
side-ways
:
and
so
it
could
not
have
kept
that
Position
long
,
but
must
have
chang'd
its
Site
in
compliance
with
the
duct
or
tendency
of
that
Current
wherein
it
swam
.
In
answer
to
this
it
is
suggested
;
that
such
a
posture
as
lying
cross
the
Stream
,
would
be
more
likely
to
effect
the
Earth's
turning
upon
its
own
axis
,
as
it
does
.
And
the
Stream
would
take
more
hold
of
an
oblong
Body
,
than
of
a
round
.
(
Answ.
p.
40.
)
And
because
it
would
take
more
hold
of
it
,
for
that
very
reason
it
would
the
sooner
turn
it
out
of
its
Position
.
For
what
makes
the
force
of
a
stream
,
turn
a
long
Body
that
lies
cross
it
;
sooner
than
another
as
long
,
which
already
lies
length-ways
in
it
;
but
only
its
taking
more
hold
of
it
?
And
then
as
to
the
Earth's
turning
upon
its
own
axis
,
it
would
rather
have
promoted
than
prevented
the
change
of
its
situation
;
considering
its
wallowings
in
its
Annual
Circuit
.
For
where
a
Body
has
two
Motions
upon
the
same
Center
,
if
one
of
them
chances
to
be
irregular
;
the
other
commonly
disorders
it
farther
,
rather
than
helps
to
correct
its
Exorbitance
.
Somewhat
like
a
Bowl
,
which
being
not
set
out
of
hand
right
;
the
oftner
it
turns
round
in
its
progressive
motion
,
the
farther
it
runs
on
in
a
wrong
Course
.
The
second
Argument
against
the
Oval
Figure
of
the
first
Earth
,
the
Theorist
,
alledg'd
many
more
Authorities
in
favour
of
the
Oval
Figure
of
the
Earth
.
For
besides
Empedocles
in
particular
,
he
affirms
that
the
Philosophy
of
Orpheus
,
the
Phoenician
,
Aegyptian
,
and
Persian
Philosophers
,
did
all
compare
the
Earth
to
an
Egg
,
with
respect
to
its
Oval
External
Form
.
Here
we
must
reply
,
false
Assertion
.
For
those
Philosophers
made
the
comparison
betwixt
the
World
and
the
Egg
,
not
betwixt
the
Earth
and
the
Egg
(
tho
our
Author
would
put
that
sense
upon
them
.
)
Only
two
of
the
Authorities
cited
by
him
,
Legat.
pro
Christ
.
pa.
(
mihi
)
72.
Disc.
p.
105.
Sympos
.
l.
2.
Qu.
3.
of
the
Doctrine
of
the
Mundane
Egg
;
for
Plutarch
calls
it
▪
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
Orphic
Doctrine
)
taught
;
that
a
vast
Egg
brought
forth
by
Hercules
,
being
broke
by
him
,
fell
into
two
parts
.
Of
the
upper
part
,
Heaven
was
made
;
and
of
the
lower
,
the
Earth
.
(
So
that
Heaven
was
contained
in
,
and
sprung
out
of
this
Egg
,
as
well
as
the
Earth
.
)
And
then
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
&c.
Heaven
being
mingled
with
Earth
,
brought
forth
Men
,
Women
,
and
GODS
.
And
what
is
this
less
(
tho
the
Gentil
Divinity
was
tinctur'd
with
it
)
than
a
piece
of
rankest
Atheistic
Physiology
?
For
it
makes
Mankind
and
Gods
,
to
rise
out
of
meer
Matter
,
without
allowing
such
a
Principle
as
Soul
or
Spirit
to
any
one
of
them
.
And
this
Egg
,
out
of
which
Aristophanes
will
have
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
Race
of
Gods
to
be
hatched
,
as
well
as
mortal
and
inanimate
Creatures
;
was
layed
,
he
says
,
by
Chaos
and
Night
.
And
so
gives
us
a
plain
account
of
the
old
Atheistic
Theology
;
which
made
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
and
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
Production
of
the
Gods
,
and
the
Production
of
the
World
,
the
same
thing
.
Yet
the
Theorist
was
pleased
to
show
,
Lat.
Theor.
li.
2.
c.
7.
&
10.
Edit.
2.
that
between
this
Doctrine
,
and
his
,
there
is
an
Harmony
or
Affinity
.
Which
if
it
will
conciliate
Reputation
to
his
Hypothesis
,
let
it
.
But
so
far
as
it
agrees
with
the
Aristophanic
or
Atheistic
Cosmogony
;
so
far
it
will
be
the
less
reconcilable
to
the
Mosaic
Cosmology
,
or
inspired
Doctrine
of
the
Creation
.
But
that
,
says
the
Answerer
,
cannot
make
a
Difference
,
sensible
to
us
at
this
distance
,
whether
the
Body
that
cast
the
shadow
was
exactly
Sphaerical
or
Oval
.
This
is
gratis
dictum
,
and
spoken
against
a
common
and
approved
Argument
;
and
so
of
little
weight
.
Secondly
,
It
was
inferred
from
the
place
of
the
Waters
.
Which
are
deepest
,
so
far
as
we
know
,
near
the
Poles
:
whereas
were
the
Earth
Oval
,
the
middle
Regions
thereof
being
lowest
,
the
Waters
would
have
run
thither
,
and
settled
under
the
Aequator
.
But
this
,
he
tells
us
,
has
been
answer'd
before
.
The
same
Cause
that
drive
the
Waters
thither
,
would
have
kept
them
there
.
And
that
Answer
has
been
reply'd
to
already
:
and
the
Replicant
has
shewed
,
that
there
was
no
sufficient
Cause
to
drive
the
Waters
thither
;
and
so
none
to
keep
them
there
.
Thirdly
,
It
was
urged
,
That
if
this
Earth
was
Oval
,
Navigation
towards
the
Poles
would
be
extremely
difficult
,
if
not
impossible
,
because
of
Sailing
up
an
Ascent
.
But
,
says
the
Answerer
,
If
there
be
a
continual
draught
of
Waters
from
the
Aequator
towards
the
Poles
,
this
will
Ballance
the
Difficulty
.
But
if
there
be
no
such
draught
,
the
difficulty
holds
:
and
that
there
is
such
a
Draught
,
remains
to
be
proved
.
That
the
Figure
of
this
Earth
is
truly
Sphaerical
,
is
fairly
discovered
and
determin'd
by
this
Observation
.
That
the
Gibbosity
of
the
Sea
rises
as
fast
behind
a
Ship
Sailing
in
direct
Latitude
,
towards
the
Poles
:
as
behind
one
whose
course
lies
in
direct
Longitude
,
towards
East
or
West
.
CHAP.
X.
THE
Excepter
proved
that
Mountains
were
before
the
Flood
,
from
the
words
of
Moses
,
Psal
.
90.
Disc.
c.
10.
§
1.
Before
the
Mountains
were
brought
forth
—
Thou
art
GOD
from
everlasting
.
And
from
Pro.
8.22
,
25.
where
we
read
,
that
the
LORD
possessed
WISDOM
,
—
before
the
Mountains
were
settled
.
And
the
Answerer
grants
,
that
the
design
and
intention
of
the
H.
GHOST
is
plain
in
both
these
places
:
in
the
one
,
to
set
out
the
Eternity
of
GOD
;
and
in
the
other
,
of
the
Logos
in
particular
.
Now
where
it
was
the
design
and
intention
of
the
H.
GHOST
,
to
set
out
the
Existence
of
GOD
and
the
Divine
Logos
,
which
were
from
everlasting
,
by
temporal
things
;
would
he
do
it
by
any
but
such
as
were
soonest
brought
into
being
?
Or
would
Moses
himself
,
without
the
H.
GHOST
,
have
done
it
by
any
other
things
than
such
?
Surely
it
would
have
been
a
very
faint
and
improper
Illustration
of
GOD's
Eternity
(
unbecoming
Moses
,
much
more
the
H.
SPIRIT
)
to
say
that
he
existed
before
the
World
was
seventeen
hundred
years
old
.
Yet
when
he
said
He
was
before
the
Mountains
,
what
did
he
say
less
,
if
the
Mountains
were
made
in
the
time
of
the
Flood
:
the
World
having
stood
above
sixteen
hundred
and
fifty
years
,
before
that
came
in
?
And
whereas
the
Answerer
suggests
,
a
gradation
in
them
from
a
lower
Epocha
to
an
higher
;
when
he
said
,
before
the
Mountains
were
brought
forth
,
and
the
Earth
and
the
World
were
made
:
Let
him
show
when
,
and
where
,
any
such
gradation
was
ever
made
use
of
,
by
an
inspired
Writer
,
to
set
out
the
Eternity
of
the
EVERLASTING
GOD.
And
whereas
he
adds
,
as
for
that
place
in
Prov.
8.
it
would
be
very
hard
to
reduce
all
those
things
that
are
mentioned
there
,
(
from
ver.
22.
to
the
30
)
to
the
same
time
of
existence
:
Let
him
show
,
if
he
pleases
,
why
the
things
there
mention'd
,
called
GOD's
Works
of
old
,
may
not
very
easily
be
reduced
(
as
to
their
first
existence
)
within
the
time
of
the
six
days
of
Creation
.
the
River
Kishon
is
call'd
the
ancient
River
;
but
I
do
not
therefore
think
it
necessary
,
that
that
brook
should
have
been
before
the
flood
.
Nor
does
he
think
it
necessary
that
several
other
things
should
have
been
before
the
Flood
.
Yea
,
his
Hypothesis
makes
it
necessary
that
they
should
not
then
be
.
But
does
it
follow
ever
the
more
from
hence
that
they
were
not
?
He
goes
on
.
Things
may
very
well
deserve
that
Character
of
lasting
,
tho
they
be
of
less
antiquity
than
the
Deluge
;
as
lasting
Pyramids
,
and
ancient
Babylon
.
But
were
the
Mountains
,
supposing
them
made
at
the
Flood
,
as
lasting
and
ancient
in
Moses's
time
;
as
the
Pyramids
and
Babylon
are
now
?
T
is
easy
to
see
,
the
Answerer
says
,
that
this
is
no
good
Argument
.
For
besides
that
the
Orb
there
might
be
more
thick
,
all
ruines
do
not
fall
alike
.
And
't
is
as
easy
to
see
that
this
is
no
good
Answer
.
For
the
Moon
being
more
than
forty
times
less
than
the
Earth
;
the
Chaos
out
of
which
She
was
formed
at
first
,
must
be
more
than
forty
times
less
than
the
Earth's
Chaos
was
:
else
she
could
never
have
been
so
little
.
For
a
larger
Chaos
would
have
contained
more
matter
;
and
more
matter
would
have
made
her
Dimensions
bigger
.
But
if
the
Chaos
out
of
which
the
Moon
was
made
,
was
forty
times
less
than
that
out
of
which
the
Earth
arose
;
then
it
s
central
Earth
,
together
with
its
Abyss
,
and
exterior
Orb
,
must
be
so
much
less
than
the
same
parts
of
the
Earth
respectively
were
,
as
being
made
of
Ingredients
which
were
forty
times
less
than
theirs
.
And
so
the
Orb
of
the
Moon
could
not
possibly
be
thicker
than
the
Orb
of
the
Earth
;
nor
could
its
Mountains
be
higher
than
the
Earths
Mountains
are
,
much
less
above
four
times
higher
,
upon
that
account
.
And
then
as
to
the
falling
of
its
Ruines
,
if
we
allow
it
to
have
been
done
with
all
imaginable
Advantages
;
which
way
could
they
have
pil'd
themselves
up
so
much
higher
than
the
ruines
of
the
Earth
?
Especially
if
we
consider
that
their
Materials
were
alike
(
I
speak
of
the
primitive
Bodies
of
the
Earth
and
Moon
)
their
Figures
alike
,
and
also
the
manner
of
their
Dissolution
.
Only
if
we
suppose
the
Earth
to
have
been
twenty
thousand
miles
in
perimeter
;
the
Moon
must
be
less
than
five
hundred
.
As
to
the
Historical
Arguments
alledg'd
in
this
case
,
he
demands
over
and
over
why
they
were
mention'd
.
But
such
Questions
had
an
anticipative
Answer
made
to
them
in
our
Discourse
;
and
that
excuses
all
farther
reply
.
In
the
next
place
he
falls
upon
the
Excepter's
Conjecture
about
the
Original
of
Mountain
.
And
in
this
New
Hypothesis
as
he
calls
it
,
Answ.
p.
45
,
46.
he
finds
many
palpable
defects
or
oversights
;
whereof
,
he
says
,
this
is
one
of
the
grossest
,
that
he
supposes
the
Sun
,
by
his
heat
,
the
third
day
to
have
raised
the
Mountains
of
the
Earth
;
whereas
the
Sun
was
not
created
till
the
fourth
day
.
But
here
he
relapses
into
his
wonted
Infirmity
of
Mistaking
egregiously
.
Sun
alone
rais'd
the
Earth's
Mountains
.
This
plainly
appears
from
what
he
said
in
his
entrance
upon
the
Conjecture
.
That
Nature
might
have
a
considerable
stroke
in
the
Work
.
And
if
Nature
were
to
have
but
a
considerable
stroke
in
that
work
,
the
whole
of
it
could
not
be
done
by
the
Sun
.
No
,
the
main
part
of
it
was
still
to
be
effected
by
the
hand
of
GOD.
And
the
concurrence
of
his
Power
with
the
influence
of
the
Sun
,
in
producing
Mountains
,
the
Excepter
acknowledged
in
these
words
.
could
,
and
't
is
like
did
produce
them
another
way
;
I
will
venture
to
guess
HE
might
do
it
thus
.
So
that
still
it
was
HE
,
that
is
,
GOD
,
who
thus
produced
the
Mountains
,
not
the
Sun
alone
.
And
then
follows
an
account
how
or
wherein
the
Sun
help'd
forward
this
extraordinary
Work
;
tho
he
must
not
be
understood
to
accomplish
the
same
by
his
own
sole
and
proper
efficiency
;
but
as
he
was
an
Instrument
in
the
hand
of
Omnipotence
,
and
so
inabled
to
do
that
which
of
himself
▪
he
could
never
have
done
.
Tho
I
must
add
withal
,
that
at
that
time
he
was
capable
of
doing
a
great
deal
in
this
Work
.
For
1st
,
Perhaps
he
had
then
no
Maculaes
about
him
;
which
now
swimming
upon
his
face
in
great
abundance
,
do
check
,
and
damp
,
and
weaken
his
influence
.
2dly
,
There
being
then
a
Fla●uous
Moisture
in
the
Earth
,
put
into
it
on
purpose
to
make
it
Heave
;
His
piercing
Beams
soon
gave
it
such
an
heat
and
agitation
,
as
made
it
dilate
it self
with
furious
Rarefaction
.
3ly
,
The
Earth
it self
being
then
most
light
,
and
soft
,
and
unctuous
;
was
also
of
a
more
pliant
yielding
nature
,
and
so
more
apt
and
easie
to
ascend
.
Lastly
,
The
Pores
of
this
Earth
being
then
close
shut
;
and
the
vehement
Vapours
rarefy'd
within
,
having
no
other
possible
way
to
get
out
,
but
by
elevating
the
Ground
which
lay
upon
them
,
and
so
confin'd
and
kept
them
down
:
no
wonder
if
they
threw
it
up
with
a
mighty
Force
,
and
made
it
rise
into
many
and
prodigious
inequalities
.
And
these
things
are
here
mention'd
the
rather
,
as
being
a
full
answer
to
a
Question
that
is
put
.
Namely
,
why
we
have
no
Mountains
made
now
.
accelerated
by
a
divine
hand
;
so
in
raising
Mountains
the
Sun
might
be
assisted
by
the
same
.
But
for
the
Excepter
to
have
supposed
that
that
,
and
other
Mountains
,
were
drawn
up
by
the
sole
power
of
the
Sun
;
would
have
been
to
run
himself
under
the
Dint
of
his
own
Invective
against
abusing
Philosophy
,
screwing
it
too
high
.
But
Secondly
;
as
the
Answerer
mistook
greatly
concerning
the
Thing
:
on
the
third
day
:
that
he
supposed
them
to
issue
forth
into
being
,
but
as
fast
as
Nature
could
permit
.
by
a
far
distant
succession
neither
(
as
he
says
in
the
same
sentence
)
but
all
together
;
that
is
,
in
a
short
space
of
time
,
as
fast
as
they
could
well
be
,
one
after
another
.
And
however
the
Earliest
,
that
is
to
say
,
the
Maritime
Mountains
,
and
such
as
were
made
with
the
Hollow
of
the
Sea
,
must
rise
when
that
was
sunk
or
depressed
;
yet
touching
the
Inland
ones
,
in
raising
which
the
Sun
was
cencern'd
:
he
said
,
as
plainly
as
he
could
speak
,
that
in
some
Countries
they
were
produced
earlier
,
and
in
some
later
.
the
Sun
by
his
heat
,
raised
them
the
third
day
?
How
strange
is
it
that
an
Answerer
should
thus
run
on
in
Mistaking
?
That
having
once
got
into
the
way
of
doing
it
,
he
should
never
know
when
to
come
out
of
it
again
?
Surely
by
fair
and
just
dealings
with
the
Excepter
,
he
had
better
consulted
his
own
ease
,
as
well
as
his
Credit
.
For
by
making
these
false
charges
upon
him
,
he
occasion'd
himself
the
trouble
of
spending
most
of
this
long
Chapter
,
in
confuting
nothing
?
by
things
which
he
took
to
be
plainly
unanswerable
.
considerable
stroke
in
making
the
Mountains
;
and
tho
GOD
could
,
and
t
is
like
did
produce
them
another
way
;
yet
He
might
do
it
partly
by
the
instrumental
Efficiency
of
the
Sun
;
raising
the
Inland
ones
some
earlier
,
and
some
later
;
but
all
together
as
fast
as
Nature
could
permit
.
Tho
when
GOD
caused
the
Sun
to
raise
the
Mountains
,
it
was
as
he
caused
the
Earth
to
bring
forth
Trees
on
the
third
day
,
humour
Philosophy
(
Disc.
p.
208.
)
and
was
meerly
conjectural
:
I
will
venture
to
guess
he
might
do
it
thus
.
(
p.
209.
)
The
last
argument
to
prove
that
there
were
Mountains
in
the
First
World
,
he
's
hard
put
to
it
,
to
prove
that
the
Theorist
hath
any
where
asserted
,
whatsoever
he
thought
,
that
there
were
no
Metals
then
.
Yet
he
did
prove
it
,
and
that
so
plainly
,
that
the
Answerer
(
if
he
considers
)
will
be
much
harder
put
to
it
to
deny
it
.
The
proof
consists
of
his
own
words
,
cited
out
of
the
English
Theory
(
p.
244.
As
for
subterraneous
things
,
Metals
,
and
Minerals
,
I
believe
they
had
none
in
the
first
Earth
:
and
the
happier
they
;
no
Gold
,
nor
Silver
,
nor
Courser
Metals
.
And
then
he
proceeds
to
give
Reasons
why
there
could
be
none
.
And
does
not
he
that
says
,
he
believes
there
were
no
Metals
in
the
Earth
;
and
then
gives
Reasons
why
there
could
be
none
;
and
declares
men
were
happier
because
there
were
none
:
assert
that
there
were
no
Metals
?
But
that
there
were
Metals
before
the
Flood
,
was
shewed
from
the
Building
of
Noah's
Ark
;
Disc.
c.
10.
§
ult.
from
the
building
of
Cain's
City
;
and
from
Tubal
Cain's
being
an
Instructer
of
every
Artificer
in
Brass
and
Iron
.
Iron
Tools
in
Building
the
Ark
,
but
only
Gopher
Wood
and
Pitch
:
and
therefore
't
is
a
Presumption
rather
;
that
there
were
no
other
Materials
us'd
.
Had
the
Theorist
kept
close
to
holy
Scripture
,
and
regulated
his
Principles
and
Hypothesis
by
that
;
none
of
this
Controversie
or
Dispute
had
happened
.
But
now
,
we
see
,
where
he
has
least
reason
for
it
;
there
he
is
forwardest
to
adhere
to
it
.
As
if
it
were
a
Fate
on
him
,
for
deserting
it
so
much
in
other
Cases
,
and
going
against
it
.
If
he
can
presume
that
the
Ark
was
made
of
Gopher
Wood
and
Pitch
only
,
because
Scripture
mentions
nothing
else
:
why
could
he
not
admit
of
a
Sea
as
well
,
which
the
Scripture
mentions
every
whit
as
expresly
?
Or
if
Scripture's
Silence
concerning
Things
,
be
a
ground
of
Presumption
that
they
were
not
;
what
then
shall
we
think
of
an
Oval
and
unmountainous
Earth
,
an
inclosed
Abyss
,
a
Paradisiacal
World
,
and
the
like
;
which
the
Scripture
makes
no
mention
of
?
Surely
't
is
a
presumption
rather
that
there
were
no
such
things
.
But
not
to
digress
.
What
kind
of
Fabrick
the
Ark
was
,
the
H.
GHOST
informs
us
.
within
and
without
.
No
Sea
was
ever
so
tumultuous
as
this
,
nor
is
there
any
thing
in
present
Nature
to
be
compar'd
with
the
disorder
of
these
Waters
;
All
the
Poetry
,
and
all
Hyperboles
that
are
us'd
in
the
description
of
Storms
and
raging
Seas
,
were
literally
true
in
this
,
if
not
beneath
it
:
The
Ark
was
really
carry'd
to
the
tops
of
highest
Mountains
,
and
into
the
places
of
the
Clouds
,
and
thrown
down
again
into
the
deepest
Gulfs
.
Brave
Ark
!
and
as
bravely
built
;
that
could
endure
all
this
,
and
yet
never
spring
so
much
as
one
Tree
.
What
would
our
Merchants
give
,
I
'll
warrant
you
,
for
Ships
of
such
Gopher
Wood
and
Pitch
?
But
alas
!
this
strong
way
of
building
,
was
calculated
only
for
the
Deluge
.
The
Mystery
of
doing
it
lest
the
World
together
with
the
Equinox
:
and
never
since
the
Earth
has
stood
awry
,
could
Men
lay
Trees
so
well
in
Pitch
.
In
answer
to
the
Second
Instance
it
is
supposed
;
that
the
City
built
by
Cain
,
was
a
number
of
Cottages
,
made
of
branches
of
Trees
,
of
Osiers
,
and
Bulrushes
;
and
what
needed
they
any
other
houses
,
when
the
Air
was
so
temperate
?
But
First
,
This
Supposition
is
bottom'd
upon
a
false
Foundation
.
For
they
who
conceive
the
City
Enochia
to
be
so
mean
;
commonly
think
it
was
so
for
want
of
Workmen
,
not
for
lack
of
Tools
to
build
it
.
But
that
being
not
built
till
after
the
death
of
Abel
;
and
he
being
not
slain
before
the
hundred
and
twenty
ninth
year
of
Adam
;
by
that
time
there
might
be
Myriads
of
men
upon
the
Earth
;
Mares
.
in
Refut.
Fab.
Praead
.
Qu.
3.
and
so
great
store
of
Architects
.
And
therefore
Cain's
City
need
not
be
supposed
to
consist
of
such
Cottages
;
because
there
was
a
scarcity
of
good
Artificers
.
Secondly
,
To
say
the
Air
was
so
temperate
then
,
as
that
there
needed
no
other
than
Osier
Cottages
;
is
to
take
that
for
determin'd
,
which
is
under
debate
.
And
besides
,
houses
are
rear'd
for
other
uses
,
as
well
as
for
Defensatives
against
intemperate
Air.
And
in
Cities
commonly
they
are
best
and
most
sumptuous
.
Thirdly
,
Lyr.
in
Gen.
4.17
.
It
is
thought
that
Cain
built
this
City
for
his
own
safety
.
Being
full
of
guilt
,
and
so
of
fear
;
he
was
for
dwelling
in
a
strong
place
.
But
what
fortifications
were
Mud-walls
and
Osiers
capable
of
?
Such
a
Fortress
could
yield
but
a
little
satisfaction
to
his
mind
,
as
being
a
poor
defence
or
security
to
his
Person
.
Fourthly
,
If
Henochia
did
not
outstand
the
Flood
,
we
are
better
assured
that
Joppa
did
.
And
then
,
we
hope
,
it
must
be
built
of
such
Materials
,
as
could
not
be
fitted
and
made
into
Aedifices
,
without
the
help
of
Iron
Tools
.
And
whereas
it
is
urged
,
that
the
Excepter
says
,
that
the
Indians
had
no
Instruments
of
Iron
,
when
the
Spaniards
came
amongst
them
:
That
's
very
true
.
Introduction
to
the
Ancient
Geography
,
may
take
place
.
Si
quis
mente
concipere
velit
,
qualis
ante
diluvium
terrarum
sacies
suerit
,
is
sibi
totidem
post
diluvium
secula
proponat
,
&
inde
,
de
praeteritis
conjecturam
faciat
.
If
any
one
would
conceive
in
his
mind
,
what
kind
of
face
the
Earth
had
before
the
Flood
,
let
him
cast
with
himself
how
it
was
so
many
ages
after
the
Flood
,
and
from
thence
guess
concerning
those
that
are
past
.
And
so
there
must
be
as
many
Cities
in
the
World
,
at
the
time
of
the
Flood
,
as
there
was
since
the
flood
,
about
the
time
of
Nebuchadnezzar
:
it
being
as
long
from
the
Deluge
to
his
time
;
as
it
was
from
the
Creation
to
the
Deluge
.
And
tho
he
takes
notice
,
that
no
Cities
are
remembred
by
Writers
,
but
Henoch
,
by
Moses
;
and
Joppa
by
profane
Authors
;
yet
he
puts
the
Question
,
Quis
dubitet
adeò
jam
aucto
genere
humano
,
plurimas
regiones
,
imò
totam
penè
Asiam
&
Egyptum
,
Urbibus
,
oppidis
,
pagis
,
ante
diluvium
suisse
exornatas
.
Who
can
doubt
,
that
very
many
countries
,
yea
,
almost
all
Asia
and
Egypt
,
were
garnished
with
Cities
,
Towns
,
and
Villages
,
before
the
flood
;
mankind
being
so
increased
?
To
his
Questions
,
how
the
Children
of
Cain
came
to
find
out
Iron
;
Nature
and
use
of
it
;
and
then
the
way
of
preparing
and
tempering
it
:
I
think
we
may
reply
;
that
in
this
matter
they
had
instructions
from
Adam
,
as
he
had
his
knowledge
from
GOD.
Or
if
we
should
say
,
they
understood
this
by
Inspiration
,
it
would
be
no
rash
or
extravagant
assertion
.
For
why
might
not
some
of
Cain's
Children
be
inspired
to
find
out
Brass
,
&c.
as
well
as
Aholiab
was
inspired
to
work
in
it
,
Exod.
31.3
,
5.
?
And
yet
they
might
find
out
Iron
,
and
other
Metals
in
a
lower
way
than
that
.
For
the
Flaming
Sword
at
the
East
of
Eden
,
might
be
a
burning
of
the
Earth
(
Discourse
p.
270.
)
And
that
it
could
not
be
the
Torrid
Zone
(
as
the
Theory
allows
it
to
have
been
)
two
Reasons
were
given
(
Disc.
p.
272.
)
Tho
neither
is
answered
but
by
the
Last
Expedient
.
Now
the
Earth
being
once
fired
,
and
burning
continually
;
at
length
it
might
reach
to
some
Mine
below
,
and
melting
the
Metal
,
cause
it
to
run
,
and
boil
up
upon
the
Ground
.
And
then
observation
and
wise
experience
,
could
not
but
lead
men
into
a
speedy
acquaintance
with
its
Nature
and
Use
:
And
also
make
the
first
Iron
that
they
had
,
instrumental
in
helping
them
to
procure
more
.
Thus
(
according
to
Herodotus
,
lib.
7.
and
Natalis
Comes
,
lib.
9.
)
the
Idaei
Dactyli
(
the
same
with
the
Curetes
or
Corybantes
)
both
found
out
Iron
,
and
learnt
the
Art
of
using
it
;
by
the
burning
of
Ida.
And
why
then
might
not
the
Progeny
of
Cain
,
both
get
Iron
,
and
skill
in
it
,
the
same
way
?
But
however
they
came
by
Iron
,
or
by
skill
to
use
it
,
and
make
Tools
of
it
;
't
is
certain
that
they
had
it
,
and
that
's
enough
for
us
.
And
truly
if
they
had
not
made
Tools
of
it
also
,
Jubal
could
no
more
have
attain'd
to
his
Art
;
than
his
Brother
Tubal
could
have
taught
his
Trade
.
Jubal
was
the
Father
of
all
such
as
handle
the
Harp
and
Organ
,
Gen.
4.21
.
And
how
could
such
Musical
Instruments
be
made
without
Iron
Tools
?
But
now
I
think
on
't
,
there
might
be
Gopher
Wood
and
Pitch
as
well
in
Jubal's
time
,
as
there
was
in
Noah's
:
and
they
might
serve
as
well
to
make
the
Harp
and
Organ
of
the
one
;
as
they
did
to
make
the
Ark
of
the
other
,
without
Tools
of
Iron
.
Yet
then
the
mischief
on
't
is
,
Scripture
does
not
mention
either
:
and
therefore
according
to
the
Answerer's
Rule
above
,
't
is
a
presumption
rather
,
that
there
were
no
such
Materials
us'd
upon
those
occasions
.
But
then
't
is
a
presumption
withal
,
that
no
such
Harp
or
Organ
were
made
.
And
another
as
shrewd
a
presumption
will
follow
:
that
Jubal
was
a
Father
without
Children
.
Or
if
you
will
,
that
he
could
not
possibly
be
a
Father
of
Musick
himself
,
because
he
wanted
Instruments
whereon
to
learn
:
nor
could
he
possibly
beget
any
Sons
of
that
Science
,
because
he
had
no
Instruments
whereby
to
teach
.
He
answers
the
last
instance
thus
.
As
to
Tubal
Cain
,
let
those
that
positively
assert
that
there
was
no
Iron
in
the
first
World
,
tell
us
in
what
sense
that
place
is
to
be
understood
.
I
believe
Iron
or
Brass
is
not
once
mention'd
in
all
the
Theory
.
But
why
so
indirect
an
Answer
?
One
would
think
that
the
Argument
here
,
which
consists
of
Iron
,
were
red-hot
,
to
see
how
he
handles
it
.
And
the
truth
is
,
let
him
touch
it
never
so
Gingerly
,
it
will
all
at
once
both
burn
his
Fingers
,
and
Brand
his
Hypothesis
.
Iron
or
Brass
is
not
once
mention'd
in
all
the
Theory
.
Very
good
:
Yet
for
all
that
,
the
Theorist
flatly
denies
the
being
of
them
both
,
before
the
Flood
.
The
Clause
fore-cited
witnesseth
as
much
.
Metals
and
Minerals
,
I
believe
they
had
none
in
the
first
Earth
.
And
if
they
had
no
Metals
,
for
certain
they
had
no
Iron
nor
Brass
.
He
adds
;
the
happier
they
;
no
Gold
,
nor
Silver
,
nor
courser
Metals
.
If
therefore
Iron
and
Brass
,
be
Courser
Metals
than
Gold
and
Silver
;
he
excludes
them
out
of
the
first
World
,
as
much
as
he
does
the
finer
ones
named
.
Nor
does
he
more
absolutely
exclude
them
by
his
words
;
than
he
effectually
barrs
them
out
of
the
first
State
of
Nature
,
by
the
tenour
of
his
Hypothesis
.
For
that
lodges
the
Abyss
betwixt
the
Central
and
External
Earth
,
and
so
renders
their
Ascent
from
below
,
into
the
superior
Terrestial
Region
,
quite
impossible
.
And
so
what
sorry
and
unmanly
shifting
is
this
?
And
all
to
save
the
down-right
acknowledgement
of
an
Error
;
which
would
have
been
more
ingenuous
,
and
I
think
,
more
easie
.
'T
is
unlucky
for
one
to
run
his
Head
against
a
Post
.
But
when
he
has
done
,
if
he
will
say
he
did
not
do
it
,
and
stand
in
and
defend
what
he
says
;
't
is
a
sign
he
is
as
senseless
,
as
he
was
unfortunate
;
and
is
fitter
to
be
pitied
,
than
confuted
.
Good
is
the
advice
of
the
Son
of
Sirach
;
In
no
wise
speak
against
the
Truth
,
but
be
abashed
of
the
error
of
thine
Ignorance
,
Eccus
.
4.25
.
CHAP.
XI
.
THat
there
was
an
Open
Sea
before
the
Flood
,
the
Excepter
proved
by
Scripture
and
by
Reason
,
in
his
Eleventh
Chapter
.
But
the
Answerer
inverts
the
Order
of
that
Chapter
,
and
thinks
fit
to
begin
with
the
last
first
.
As
if
he
designed
by
altering
the
Method
,
to
perplex
the
Matter
,
and
pervert
the
Arguments
.
Or
at
least
to
raise
such
a
Mist
of
Confusion
,
as
might
dim
the
Eye
of
the
Reader
's
Observation
,
and
partly
obscure
the
Weakness
of
his
Answer
.
But
let
us
follow
him
in
his
own
way
,
and
not
fear
in
the
least
,
but
't
will
be
every
whit
as
easy
for
us
.
For
indeed
let
him
go
even
which
way
he
pleases
,
we
are
bound
in
Justice
to
give
him
this
Commendation
;
that
he
never
leads
us
into
any
difficulties
.
The
Reason
offered
in
proof
of
an
Open
Sea
,
was
this
.
Because
otherwise
the
subterraneous
Abyss
must
have
been
the
Receptacle
for
Fishes
,
the
only
place
of
their
abode
.
And
that
Abyss
could
by
no
means
have
been
a
fit
Dwelling
for
them
,
upon
Three
Accounts
:
As
being
too
Dark
,
too
Close
,
and
too
Cold.
But
the
Answerer
would
perswade
us
to
believe
otherwise
.
As
for
Coldness
methinks
,
,
says
he
,
he
might
have
left
that
out
,
unless
he
supposes
that
there
are
no
Fish
in
the
frozen
Seas
,
towards
the
North
and
South
;
which
is
against
all
sense
and
experience
:
for
Cold
Countrys
abound
most
in
Fish
.
But
are
there
any
where
any
frozen
Seas
,
on
which
the
Sun
never
shin'd
for
sixteen
hundred
years
together
?
He
must
show
us
such
Seas
,
if
he
would
bring
his
Answer
home
to
the
Objection
.
For
in
whatsoever
Seas
Fishes
do
breed
,
those
Seas
must
certainly
at
times
,
feel
a
great
deal
of
Warmth
and
Influence
from
the
Sun
:
else
these
Creatures
,
so
cold
of
themselves
,
could
never
Multiply
.
And
therefore
,
we
see
,
that
even
in
our
Seas
,
they
breed
not
in
Winter
,
for
want
of
the
Sun
.
And
if
the
Sun's
Declination
or
withdrawment
from
us
,
hinders
their
Production
in
our
Seas
(
and
Rivers
)
as
sense
and
experience
sufficiently
testifie
;
his
total
Absence
and
constant
Exclusion
,
would
put
a
final
stop
to
their
Procreation
.
Yet
such
was
his
Absence
,
and
such
his
Exclusion
from
the
inclos'd
Abyss
.
It
may
be
made
a
Question
,
whether
Fishes
can
live
and
breed
in
a
Deep
Well
,
which
is
open
;
by
reason
of
its
Coldness
.
And
if
they
cannot
,
how
much
less
in
the
Abyss
?
which
being
close
,
and
much
Deeper
;
was
answerably
colder
.
In
case
it
be
objected
,
that
in
such
a
Well
they
would
lack
Nourishment
:
the
Objection
turns
much
more
forcibly
upon
the
Abyss
.
For
whereas
the
smaller
Sorts
of
Fish
live
on
Flies
and
Worms
;
where
should
they
have
found
them
so
far
under
ground
?
And
yet
necessary
it
was
that
the
lesser
Kinds
of
Fish
should
exist
;
that
so
they
might
be
food
,
and
sustenance
for
the
Greater
.
As
for
Darkness
and
Closeness
;
he
opposes
to
them
the
Saying
of
Maimonides
,
That
no
man
ever
would
believe
,
that
a
Child
could
live
so
many
months
,
shut
up
in
its
Mothers
Belly
,
if
he
had
never
seen
the
experience
of
it
.
For
,
says
the
Answerer
,
there
's
Closeness
and
Darkness
in
the
highest
degree
:
and
in
Animals
,
that
,
as
soon
as
born
,
cannot
live
without
Respiration
.
But
surely
the
Difference
betwixt
Children
in
the
Womb
,
and
Fishes
in
the
Abyss
;
is
very
great
.
For
1st
.
Children
unborn
,
are
imperfect
;
(
and
so
indeed
they
are
,
when
new
born
,
and
long
after
;
(
they
may
be
perfect
in
Shape
,
but
they
are
imperfect
in
strength
:
)
But
with
Fishes
in
the
Abyss
,
it
could
not
be
so
.
Secondly
,
Children
in
the
Womb
,
have
no
local
Motion
;
which
to
Fishes
in
the
Abyss
,
must
be
allowed
.
Thirdly
,
Children
in
the
womb
,
are
supply'd
with
sutable
and
sufficient
Nourishment
,
by
easy
and
natural
Derivation
from
their
Mothers
:
But
Fishes
in
the
Abyss
,
were
to
seek
out
for
theirs
,
and
to
get
it
when
,
and
where
they
could
find
it
.
Fourthly
,
Fishes
in
the
Abyss
,
were
to
propagate
there
;
(
A
sure
Indication
of
their
true
Perfection
in
that
State
:
)
But
Children
unborn
,
were
far
enough
from
doing
that
.
Lastly
,
That
great
Body
of
water
,
being
close
shut
up
,
and
always
quiescent
,
and
having
no
way
to
purge
and
clarify
it self
;
would
have
putrified
,
and
poysoned
all
the
Fish
;
especially
if
it
inclin'd
to
any
degree
of
warmth
,
as
the
Answerer
here
surmises
:
There
would
he
more
danger
of
too
much
warmth
.
But
from
this
Inconvenience
,
And
whereas
he
urges
that
Fishes
Prey
on
the
night
time
:
That
signifies
nothing
.
For
first
,
Fishes
living
in
subterraneous
Lakes
;
the
reply
is
as
easy
.
For
no
subterraneous
Lakes
in
which
Fishes
live
;
are
so
close
,
and
deep
into
the
Earth
;
as
this
pretended
subterraneous
Abyss
.
But
farther
;
that
there
was
an
Open
Sea
in
the
primaeval
World
,
the
Excepter
prov'd
,
against
the
Theory
,
from
Scripture
.
And
the
first
Argument
,
Disc.
p.
219
,
220
was
the
Dominion
which
GOD
gave
unto
Adam
,
over
the
Fish
of
the
Sea
.
Gen.
1.26
,
28.
But
if
there
were
not
an
open
Sea
,
impossible
it
was
,
that
he
should
have
or
exercise
such
a
Dominion
as
GOD
ALMIGHTY
gave
him
.
Whereunto
it
is
answered
thus
.
Adam
had
no
more
Dominion
given
him
over
the
Fish
of
the
Sea
,
than
over
the
Fowls
of
the
Air.
And
did
the
Excepter
affirm
that
he
had
?
Let
it
be
granted
that
he
had
but
as
much
;
and
our
Business
is
done
,
and
so
is
the
Theorist's
.
This
,
the
Gentleman
knew
very
well
;
and
therefore
we
see
how
shie
he
is
of
a
direct
Answer
,
and
how
aloof
he
stands
in
what
he
says
.
As
for
Adam's
Power
over
the
Fowls
,
it
was
sufficient
;
such
as
shewed
his
Dominion
to
be
real
.
For
he
exercis'd
it
thou
,
at
least
as
much
as
we
do
now
.
That
is
,
he
could
take
them
in
Fields
,
or
Fens
,
or
Heaths
,
or
Rivers
;
and
have
them
in
good
plenty
about
Him
.
But
had
he
an
equal
power
over
the
Fish
,
when
they
kept
only
in
a
subterraneous
Pond
;
and
that
was
wall'd
round
at
such
a
rate
,
that
even
through
all
his
long
life
,
could
not
come
at
them
.
or
seize
them
at
his
pleasure
,
unless
he
could
fly
into
the
Air
after
them
.
Very
much
to
the
purpose
.
As
if
he
could
have
had
no
Dominion
over
the
Fowls
,
without
the
use
of
Wings
.
And
because
he
had
not
a
Power
over
the
Fowls
,
above
his
capacity
;
and
such
a
Command
as
neither
his
Nature
and
Circumstances
,
nor
theirs
would
allow
:
therefore
he
had
none
at
all
over
the
Fish
.
Notably
argu'd
,
and
with
mighty
good
Consequence
.
Adam
was
not
tall
enough
to
stand
upon
the
ground
,
and
take
the
Weather-cock
of
a
Church-steeple
;
and
therefore
,
good
man
,
he
could
not
stand
upon
tip-toe
neither
.
Because
he
had
not
such
a
Dominion
over
the
Sea
,
as
was
impossible
;
therefore
he
could
not
have
one
of
which
he
was
capable
.
Certainly
he
must
be
akin
to
the
Sages
of
Gotham
,
who
argues
that
Man
is
not
Lord
of
the
Creatures
,
because
they
could
not
hedge
in
the
poor
Cuckow
;
or
drown
the
Eel
as
they
might
have
done
a
Kitling
.
When
a
King
makes
a
Gentleman
,
Lord-Lieutenant
of
a
County
;
by
virtue
of
his
Commission
,
is
he
presently
the
strongest
man
that
is
in
it
?
Does
it
inable
him
to
encounter
whole
Regiments
of
Souldiers
in
his
single
Person
;
or
to
vanquish
all
the
Militia
under
him
,
at
once
?
Does
it
impower
him
to
carry
a
Canon
upon
his
Neck
?
Or
when
the
great
Gun
is
fir'd
off
,
to
catch
the
Bullet
as
it
flies
,
and
put
it
up
in
his
Pocket
?
Can
he
not
hold
the
place
,
and
execute
the
Office
of
a
Lord-Lieutenant
,
without
such
preternatural
and
monstrous
abilities
?
So
when
GOD
gave
Adam
Dominion
over
the
Fowls
;
did
he
mean
that
he
should
dive
like
a
Duck
,
or
soar
like
a
Falcon
?
That
he
should
swim
as
naturally
as
the
Swan
;
and
hunt
the
Kite
,
or
Hobby
,
as
Boys
do
the
Wren
?
Did
he
mean
that
he
should
hang
up
Ostritches
in
a
Cage
,
as
people
do
Linnets
?
Or
fetch
down
the
Eagles
to
feed
with
his
Pullen
,
and
make
them
perch
with
his
Chickens
in
the
Hen-roost
?
Or
else
could
he
have
no
command
over
the
Fowls
?
And
in
like
manner
when
he
gave
the
same
Adam
Dominion
over
the
Sea
;
was
he
to
be
able
to
dwell
at
the
bottom
,
or
to
walk
on
the
top
of
it
?
To
drain
it
as
a
Ditch
;
or
take
all
its
Fry
at
once
in
a
Drag-net
?
Was
he
to
Snare
the
Shark
as
we
do
young
Pickarels
?
Or
to
bridle
the
Sea-Horse
,
and
ride
him
for
his
Pad
?
Or
to
put
a
slip
upon
the
Crocodiles
Neck
,
and
play
with
him
as
with
a
Dog
?
Or
else
must
he
have
no
Dominion
over
that
Element
,
and
the
Creatures
in
it
?
Certainly
betwixt
having
Dominion
over
the
Fowls
,
and
flying
after
them
in
the
Air
;
there
is
great
difference
.
And
so
there
is
betwixt
the
real
Dominion
which
Adam
had
over
the
Sea
,
and
its
Fish
;
and
all
excess
or
extravagance
of
Rule
.
When
GOD
set
Adam
over
the
Fish
of
the
Sea
,
he
plac'd
him
under
his
Glorious
SELF
.
For
had
his
Dominion
been
supreme
and
absolute
,
he
must
have
partook
of
GOD's
Nature
;
as
well
as
he
did
of
his
Image
,
and
Empire
.
But
as
we
very
well
know
,
all
Subordinate
Power
must
be
limited
:
and
so
was
Adam's
.
And
therefore
he
could
not
go
beyond
his
prescribed
Bounds
;
but
was
to
command
the
Fish
,
as
he
did
other
Creatures
.
That
is
,
according
to
the
Order
of
the
World
,
and
the
Laws
of
Providence
;
according
to
the
Capacity
of
his
own
Nature
,
and
the
Quality
of
theirs
.
And
if
so
be
he
did
but
act
in
his
Station
,
in
pursuance
of
his
Commission
;
governing
his
Subjects
as
in
Duty
he
was
obliged
,
and
as
in
Power
he
was
inabled
;
that
is
,
according
to
the
Will
of
GOD
,
and
the
measures
of
a
Man
:
this
will
be
sufficient
for
him
who
had
the
Dominion
;
and
so
it
will
be
for
us
who
defend
it
.
The
Answerer
proceeds
;
Adam
was
made
Lord
of
all
Animals
upon
the
Earth
,
and
had
a
right
to
use
them
for
his
conveniency
,
when
they
came
into
his
power
.
Here
he
speaks
as
out
of
a
Cloud
;
and
we
may
justly
suspect
that
what
he
says
,
had
need
be
clear'd
from
doubtful
meaning
.
For
Fishes
,
if
his
Hypothesis
may
be
believed
,
were
never
upon
this
Earth
,
but
always
under
it
,
during
Adam's
time
;
and
so
they
never
came
into
his
power
neither
.
And
therefore
it
may
be
question'd
,
whether
he
means
that
Adam
was
Lord
of
them
or
not
.
But
if
in
,
all
Animals
,
he
includes
the
Fishes
;
then
we
reply
as
follows
.
That
in
case
the
Doctrine
of
the
Theory
be
true
,
Adam
could
be
but
a
poor
and
sorry
Lord
over
the
Fishes
;
which
are
a
considerable
part
of
the
living
Creatures
.
Natural
History
,
to
reduce
all
of
them
,
that
belong
to
the
Sea
,
to
an
hundred
seventy
and
six
kinds
;
and
to
particularize
the
several
Names
of
them
respectively
.
But
so
mean
a
Lord
was
Adam
over
them
,
that
indeed
to
call
him
by
this
Title
,
in
reference
to
those
Animals
;
would
be
but
to
put
an
affront
upon
him
,
he
enjoying
no
more
(
if
the
Theorist
errs
not
)
than
a
meer
colour
or
shadow
of
that
honour
.
Should
an
Emperor
grant
one
of
his
Courtiers
a
Commission
,
to
be
his
Vice-Roy
,
or
Deputy
,
in
a
certain
Country
,
which
't
is
utterly
impossible
he
should
ever
come
at
;
as
this
Patent
would
reproach
the
Majesty
that
gives
it
,
so
would
it
not
be
Mockage
to
the
Favourite
that
receives
it
?
Yet
just
such
is
the
Case
here
.
As
impossible
it
was
for
Adam
to
come
at
the
Abyss
below
;
as
it
was
for
him
to
dart
downward
,
for
a
Mile
or
two's
Thickness
,
through
the
compact
and
solid
Earth
.
So
that
his
Lordship
over
the
Fishes
there
,
must
be
a
bare
nominal
and
titular
thing
.
And
he
might
as
well
have
been
Lord
over
the
Fish
in
the
Moon
(
supposing
she
had
any
)
as
over
the
Fish
in
the
Infernal
Sea
.
For
his
descent
to
the
one
,
was
as
difficult
,
as
his
ascent
would
have
been
to
the
other
;
and
his
Power
was
exercis'd
alike
in
both
:
for
he
died
above
seven
hundred
years
,
before
the
Ocean
,
or
so
much
as
one
Fish
,
appeared
in
the
World
.
Now
pray
,
when
,
or
to
whom
?
in
what
Ages
,
and
to
which
of
his
Servants
,
did
the
GOD
of
Heaven
ever
assign
such
mock
Seigniories
,
and
pitiful
airy
Royalties
,
as
this
?
No
,
they
are
windy
promises
that
convey
empty
Donatives
;
and
neither
can
proceed
from
that
Glorious
Being
,
which
is
the
fulness
of
Sincerity
and
all
Munificence
.
Where
GOD
is
pleas'd
to
impart
Dominion
;
we
may
assure
our selves
it
shall
not
be
a
name
or
empty
notion
.
But
as
there
shall
be
a
Scaene
for
Jurisdiction
to
act
in
;
so
there
shall
be
Subjects
for
it
to
be
exercis'd
upon
;
and
Matters
also
to
imploy
it
about
.
And
so
here
is
something
more
suggested
(
in
way
of
Reply
)
as
to
the
Favour
which
GOD
bestowed
upon
Adam
,
in
relation
to
the
Fishes
:
namely
,
that
he
imparted
to
him
a
Dominion
over
them
.
And
that
I
hope
,
is
quite
different
from
a
Titular
Lordship
.
And
so
Titular
was
his
Lordship
(
according
to
the
Theory
)
over
the
Fish
;
that
tho
he
held
it
near
a
thousand
years
,
it
did
not
all
that
time
bring
one
of
them
to
his
Sight
.
A
man
may
have
a
Title
to
things
,
and
Right
to
use
them
when
he
can
get
them
;
tho
he
never
had
,
nor
ever
shall
have
Dominion
over
them
.
I
do
by
no
means
wish
the
Answerer
to
be
unjustly
barred
from
his
Estate
.
But
if
he
were
so
,
he
would
find
that
a
Title
to
it
,
and
a
Right
to
use
it
when
it
should
come
into
his
Power
;
must
not
be
compar'd
to
a
real
Dominion
or
Command
over
it
.
But
now
it
was
an
actual
Dominion
which
GOD
gave
Adam
over
the
Fish
.
And
therefore
he
did
not
say
,
have
thou
the
Title
of
Lord
over
them
,
and
use
them
for
thy
conveniency
,
when
they
come
into
thy
power
;
(
which
yet
would
have
been
a
plain
Jeer
(
such
as
Heaven
never
put
upon
an
Innocent
)
because
into
his
power
they
were
not
to
come
:
)
but
have
DOMINION
over
the
Fish
of
the
Sea
,
and
over
the
Fowl
of
the
Air
,
and
over
every
living
thing
which
moveth
upon
the
Earth
,
Gen.
1.28
.
Where
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
which
the
Targum
renders
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
and
have
the
Dominion
;
does
signify
an
actual
Rule
,
and
the
very
exercise
of
it
.
And
the
Word
is
used
in
this
Sense
,
in
too
many
Places
of
the
H.
Bible
to
be
here
recited
.
So
that
Adam's
Dominion
over
the
Fish
,
was
not
(
as
the
Answerer
would
most
unreasonably
make
it
)
a
Titular
Lordship
,
or
imaginary
Right
:
which
was
to
hang
in
the
Air
,
and
not
be
realiz'd
even
to
his
Posterity
,
till
above
sixteen
hundred
Years
should
be
past
;
and
till
the
World
in
which
they
lived
should
be
quite
destroyed
,
and
a
new
one
founded
:
but
it
was
a
real
Power
actually
conferred
upon
,
and
exercis'd
in
his
own
Person
;
and
with
him
,
by
his
Children
,
jointly
;
and
after
him
,
by
them
,
successively
.
And
truly
when
in
the
Grant
of
this
power
over
the
Fish
,
the
Advantage
lay
so
much
on
Adam's
side
,
more
than
on
his
Offspring's
;
(
it
being
made
to
him
in
his
Person
,
and
also
in
his
Innocence
:
)
it
may
seem
somewhat
strange
,
that
he
who
shared
most
in
the
conveyance
of
the
Priviledge
;
should
(
in
the
Judgment
of
a
wise
Civilian
)
have
nothing
to
do
with
the
Possesion
of
it
.
Especially
when
this
Grant
was
made
by
the
GOD
of
faithfulness
and
truth
;
with
Whom
,
as
there
is
no
shadow
of
Change
,
so
there
can
be
no
semblance
of
Fraud
.
Yet
had
the
Case
here
been
as
the
Theory
makes
it
;
there
must
have
been
wrong
on
GOD's
part
,
as
well
as
fallacy
;
and
his
creatures
he
must
have
injured
,
by
imposing
upon
them
;
which
who
can
think
?
As
if
that
righteous
Being
,
whose
Nature
is
the
Rule
of
eternal
Justice
,
could
violate
that
Law
which
Himself
had
made
:
And
when
he
had
commanded
,
not
to
steal
;
could
rob
poor
men
of
that
common
Right
,
which
his
own
free
Goodness
,
and
his
own
kind
Promise
,
settled
on
them
.
Not
to
be
too
toedious
.
Either
Adam
had
actual
Dominion
over
the
Fish
;
or
he
had
not
.
If
he
had
not
,
why
did
GOD
say
to
him
,
Have
Dominion
over
the
Fish
of
the
Sea
?
If
he
had
,
why
does
the
Answerer
so
mince
it
,
as
if
he
intended
to
make
away
with
it
?
Again
;
Either
Adam
had
as
much
Power
over
the
Fish
of
the
Sea
,
as
he
had
over
the
Fowls
of
the
Air
,
and
the
Living
things
upon
the
Earth
;
or
he
had
not
.
If
he
had
as
much
;
we
have
what
we
contend
for
.
If
he
had
not
;
the
Answerer
must
show
,
that
the
Divine
Grant
now
recited
,
vesting
Adam
with
Dominion
over
the
Creatures
;
did
confer
more
Power
in
the
latter
part
of
it
,
than
it
did
in
the
first
.
But
that
he
cannot
do
;
and
therefore
his
Cause
is
lost
.
For
if
Adam
had
as
much
power
over
the
Fish
,
as
he
had
over
the
Fowls
,
and
over
other
Animals
;
there
must
be
an
open
Sea
at
first
.
And
if
there
was
an
open
Sea
;
there
was
Mountains
too
.
And
if
there
was
Mountains
;
there
was
Clouds
also
.
And
if
there
was
Clouds
;
there
was
Winds
,
and
Rains
,
and
Hails
,
and
Snows
,
and
Thunders
,
&c.
And
then
where
's
the
Theorists
Primitive
Earth
,
and
his
Paradisiacal
World
before
the
Flood
?
In
the
Fourth
Chapter
of
his
Answer
he
reflected
upon
the
Excepter
for
Dabbling
in
Philosophy
.
And
now
I
think
he
has
dabbled
in
it
fairly
himself
;
even
till
he
has
drowned
his
hopeful
Hypothesis
,
in
an
inclos'd
Abyss
.
And
as
for
Extraordinary
Providence
,
it
affords
no
help
in
this
Case
.
However
it
be
made
too
much
a
Pack-horse
to
carry
the
Theory
through
several
Difficulties
,
which
otherwise
must
have
been
impassable
:
yet
here
it
fails
,
and
is
able
to
yield
no
manner
of
assistance
.
For
he
who
can
imagine
,
that
Adam
upon
the
Earth
,
could
have
Dominion
over
the
Fish
in
this
inclosed
Sea
,
by
Extraordinary
Providence
;
must
be
guilty
of
most
amazing
and
unmerciful
Extravagance
.
Yet
by
another
Expedient
he
may
find
relief
.
When
,
to
leave
things
out
,
he
prints
his
Theory
next
;
he
may
leave
this
inclos'd
Abyss
out
of
that
Edition
.
And
tho
he
can
worse
spare
it
;
yet
whether
he
has
not
as
much
reason
to
leave
it
out
,
as
he
had
to
leave
any
thing
out
,
which
he
did
leave
out
;
That
there
was
Open
Seas
before
the
Flood
,
we
argu'd
Secondly
,
from
the
Waters
under
the
Firmament
,
Gen.
1.7
.
For
had
there
been
none
but
River-waters
in
the
first
World
;
the
Earth
might
have
been
said
to
be
under
the
Firmament
,
more
properly
,
than
the
Waters
.
And
the
Firmament
,
which
in
the
6th
.
verse
,
is
said
to
be
in
the
midst
of
the
Waters
,
and
to
divide
the
Waters
from
the
Waters
;
Well
,
allow
this
,
says
the
Answerer
,
that
a
Firmament
was
made
to
divide
the
Waters
from
the
Waters
.
Tell
us
then
what
that
Firmament
was
,
For
it
is
said
there
,
that
GOD
set
the
Sun
,
Moon
,
and
Stars
,
in
the
Firmament
.
We
own
it
is
said
so
,
and
that
GOD
did
do
so
.
But
if
he
cannot
tell
what
this
Firmament
was
;
a
few
words
will
inform
him
.
It
is
plain
that
Moses
,
in
his
Cosmopaeia
,
makes
mention
of
Two
Firmaments
;
(
and
we
have
told
him
of
them
once
already
.
)
Here
the
Excepter
encountred
that
New
Notion
of
the
Firmament
,
Things
cited
and
opposed
,
are
not
in
the
Second
Edition
of
the
Theory
.
Theor.
Edit.
1.
p.
254.
But
the
best
on
't
is
,
when
he
had
been
so
brisk
as
to
give
us
all
a
Magisterial
Reprimand
;
by
telling
us
plainly
that
Moses's
Firmament
as
commonly
understood
,
is
an
Vnphilosophic
thing
:
on
the
other-side
he
was
so
bashful
,
that
he
would
not
stand
by
his
own
opinion
,
tho
more
Philosophic
,
as
he
thought
.
But
having
conceived
it
,
and
brought
it
forth
,
he
very
fairly
gives
it
the
slip
;
and
leaves
the
infant
Notion
,
defenceless
as
it
is
,
to
shift
for
it self
.
Concerning
what
we
said
in
vindication
of
the
Clouds
from
that
contempt
which
the
Thorist
threw
upon
them
;
With
submission
to
better
Judgments
,
I
take
it
to
be
a
Country-Sermon
,
about
the
usefulness
of
Rain
.
But
I
do
assure
him
(
tho
that
's
no
strange
nor
new
thing
with
him
)
he
is
very
much
mistaken
.
Yet
if
he
will
needs
have
it
be
a
Sermon
;
with
submission
to
better
Judgments
,
I
take
it
to
be
a
Funeral-Sermon
for
one
of
his
Notions
.
Namely
,
that
the
Clouds
were
no
such
eminent
and
remarkable
things
,
as
to
deserve
a
particular
commemoration
by
Moses
in
his
six
days
work
.
As
for
what
follows
(
towards
the
end
of
our
Chapter
)
against
the
Theorist's
Objection
,
touching
the
difficult
Propagation
of
Mankind
into
the
Islands
and
Continents
of
the
first
world
;
the
Answerer
declares
,
that
it
does
but
confirm
his
Objection
.
Angelic
Ministery
,
to
translate
or
convey
men
from
place
to
place
?
He
shewed
plainly
,
Disc.
c.
11.
§.
7.
that
a
few
sorry
Sciphs
,
or
rude
kind
of
Boats
,
might
very
well
do
what
was
here
to
be
done
,
without
making
Angels
to
be
Carriers
of
men
,
and
to
transport
their
Colonies
,
through
the
Torrid
Zone
,
into
new
Plantations
.
But
this
is
a
Difficulty
which
attends
the
Theory
:
or
else
the
Answerer
wrongs
his
Hypothesis
,
by
flying
to
those
Spirits
for
such
their
Assistance
.
CHAP.
XII
.
THIS
is
a
short
Chapter
,
and
will
soon
be
dispatch'd
.
Ib.
p.
53
,
54.
For
thus
he
positively
affirms
of
the
Excepter
.
He
says
,
GOD
might
as
well
as
to
significancy
have
appointed
the
Sun
,
as
the
Rainbow
,
for
a
sign
that
there
should
never
have
been
another
Flood
.
And
again
,
This
would
have
done
as
well
,
he
says
,
as
the
Rainbow
.
But
this
is
utterly
false
;
for
,
as
any
one
may
see
,
the
Excepter
said
not
so
.
His
words
are
these
.
Disc.
p.
253
,
254
If
GOD
had
appointed
the
Sun
to
that
use
,
he
would
have
signified
the
same
thing
that
the
Bow
does
.
But
he
did
not
say
,
he
would
have
signify'd
it
as
well
.
Nay
,
in
effect
,
he
said
the
quite
contrary
,
as
appears
by
what
follows
.
Tho
as
all
must
grant
,
the
Bow
is
the
most
fit
Emblem
of
the
two
;
and
therefore
it
was
chosen
.
And
when
the
Excepter
said
,
the
Bow
is
the
most
fit
Emblem
of
the
two
,
and
that
GOD
chose
it
for
that
Reason
:
what
did
he
say
less
,
than
that
it
must
do
better
than
the
Sun
;
and
consequently
that
the
Sun
could
not
do
so
well
as
that
?
which
is
contrary
to
the
Answerers
Affirmation
.
Another
man
,
I
hope
,
may
write
a
piece
of
Natural
History
,
tho
he
does
it
not
as
well
and
remarkably
as
the
Theorist
has
done
:
for
there
are
degrees
of
Comparison
in
doing
things
.
But
will
he
never
leave
falsifying
,
and
speak
the
truth
?
Ib.
p.
259
,
260.
As
to
our
Argument
proving
the
Existence
of
Clouds
before
the
Flood
;
and
consequently
the
Appearance
of
the
Rainbow
then
:
He
answers
it
by
his
last
Expedient
only
.
CHAP.
XIII
.
fairly
baulks
all
the
the
Difficulties
in
that
Doctrine
,
and
contents
himself
with
a
few
generals
,
which
every
body
knows
.
Betwixt
the
Doctrine
and
Difficulties
of
an
Article
,
there
may
be
great
Difference
.
And
where
there
is
so
,
they
must
be
warily
noted
and
distinguished
.
There
we
must
duly
consider
and
examine
,
whether
these
Difficulties
be
inherent
in
the
Doctrine
,
and
inseparable
from
it
;
or
whether
they
be
Appendages
or
Additionals
to
it
.
Whether
the
Doctrine
delivered
were
interwoven
or
wrapt
up
in
Difficulties
by
GOD
;
or
whether
those
Difficulties
were
the
meer
phantsiful
inventions
of
men
,
annexed
to
it
,
or
clapt
upon
it
.
And
in
case
they
appear
to
be
extrinsic
Accessaries
,
humane
Conjectures
,
or
perhaps
Extravagancies
and
Mistakes
:
what
have
we
more
to
do
with
them
,
or
how
can
we
do
better
by
them
,
than
part
the
Shadows
from
the
true
Substance
,
and
so
throwing
off
the
one
,
keep
close
to
the
other
?
English
Theory
,
shows
as
much
.
There
he
informs
us
,
under
the
Aequinoctial
.
Where
others
of
the
Learned
plac'd
the
Ocean
,
and
where
he
himself
places
the
Fiery
Zone
.
He
might
have
added
,
that
their
common
Opinion
was
,
that
GOD
made
Paradise
before
the
World
:
And
when
there
was
neither
Heaven
nor
Earth
in
being
,
Where
was
the
Aequinoctial
to
place
it
under
?
As
for
Ancient
Heathens
,
Poets
,
and
Philosophers
,
they
,
he
tells
us
,
were
rather
for
several
Paradises
in
the
Earth
.
As
for
Christian
Fathers
,
he
says
,
they
disputed
,
whether
Paradise
was
[
*
](A67683-e41260-b)
*
That
Paradise
was
Corporeal
,
seems
to
be
the
constant
Doctrine
of
all
the
Fathers
except
Origen
(
whom
some
count
a
Corrupter
of
the
Scriptures
simplicity
)
and
St.
Ambrose
.
Corporeal
,
or
Intellectual
only
,
and
Allegorical
;
This
was
the
grand
point
amongst
them
.
And
so
they
were
like
to
make
good
work
of
the
place
of
Paradise
.
And
of
those
of
them
that
thought
it
local
,
did
not
determine
any
thing
concerning
the
Particular
place
of
it
.
But
the
rest
that
did
,
exprest
themselves
in
various
ways
,
yet
,
upon
a
due
interpretation
,
they
agree
,
that
Paradise
was
seated
in
the
other
Hemisphere
:
And
having
well
observed
,
their
Ignorance
of
the
Globe
of
the
Earth
(
which
could
not
but
betray
them
into
false
Notions
about
the
Form
of
it
,
and
about
Places
in
it
)
at
length
he
concludes
thus
.
Wherefore
laying
aside
all
Natural
Topicks
,
we
are
willing
in
this
particular
to
refer
our selves
wholly
to
the
report
and
majority
of
Votes
amongst
the
Ancients
whether
Christians
or
others
,
who
seem
generally
to
incline
to
the
South
or
South-East
Land
.
And
so
the
place
of
Paradise
is
still
GOD
knows
where
.
Tho
to
bring
it
to
this
,
even
to
the
South
,
or
South-East
Land
;
he
was
fain
to
take
pains
,
we
see
,
and
use
some
art
.
That
is
,
in
making
a
due
Interpretation
of
those
Passages
in
the
Ancients
Writings
,
by
which
they
exprest
themselves
in
various
ways
touching
this
Matter
.
And
all
that
he
could
get
out
of
them
at
last
,
was
but
this
neither
;
Who
seem
generally
to
incline
to
the
South
or
South-East
Land
.
And
those
of
the
Fathers
,
who
were
ignorant
of
the
Globe
of
the
Earth
,
and
variously
expressive
of
themselves
in
this
point
;
so
that
their
Expressions
wanted
a
due
interpretation
,
to
make
them
speak
this
seeming
Inclination
of
theirs
:
were
but
a
few
:
The
rest
,
as
he
calls
them
.
A
certain
Remnant
that
did
not
dispute
whether
Paradise
were
intellectual
,
&c.
So
that
the
Place
of
it
,
I
say
,
is
still
to
seek
:
As
much
to
seek
as
ever
.
And
as
for
the
Theorist
,
if
he
will
but
look
impartially
upon
Particulars
,
and
fairly
cast
up
what
the
whole
amounts
to
;
he
may
very
justly
for
the
Total
Sum
of
his
Gains
,
set
down
a
Cypher
,
at
the
Bottom
of
his
Account
.
And
truly
it
would
be
well
if
that
were
all
.
If
he
could
cross
his
Books
,
and
make
things
so
even
;
as
after
his
Travels
in
this
search
for
Paradise
to
cry
he
is
clear
with
all
the
World
.
But
alas
he
must
come
to
another
Reckoning
,
and
will
find
he
came
home
a
much
worse
man
,
than
he
went
out
;
We
will
never
depend
wholly
upon
their
Credit
,
nor
assert
any
thing
upon
the
authority
of
the
Ancients
,
which
is
not
first
proved
by
natural
Reason
,
or
warranted
by
Scripture
.
A
positive
ingagement
made
,
and
public
enough
:
but
let
us
see
how
well
he
stood
to
it
.
Does
Reason
prove
the
place
of
Paradise
to
be
in
the
other
World
?
No.
Does
Scripture
warrant
it
to
be
there
?
No.
For
he
himself
tells
us
expressly
,
neither
Scripture
,
nor
Reason
determine
the
Place
of
Paradise
.
Wherefore
laying
aside
all
natural
Topics
,
we
are
willing
in
this
Particular
to
refer
our selves
wholly
to
the
report
and
majority
of
Votes
amongst
the
Ancients
,
whether
Christians
or
others
,
who
seem
generally
to
incline
to
the
South
,
or
South-East
Land
.
As
if
he
had
set
up
his
Resolution
of
adhering
to
Scripture
and
Reason
,
(
as
firm
one
would
think
)
as
a
Rock
;
meerly
to
dash
his
Credit
in
pieces
against
it
.
It
was
a
very
good
Declaration
which
he
made
that
way
,
and
contains
a
Rule
proper
for
him
to
go
by
.
But
it
is
as
strange
that
he
should
break
it
so
soon
,
This
Theory
being
chiefly
Philosophical
,
Reason
is
to
be
our
first
Guide
;
and
where
that
falls
short
,
we
may
receive
further
light
and
confirmation
from
the
sacred
Writings
.
—
But
as
for
Antiquity
and
the
testimonies
of
the
Ancients
,
we
only
make
general
Reflections
upon
them
,
for
illustration
rather
than
proof
of
what
we
propose
.
Put
this
to
what
was
declar'd
before
,
and
from
both
we
learn
this
useful
Lesson
.
That
in
the
Theory
,
not
any
thing
is
to
be
taken
up
upon
the
Authority
of
the
Ancients
,
or
to
depend
wholly
upon
their
Credit
;
but
it
is
first
to
be
proved
by
Reason
,
or
warranted
by
Scripture
.
Natural
Reason
is
to
be
the
Chief
Guide
,
and
Confirmation
of
what
is
proposed
must
come
from
the
Sacred
Writings
;
and
the
Testimonies
of
the
Ancients
are
for
illustration
rather
than
for
Proof
.
But
this
being
the
declared
Judgment
of
the
Theorist
,
what
means
he
so
flatly
to
contradict
it
in
his
practice
;
by
yielding
Paradise
was
in
the
Southern
Hemisphere
wholly
upon
the
Authority
of
the
Ancients
;
without
either
natural
Reason
to
prove
it
,
or
Scripture
to
warrant
and
confirm
it
?
And
thereby
indeed
he
contradicts
Great
Moses
too
,
as
well
as
himself
.
For
his
inspired
Pen
describing
that
Garden
,
by
the
Rivers
Euphrates
,
Hiddekel
,
&c.
as
principal
Marks
of
its
Situation
;
does
place
it
originally
in
our
Northern
World
.
Now
had
we
not
better
content
our selves
with
a
few
Generals
which
every
body
knows
,
that
are
certain
;
than
go
thus
far
,
and
pay
thus
dear
,
for
singular
Notions
which
are
vain
and
void
of
truth
?
But
if
against
the
Divine
Caveat
from
above
,
men
will
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
be
wise
in
their
own
conceits
;
and
without
Reason
to
prove
them
,
or
Scripture
to
warrant
them
,
will
form
Opinions
to
themselves
about
sacred
Doctrines
;
or
recommend
them
to
others
,
even
against
Scripture
:
no
wonder
that
their
Studies
should
tend
to
Vanity
;
and
that
their
Disquisitions
should
run
out
into
wild
Extravagance
;
and
that
having
roiled
the
limpid
Streams
of
Truth
,
they
should
drink
in
the
muddy
waters
of
Error
,
to
quench
their
inordinate
thirst
of
knowledge
.
This
is
spoken
in
remark
of
the
Nature
of
those
Difficulties
,
which
according
to
the
Theory
,
attend
the
Doctrine
of
Paradise
;
and
with
Baulking
of
which
we
are
charged
by
the
Answer
.
The
place
of
Paradise
our
Author
makes
to
be
the
first
of
them
,
and
he
yields
it
to
be
in
the
South-East-Land
.
But
then
in
yielding
it
there
,
by
his
own
Confession
,
he
proceeds
without
Reason
,
and
without
Scripture
,
and
we
may
add
against
both
;
inasmuch
as
it
is
against
Reason
,
for
a
Christian
Doctor
to
go
against
Scripture
.
Yet
if
the
place
of
Paradise
is
such
an
hidden
,
hamper'd
,
difficult
Thing
(
as
the
Theorist
makes
it
)
which
in
it self
must
needs
be
real
,
because
Paradise
was
Local
:
If
that
,
I
say
,
in
the
Circumstance
of
its
Situation
,
is
so
difficult
,
latent
,
and
incertain
;
as
to
baffle
his
best
Attempts
of
finding
it
,
and
render
them
insignificant
:
What
shall
we
think
of
the
rest
of
those
Difficulties
,
which
he
calls
the
Properties
of
Paradise
?
Surely
they
must
be
strange
and
unreasonable
Things
,
to
be
appropriated
to
the
true
Doctrine
of
Paradise
;
as
having
nothing
of
that
certain
Reality
in
them
,
which
the
place
of
Paradise
had
;
the
meer
Site
of
which
prov'd
so
puzzling
to
him
,
as
to
defeat
his
Labours
in
searching
after
it
,
and
make
them
vain
and
unhappy
.
And
These
Difficulties
being
of
this
Quality
;
no
certain
,
Real
Things
;
no
better
than
Chimaerical
Figments
,
or
Romantick
Forgeries
;
no
other
than
fine
and
light
Ideas
,
which
float
only
in
the
Imaginations
of
the
Phantsiful
:
Such
things
as
GOD
never
put
into
the
Doctrine
of
Paradise
;
Such
as
want
Scripture
to
warrant
them
,
Reason
to
prove
them
,
and
even
so
much
as
clear
and
sound
Authorities
to
vouch
and
recommend
them
;
Such
as
yield
no
profit
,
but
rather
bring
Prejudice
to
Doters
upon
them
,
and
writers
about
them
;
as
we
see
by
a
fair
Example
before
us
.
These
Difficulties
,
I
say
,
being
of
this
Strain
;
if
we
had
baulked
them
,
we
might
well
have
born
the
Censure
of
doing
it
,
and
as
well
have
justifi'd
the
censured
Action
.
But
then
they
were
not
so
Baulked
neither
,
but
that
at
the
same
time
they
were
confuted
also
.
For
while
our
short
paraphrase
upon
the
holy
Texts
,
relating
to
the
Place
of
Paradise
(
and
containing
the
Divine
and
only
authentic
Account
thereof
)
lays
down
the
Generals
which
Scripture
affirms
or
teaches
concerning
it
;
it
so
far
confutes
the
Theory's
Singularitys
,
or
Properties
of
it
,
as
it
shews
,
that
(
however
they
may
be
Difficulties
indeed
)
they
are
no
real
Parts
of
the
true
and
genuine
Doctrine
of
Paradise
.
If
they
were
,
why
do
not
the
sacred
writings
take
some
notice
of
them
at
least
?
But
they
make
not
the
least
mention
of
a
Perpetual
Aequinox
,
of
a
perpetual
Spring
,
or
of
the
Earth's
spontaneous
Production
of
Animals
;
which
the
Theory
makes
to
be
Properties
of
Paradise
.
Tho
from
hence
we
may
conclude
,
that
they
are
falsely
so
counted
,
they
are
falsely
so
called
,
because
the
Scripture
owns
them
not
;
nor
are
they
consentaneous
to
its
Doctrine
,
either
in
themselves
,
or
in
the
train
of
their
Consequences
.
It
approves
of
them
no
more
,
than
it
does
of
Paradise's
Prae-existence
to
the
World
;
than
it
does
of
its
Situation
under
the
Aequinoctial
;
than
it
does
of
its
being
placed
near
to
the
Moon
,
or
set
up
so
high
,
as
to
be
above
Darkness
,
and
out
of
the
reach
of
the
Flood
.
(
Which
made
the
Sons
of
Infallibility
(
a
sort
of
Theological
Theorists
)
mount
Enoch
thither
before
the
Deluge
;
whither
after
it
,
they
sent
Elias
,
to
keep
him
Company
.
)
These
Conceits
,
in
the
Judgments
of
Some
(
both
learned
men
and
ancient
Fathers
)
were
Properties
of
Paradise
.
But
for
all
that
,
they
were
meer
empty
Conceits
still
,
nor
could
they
be
other
.
Yet
let
it
be
noted
,
they
all
stand
in
the
same
Rank
,
and
are
built
on
every
whit
as
good
Foundations
,
as
the
Theory's
Properties
of
Paradise
are
.
For
tho
neither
Reason
nor
Scripture
do
allow
or
confirm
them
;
yet
they
are
rear'd
on
express
Authorities
of
the
Ancients
,
and
ratifi'd
by
them
.
But
are
they
of
power
to
authenticate
Phantsies
,
and
turn
them
into
Realities
?
But
to
go
on
with
this
Point
,
upon
which
I
little
thought
to
have
said
thus
much
.
Baulking
all
the
Difficulties
in
the
Doctrine
of
Paradise
;
not
baulk
all
those
Difficulties
.
For
the
Properties
of
Paradise
,
that
is
to
say
,
the
Perpetual
Aequinox
,
the
Longaevity
of
the
Antediluvians
,
and
the
Spontaneous
or
Vital
Fertility
of
the
Earth
,
were
at
least
some
of
the
Difficulties
meant
.
Now
to
the
First
of
these
we
spake
in
the
Eighth
Chapter
of
our
Discourse
,
and
so
had
no
reason
to
return
to
it
in
the
Thirteenth
.
And
in
the
Thirteenth
Chapter
we
handled
the
other
Two
;
else
what
means
the
Answer
given
in
to
them
here
?
But
before
we
consider
the
Answer
he
has
made
,
there
is
one
Objection
to
be
removed
,
which
he
has
thrown
in
our
way
.
He
tells
the
Animadverter
,
that
if
he
would
undertake
to
confute
the
Theory
in
this
Point
,
he
should
have
confuted
four
of
his
Particulars
concerning
the
Place
of
Paradise
;
But
he
slips
over
these
.
The
Animadverter
was
to
confute
this
Assertion
of
the
Theory
.
The
Doctrine
of
Paradise
cannot
be
understood
,
but
upon
supposition
of
the
Primitive
Earth
and
its
Properties
.
Now
if
he
could
make
it
out
,
that
the
Doctrine
of
Paradise
is
intelligible
without
the
Theory
;
as
intelligible
without
it
,
as
it
is
with
it
;
this
Assertion
must
needs
be
confuted
.
This
therefore
he
undertook
to
do
.
And
it
being
done
,
what
he
intended
,
and
what
he
was
obliged
to
,
was
performed
.
And
even
these
particular
Objections
too
,
tho
before
not
so
distinctly
made
:
were
virtually
answered
,
and
confuted
in
the
Substance
of
them
.
But
however
it
being
expected
we
should
do
it
,
let
us
speak
more
expressly
to
these
Four
Particulars
.
The
Place
of
Paradise
cannot
be
determin'd
by
Scripture
only
.
First
,
if
it
cannot
be
determin'd
by
Scripture
only
,
it
must
be
determin'd
by
Scripture
chiefly
.
For
that
alone
gives
the
best
grounds
whereon
,
and
the
best
light
whereby
to
describe
the
Place
,
so
far
as
it
can
be
done
.
And
secondly
,
it
is
not
to
be
doubted
,
but
that
at
first
it
did
more
exactly
define
or
bound
it
out
:
only
since
that
time
,
such
changes
have
happened
to
the
Chanels
of
Rivers
,
and
the
Boundaries
of
it
;
as
render
the
Draught
or
Description
of
the
Country
,
which
was
then
more
exact
and
clear
;
dark
now
and
insufficient
.
And
Scripture
having
described
Paradise
so
well
at
first
,
and
contributing
so
peculiarly
to
the
best
possible
description
of
it
still
;
it
is
that
which
did
determine
it
only
,
in
a
more
satisfactory
measure
,
once
;
and
that
which
does
determine
it
only
,
in
a
well
qualifi'd
sense
,
to
this
day
;
so
far
,
that
is
,
as
it
is
determinable
.
And
what
can
be
expected
from
it
more
?
The
Second
is
this
.
The
place
of
Paradise
cannot
be
determin'd
by
the
Theory
.
And
how
should
it
,
when
GOD
signifies
it
(
as
we
shall
see
immediately
)
to
be
seated
in
one
Hemisphere
,
and
that
fixes
it
in
the
other
?
But
is
it
not
pretty
then
,
that
the
Animadverter
,
if
he
would
confute
the
Theory
,
should
be
put
to
confute
this
Particular
?
That
is
,
he
must
prove
the
Theory
can
do
,
what
it
cannot
do
.
A
notable
way
of
securing
an
Hypothesis
;
to
tie
him
who
attaques
it
,
to
do
a
thing
that
is
impossible
,
whereby
to
overthrow
it
.
The
Third
is
this
.
If
we
appeal
to
Antiquity
in
this
case
,
we
shall
find
that
it
(
Paradise
)
was
not
in
Mesopotamia
.
But
according
to
his
own
Rule
,
Antiquity
without
Reason
and
Scripture
to
back
it
,
is
not
to
be
depended
on
.
And
for
the
same
reason
,
his
Fourth
Particular
falls
of
it self
;
which
is
this
,
According
to
the
plurality
of
Votes
,
both
amongst
the
Heathen
and
Christian
Authors
,
it
was
plac'd
in
the
other
Hemisphere
.
But
these
Heathen
and
Christian
Authors
,
having
neither
Reason
nor
Scripture
to
second
what
they
say
;
(
again
we
repeat
it
)
they
are
not
to
be
depended
on
:
nor
can
the
Answerer
,
if
he
stands
to
his
word
,
assert
Paradise
to
have
been
where
they
place
it
,
upon
their
credit
or
authority
.
But
we
have
something
else
to
offer
,
which
will
reach
both
the
Particulars
at
once
.
The
Best
Antiquity
in
the
whole
World
,
is
Scripture
.
And
if
we
appeal
to
that
,
we
shall
find
it
most
probable
,
that
the
seat
of
Paradise
was
Mesopotamia
,
or
some
Region
thereabouts
;
by
the
several
broad
Signs
which
it
gives
us
thereof
,
in
the
Second
Chapter
of
Genesis
.
For
First
,
That
is
Eastward
of
the
place
where
Moses
wrote
.
And
it
is
said
,
Gen.
2.8
.
that
the
LORD
GOD
planted
a
Garden
Eastward
.
in
the
beginning
;
Moses
teaches
us
plainly
that
it
signifies
,
in
the
East
,
by
using
the
word
in
that
sense
himself
,
in
the
very
next
Chapter
.
For
in
the
last
Verse
of
it
,
he
says
,
that
GOD
placed
Cherubim
and
a
flaming
Sword
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
in
the
East
of
the
Garden
of
Eden
.
But
to
have
rendred
it
thus
,
he
placed
in
the
Beginning
of
the
Garden
of
Eden
,
Cherubim
and
a
flaming
Sword
;
would
have
been
a
very
improper
and
ill
Reddition
.
And
as
often
as
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
do
occur
in
the
Pentateuch
,
which
I
think
,
is
at
least
thirty
times
,
besides
Gen.
2.8
.
I
do
not
find
that
they
can
,
in
any
one
place
,
be
rendred
otherwise
than
,
East
,
Eastward
,
of
the
East
,
or
in
the
East
.
Which
if
they
cannot
,
it
is
enough
to
convince
us
,
that
Mikkedhem
,
Gen.
2.8
.
must
be
rendred
,
in
the
East
;
not
,
in
the
Beginning
.
Secondly
,
Eden
is
there
;
the
Country
wherein
Paradise
was
planted
.
So
we
read
again
,
Gen.
2.8
that
the
LORD
GOD
planted
a
Garden
Eastward
in
EDEN
.
And
tho
He
would
have
Eden
signify
,
the
LORD
GOD
planted
a
Garden
in
pleasure
:
that
cannot
be
the
true
meaning
.
For
the
word
is
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
;
and
so
it
must
be
read
,
the
LORD
GOD
planted
a
Garden
in
pleasure
;
which
would
sound
but
harshly
.
And
in
the
next
Verie
but
one
,
it
is
said
,
that
a
River
went
out
of
Eden
to
water
the
Garden
.
But
to
say
a
River
went
out
of
pleasure
to
water
the
Garden
;
would
be
no
good
sense
.
And
in
the
fourth
of
Genesis
we
meet
with
a
Passage
,
which
shows
that
Moses
,
by
Mikkedhem
,
must
mean
the
East
,
and
not
the
Beginning
;
and
by
Eden
,
a
Country
,
and
not
pleasure
.
For
telling
us
there
at
the
16th
.
Verse
,
which
way
the
Land
of
Nod
lay
,
where
Cain
dwelt
;
he
says
,
it
was
on
the
East
of
Eden
.
But
for
him
to
have
said
,
it
was
in
the
beginning
of
Pleasure
;
would
have
been
an
odd
account
of
its
Situation
.
After
all
which
(
if
it
will
not
seem
superfluous
)
may
be
added
the
words
spoken
by
Rabshakeh
in
the
person
of
his
Master
,
and
recorded
by
the
Prophet
,
Jer.
37.12
.
Have
the
GODS
of
the
Nations
delivered
them
which
my
Fathers
have
destroyed
,
as
Gozan
,
and
Haran
,
and
Rezeph
,
and
the
Children
of
Eden
which
were
in
Talassar
?
into
the
land
of
the
Children
of
the
East
,
Gen.
29.1
.
And
Balaam
who
was
brought
out
of
the
Mountains
of
the
East
,
Numb
.
23.7
;
is
said
to
be
of
Mesopotamia
,
Deut.
23.4
.
Thirdly
,
the
Land
of
Havilah
is
there
;
about
which
the
River
Pison
is
said
to
fetch
a
compass
,
Gen.
2.11
.
Not
the
Indian
Havilah
(
as
some
have
greatly
mistaken
:
and
by
that
mistake
have
been
led
into
another
,
that
Pison
was
Ganges
:
)
but
that
Havilah
which
was
so
called
from
the
Son
of
Cush
.
Whereas
the
other
Havilah
took
its
denomination
from
the
Son
of
Joctan
.
Strabo
also
placeth
the
Havilah
that
relates
to
Paradise
,
in
the
Confines
of
Arabia
and
Mesopotamia
.
Fourthly
,
the
Land
of
Cush
is
there
;
so
denominated
from
Cush
the
Son
of
Ham
,
who
settled
himself
and
his
Family
in
it
.
It
is
said
to
be
compassed
with
the
River
Gihon
,
Gen.
2.13
.
and
it
is
the
Asiatic
Aethiopia
.
Tho
some
presuming
that
the
African
Aethiopia
was
there
meant
,
concluded
that
Gihon
must
be
the
Nile
.
Fifthly
,
Hiddekel
or
Tigris
is
there
;
which
is
said
to
run
towards
the
East
of
Assyria
,
Gen.
2.14
.
Upon
whose
Stream
rising
from
the
Gordian
Mountains
in
the
greater
Armenia
,
and
flowing
Southwards
to
the
dividing
of
Mesopotamia
from
Assyria
;
stands
the
Principal
City
of
that
Country
,
the
famous
Ninive
,
built
by
Assur
.
Sixthly
,
Euphrates
,
that
Celebrated
River
of
Asia
,
is
there
also
,
Gen.
2.14
.
I
mean
in
that
Eastern
part
of
our
Continent
.
Now
are
not
all
these
Regions
and
Rivers
,
in
,
or
about
Eden
,
or
Mesopotamia
?
And
are
they
not
Marks
of
the
Earthly
Paradise
?
And
were
they
not
made
so
by
Moses
himself
?
And
was
not
he
directed
by
the
H.
GHOST
?
And
might
it
not
be
in
Mesopotamia
then
,
or
must
it
not
be
near
it
?
For
had
it
been
out
of
it
,
and
remote
from
it
;
what
wise
man
inspired
by
GOD
,
would
have
described
it
by
such
Rivers
,
and
describ'd
it
by
such
Regions
as
lay
about
Mesopotamia
,
and
were
conterminous
with
it
,
or
bordering
upon
it
?
and
if
some
of
these
Rivers
,
and
some
of
these
Regions
,
be
very
much
chang'd
in
their
Names
and
Postures
,
since
Moses
wrote
;
that
's
no
marvel
.
It
would
rather
be
a
wonder
(
considering
[
*
](A67683-e44830-b)
*
Certum
est
insignes
variationes
in
terrae
partibus
continuo
evenire
,
propter
bellorum
incurpiones
;
aquarum
inundationes
;
Marium
praeruptiones
ac
recessus
;
imperiorum
,
regnorum
,
&
dominiorum
instabilitates
.
Etenim
non
solum
regiones
,
urbes
,
oppida
,
flumina
,
&
alia
hujusmodi
sua
nomina
pro
tempore
mutant
,
amissis
prorsus
prioribus
,
verum
etiam
&
sines
ipsarum
regionum
variantur
,
&
urbes
,
oppidaque
senectute
dele●tur
,
bellorum
calamitate
evertuntur
,
aliaque
de
novo
conduntur
,
&
mare
uno
in
le●o
continentem
terrae
dilatat
,
in
alio
coarctat
,
&
flumina
quandoque
augescunt
,
quandoque
minuuntur
,
quandeque
cursus
variant
,
quandoque
etiam
prorsus
,
deficiunt
.
Sic
quoque
,
fontes
,
stagna
,
paludes
alibi
exiccantur
,
alibi
vero
procreantur
,
&c.
Magin
.
in
praef.
ad
Geogr.
the
Mutability
of
Nature
here
below
)
if
in
so
long
a
time
they
were
not
greatly
altered
.
Tho
these
Alterations
do
not
argue
in
the
least
,
that
Paradise
was
not
situate
in
Mesopotamia
,
or
some
adjacent
Region
.
Where
after
so
many
thousands
of
years
,
we
are
no
more
to
look
for
the
same
Features
in
the
Earth's
Face
;
than
for
the
same
Fruitfulness
in
its
Soil
.
Tho
if
we
will
believe
Herodotus
,
Q.
Curtius
;
the
Babylonian
Soil
does
still
retain
a
strange
and
happy
Fertility
.
For
they
assure
us
,
that
it
yields
Corn
at
the
rate
of
two
hundred
fold
;
and
that
it
bears
Palm
Trees
of
its
own
accord
;
which
afford
Bread
,
Wine
,
Honey
,
&c.
And
as
Pliny
informs
us
,
So
that
upon
the
whole
Matter
,
let
Rabbies
,
and
Fathers
,
and
Poets
,
and
Theorists
say
what
they
please
;
yet
so
long
as
Moses
wrote
the
second
Chapter
of
Genesis
,
and
his
hand
was
guided
by
the
most
HOLY
and
unerring
SPIRIT
;
we
cannot
but
think
,
that
men
in
reason
ought
to
conclude
,
and
that
in
duty
they
ought
to
believe
,
that
Paradise
was
seated
in
Mesopotamia
,
or
thereabouts
.
And
we
hope
it
is
as
intelligible
that
it
should
be
there
seated
,
as
that
it
was
situate
in
the
Southern
Hemisphere
.
For
who
ever
yet
understood
,
or
who
can
understand
;
That
Eden
,
and
Havilah
,
and
Cush
,
and
Assyria
,
were
Countries
;
and
that
Pison
,
and
Gihon
,
and
Hiddekel
,
and
Euphrates
,
were
Rivers
,
in
that
Southern
Hemisphere
?
In
case
they
were
so
,
how
came
they
from
thence
hither
?
I
remember
Sir
Richard
Baker
tells
it
,
as
a
great
Wonder
,
amongst
the
Casualties
that
hapned
in
our
Queen
Elizabeth's
Reign
;
that
a
certain
hill
in
Herefordshire
,
beginning
to
remove
out
of
its
place
,
on
Saturday
Evening
,
continued
walking
till
Munday
noon
.
But
if
such
large
Countries
as
these
,
could
take
so
long
a
Journey
;
the
ambulatory
Mount
may
stand
by
for
a
diminutive
Prodigy
.
Tho
we
must
observe
withal
,
that
the
Fathers
never
seated
Paradise
in
the
other
Hemisphere
neither
.
They
only
seem
to
incline
to
that
,
by
the
Theorists
due
interpretation
of
them
,
as
was
noted
above
.
And
as
to
the
Seat
of
Paradise
(
as
he
says
)
they
expressed
themselves
in
various
ways
.
That
is
,
their
Notions
of
it
were
incertain
;
and
in
plain
terms
,
they
knew
not
where
to
fix
it
.
But
so
far
were
they
from
believing
it
to
be
in
the
Southern
Hemisphere
,
that
they
did
not
believe
that
Hemisphere
was
ever
inhabited
;
for
they
did
not
believe
that
there
were
Antipodes
.
And
when
some
of
them
would
have
Paradise
to
be
Mystical
only
;
and
others
would
have
it
to
be
the
whole
Earth
;
and
others
place
it
under
the
Aequinoctial
;
and
others
under
the
Globe
or
Circle
of
the
Moon
;
and
others
in
the
exterior
part
of
a
flat
or
plain
Earth
,
round
the
inward
part
of
which
,
they
supposed
the
Ocean
to
stand
like
a
Ring
:
Which
of
them
set
it
in
the
Southern
Hemisphere
?
Tho
if
they
had
,
we
need
not
have
been
much
surpriz'd
at
it
neither
.
For
being
but
men
,
they
might
have
done
as
men
;
have
erred
,
that
is
,
in
their
Opinion
.
And
truly
ever
since
Adam
,
through
desire
of
Knowledge
,
first
planted
error
in
Paradise
;
that
poysonous
Weed
has
been
apt
to
Spring
up
and
spread
unhappily
in
other
places
,
and
the
best
Gardens
of
Antiquity
have
been
stained
with
it
.
Witness
the
Millenium
;
the
Rebaptizing
of
Haeretics
;
the
Limbus
Patrum
;
the
Communicating
of
Infants
;
and
the
like
.
And
if
we
'll
take
in
Errors
of
a
lower
Strain
,
we
shall
find
the
false
Notions
entertained
by
the
Ancients
,
of
the
Form
of
the
Earth
,
of
the
Figure
and
Situation
of
the
Sea
,
of
the
non-existence
of
Antipodes
,
&c.
ready
to
confirm
and
corroborate
the
Testimony
.
And
what
does
the
famous
Aristotelian
Hypothesis
seem
to
be
now
in
this
present
Age
,
Milky
Way
to
be
a
Meteor
.
He
also
allowed
but
Eight
Heavenly
Sphaeres
;
which
Timocaris
,
above
three
hundred
years
before
the
Incarnation
,
improved
to
Nine
;
and
Alphonsus
(
in
the
thirteeneth
Century
after
it
)
into
Ten
;
and
afterward
they
were
commonly
reckoned
Eleven
.
And
not
only
Egyptians
,
Graecians
,
and
Arabians
,
but
even
Hebrew
and
Christian
Doctors
,
took
the
Stars
to
be
living
Bodies
actuated
with
Souls
;
as
Espencaeus
informs
us
in
his
Treatise
de
Cal.
animat
.
but
a
Mass
of
Errors
?
Where
such
a
Systeme
was
contrived
for
the
Heavens
,
and
such
a
situation
assigned
to
the
Earth
;
as
neither
Reason
can
approve
,
nor
Nature
allow
.
Yet
so
prosperous
and
prevailing
was
this
Hypothesis
,
that
it
was
generally
received
and
successfully
propagated
for
many
Ages
.
And
when
the
Heavens
were
so
misconceived
,
and
the
Earth
so
misplaced
;
and
the
Errors
touching
both
,
were
spread
so
far
,
and
continued
so
long
:
why
might
not
the
same
happen
as
to
Paradise
?
Why
might
not
the
Ancients
,
and
the
choicest
of
the
Ancients
mistake
concerning
it
,
particularly
concerning
the
place
of
it
?
Were
an
Account
to
be
given
of
the
Original
or
Occasion
of
this
their
Mistake
;
it
might
seem
methinks
to
have
risen
thus
,
or
proceeded
from
hence
.
They
thought
and
spake
too
Great
things
of
Paradise
,
and
supposed
such
Properties
and
Excellencies
in
it
,
as
it
never
had
,
nor
was
capable
of
.
And
having
rais'd
their
Phantsies
to
so
high
a
Pitch
,
they
could
not
tell
how
to
let
them
fall
again
,
and
stoop
so
low
as
Mesopotamia
.
And
so
they
conceited
that
Paradise
was
in
some
remote
,
unknown
,
inaccessible
Region
,
or
as
it
were
in
another
World
,
because
they
could
find
out
no
place
in
this
,
which
answered
the
gay
Notions
that
they
had
,
and
their
fine
but
false
Idea's
of
it
.
Just
as
the
Jews
overlookt
the
Person
of
the
true
Messiah
,
because
it
came
not
up
to
that
vain
and
extravagant
Character
of
Him
,
unhappily
imprinted
on
their
Minds
:
So
these
pious
,
learned
,
and
incomparable
men
,
took
no
notice
of
the
real
Place
of
Paradise
,
as
being
prepossest
with
misapprehensions
of
it
.
The
lofty
Opinions
which
they
had
concerning
it
,
lifted
up
their
Thoughts
far
above
it
,
and
carry'd
them
away
quite
beyond
it
.
They
imagin'd
that
it
was
they
knew
not
well
what
,
and
so
they
placed
it
they
knew
not
well
where
;
believing
they
should
wrong
it
,
if
they
fixt
it
any
where
in
this
ordinary
World
.
The
Excepter
having
done
with
the
Place
of
Paradise
;
he
objected
next
against
the
Longaevity
of
men
before
the
flood
,
as
a
Property
of
it
.
But
this
,
he
handles
so
loosely
,
that
in
the
conclusion
of
his
Discourse
,
one
cannot
tell
whether
he
affirms
it
or
denies
it
.
The
Excepter
begins
his
discourse
of
this
matter
,
As
for
the
Longaevity
of
the
Antediluvians
,
that
could
be
no
Property
or
Adjunct
of
Paradise
.
And
did
he
not
deny
then
,
and
positively
deny
the
Longaevity
of
the
Antediluvians
,
as
a
Property
of
Paradise
,
which
is
his
notion
of
it
?
And
because
the
Answerer
does
affirm
the
thing
,
by
dividing
the
Doctrine
of
the
local
Paradise
into
two
parts
,
no
Property
of
Paradise
.
He
makes
it
good
thus
.
If
it
had
been
so
,
it
would
have
ceased
,
or
have
been
extinguisht
in
Mankind
,
by
their
loss
of
that
Place
.
For
where-ever
Priviledges
are
the
Properties
of
a
Place
,
he
that
enjoys
them
,
can
hold
them
no
longer
than
he
continues
in
that
place
.
If
once
he
forfeits
the
Place
,
and
be
dispossess'd
of
that
;
together
with
it
,
he
must
actually
lose
all
those
Priviledges
which
are
Properties
of
it
,
and
be
deprived
of
them
.
And
this
Longaevity
being
(
according
to
our
Author
)
a
Property
of
the
Place
of
Paradise
;
Adam
and
his
Children
could
not
be
priviledg'd
with
it
as
such
,
when
he
himself
was
soon
turn'd
out
of
it
,
and
none
of
them
were
ever
in
it
.
Besides
,
how
could
this
Longaevity
be
a
Property
of
the
Particular
Topical
Paradise
;
when
he
makes
it
to
be
one
of
his
three
general
Characters
,
2
,
3.
common
to
the
whole
Primitive
Earth
?
Yet
a
Property
of
the
particular
Paradise
it
must
needs
be
,
because
it
is
one
of
the
Properties
meant
,
where
he
divides
the
Doctrine
of
that
Paradise
,
into
the
Place
,
and
the
Properties
of
,
that
Place
.
But
then
is
not
here
something
like
Contradiction
again
,
where
a
Property
of
one
particular
Place
of
the
Earth
,
is
made
common
to
the
whole
habitable
Earth
?
Indeed
the
Excepter
did
not
positively
deny
the
Longaevity
of
the
Antediluvians
to
be
General
.
And
therefore
the
Answerer
taxes
him
with
Sceptical
humour
.
After
this
he
observes
,
take
notice
of
the
two
last
Reosons
he
gave
,
in
confirmation
of
the
Antediluvian
Longaevity
.
One
of
them
runs
thus
.
The
generations
recorded
in
Scripture
after
the
Flood
,
as
they
exceed
the
term
of
succeeding
Ages
,
so
they
decline
by
degrees
from
the
Antediluvian
Longaevity
.
To
this
we
answered
sufficiently
,
(
tho
we
did
not
expressly
apply
it
to
that
particular
Reason
)
where
we
said
,
Shem
,
Arphaxad
,
Salah
,
and
Eber
,
living
much
longer
just
after
the
Flood
,
than
others
did
then
,
Disc.
p.
27●
.
or
have
done
since
;
did
live
so
long
for
the
same
reasons
that
the
ten
men
in
a
lineal
descent
Gen.
5.
were
such
long-livers
.
For
so
their
lives
are
not
to
be
lookt
upon
as
declining
from
the
Antediluvian
Longaevity
,
as
the
Answerer
conceits
;
but
as
extraordinarily
lengthened
,
by
a
special
Blessing
;
the
elongation
of
them
being
a
work
of
Providence
,
not
of
Nature
.
The
other
Reason
was
this
.
Jacob
complains
of
the
shortness
of
his
life
,
and
fewness
of
his
days
,
in
comparison
of
his
Forefathers
,
when
he
had
liv'd
one
hundred
and
thirty
years
;
which
had
been
a
groundless
complaint
,
if
his
Ancestors
had
not
lived
much
longer
.
The
Answer
to
this
is
so
obvious
and
easy
,
that
it
was
not
worth
troubling
the
Reader
with
it
.
The
days
of
the
years
of
my
Pilgrimage
are
an
hundred
and
thirty
years
;
few
and
evil
have
the
days
of
the
years
of
my
Life
been
,
and
have
not
attained
to
the
days
of
the
years
of
the
life
of
my
Fathers
:
So
Jacob
complained
,
Gen.
47.9
.
Now
his
days
being
spent
,
or
so
far
past
,
they
could
not
but
seem
few
to
the
good
Patriarch
,
tho
they
were
an
hundred
and
thirty
years
.
And
being
no
more
,
he
might
truly
say
,
that
they
had
not
attain'd
to
the
years
of
his
Fathers
;
without
any
manner
of
reference
to
,
or
so
much
as
thought
of
,
the
Antediluvian
long-livers
.
For
his
Great-Grandfather
Terah
lived
two
hundred
and
five
years
.
much
longer
than
he
had
then
done
:
even
by
more
than
a
Third
part
of
his
Time
mentioned
.
That
those
remembred
by
Moses
as
Long-livers
before
the
Flood
,
do
not
show
all
in
general
to
be
so
;
the
Excepter
argued
from
these
words
of
his
:
Disc.
p.
277.
Gen.
6.4
.
There
were
Giants
on
the
Earth
in
those
days
.
Now
as
his
telling
the
World
,
there
were
some
Giants
then
,
does
not
imply
that
the
whole
Race
of
Mankind
were
such
;
but
does
rather
import
that
the
rest
were
otherwise
:
so
his
mentioning
some
so
very
Long-livers
;
may
insinuate
that
the
rest
were
not
so
.
To
this
it
is
answered
;
there
had
been
some
pretence
for
this
,
had
made
a
distinction
of
two
races
of
men
in
the
first
World
:
Long-livers
and
Short-livers
;
as
he
hath
distinguisht
the
Giants
from
the
Common
race
of
Mankind
.
And
is
not
his
Distinction
equally
plain
in
both
cases
?
Or
if
there
be
any
difference
,
does
he
not
distinguish
better
betwixt
long-livers
and
short-livers
;
than
he
does
betwixt
men
of
Gigantic
,
and
of
usual
Proportions
?
For
whereas
to
distinguish
Giants
from
ordinary
men
,
he
only
said
,
there
were
Giants
on
the
Earth
in
those
days
;
he
did
more
than
say
there
were
Long-livers
on
the
Earth
in
those
days
:
for
he
specifi'd
their
Names
,
and
he
set
down
their
Ages
,
signifying
clearly
both
who
they
were
,
and
to
what
years
they
reached
.
But
on
the
other
side
,
he
neither
expressed
who
the
Giants
were
,
nor
what
their
Stature
and
Dimensions
.
So
that
of
the
two
,
he
distinguishes
more
plainly
betwixt
long-livers
and
short-livers
;
than
betwixt
the
Giants
and
men
of
common
size
.
For
thus
indeed
he
fairly
intimated
that
the
Generality
of
the
praediluvians
were
short
livers
,
by
his
care
to
particularize
those
that
liv'd
long
;
and
both
by
their
names
,
and
by
the
length
of
their
days
,
to
discriminate
them
from
the
rest
.
And
tho
the
Answerer
says
,
in
the
close
of
his
Paragraph
,
that
not
to
suppose
long
life
general
to
Mankind
at
that
time
,
is
a
groundless
restriction
,
which
is
neither
founded
upon
Scripture
nor
reason
:
We
reply
,
that
it
may
be
founded
upon
both
.
For
Scripture
says
,
in
the
day
that
thou
eatest
thereof
thou
shalt
surely
dye
,
Gen.
2.17
.
And
tho
this
Sentence
was
denounc'd
against
man
conditionally
at
first
,
in
case
he
sinned
;
yet
upon
his
actual
disobedience
,
it
became
positive
as
it
were
,
and
absolute
.
And
when
Scripture
makes
this
the
Sentence
of
GOD
;
(
Who
had
sufficient
power
to
execute
it
,
as
well
as
just
and
mighty
provocation
to
do
it
:
)
after
once
it
took
place
,
it
must
be
consonant
to
Reason
,
that
short
life
rather
than
long
life
,
should
be
the
general
lot
of
men
.
And
so
both
Scripture
and
Reason
plainly
suggest
,
that
they
who
lived
eight
or
nine
hundred
years
,
under
this
Sentence
,
must
in
all
likelihood
ow
their
Longaevity
to
the
favour
of
Heaven
,
and
a
special
Benediction
;
rather
than
to
the
strength
of
their
own
nature
within
,
or
any
Course
or
Order
of
Nature
without
.
Especially
if
we
consider
,
that
even
the
pretended
Aequinoctial
State
of
Nature
,
would
have
shortned
mens
days
,
As
to
the
Testimonies
of
the
Ancients
cited
by
Josephus
,
utterly
false
.
last
Expedient
only
)
fell
very
short
of
it
.
Thus
,
Seth
came
short
of
a
thousand
years
,
by
almost
Ninety
;
Enos
,
by
almost
an
Hundred
;
Mahalaleel
,
by
above
an
Hundred
;
Lamech
,
by
above
two
Hundred
and
Twenty
.
The
Answerer
therefore
need
not
have
insisted
upon
the
Ancients
Tradition
.
And
tho
he
tells
the
Excepter
that
he
seems
content
,
this
Tradition
should
be
admitted
:
Yet
as
the
Context
plainly
shows
,
he
yielded
it
only
so
far
,
as
to
make
the
Concession
introductive
to
an
Enquiry
after
farther
Tradition
,
about
a
constant
Equinox
and
Perpetual
Spring
;
how
it
comes
to
pass
that
Tradition
is
so
partial
,
as
not
to
tell
us
explicitly
of
them
,
the
Causes
of
this
Longaevity
?
But
this
Question
,
he
says
,
is
fully
answered
,
and
the
Tradition
fully
made
out
before
,
in
the
8th
.
Chapter
.
And
to
that
8th
Chapter
of
his
Answer
,
the
8th
Chapter
here
does
as
fully
Reply
.
But
let
us
go
on
to
the
Reasons
alledg'd
against
the
General
Longaevity
of
the
Praediluvians
.
The
First
was
this
.
That
Earth
was
more
capacious
than
this
is
,
where
the
Sea
takes
away
half
of
its
Surface
.
But
as
the
Sea
takes
away
from
this
Earth
,
so
the
Torrid
Zone
and
Rainy
Regions
took
away
from
that
.
That
Earth
also
had
no
Mountains
,
which
in
this
are
great
as
well
as
numerous
;
and
do
very
much
inlarge
its
Capacity
or
room
for
Inhabitants
.
And
whereas
he
suggests
,
that
Mountains
are
less
habitable
than
Plains
,
by
reason
of
their
barrenness
:
It
must
be
considered
first
,
that
a
Mountainous
Earth
must
have
Valleys
in
it
.
And
as
Mountains
are
more
barren
than
Plains
,
so
Valleys
are
oftentimes
more
fruitful
than
they
;
and
also
receptive
of
more
Dwellers
.
That
is
,
by
reason
of
their
hollowness
and
declivities
,
they
are
more
capacious
than
Plains
,
whose
superficial
extent
is
equal
to
the
tops
of
these
Valleys
,
if
measured
by
lines
drawn
from
side
to
side
.
Secondly
,
tho
some
Mountains
be
barren
,
others
are
as
fruitful
.
Taurus
,
for
instance
,
which
takes
its
Denomination
,
as
some
think
,
from
its
Magnitude
;
and
is
the
Greatest
Mountain
in
all
Asia
(
being
as
we
are
told
,
fifty
Miles
broad
in
some
places
on
the
Top
of
it
,
and
fifteen
hundred
long
,
reaching
from
the
Ocean
of
Chinah
,
to
the
Sea
of
Pamphylia
;
)
on
the
sides
of
it
is
prodigious
fruitful
,
tho
its
highest
parts
are
covered
with
Snow
.
For
it
affords
Honey
,
Wheat
,
Gums
,
Wines
,
and
Fruits
in
vast
Quantities
.
What
he
intimates
touching
Holland
,
that
there
are
more
people
in
it
,
than
upon
a
like
number
of
Acres
upon
the
Alps
or
Pyreneans
;
is
allowed
to
be
true
.
But
then
the
Populousness
of
that
Place
(
as
of
many
others
)
is
not
owing
to
the
Fruitfulness
of
the
Soil
,
but
to
the
Traffique
by
Sea
.
And
therefore
he
had
the
less
reason
to
accuse
the
Sea
of
straightning
the
Earth
;
when
by
vertue
of
its
Trade
,
it
inables
so
great
a
multitude
of
People
,
Two
things
to
complain
of
as
foul
play
;
Citing
the
Theory
partially
;
and
not
marking
the
place
whence
the
Citation
was
taken
.
As
to
this
Latter
,
it
was
not
so
needful
to
mark
the
place
of
the
Citation
,
because
the
place
of
another
Citation
immediately
before
this
,
and
relating
to
the
same
matter
,
was
marked
:
Disc.
p.
279.
And
this
Citation
here
meant
,
was
but
six
lines
distant
from
that
,
on
the
very
next
page
.
As
to
the
Former
,
He
had
no
cause
to
blame
the
Excepter
for
a
Partial
Citation
;
for
he
cited
enough
to
confute
the
Theory
fairly
,
as
to
this
Point
,
out
of
it self
;
and
what
needed
he
to
cite
more
?
The
Citation
was
this
.
If
we
allow
the
first
Couple
,
at
the
end
of
one
hundred
years
,
or
of
the
first
Century
,
to
have
left
ten
pair
of
breeders
which
is
an
easy
supposition
,
there
would
arise
from
these
in
fifteen
hundred
years
,
a
greater
number
than
the
Earth
was
capable
of
,
allowing
every
pair
to
multiply
in
the
same
decuple
proportion
the
first
pair
did
.
So
that
admitting
this
easy
Supposition
,
either
the
Longaevity
of
the
Antediluvians
must
not
be
universal
,
or
the
Earth
was
incapable
of
its
Inhabitants
,
said
the
Excepter
.
But
therefore
,
says
the
Answerer
,
the
Theorist
tells
you
,
the
same
measure
cannot
run
equally
through
all
Ages
.
Answ.
p.
58
,
59.
And
in
his
calculation
you
see
,
after
the
first
Century
,
he
hath
taken
only
a
quadruple
proportion
for
the
increase
of
mankind
.
This
the
Excepter
might
have
observed
.
And
this
the
Excepter
did
observe
.
But
then
he
observed
withal
,
that
he
had
no
reason
to
go
off
from
this
easy
supposition
of
a
decuple
proportion
.
And
therefore
he
stopt
at
it
,
and
did
not
concern
himself
with
the
Quadruple
proportion
,
as
being
a
groundless
diminution
of
that
Decuple
Measure
of
increase
,
which
would
have
easily
held
on
through
all
following
Centuries
,
in
a
proportion
equal
to
that
of
the
first
.
For
if
Adam
and
Eve
,
the
first
pair
of
Breeders
at
the
end
of
the
first
Century
,
lest
ten
pair
;
why
should
not
every
other
pair
be
allow'd
to
multiply
at
the
same
rate
?
The
reason
given
seems
to
be
this
.
This
is
an
easy
supposition
for
the
first
century
,
but
it
would
be
a
very
uneasy
one
for
the
following
Centuries
.
And
why
?
I
find
no
reason
again
but
this
:
because
this
(
decuple
proportion
)
would
rise
far
beyond
the
capacities
of
this
Earth
.
That
is
,
it
would
not
be
uneasy
in
the
truth
and
reality
of
the
thing
;
but
uneasy
in
regard
of
the
Theory's
Hypothesis
.
It
would
not
be
uneasy
for
Mankind
to
multiply
in
a
decuple
proportion
;
but
it
would
be
uneasy
for
the
Theory
to
allow
they
did
so
;
because
then
,
as
the
Excepter
urges
,
the
Earth
would
have
been
overcharg'd
with
their
numerous
increase
.
And
when
the
Excepter
cited
so
much
of
the
Theory
,
as
carried
the
whole
Truth
of
the
Matter
in
it
;
he
had
no
reason
to
go
farther
in
citing
more
of
it
,
which
was
added
but
to
serve
the
Theory
against
the
Truth
:
nor
is
there
reason
why
he
should
be
counted
or
called
partial
,
because
he
did
not
do
it
.
That
every
Pair
of
breeders
should
at
the
end
of
every
Century
leave
ten
pair
more
;
is
easy
and
allowable
,
because
,
in
all
likelihood
,
true
in
it self
:
and
was
the
Excepter
to
take
in
a
lower
proportion
,
because
this
higher
one
was
not
for
the
Theorist's
purpose
?
The
first
Supposition
being
easy
,
and
in
all
probability
true
;
why
should
a
second
be
admitted
,
to
render
that
uneasy
and
false
,
meerly
because
it
favours
not
him
who
made
it
?
But
let
him
show
why
Seth
and
his
Wife
,
and
Enos
and
his
Wife
,
and
other
pairs
downward
,
may
not
be
allowed
to
multiply
in
the
same
decuple
proportion
that
the
first
pair
are
allowed
to
do
;
and
then
the
Excepter
will
own
himself
faulty
for
not
enlarging
the
Citation
,
and
taking
in
the
Quadruple
proportion
mentioned
.
But
because
in
all
probability
,
they
multipli'd
in
equal
measures
;
he
had
no
reason
to
be
blam'd
as
partial
,
for
leaving
it
out
.
Tho
the
truth
is
,
if
but
the
Quadruple
proportion
be
admitted
,
it
will
set
the
Number
of
the
Praediluvians
very
much
too
high
,
if
compar'd
with
the
Number
of
the
present
Earth's
Inhabitants
;
as
the
Theorist
computes
them
both
.
For
whereas
he
thinks
that
the
present
number
of
men
upon
the
face
of
the
Earth
,
is
commonly
estimated
to
be
betwixt
three
and
four
hundred
Millions
:
other
Citation
out
of
the
Theory
before
this
;
the
Earth
would
still
be
overlaid
with
the
multitude
of
its
Inhabitants
.
Disc.
p.
279.
The
Citation
runs
thus
.
'T
is
likely
they
were
more
fruitful
in
the
first
Ages
of
the
World
,
than
after
the
Flood
;
and
they
lived
six
,
seven
,
eight
,
nine
hundred
years
apiece
,
getting
Sons
and
Daughters
.
And
when
men
lived
so
many
hundreds
of
years
before
the
Flood
,
and
lived
getting
of
Sons
and
Daughters
,
and
were
more
fruitful
,
then
,
than
since
;
how
is
it
possible
but
that
the
first
Earth
in
sixteen
hundred
years
,
must
be
mightily
over-peopled
;
especially
when
Digamy
,
and
(
as
the
H.
GHOST
seems
to
intimate
)
Poligamy
too
,
last
clause
cited
out
of
your
Theory
;
and
according
to
any
,
or
according
to
all
of
them
,
the
primitive
Earth
would
have
been
greatly
overstockt
,
in
case
the
Longaevity
of
the
Antediluvians
had
been
universal
.
The
second
Reason
against
that
Longaevity
was
the
inequality
of
it
;
or
the
difference
as
to
length
of
days
,
and
Constitutions
might
then
be
of
a
different
strength
,
as
well
as
now
.
The
length
of
Mens
days
depends
naturally
upon
the
strength
of
their
Bodies
;
and
the
strength
of
their
Bodies
,
upon
the
goodness
of
their
Stamina
,
and
Constitutions
.
And
therefore
if
These
were
as
different
before
the
Flood
,
as
they
are
since
;
many
Millions
might
dye
then
as
soon
as
they
were
born
,
and
as
many
in
their
Infancy
,
and
as
many
very
young
,
and
so
the
Longaevity
of
the
Praediluvians
could
not
be
General
:
which
was
the
Thing
objected
.
The
last
Reason
against
the
Praediluvian
Longaevity
supposed
to
proceed
from
a
constant
Equinox
;
Answ.
p.
59.
Disc.
p.
281
,
282
,
283
,
The
second
Character
is
the
Longaevity
of
men
;
and
,
as
is
probable
,
of
all
other
Animals
in
proportion
.
Eng.
Theor.
p.
180.
was
the
proportionable
long
life
of
other
Animals
.
For
that
would
have
been
an
Effect
of
the
same
Cause
.
And
they
multiplying
much
faster
than
Mankind
;
had
they
lived
long
,
they
would
have
grown
so
numerous
as
to
have
been
pernicious
.
To
which
it
is
answered
thus
.
I
can
say
nothing
to
that
,
nor
he
neither
upon
good
grounds
,
unless
we
knew
what
species's
of
Animals
were
then
made
,
and
in
what
degrees
they
Multiplied
.
He
formerly
yielded
,
that
the
Earth
then
brought
forth
the
principles
of
life
,
and
all
living
Creatures
,
Man
excepted
:
knew
not
what
;
for
he
owns
that
he
knows
not
what
species's
of
Animals
were
then
made
.
And
then
as
to
the
Degrees
which
they
multiply'd
in
,
they
must
needs
be
strangely
high
.
For
besides
that
the
Ground
was
then
most
fat
and
fruitful
,
and
the
Air
most
warm
and
cherishing
,
and
all
advantages
imaginable
concurr'd
to
constant
and
numerous
propagations
of
them
;
the
Earth
brought
forth
the
principles
of
life
,
we
see
,
and
all
living
creatures
:
and
so
by
spontaneous
Births
they
would
have
increased
even
sans
number
;
and
such
a
consuming
multitude
of
them
would
have
been
produced
,
as
would
not
only
have
greatly
annoyed
,
but
utterly
ruined
Mankind
.
For
while
Horses
,
Asses
,
Cows
,
Sheep
,
Goats
,
Swine
,
Dogs
,
Lions
,
Bears
,
Wolves
,
Crocodiles
,
Serpents
,
Scorpions
,
Rats
,
Mice
,
Fowls
,
Hornets
,
&c.
grew
out
of
the
Earth
in
strange
plenty
;
and
this
Terrigenous
Breed
(
by
the
help
and
influence
of
a
perpetual
Equinox
)
were
naturally
far
more
prolific
than
now
these
Creatures
are
,
and
there
were
no
hands
to
hinder
their
Procreations
,
or
to
destroy
either
young
or
old
:
how
could
Mankind
who
multiply'd
(
in
comparison
)
so
very
slowly
,
have
defended
either
themselves
or
their
Provisions
(
naked
and
destitute
of
Weapons
as
they
were
)
from
the
Assaults
and
Invasions
of
such
inconceiveable
Herds
or
Swarms
of
Vermin
,
as
would
have
come
upon
them
?
But
here
therefore
the
old
Expedient
,
Extraordinary
Providence
,
is
call'd
in
again
for
Remedy
or
Prevention
.
The
Theorist
always
supposes
a
Divine
Providence
to
superintend
,
proportion
and
determine
,
both
the
number
and
food
of
Animals
upon
the
Earth
:
suitably
to
the
constitution
and
circumstances
of
every
World
.
That
is
,
when
ordinary
Providence
had
put
Nature
into
such
a
condition
,
as
to
bring
forth
the
aforesaid
animals
,
and
many
other
,
out
of
the
Earth
;
Extraordinary
Providence
was
to
stand
by
,
and
either
hinder
them
from
rising
into
animation
;
or
else
knock
them
on
the
head
as
fast
as
they
quickned
,
and
send
them
packing
out
of
life
again
.
As
if
divine
Providence
imitated
Penelope
;
unravelling
by
night
,
what
it
weav'd
by
day
.
Thus
he
pulls
down
his
own
Censure
upon
himself
:
Methinks
they
make
very
bold
with
the
Deity
,
when
they
make
Him
do
and
undo
,
go
forward
and
backwards
by
such
countermarches
and
retractions
,
as
we
do
not
willingly
impute
to
the
Wisdom
of
GOD
ALMIGHTY
.
CHAP.
XIV
.
HEre
another
Vital
Assertion
of
the
Theory's
is
excepted
against
;
and
Reasons
are
given
why
the
Deluge
cannot
be
rightly
explicated
by
the
Dissolution
of
the
Earth
,
or
its
Disruption
and
fall
into
the
Abyss
.
The
first
is
,
it
would
be
inconsistent
with
Moses
's
Description
of
Paradise
;
which
he
has
made
according
to
proper
Rules
of
Topography
.
But
,
says
the
Answerer
,
this
Objection
,
I
'm
afraid
,
will
fall
heavier
upon
Moses
,
or
upon
the
Excepter
himself
,
than
upon
the
Theorist
.
And
why
so
?
Why
,
cannot
be
understood
or
determin'd
by
the
Mosaical
Topography
,
one
of
these
two
things
must
be
allowed
;
either
that
the
description
was
insufficient
and
ineffectual
:
or
that
there
has
been
some
great
change
in
the
Earth
,
whereby
the
Marks
of
it
are
destroy'd
.
—
If
he
take
the
second
of
these
Answers
,
he
joins
with
the
Theorist
.
If
the
first
,
he
reflects
upon
the
honour
of
Moses
,
or
confutes
himself
.
Moses's
Topography
of
Paradise
,
as
it
was
done
by
proper
Rules
,
so
it
was
sufficient
and
effectual
enough
for
marking
it
out
,
as
it
once
stood
.
And
that
it
is
not
so
now
,
is
because
(
as
the
second
Answer
intimates
)
there
has
been
a
great
change
in
the
Earth
,
in
that
part
of
the
Earth
where
the
Paradisiacal
Region
was
.
And
such
a
change
may
be
allowed
without
joining
with
the
Theorist
,
as
he
Himself
assures
us
.
For
he
tells
us
in
the
same
page
,
that
good
interpreters
suppose
,
that
the
Chanels
of
Rivers
were
very
much
changed
by
the
Flood
.
And
a
great
change
in
the
Chanels
of
Rivers
,
must
make
a
great
change
in
a
Country
:
Especially
where
that
Country
is
describ'd
by
those
Rivers
;
which
is
the
case
of
Paradise
.
And
this
change
is
the
very
thing
which
makes
the
place
of
Paradise
so
hard
to
be
found
.
Yet
this
,
I
say
,
is
very
far
from
joining
with
the
Theorist
.
For
according
to
him
,
the
Chanels
of
Rivers
were
not
only
changed
,
all
broke
up
,
and
so
quite
put
by
,
by
that
Fraction
of
the
Earth
which
made
the
Flood
.
And
not
only
the
Chanels
of
Rivers
were
destroyed
,
but
even
the
Sources
of
them
too
,
by
his
Hypothesis
.
For
whereas
the
general
Sources
of
all
Rivers
in
the
primitive
World
,
were
the
Rainy
Regions
about
the
Poles
;
Those
Polar
Regions
fell
in
together
with
the
rest
,
and
so
Rivers
which
were
before
,
could
not
afterward
continue
.
Let
him
please
to
say
therefore
whether
Tygris
and
Euphrates
were
before
the
Flood
or
not
.
If
they
were
not
,
how
could
Moses
describe
Paradise
by
them
?
If
they
were
,
had
the
Flood
come
in
by
the
Earth's
Dissolution
,
they
must
inevitably
have
been
destroyed
.
But
instead
of
that
,
they
are
still
in
being
;
and
this
is
an
evidence
that
the
Earth
was
not
delug'd
,
by
being
dissolv'd
.
Nor
is
this
the
only
difficulty
upon
the
Theorist
here
.
For
as
to
the
place
of
Paradise
,
he
refers
himself
wholly
(
as
we
have
heard
)
to
the
Ancients
;
and
they
incline
to
seat
it
in
the
South
,
or
South-East
Land
,
in
the
other
World
.
And
can
it
enter
into
the
mind
of
man
to
think
,
that
Havilah
,
and
Aethiopia
,
and
Assyria
,
and
Hiddekel
,
and
Euphrates
,
which
Moses
takes
into
the
description
of
Paradise
;
could
ever
be
situate
in
the
other
Hemisphere
,
when
they
are
now
found
in
this
?
If
the
Earth
fell
in
,
without
question
it
gave
a
deadly
jounce
.
But
could
it
make
these
Countries
and
Rivers
rebound
with
such
force
,
as
to
leap
quite
beyond
the
torrid
Zone
,
and
settle
some
degrees
on
this
side
of
our
Tropic
?
There
are
a
sort
of
Divinity
Theorists
,
[
*
](A67683-e49210-b)
*
Annus
ipse
nonagesimus
primus
ejus
seculi
erat
,
quod
eodem
anno
,
ac
pene
mense
,
natalis
Deiparae
Virginis
domus
,
deficiente
cultu
,
ex
Asia
in
Europam
,
coelestium
ministerio
transit
.
Quae
primo
in
Dalmatia
,
inde
quadrienno
post
in
Piceno
consedit
.
Hor.
Tursel
.
Epit.
Hist.
lib.
9.
pag.
(
mihi
)
302.
who
would
fain
perswade
us
,
that
the
Lady
of
Loretto's
Chamber
went
thither
a
Pilgrimage
out
of
Nazareth
.
This
is
strangely
marvellous
:
but
the
wonder
of
it
will
be
much
abated
,
if
we
can
find
the
Regions
and
Rivers
we
speak
of
,
going
on
procession
out
of
the
South-East
Land
,
into
this
Northern
Continent
.
I
confess
we
are
taught
strange
things
of
Paradise
;
but
this
its
translation
would
surpass
all
.
And
how
good
soever
its
Soil
was
at
first
,
certainly
it
grew
very
light
at
last
,
to
hop
thus
far
.
Were
this
an
effect
of
the
Earth's
fall
,
believe
it
,
here
is
either
a
very
fair
tumbling
Cast
;
or
else
our
Author
is
in
a
foul
mistake
.
And
so
indeed
he
must
be
;
and
the
Objection
which
he
was
afraid
would
fall
on
Moses
,
or
the
Excepter
;
lights
heavy
on
the
Theorist
.
But
out
of
this
fear
,
he
quickly
rises
into
another
Passion
,
if
we
may
guess
by
his
expressions
in
the
next
Paragraph
.
Tho
I
cannot
but
say
,
his
Passion
is
as
causeless
,
as
his
fear
was
groundless
.
For
,
speaking
truth
in
a
controversy
,
should
never
move
choler
.
And
did
the
Excepter
do
more
than
so
,
when
he
said
,
that
to
affirm
Moses's
Description
of
Paradise
to
be
false
,
must
be
horrid
Blasphemy
,
it
being
Dictated
by
the
H.
GHOST
?
Yet
this
is
the
word
which
he
takes
so
ill
.
And
truly
so
far
as
he
has
said
any
thing
,
that
implies
Mose's
Topography
of
Paradise
to
be
false
;
So
far
he
ought
to
resent
what
was
spoken
;
tho
not
with
anger
.
And
,
pray
,
how
can
he
(
allowing
own
Hypothesis
to
be
true
)
defend
Moses's
description
of
Paradise
from
being
false
;
seeing
he
describes
it
by
Rivers
,
and
those
Rivers
,
according
to
the
Theory
,
could
not
be
before
the
Flood
?
He
attempts
the
Defence
thus
.
The
Theorist
supposes
Rivers
before
the
Flood
,
in
great
plenty
,
and
why
not
like
to
these
?
He
himself
has
given
Reasons
why
they
could
not
be
like
them
.
'T
is
true
,
if
you
admit
our
Hypothesis
,
concerning
the
fraction
and
disruption
of
the
Earth
at
the
Deluge
,
then
we
cannot
expect
to
find
rivers
,
as
they
were
before
,
their
general
source
is
changed
,
and
their
Chanels
are
all
broke
up
.
And
if
Rivers
after
the
Flood
,
are
not
as
they
were
before
it
;
how
can
they
be
alike
?
And
when
their
source
was
changed
at
the
Deluge
,
and
their
Chanels
all
broke
up
;
how
is
it
possible
but
that
they
must
differ
greatly
from
what
they
were
,
in
their
situations
,
Courses
,
&
c
?
Which
must
utterly
spoil
them
for
being
topographical
marks
;
I
mean
the
same
true
topographical
marks
to
any
Country
,
to
which
they
formerly
were
so
:
And
can
they
then
be
alike
?
That
Person
who
can
think
that
the
Earth
was
dissolved
,
and
by
that
dissolution
fell
a
Mile
or
two
downward
,
and
by
that
fall
was
broken
to
pieces
,
and
by
that
fraction
was
thrown
into
wildest
disorders
;
so
that
whereas
before
it
had
one
entire
,
smooth
,
level
,
uniform
Surface
;
it
was
thus
made
into
Mountains
,
Hills
,
Valleys
,
Islands
,
Rocks
,
Seas
,
Gulphs
,
Lakes
,
&c.
And
yet
can
think
again
,
that
those
Rivers
which
were
before
this
happened
,
should
in
their
situations
and
chanels
(
the
principal
circumstances
we
are
now
concern'd
in
)
be
just
like
these
after
it
;
he
must
be
one
of
a
very
strong
Phantsy
,
but
withal
of
as
weak
a
Judgment
.
And
farther
,
Moses
does
not
describe
Paradise
by
Rivers
like
to
Tygris
,
and
Euphrates
,
and
Pison
,
and
Gihon
;
but
by
those
very
same
Rivers
as
originally
flowing
there
.
And
every
like
,
we
know
,
is
far
from
being
the
very
same
.
Men
and
Animals
now
upon
Earth
,
are
like
to
them
before
the
Deluge
:
yet
I
hope
they
are
not
the
same
revived
.
And
then
lastly
,
the
Theorist
yields
Paradise
was
in
the
Southern
Hemisphere
,
and
so
the
Rivers
of
it
before
the
Flood
must
be
there
too
,
and
so
they
must
rise
from
the
rainy
Region
at
the
Antarctic
Pole
,
and
so
they
must
be
very
remote
from
the
Land
of
Havilah
and
Assyria
.
Whereas
since
the
Flood
,
Moses
describes
Paradise
by
Tygris
and
Euphrates
,
and
these
are
Rivers
in
this
Northern
Hemisphere
,
and
they
spring
up
from
the
Mountains
of
Armenia
,
and
they
run
by
or
through
the
aforesaid
Countries
.
And
is
it
to
be
thought
then
that
those
Rivers
before
the
Flood
,
and
these
Rivers
since
the
Flood
,
could
be
alike
?
Especially
alike
in
showing
the
Situation
and
the
bounds
of
Paradise
?
from
Moses's
Description
or
Topography
of
which
,
was
the
first
Reason
borrow'd
against
the
Earth's
Dissolution
.
Concerning
which
he
expostulates
;
Is
it
not
a
strange
thing
that
the
Dissolution
of
the
Earth
should
be
made
Blasphemy
?
Yes
,
very
strange
,
and
let
them
that
make
it
so
,
be
blamed
for
it
.
But
still
to
affirm
that
Moses's
Description
of
Paradise
is
false
,
would
be
horrid
Blasphemy
,
it
being
dictated
by
the
H.
GHOST
.
And
this
was
the
thing
which
the
Excepter
made
Blasphemy
,
(
which
the
Answerer
,
if
he
thinks
fit
,
may
contradict
.
)
And
now
the
Replicant
says
farther
,
that
to
assert
such
a
Dissolution
of
the
Earth
,
as
destroys
Moses's
Description
of
Paradise
,
or
implies
it
to
be
false
;
will
indirectly
,
consequentially
,
and
reductively
at
least
,
be
of
Blasphemous
importance
.
But
the
Answerer
alledges
;
that
very
Expression
,
the
Earth
is
dissolved
,
is
a
Scripture
Expression
(
Psalm
.
75.3
.
Isai.
24.19
.
Amos
9.5
.
)
which
,
methinks
,
might
have
been
enough
to
have
protected
it
from
the
imputation
of
Blasphemy
.
How
well
this
Allegation
will
protect
him
or
what
he
has
said
,
in
any
capacity
or
respect
;
I
know
not
.
I
only
ask
,
what
dissolution
of
the
Earth
,
do
the
Psalmist
and
Prophets
mean
,
in
the
Places
cited
?
Do
they
mean
a
figurative
,
tropological
Dissolution
;
or
a
literal
,
and
such
a
real
one
as
the
Theorist
has
invented
,
and
which
,
according
to
him
,
did
drown
the
World
?
If
the
first
,
their
notion
is
nothing
to
the
Answerer's
purpose
:
if
the
Second
,
the
Earth
must
have
been
delug'd
,
as
often
as
they
say
it
has
been
dissolv'd
.
I
cannot
think
,
that
our
Answerer
believes
,
that
Palestine
was
literally
or
really
dissolv'd
,
in
the
prophet
Esay's
time
.
Yet
't
is
plain
it
was
so
,
according
to
Scripture-expression
.
Thou
whole
Palestina
are
dissolved
,
Isai.
14.31
.
Which
shows
him
clearly
what
Dissolution
of
the
Earth
,
Scripture
means
in
the
places
cited
;
and
what
kind
of
protection
that
Scripture
expression
will
afford
him
:
and
consequently
how
weak
the
Sanctuary
is
that
he
here
flies
to
.
In
this
Paragraph
he
insinuates
odious
things
of
the
Excepter
.
As
if
he
were
guilty
of
a
rude
and
injudicious
defending
of
Scripture
,
by
railing
and
ill
language
,
such
as
tends
to
the
diminution
and
disparagement
of
it
.
As
if
he
made
his
own
Consequences
to
be
of
the
same
authority
with
the
word
of
GOD
;
and
so
whatsoever
is
against
them
,
must
be
charg'd
with
Blasphemy
against
the
H.
GHOST
.
And
as
if
there
were
nothing
safe
against
his
blind
zeal
and
opinionative
ignorance
.
How
easy
were
it
here
to
retort
and
retaliate
?
But
we
must
not
render
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
Yet
he
having
observed
,
that
weak
reasons
commonly
produce
strong
passions
;
we
may
without
offence
,
Secondly
,
the
Dissolution
of
the
Earth
could
not
be
the
cause
of
the
general
flood
;
because
it
would
have
utterly
destroyed
Noah
's
Ark
and
all
that
was
in
it
:
by
the
Theorist's
putting
the
Ark
under
the
Conduct
of
its
Guardian
Angels
,
and
a
miraculous
Providence
,
says
the
Answerer
.
I
think
it
had
been
impossible
for
the
Ark
to
have
liv'd
upon
the
raging
Abyss
;
or
for
Noah
and
his
Family
to
have
been
preserved
,
if
there
had
not
been
a
miraculous
hand
of
Providence
to
take
care
of
them
.
And
then
again
he
must
needs
fall
pell-mell
on
the
Excepter
,
tho
he
comes
off
as
he
uses
to
do
.
Now
either
the
Excepter
did
not
take
notice
of
this
passage
in
the
Theory
,
or
he
does
not
allow
that
a
miraculous
hand
was
sufficient
to
preserve
the
Ark
:
or
thirdly
,
that
he
made
an
objection
,
which
he
knew
himself
to
be
impertinent
.
And
I
confess
,
I
am
inclinable
to
think
the
last
is
true
.
But
by
his
leave
,
none
of
these
three
things
are
true
,
and
the
real
truth
is
this
.
Tho
he
put
the
Ark
under
the
conduct
of
Angels
in
the
extremity
of
the
Flood
,
and
when
it
was
upon
the
raging
Abyss
;
yet
he
lest
it
without
a
miraculous
hand
to
take
care
of
it
,
in
its
fall
.
Yea
,
instead
of
that
,
it
is
evident
,
that
he
only
put
it
into
a
River
,
or
Dock
,
it
might
be
afloat
there
before
the
Abyss
was
broken
open
;
as
if
that
could
have
sav'd
it
from
being
dasht
to
pieces
.
And
because
the
Excepter
did
not
take
notice
of
this
Contrivance
,
of
this
River
,
or
Dock
:
he
tells
him
of
it
in
both
ears
:
after
all
,
there
is
no
necessity
that
the
Ark
should
be
afloat
,
before
the
Earth
broke
.
And
for
what
reason
?
Why
,
ordinary
providence
being
thus
laid
aside
,
what
can
be
expected
but
Extraordinary
providence
should
be
brought
in
next
?
And
so
it
is
with
a
witness
,
The
Angels
,
(
whose
ministery
we
own
openly
upon
these
grand
occasions
)
could
as
easily
have
held
the
Ark
afloat
,
in
the
Air
,
as
on
the
Water
.
But
because
Angels
could
do
this
,
may
we
argue
from
thence
with
good
consequence
that
they
did
do
it
?
and
from
their
power
to
act
it
,
conclude
they
effected
it
?
Without
question
they
could
have
kept
Judea
dry
,
when
all
the
rest
of
the
World
was
drown'd
;
yet
,
we
know
,
this
was
not
done
.
But
the
Ark
however
was
held
afloat
in
the
Air
,
by
them
.
For
it
follows
,
the
Ark
,
being
an
Emblem
of
the
Church
,
GOD
certainly
did
give
his
Angels
charge
over
it
;
that
they
should
bear
it
up
in
their
hands
,
that
it
might
not
be
dash'd
against
a
stone
.
Surely
this
Hypothesis
must
needs
be
very
strong
and
lasting
,
that
has
so
much
miracle
,
and
ministery
of
Angels
to
support
it
.
And
then
what
matter
for
Philosophy
(
tho
the
Theory
is
to
be
chiefly
Philosophical
,
Eng.
Th.
p.
6.
)
when
it
may
stand
much
better
without
it
?
But
the
same
pen
writes
thus
in
another
place
.
and
his
Family
were
sav'd
by
water
;
so
as
the
water
which
destroy'd
the
rest
of
the
World
,
was
an
instrument
of
their
Conservation
,
inasmuch
as
it
bore
up
the
Ark
,
and
kept
it
from
that
impetuous
shock
,
which
it
would
have
had
,
if
it
had
either
stood
upon
dry
land
when
the
Earth
fell
,
or
if
the
Earth
had
been
dissolv'd
without
any
water
on
it
or
under
it
.
Now
if
Noah
and
his
Family
were
saved
by
water
;
if
the
water
which
destroy'd
the
rest
of
the
world
,
was
an
instrument
of
their
Conservation
;
if
it
conserv'd
them
as
it
bore
up
the
Ark
;
and
if
it
so
bore
it
up
,
as
that
it
kept
it
from
an
impetuous
shock
,
which
otherwise
it
would
have
had
when
the
Earth
fell
:
how
could
the
Answerer
say
,
there
was
no
necessity
that
the
Ark
should
be
afloat
before
the
Earth
broke
;
and
now
make
the
conservation
of
Noah
and
his
Ark
,
at
the
fall
of
the
Earth
,
to
be
wholly
Angelical
?
In
short
;
the
Theorist
affirms
,
that
mankind
was
saved
by
water
that
bore
up
the
Ark
,
and
kept
it
from
an
impetuous
shock
when
the
Earth
fell
;
it
having
the
Advantage
of
a
River
,
or
of
a
Dock
,
or
Cistern
,
wherein
to
float
.
The
Answerer
,
that
there
was
no
necessity
that
the
Ark
should
be
afloat
before
the
Earth
broke
,
because
the
Angels
could
hold
it
in
the
Air
;
and
they
having
charge
over
it
,
did
bear
it
up
in
their
hands
.
The
Question
therefore
might
be
put
,
which
of
the
two
speaks
truest
.
But
e'en
let
them
agree
the
difference
as
they
please
,
Those
things
were
premis'd
in
the
Theory
,
only
to
soften
the
way
to
men
that
are
hard
of
belief
in
such
extraordinary
matters
.
Truly
these
matters
are
very
Extraordinary
;
and
the
way
to
believing
them
had
need
be
well
softned
.
But
when
that
is
softned
,
if
so
be
men
are
not
softned
withal
,
and
made
extraordinarily
soft
too
;
they
will
hardly
ever
believe
them
at
last
.
And
pray
,
what
are
the
Extraordinary
matters
,
to
the
belief
of
which
,
the
Arks
being
afloat
in
a
River
,
or
Dock
,
or
Cistern
;
was
to
soften
the
way
?
They
seem
to
be
the
saving
of
Noah
,
and
the
saving
of
his
Family
,
and
the
saving
of
the
Ark
,
when
the
Earth
fell
.
But
then
in
truth
these
things
could
not
be
those
matters
.
For
we
are
here
told
(
at
the
same
time
)
that
there
was
no
necessity
of
the
Arks
being
afloat
in
water
,
in
order
to
these
things
:
and
that
Noah
,
and
his
Family
,
and
the
Ark
,
were
saved
by
the
Ministery
of
Angels
.
And
to
the
belief
of
the
Angels
saving
them
,
such
a
mollification
would
be
vain
and
needless
;
inasmuch
as
every
one
who
believes
their
Existence
,
believes
also
what
the
Answerer
says
of
them
;
that
they
could
as
easily
have
held
the
Ark
afloat
in
the
Air
,
as
in
the
Water
.
And
so
what
was
premised
in
the
Theory
,
of
this
softning
Nature
;
and
what
the
Excepter
is
blamed
for
not
noting
,
was
of
as
little
use
,
as
it
is
of
truth
.
And
to
shut
up
this
particular
;
by
calling
in
this
extraordinary
help
of
the
Angels
,
he
renders
the
Rains
at
the
Deluge
(
the
principal
Cause
of
it
,
Gen.
7.4
.
)
wholly
unnecessary
.
For
tho
at
first
he
would
have
them
to
save
the
Ark
by
setting
it
afloat
;
yet
now
we
see
there
was
no
necessity
of
that
.
And
then
if
the
Earth
fell
into
the
Abyss
,
and
by
its
fall
made
the
waters
of
it
so
raging
and
destructive
to
all
things
,
as
he
represents
them
;
there
could
be
no
more
need
of
forty
days
rain
in
order
to
the
Flood
;
than
of
forty
Candles
to
give
light
to
the
Sun
.
And
so
GOD
did
a
great
work
to
no
end
or
purpose
.
Especially
this
40
days
rain
following
the
Disruption
;
Which
happened
the
very
first
day
that
Noah
entred
the
Ark.
A
Third
Reason
against
the
Floods
coming
in
by
the
Dissolution
of
the
Earth
,
was
this
.
The
Earth
(
or
dry
Land
of
this
Terraqueous
Globe
)
would
in
likelihood
have
been
of
another
Figure
than
what
it
now
bears
.
it
must
be
a
wilful
dissimulation
not
to
take
notice
of
them
.
The
Fourth
Reason
.
Had
the
Earth
been
dissolved
to
make
the
Flood
;
Disc.
p.
290
,
291
,
292.
its
Dissolution
would
have
brought
it
into
lamentable
barrenness
.
For
the
dry
and
dead
Soil
would
have
been
turned
up
by
whole
Countries
at
once
:
and
where
the
outward
part
of
the
Earth
continu'd
outward
still
;
the
top
of
the
Ground
would
have
been
rinsed
off
,
by
the
vehement
workings
and
incessant
beatings
of
the
Flood
upon
it
.
And
then
the
furious
commotions
and
aestuations
of
the
Waters
,
washing
off
an
abundance
of
Earth
,
from
the
innumerable
Fragments
which
fell
into
the
Abyss
;
and
this
Earthy
stuff
being
carried
into
all
places
,
and
spread
thick
upon
the
Ground
,
and
mix'd
and
incorporated
with
much
other
Filth
;
it
would
have
hardned
(
upon
the
going
off
of
the
Flood
)
into
a
Crust
or
Cap
on
the
surface
of
the
Earth
,
and
so
have
been
very
destructive
to
its
Fruitfulness
.
It
is
answered
first
,
I
willingly
allow
,
that
some
of
the
interiour
and
barren
parts
of
the
Earth
might
be
turn'd
up
;
as
we
now
see
in
mountainous
and
wild
Countries
:
but
this
rather
confirms
the
Theory
,
than
weakens
it
.
He
must
allow
(
according
to
the
tenour
of
his
Hypothesis
)
not
only
that
some
,
but
that
many
of
the
interiour
barren
parts
of
the
Earth
were
turned
up
everywhere
.
And
then
the
Waters
being
so
strangely
tumultuous
,
and
the
fluctuations
of
them
so
extremely
boisterous
,
Eng.
Theor.
p.
76.
Ib.
p.
75.
and
their
mighty
rage
of
so
long
continuance
;
While
they
were
carried
up
to
a
great
height
in
the
Air
,
and
fell
down
again
with
prodigious
weight
and
force
;
they
could
not
but
harrass
the
Ground
at
such
a
rate
,
as
to
wear
away
the
upper
part
of
it
,
and
make
the
top
of
the
Earth
as
bare
and
barren
as
the
bottom
of
a
river
,
by
their
monstrous
and
unspeakable
Surgings
.
Secondly
,
he
answers
,
that
the
filth
and
soil
would
have
made
the
Earth
more
barren
,
I
cannot
allow
.
For
good
husbandmen
overflow
their
grounds
,
to
make
their
Crops
more
Rich.
And
't
is
generally
supposed
that
the
inundation
of
the
Nile
,
and
the
mud
it
leaves
behind
it
,
makes
Egypt
more
fruitful
.
Besides
,
this
part
of
the
objection
lies
against
the
common
Explication
of
the
Deluge
,
as
well
as
against
that
which
is
given
by
the
Theory
.
But
when
good
Husbandmen
overflow
their
grounds
to
improve
their
Crops
;
they
do
it
seasonably
,
and
they
do
it
moderately
,
and
to
be
sure
they
do
not
at
the
same
time
turn
them
up
for
half
a
mile
or
a
mile
deep
.
And
tho
several
Rivers
do
inrich
grounds
by
their
Inundations
,
by
vertue
of
a
great
plenty
of
unctuous
mud
which
they
bring
upon
them
,
that
makes
the
Soil
new
as
it
were
;
Cayster
,
Menander
,
and
Caicus
,
as
Strabo
informs
us
from
Nearchus
)
yet
that
mud
which
the
Deluge
would
have
left
,
would
have
been
of
a
silty
and
sandy
nature
,
and
so
of
a
lean
,
and
hungry
,
and
starven
quality
,
as
being
mostly
washt
off
from
the
Edges
of
those
pieces
into
which
the
dissolved
Earth
was
shattered
:
and
consequently
would
rather
have
prevented
and
hindred
,
than
helped
or
promoted
the
Earth's
fruitfulness
.
And
therefore
the
Geographer
notes
,
that
the
mud
of
the
aforesaid
Rivers
,
which
makes
the
fields
over
which
they
flow
;
is
not
coarse
and
dry
(
like
that
which
would
have
been
eaten
off
of
the
verges
of
the
terrestrial
Fragments
)
but
of
a
softer
and
fatter
sort
.
Id.
Ib.
And
then
as
to
the
Nile
,
that
the
Mud
it
brings
down
upon
the
Land
of
Egypt
,
is
light
and
soft
,
and
fat
;
and
so
fit
to
impregnate
it
with
a
strong
Fertility
:
we
may
properly
infer
from
the
sweetness
of
its
Waters
.
For
as
Diodorus
reports
,
they
are
the
sweetest
of
all
that
are
in
the
whole
Earth
.
Which
made
that
famous
General
,
Piscenius
Niger
,
(
who
contended
with
Septimus
Severus
for
the
Empire
)
reprimand
his
Souldiers
for
hankering
after
wine
,
and
for
muttering
for
the
want
of
it
;
when
they
might
drink
their
fill
of
this
pleasant
Stream
.
Tho
it
is
well
known
,
that
an
ingenious
French
Writer
,
I
mean
Duval
(
in
his
Geogr.
Vnivers
.
)
ascribes
both
the
Muddiness
,
Fruitfulness
,
and
Overflow
of
it
;
to
its
Nitrous
Quality
.
His
words
are
to
this
purpose
.
It
has
lately
been
found
out
,
that
the
Nitre
wherewith
the
Nile
abounds
so
much
,
is
the
cause
of
all
those
wonderful
Effects
;
and
that
being
heated
by
the
sun
,
it
mingles
it self
with
the
water
,
renders
it
troubled
,
swells
it
,
and
makes
it
pass
over
its
Banks
.
But
yet
concerning
this
noble
River
it
is
as
well
known
;
that
as
sometimes
it
has
not
increased
at
all
,
(
as
in
the
tenth
and
eleventh
year
of
Cleopatra
,
against
the
downfal
and
the
death
of
that
Princess
,
and
her
admired
Anthony
:
)
and
as
sometimes
it
is
defective
in
its
increase
,
to
lamentable
failures
in
the
usual
Products
of
that
plentiful
Country
:
So
if
at
any
time
it
happens
to
exceed
in
its
increment
,
but
two
or
three
Cubits
;
that
excess
is
at
once
both
a
clear
Prognostic
,
and
a
certain
Cause
,
of
a
dearth
or
scarcity
in
the
ensuing
year
.
But
then
that
such
a
Deluge
as
the
Theory
supposes
,
(
it
being
Universal
,
and
of
long
continuance
,
and
made
of
lean
subterraneous
water
,
and
full
of
dead
,
and
harsh
,
and
heavy
soil
,
fetcht
off
from
numberless
pieces
of
the
broken
Earth
)
should
occasion
barrenness
,
for
a
considerable
time
,
in
the
post-diluvian
World
;
is
but
reasonable
to
conclude
.
Nor
lastly
does
this
part
of
the
Objection
lie
against
the
common
Explication
of
the
Deluge
,
with
such
force
as
it
does
against
the
Theory's
Explication
of
it
.
For
tho
a
General
Flood
overtopping
the
Mountains
,
must
have
left
mud
,
and
slime
,
and
filth
behind
it
;
yet
where
the
water
rise
upon
an
Earth
that
remained
unbroken
,
they
could
be
nothing
in
quantity
,
to
what
they
must
have
been
where
the
Earth
was
dissolv'd
and
fell
all
to
pieces
;
and
where
the
water
boiling
up
from
under
these
Fragments
,
and
then
falling
down
again
violently
upon
them
,
raged
amongst
them
with
lasting
,
incessant
,
and
unimaginable
turbulence
.
As
a
Fifth
Reason
against
the
Earth's
being
drowned
,
by
its
being
dissolved
,
All
the
Buildings
erected
before
the
Flood
,
would
have
been
shaken
down
,
or
else
overwhelmed
.
Here
,
as
to
the
City
Joppa
(
which
is
the
main
hinge
upon
which
the
Objection
turns
)
he
Answers
:
it
is
incertain
whether
it
was
built
before
the
Flood
.
However
suppose
the
ruines
of
one
Town
remain'd
after
the
Flood
;
does
this
prove
that
the
Earth
was
not
dissolv'd
?
I
do
not
doubt
,
but
there
were
several
tracts
of
the
Earth
,
much
greater
than
that
Town
,
that
were
not
broken
all
to
pieces
by
their
fall
.
Had
that
tract
,
whereon
Joppa
stood
,
continued
whole
;
yet
falling
down
so
very
low
(
a
mile
at
least
;
)
by
the
force
of
its
weight
it
would
have
suffer'd
such
a
shock
,
as
could
not
but
have
levell'd
its
Buildings
with
the
ground
.
Thus
very
good
houses
are
oftentimes
shatter'd
down
in
Earthquakes
,
meerly
by
the
concussion
or
shaking
of
the
Ground
,
tho
it
never
breaks
.
And
truly
if
only
the
bare
ruines
of
it
had
remained
(
which
we
do
not
,
nor
need
not
grant
)
yet
these
must
have
given
as
fatal
a
blow
to
the
Theory
,
as
the
fall
of
the
Earth
would
have
done
to
this
City
.
For
their
very
out-lasting
the
fury
of
the
Deluge
,
would
prove
that
Joppa
consisted
,
not
of
a
Number
of
Cottages
,
made
of
branches
of
trees
,
of
Osiers
,
and
Bull-rushes
;
or
of
Mud-Walls
and
Straw
Roofs
(
which
then
must
all
have
been
quite
washt
away
:
)
but
of
Edifices
made
of
such
Materials
,
as
could
never
be
prepared
,
formed
,
and
set
up
,
without
Iron
tools
.
And
so
we
come
to
The
Last
Reason
against
the
supposed
dissolution
of
the
Earth
.
It
would
have
made
GOD's
Covenant
with
Noah
,
Disc.
p.
296
,
297
,
298.
a
very
vain
and
trifling
thing
.
Because
then
the
Earth
was
not
capable
of
,
or
liable
to
such
another
Deluge
.
It
is
here
answered
:
So
much
is
true
,
that
the
Deluge
in
the
course
of
Nature
,
will
not
return
again
in
the
same
way
.
If
it
returns
not
in
the
same
way
,
that
is
,
in
the
course
of
nature
;
it
cannot
be
such
another
Deluge
as
Noah's
was
:
for
that
came
in
by
the
Course
of
Nature
.
Reply
.
Answ.
p.
65.
He
proceeds
;
But
unless
GOD
prevents
it
,
it
both
may
and
will
return
in
another
way
.
That
is
,
if
the
World
,
continues
long
enough
,
the
Mountains
will
wear
and
sink
and
the
Waters
,
in
proportion
,
rise
;
and
overflow
the
whole
Earth
.
How
possible
soever
such
a
Deluge
may
be
in
long
process
of
time
;
yet
Christians
,
who
believe
the
Doctrine
of
the
Gospel
,
and
that
principal
Article
of
it
,
the
World's
Conflagration
;
can
never
think
that
it
shall
come
to
pass
.
For
if
the
World
in
the
end
,
were
to
be
overflow'd
with
Water
;
how
could
it
,
according
to
St.
Peter
,
be
reserved
unto
fire
?
GOD
might
,
when
He
pleased
,
by
an
extraordinary
power
,
and
for
the
sins
of
men
,
bring
another
Deluge
upon
the
World
.
And
that
is
the
thing
which
Noah
seems
to
have
feared
,
and
which
GOD
,
by
his
Covenant
,
secur'd
him
against
.
Noah's
Flood
was
brought
upon
the
World
for
the
sins
of
men
;
And
if
another
Flood
may
be
brought
in
,
upon
that
account
,
by
GOD's
extraordinary
power
;
then
Noah's
Flood
might
come
in
by
that
power
too
,
even
by
its
creating
waters
to
make
it
.
Which
in
case
it
had
been
but
yielded
at
first
,
it
might
have
sav'd
the
pains
,
of
setting
up
this
Hypothesis
.
And
not
only
so
,
but
likewise
have
superseded
the
collateral
trouble
,
of
too
weak
and
ineffectual
endeavours
to
support
it
.
And
when
all
is
said
,
the
sole
reason
why
such
another
flood
as
Noah's
was
,
shall
never
come
in
again
;
is
not
any
change
in
Nature
,
rendring
the
thing
difficult
or
impossible
;
but
the
unchangeable
covenant
of
GOD
,
as
appears
,
Isai.
54.9
.
Where
GOD
,
to
illustrate
the
stability
of
his
kindness
to
the
Jewish
Church
,
and
to
show
that
its
calamity
shall
never
be
reiterated
;
compares
it
to
the
sure
and
perpetual
exclusion
of
the
waters
of
Noah
,
to
the
return
of
which
,
his
immutable
Oath
is
the
eternal
bar
.
For
this
is
as
the
waters
of
Noah
unto
me
:
for
as
I
have
sworn
that
the
waters
of
Noah
should
no
more
go
over
the
Earth
;
so
have
I
sworn
that
I
would
not
be
wroth
with
thee
,
nor
rebuke
thee
.
Thus
we
have
done
with
the
Answer
to
our
Exceptions
.
In
which
I
am
not
conscious
to
my self
,
that
I
have
omitted
any
one
thing
,
which
deserves
notice
and
a
Reply
.
And
here
I
might
speak
freely
of
this
Answer
.
But
because
its
defects
are
plain
and
obvious
enough
to
the
intelligent
;
I
only
say
this
much
.
That
I
expected
a
better
from
the
Author
of
the
Theory
,
or
none
at
all
.
CHAP.
XV.
HEre
the
Scaene
changes
;
and
our
Answerer
now
becomes
an
Objector
;
and
manages
this
part
,
as
he
did
the
other
.
And
as
an
instance
of
as
much
,
he
trips
in
the
first
step
that
he
makes
,
and
stumbles
into
a
Mistake
.
For
he
affirms
,
the
first
Proposition
laid
down
for
the
establishing
of
our
Hypothesis
,
is
this
.
That
the
Flood
was
but
fifteen
Cubits
high
,
above
the
ordinary
level
of
the
Earth
.
But
as
any
one
,
that
pleases
,
may
see
,
the
Proposition
laid
down
as
the
foundation
of
our
Hypothesis
,
is
verbatim
this
.
That
the
highest
parts
of
the
Earth
,
that
is
,
of
the
common
surface
of
it
,
were
under
Water
but
fifteen
Cubits
in
depth
.
And
between
the
common
surface
(
or
ordinary
level
)
of
the
Earth
;
and
the
highest
parts
of
that
surface
,
or
level
;
there
is
great
difference
.
For
according
to
the
first
,
the
Waters
were
not
30
foot
high
,
as
he
noted
:
they
might
,
in
most
places
,
be
thirty
,
forty
,
or
fifty
Cubits
high
,
or
higher
,
as
we
observed
.
that
they
were
but
fifteen
Cubits
high
in
all
,
above
the
surface
of
the
Earth
;
it
is
manifest
that
the
highest
parts
of
its
surface
were
there
intended
,
by
what
follows
,
in
explanation
of
that
Clause
,
even
to
the
end
of
the
Paragraph
.
Touching
the
Proposition
he
cries
out
,
This
is
an
unmerciful
Paradox
.
sliver
in
my
Teeth
;
I
may
justly
give
him
the
Talmudic
answer
,
usually
directed
to
the
more
guilty
Reprehender
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
take
the
Beam
out
of
thine
eyes
.
Then
he
enquires
,
Ib.
p.
66
,
67.
under
what
notion
must
this
Proposition
be
receiv'd
?
as
a
Postulatum
,
or
as
a
Conclusion
?
If
it
be
a
Postulatum
,
it
must
be
clear
from
its
own
light
,
or
acknowledg'd
by
general
consent
.
It
cannot
pretend
to
be
clear
from
its
own
light
,
because
it
is
matter
of
fact
,
which
is
not
known
,
but
by
Testimony
.
Neither
is
it
generally
acknowledg'd
:
for
the
general
opinion
is
,
that
the
Waters
covered
the
tops
of
the
Mountains
,
and
were
fifteen
Cubits
higher
.
We
might
bring
this
home
to
the
vital
Assertions
of
the
Theory
;
but
let
us
try
but
one
of
them
.
Namely
,
that
the
Primitive
Earth
was
without
a
Sea
.
Under
what
notion
must
this
Proposition
be
receiv'd
?
As
a
Postulatum
,
or
as
a
Conclusion
?
If
it
be
a
Postulatum
,
it
must
be
clear
from
its
own
light
,
or
acknowledg'd
by
general
consent
.
It
cannot
pretend
to
be
clear
from
its
own
light
,
because
it
is
matter
of
fact
,
which
is
not
known
but
by
testimony
.
Neither
is
it
generally
acknowledg'd
;
For
the
general
opinion
is
,
that
the
First
Earth
had
an
Open
Sea
.
Wherefore
we
may
well
goon
(
with
a
little
variation
)
against
the
Answerer
,
as
he
does
against
the
Excepter
.
It
must
not
therefore
be
made
a
Postulatum
,
that
such
an
Assertion
is
true
,
but
the
truth
of
it
must
be
demonstrated
by
good
proofs
.
Next
he
is
for
noting
one
or
two
things
,
wherein
the
Excepter
seems
to
be
inconsistent
with
himself
,
or
with
good
sense
.
Not
that
I
will
be
bound
to
defend
what
I
say
,
as
true
and
real
.
Now
where
's
the
inconsistency
of
these
words
,
either
with
him
that
spake
them
,
or
with
good
sense
?
Rather
how
consistent
is
it
with
a
mans
self
,
and
with
good
sense
;
not
to
be
bound
to
defend
,
what
he
thinks
may
not
be
true
and
real
?
Yet
as
if
he
would
make
good
his
charge
out
of
these
very
words
;
he
Querys
immediately
,
But
why
does
he
then
trouble
himself
,
or
the
World
,
with
an
Hypothesis
,
which
he
does
not
believe
to
be
true
and
real
?
Many
have
written
ingenious
and
useful
things
,
which
they
never
believed
to
be
true
and
real
:
but
were
they
for
this
troublers
of
the
World
,
and
inconsistent
with
themselves
,
or
with
good
sense
?
And
why
then
should
the
Excepter's
Hypothesis
be
so
,
for
his
not
believing
it
to
be
true
and
real
?
Especially
when
he
so
far
insinuates
his
mistrust
or
doubt
of
it
,
as
to
declare
he
would
not
defend
it
as
true
and
real
.
Besides
,
an
Hypothesis
,
in
the
very
term
of
it
,
being
but
a
Supposition
;
it
would
have
been
more
like
inconsistency
with
himself
,
or
with
good
sense
;
if
he
had
believed
it
to
be
true
and
real
.
For
in
case
it
be
a
true
and
real
thing
,
why
should
it
any
longer
be
an
hypothesis
?
And
therefore
he
who
fancies
the
Theory
to
be
a
Reality
;
affirms
it
to
be
something
more
than
a
bare
Hypothesis
:
above
the
character
of
a
bare
Hypothesis
;
and
be
a
true
piece
of
natural
history
,
and
the
greatest
and
most
remarkable
that
hath
yet
been
since
the
beginning
of
the
World
.
The
Inconsistency
he
talks
of
,
is
not
to
be
found
here
;
whither
goes
he
to
seek
it
next
?
Why
,
he
has
recourse
to
this
saying
of
the
Excepter's
.
Our
Supposition
stands
supported
by
Divine
authority
:
as
being
founded
upon
Scripture
.
Which
tells
us
,
as
plainly
as
it
can
speak
,
that
the
Waters
prevailed
but
fifteen
Cubits
upon
the
Earth
.
Now
tho
nothing
of
the
suggested
Inconsistency
,
appears
here
neither
,
prima
facie
,
or
at
first
glance
;
yet
he
labours
to
discover
it
by
what
follows
.
If
his
Hypothesis
be
founded
upon
Scripture
;
Ib.
p.
67
,
68.
and
upon
Scripture
as
plainly
as
it
can
speak
;
why
will
not
he
defend
it
as
true
and
real
?
For
to
be
supported
by
Scripture
,
and
plain
Scripture
,
is
as
much
as
we
can
alledge
for
the
Articles
of
our
faith
;
which
every
one
surely
is
bound
to
defend
.
In
our
entrance
on
this
new
Hypothesis
,
we
desired
allowance
to
make
bold
with
Scripture
a
little
,
as
the
Theory
had
done
a
great
deal
.
a
Text
or
two
of
Scripture
,
bound
to
defend
what
we
say
,
of
the
new
Hypothesis
,
as
true
and
real
.
And
therefore
the
founding
it
upon
Scripture
,
and
making
that
to
support
it
plainly
;
cannot
possibly
be
understood
,
by
men
of
sense
,
to
be
done
otherwise
than
in
an
hypothetic
or
suppositious
way
.
And
thus
the
Excepter
is
so
far
from
proving
inconsistent
with
himself
or
good
sense
;
that
how
could
he
be
more
consistent
with
both
,
than
in
refusing
to
defend
,
as
true
and
real
,
what
he
only
supposed
to
be
thus
founded
upon
Scripture
and
supported
by
it
.
And
whatever
he
said
of
that
nature
,
was
spoken
only
in
way
of
supposition
conjectural
.
Yea
,
tho
it
was
spoken
never
so
positively
,
it
was
but
to
set
forth
,
rei
personam
;
to
make
the
more
full
and
lively
representation
of
the
supposed
thing
.
And
therefore
before
he
began
his
new
Explication
of
the
Flood
,
he
premised
this
caution
(
Disc.
p.
300.
)
Where
we
speak
never
so
positively
,
still
what
we
deliver
is
to
be
lookt
upon
,
not
as
an
absolute
,
but
as
a
comparative
Hypothesis
.
And
so
not
as
really
founded
upon
Scripture
,
and
supported
by
it
;
but
as
supposed
to
be
so
only
.
The
Answerer
therefore
,
in
this
business
need
not
have
brought
in
so
over-strain'd
a
comparison
,
as
the
Articles
of
our
Faith
.
Peter
convinces
us
,
The
pretended
Inconsistency
is
hitherto
invisible
;
and
concerning
it
we
may
return
,
a
non
est
inventa
.
On
he
goes
therefore
,
as
by
a
melius
Inquirendo
,
and
makes
farther
search
after
it
in
the
ensuing
Paragraph
.
The
strength
it
has
,
lies
much
in
the
close
of
it
,
and
expresses
it self
in
this
Argument
.
The
Church-way
of
explaining
the
Deluge
,
is
either
rational
,
or
irrational
.
If
he
say
it
is
rational
,
why
does
he
desert
it
,
and
invent
a
new
one
?
And
if
he
say
it
is
irrational
,
then
that
dreadful
thing
,
which
,
he
cannot
well
endure
to
speak
,
That
the
Church
of
GOD
has
ever
gone
on
in
an
irrational
way
of
explaining
the
Deluge
,
falls
flat
upon
himself
.
The
last
vital
Assertion
of
the
Theory
,
which
the
Excepter
undertook
in
his
Fifteenth
Chapter
,
is
this
.
That
neither
Noah
's
Flood
,
nor
the
present
form
of
the
Earth
,
can
be
explained
in
any
other
method
that
is
rational
,
nor
by
any
other
causes
that
are
intelligible
,
besides
those
which
the
Theory
assigns
.
Whence
follows
(
what
I
cannot
well
endure
to
speak
,
said
the
Excepter
,
)
that
the
Church
of
GOD
has
ever
gone
on
in
an
irrational
way
of
explaining
the
Deluge
.
Now
,
says
the
Answerer
,
this
charge
falls
flat
upon
himself
:
and
he
attempts
to
prove
it
,
by
the
Argument
produced
.
But
we
take
it
off
with
this
direct
and
plain
Reply
.
First
,
we
say
,
that
the
Church
way
of
explaining
the
Deluge
is
very
rational
.
For
it
implies
no
more
than
GOD's
creating
Waters
sufficient
for
it
,
and
his
annihilating
them
again
:
which
is
not
in
the
least
inconsistent
with
reason
or
repugnant
to
it
.
Tho
evident
it
is
,
that
his
vital
Assertion
,
expressly
condemns
this
way
,
in
which
GOD's
Church
has
ever
gone
,
as
both
irrational
and
unintelligible
at
once
.
Methinks
an
excuse
or
defence
of
this
should
have
been
more
seasonable
,
than
what
we
here
meet
with
.
Unless
he
thinks
that
so
black
a
blemish
,
can
be
fastned
on
the
wisest
and
noblest
Society
in
the
whole
World
,
without
offence
;
or
means
that
the
Readers
Judgment
,
for
his
unadvised
rashness
should
pass
upon
him
in
course
,
by
nihil
dicit
.
Secondly
,
we
say
,
that
we
do
not
desert
or
reject
the
Church-way
of
explaining
the
Deluge
.
We
allow
indeed
,
as
he
notes
,
That
it
may
be
disgustful
to
the
best
and
soundest
Philosophic
Judgments
:
The
Flood
was
a
Miracle
in
good
measure
.
Or
had
so
much
miracle
running
through
it
,
and
interwoven
with
it
;
that
all
passages
in
it
,
are
not
to
be
accounted
for
by
Reason
and
Philosophy
.
And
truly
where
Nature
was
over-rul'd
by
Providence
;
it
is
but
fit
that
Philosophy
should
give
place
to
Omnipotence
.
And
whereas
he
observes
,
that
we
say
,
that
by
our
Hypothesis
,
we
are
excused
from
running
to
those
Causes
or
Methods
,
which
seem
unreasonable
to
some
,
and
unintelligible
to
others
,
and
unsatisfactory
to
most
:
This
is
no
proof
that
the
Excepter
deserts
the
Churches
way
of
Explaining
the
Deluge
.
For
however
some
,
or
others
,
may
think
it
unreasonable
,
and
unintelligible
,
as
the
Theorist
makes
it
:
and
how
unsatisfactory
soever
some
of
the
causes
or
methods
alledg'd
by
the
Excepter
,
may
be
to
most
:
yet
the
Excepter
is
of
the
mind
that
the
Churches
method
,
is
very
rational
,
and
easy
to
be
understood
.
And
tho
he
farther
remarks
,
that
the
Excepter
says
,
that
the
ordinary
Supposition
,
that
the
Mountains
were
covered
with
water
in
the
Deluge
,
brings
on
a
necessity
of
setting
up
a
new
Hypothesis
for
explaining
the
Flood
:
yet
that
necessary
new
Hypothesis
,
which
the
Excepter
means
,
will
plainly
show
,
that
he
justifies
and
defends
the
Church-Hypothesis
;
instead
of
deserting
it
.
For
it
is
only
this
.
We
must
suppose
that
the
Mountains
of
Ararat
,
whereon
the
Ark
rested
in
the
height
of
the
Deluge
,
were
then
the
highest
Mountains
in
the
World
:
but
since
that
time
they
are
either
worn
down
,
or
sunk
and
settled
lower
than
some
others
.
Admit
but
this
;
and
then
Scripture
,
Geography
,
and
the
Churches
method
of
explaining
the
Flood
,
will
all
be
reconcil'd
:
and
the
usual
Hypothesis
will
stand
clear
of
material
Difficulties
and
Objections
.
Thirdly
,
we
say
,
that
tho
we
invented
a
new
Hypothesis
;
it
was
not
set
up
in
competition
with
this
of
the
Church
,
but
in
comparison
with
that
of
the
Theory
,
and
in
Confutation
of
its
last
vital
Assertion
.
For
it
makes
it
evident
,
that
there
is
another
way
of
explaining
Noah's
Flood
,
both
rational
in
its
method
,
and
intelligible
in
its
causes
;
Second
Edition
to
support
it
on
the
one
side
,
and
a
Review
to
prop
it
up
on
the
other
,
and
have
many
things
left
out
of
it
,
and
have
one
word
in
it
explain'd
by
another
,
and
have
here
and
there
a
Contradiction
allow'd
it
,
&c.
And
thus
the
Excepter
is
freed
from
the
objected
inconsistency
with
himself
and
good
sense
.
This
same
Reply
will
take
off
those
Objections
also
,
which
are
brought
on
by
the
Answerer
,
at
the
bottom
of
his
seventieth
Page
;
as
being
of
near
affinity
with
what
he
last
alledged
.
Having
thus
made
his
general
Observations
,
he
comes
now
to
Particulars
.
The
first
he
pitches
upon
,
is
the
Height
of
the
Deluge-waters
,
which
we
set
at
fifteen
Cubits
above
the
highest
parts
of
the
common
Surface
of
the
Earth
;
making
it
the
Foundation
of
our
Hypothesis
,
and
supposing
it
to
rest
upon
Scripture
,
and
to
be
supported
by
that
.
This
therefore
,
he
says
,
must
needs
raise
our
Curiosity
,
to
see
that
place
of
Scripture
,
which
has
been
overlookt
by
all
the
Learned
hitherto
.
But
if
learned
mens
overlooking
this
Text
,
as
to
the
sense
that
we
apply
it
to
,
be
a
just
Objection
against
our
alledging
it
:
how
much
more
strongly
must
the
same
Objection
come
against
the
Theorist
,
for
alledging
so
many
Texts
as
he
does
,
in
confirmation
of
such
new
and
strange
notions
,
as
none
of
the
learned
could
ever
see
contained
in
them
,
or
confirmed
by
them
;
but
always
overlookt
them
as
to
such
meanings
?
says
plainly
that
the
Mountains
were
covered
with
waters
;
how
could
fifteen
Cubits
reach
to
the
tops
of
the
Mountains
?
This
Objection
is
fully
answered
in
our
Discourse
:
only
thus
much
may
be
here
put
in
.
two
Cubits
high
upon
the
face
of
the
Earth
,
Numb.
11.31
.
Now
if
two
Cubits
of
Quails
could
cover
this
Camp
;
then
fifteen
Cubits
of
Water
might
cover
these
Mountains
.
And
as
for
the
Tops
of
the
Mountains
,
they
are
no
where
said
to
be
covered
,
any
more
than
the
top
of
the
Camp
was
.
But
he
says
,
the
Tops
of
the
Mountains
were
discover'd
,
when
the
Waters
began
to
decrease
,
Gen.
8.5
.
Is
not
that
a
plain
demonstration
that
they
were
cover'd
before
,
and
cover'd
with
those
Waters
?
To
this
Objection
also
an
answer
was
given
by
the
Excepter
.
Disc.
Ch.
16.
§.
5.
However
to
make
it
more
full
,
we
are
content
to
recite
part
of
what
was
formerly
said
,
and
to
add
somewhat
new
,
as
occasion
requires
.
We
say
therefore
that
the
tops
of
the
Mountains
being
discovered
upon
the
decrease
of
the
Waters
,
is
no
demonstration
that
they
were
covered
with
them
:
for
they
might
be
discovered
by
their
Emergency
out
of
darkness
.
Upon
that
Answer
he
brings
this
Quaery
.
Where
finds
he
this
Account
?
't
is
neither
in
the
Text
nor
in
Reason
.
It
was
fairly
gathered
out
of
both
,
as
plainly
appears
in
our
Discourse
.
The
holy
Text
we
went
upon
,
was
Gen.
8.
ult.
Where
day
being
settled
upon
the
recovering
World
:
the
very
settling
of
it
then
,
implies
,
that
in
time
of
the
Flood
,
the
Earth
was
strangely
benighted
.
And
for
a
Reason
,
was
suggested
,
the
Exclusion
of
Frost
.
Which
,
had
not
the
Air
been
very
thick
(
thick
enough
to
hide
the
Tops
of
the
Mountains
from
the
Eyes
of
men
)
would
have
seiz'd
the
Waters
with
exceeding
vehemence
,
and
have
thereby
hindred
the
so
speedy
drying
of
the
Earth
.
But
he
goes
on
in
his
way
of
objecting
:
If
it
was
always
so
dark
,
and
the
Tops
of
the
Mountains
and
Rocks
naked
and
prominent
every
where
,
how
could
the
Ark
avoid
them
in
that
darkness
?
And
could
it
,
by
an
ordinary
Providence
,
have
avoided
them
in
the
Light
?
For
tho
the
H.
GHOST
,
in
that
Description
which
he
was
pleas'd
to
give
of
the
Ark
,
descends
even
to
Particulars
,
and
that
to
the
very
Door
,
and
the
Window
of
it
;
yet
He
hints
not
the
least
concerning
a
Rudder
belonging
to
it
.
And
being
destitute
of
that
,
there
could
be
nothing
whereby
to
turn
or
govern
it
;
but
at
all
times
it
must
be
left
to
drive
right
on
,
whatever
Dangers
(
tho
great
and
visible
)
might
come
in
its
way
.
Or
say
it
had
an
Helm
;
yet
what
Pilot
,
without
inspiration
,
could
have
steer'd
its
Course
safely
,
in
those
perilous
,
new-made
Seas
upon
Earth
?
Where
,
as
Rocks
,
and
Banks
,
and
Flats
,
and
Sands
,
were
thick
set
and
innumerable
;
so
there
was
not
so
much
as
one
Buoy
or
Sea-mark
,
which
,
by
showing
any
of
them
,
might
help
to
shun
them
.
And
as
these
dangers
,
according
to
the
Common
Hypothesis
,
would
have
been
equal
,
when
first
this
Vessel
was
set
afloat
;
so
according
to
the
Theory
,
they
would
have
been
much
greater
.
He
continues
to
object
.
I
see
no
reason
to
imagine
,
that
there
would
be
darkness
after
the
forty
days
rain
.
—
For
he
(
the
Excepter
)
says
,
the
Atmosphaere
was
never
so
exhausted
of
Vapours
,
and
never
so
thin
;
as
when
the
waters
were
newly
come
down
.
Tho
the
Atmosphaere
was
never
so
exhausted
of
Vapours
,
and
never
so
thin
as
at
that
time
,
in
the
vast
Body
,
or
general
Comprehension
of
it
upwards
;
yet
here
below
,
the
Air
might
still
be
foggy
and
thick
.
So
we
are
often
invelop'd
with
caliginous
Mists
in
this
lower
Region
next
the
Earth
;
when
let
them
but
disperse
and
wear
off
,
and
the
heaven
above
is
most
serene
,
and
in
the
Skie
there
's
nothing
but
glorious
day
.
He
objects
still
.
It
was
in
the
Tenth
month
that
they
(
the
Mountains
)
begun
to
be
seen
,
when
the
Waters
were
decreas'd
;
't
was
therefore
the
Waters
,
not
the
gross
Air
,
that
hindred
the
sight
of
them
before
.
For
if
according
to
the
method
of
the
Excepter
,
the
Deluge
begun
to
decrease
after
the
first
forty
days
rain
,
by
the
Sun
's
resolving
waters
into
Vapours
and
Exhalations
:
this
,
in
proportion
,
must
lessen
the
waters
of
the
Deluge
.
But
we
do
not
read
in
Moses
of
any
abatement
in
the
Deluge
,
till
the
end
of
one
hundred
and
fifty
days
(
Gen.
8.3
.
)
which
is
four
Months
after
this
term
.
Nor
do
we
imagine
that
there
was
any
considerable
abatement
of
the
Waters
till
that
time
.
For
after
the
Flood
was
come
to
its
height
,
it
was
necessary
it
should
stand
there
a
good
while
,
the
better
to
effect
that
fatal
destruction
of
the
Animal
World
,
for
which
it
was
sent
.
Yet
during
the
time
that
the
Flood
was
thus
Stationary
,
we
suppose
that
GOD
did
work
no
Miracle
(
for
we
read
of
none
)
to
weaken
Nature
in
its
force
,
and
put
by
its
proper
Operations
.
And
so
the
Sun
,
which
had
then
a
more
than
ordinary
power
upon
the
outragious
and
prevailing
Waters
;
as
shining
on
them
through
a
thinner
Medium
than
ever
yet
he
did
;
could
not
but
turn
them
a
great
pace
into
Misty
Vapours
and
Exhalations
.
And
these
ascending
swiftly
and
copiously
,
to
replenish
the
Atmosphaere
so
lately
emptied
by
excessive
Resolution
;
might
render
the
Mountains
(
as
Mists
always
do
)
quite
invisible
at
a
little
Distance
.
Yet
this
work
being
done
only
by
Nature's
hand
;
or
,
to
use
the
Answerer's
elegant
style
,
by
the
Sun
's
setting
his
Engines
awork
;
tho
it
was
carried
on
for
several
Months
,
the
diminution
of
the
Waters
,
I
say
,
might
be
inconsiderable
.
So
inconsiderable
,
as
not
to
be
worth
the
Spirits
notice
.
And
withal
so
ineffectual
,
that
if
some
better
course
had
not
been
taken
,
the
Waters
would
have
remain'd
a
very
long
time
upon
the
drowned
Earth
,
beyond
the
hundred
and
fifty
days
mention'd
,
without
any
considerable
degree
of
abatement
.
For
if
in
the
hundred
and
ten
days
,
succeeding
those
in
which
the
rains
fell
,
the
Waters
went
up
in
misty
Vapours
(
towards
restoring
the
Atmosphaere
to
its
lost
Consistency
)
in
such
a
quantity
as
to
sink
the
Flood
suppose
but
one
or
two
Cubits
;
tho
this
reeking
evaporation
might
so
darken
the
Air
,
as
to
hide
the
Mountains
;
yet
how
little
would
such
a
diminution
of
the
Deluge
,
be
taken
notice
of
by
Heaven
,
or
how
little
would
it
contribute
to
drying
of
the
Earth
?
And
therefore
to
speed
the
work
,
which
by
the
strength
of
Nature
went
on
but
slowly
;
GOD
made
use
of
a
certain
Wind
(
Gen.
8.1
.
)
as
an
extraordinary
Instrument
.
And
by
this
,
added
at
length
to
the
Attractive
influence
of
the
Sun
,
the
Waters
asswaged
so
very
fast
;
that
as
the
SPIRIT
notes
,
on
the
first
day
of
the
Tenth
Month
the
Tops
of
the
Mountains
were
seen
,
Gen.
8.5
.
And
whereas
the
sacred
Story
makes
the
appearance
of
these
Mountain-tops
,
to
follow
the
decrease
of
the
Deluge-waters
;
nothing
could
be
done
more
properly
according
to
the
tenour
of
this
new
Hypothesis
.
For
in
case
the
Waters
had
not
been
decreased
;
and
so
decreased
as
to
have
refill'd
the
Atmosphaere
with
Vapours
;
and
so
decreased
,
as
to
have
dampt
the
attractive
power
of
the
sun
;
and
so
decreased
,
as
to
be
drawn
so
low
,
and
grown
so
gross
,
and
foul
,
and
heavy
,
as
to
resist
the
attenuating
force
of
the
Wind
aforesaid
:
these
tops
of
the
Mountains
could
not
have
shown
themselves
as
yet
.
For
had
not
the
Waters
been
thus
decreased
,
they
would
still
have
gone
away
into
Vapours
and
Exhalations
at
such
a
rate
;
as
that
the
air
by
them
would
have
been
so
bemisted
,
and
the
Mountains
by
that
would
have
been
so
obscured
,
that
the
tops
of
them
could
not
have
been
so
soon
discovered
.
And
why
the
tops
of
them
were
discerned
before
their
lower
and
their
larger
parts
,
Lastly
,
as
to
this
matter
,
he
objects
.
That
the
whole
notion
of
spending
the
waters
of
the
Deluge
by
Evaporation
hath
no
foundation
in
Scripture
or
Reason
But
in
short
,
it
is
founded
upon
both
.
1st
,
Upon
Reason
.
For
how
reasonable
is
it
that
Waters
should
be
turned
into
Vapours
;
it
being
a
thing
most
natural
?
And
how
reasonable
that
they
should
be
so
turned
at
an
extraordinary
rate
,
where
the
Sun
had
an
extraordinary
power
;
and
when
to
the
force
of
the
Sun
,
was
join'd
the
assistance
of
a
mighty
Wind
?
2ly
,
Upon
Scripture
.
For
their
Returning
off
the
Earth
continually
,
Gen.
8.3
.
might
be
but
their
returning
into
that
Principle
out
of
which
they
were
made
;
namely
,
into
Vapours
.
Disc.
p.
340
,
341.
And
that
Expression
,
the
Waters
were
going
and
decreasing
,
Gen.
8.5
.
may
be
understood
of
their
going
away
quite
by
a
wasting
or
diminishing
of
them
.
And
the
learned
Schindler
makes
the
word
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
in
that
very
place
,
to
signify
this
very
thing
.
And
so
the
Notion
was
not
only
founded
upon
Scripture
,
and
Reason
,
but
moreover
upon
good
Authority
.
And
whereas
the
Answerer
would
have
the
first
of
these
two
cited
Texts
,
to
denote
the
local
motion
of
the
Waters
,
or
their
returning
to
the
place
from
whence
they
came
;
fill'd
up
in
a
great
measure
by
the
fallen
Earth
.
And
whereas
he
says
farther
,
that
then
the
Dove
's
returning
,
was
her
returning
into
her
principles
;
that
is
,
into
an
Egg
:
;
It
is
said
expressly
of
the
Dove
,
that
she
returned
unto
him
(
Noah
)
into
the
Ark
:
where
does
he
find
this
notion
in
Scripture
?
(
Answ.
p.
74.
)
I
might
better
put
the
like
question
to
him
;
where
does
he
in
Scripture
find
the
vital
Assertions
of
his
Theory
?
Which
yet
for
the
relation
it
has
to
Scripture
,
he
calls
,
Theoria
sacra
,
the
holy
Theory
;
tho
in
sundry
things
,
it
be
inconsistent
with
Scripture
and
opposite
to
it
.
I
must
take
my
leave
of
this
point
,
with
remarking
an
Vntruth
which
he
lays
upon
the
Excepter
:
Answ.
p.
73●
li.
24●
It
is
this
.
He
gives
him
(
the
Sun
)
a
miraculous
power
to
draw
up
waters
.
But
where
does
he
ascribe
such
a
power
to
him
?
The
Answerer
must
show
it
,
or
else
incur
the
Censure
of
a
false
Accuser
.
Indeed
that
the
Sun
has
power
to
exhale
Water
now
,
by
agitating
its
Particles
,
and
so
dilating
and
putting
them
into
a
flying
motion
;
is
not
to
be
doubted
.
Nor
is
it
to
be
question'd
but
this
his
power
of
Exhalation
was
most
operative
,
just
after
the
full
Rise
of
the
Deluge
.
For
then
the
Atmosphaere
having
newly
suffered
a
thorow
Solution
of
its
Continuity
,
and
the
stock
of
its
Vapours
being
greatly
exhausted
;
and
the
whole
Earth
,
except
the
higher
parts
of
the
Mountains
,
being
covered
with
the
Flood
;
his
Beams
,
having
now
a
freer
Passage
through
a
finer
Air
,
could
not
but
shoot
down
much
more
forcibly
upon
the
diffused
Water
,
and
agitating
it
more
vehemently
,
make
Vapours
to
rise
at
a
far
greater
Rate
than
they
us'd
to
do
.
And
these
Vapours
being
once
raised
by
the
action
of
the
Sun
,
would
immediately
take
wing
and
fly
into
the
empty
Atmosphaere
above
,
there
being
such
room
and
reception
for
them
.
And
as
fast
as
some
gave
way
,
others
following
,
while
the
void
Atmosphaere
suckt
them
up
as
it
were
,
and
helpt
them
to
ascend
by
its
readiness
to
receive
them
;
an
excessive
plenty
of
misty
Vapours
must
needs
go
up
,
in
continued
streams
,
from
the
steaming
surface
of
the
rarefying
Water
.
Thus
,
I
confess
,
the
Sun
had
power
to
draw
up
Water
,
and
power
to
attract
it
very
copiously
at
the
time
we
speak
of
,
till
confused
Nature
came
to
be
resettled
in
its
first
Order
.
Yea
,
so
plentifully
did
he
draw
up
Water
in
that
juncture
,
and
such
a
mistiness
thereby
did
he
cause
in
the
Air
;
as
he
never
did
do
before
,
nor
never
(
in
likelihood
)
shall
do
again
;
because
there
never
was
,
nor
will
be
the
like
reasons
for
it
.
But
that
the
Excepter
gave
him
miraculous
power
to
do
it
,
is
incumbent
upon
the
Answerer
,
who
was
pleas'd
to
say
it
,
to
make
it
out
.
A
miraculous
Wind
indeed
the
Excepter
owned
,
a
Lapide
in
loc.
Gen.
8.1
.
which
in
course
of
Nature
could
never
have
been
done
in
so
short
a
time
,
if
it
could
have
been
done
at
all
:
but
as
for
a
miraculous
influence
of
the
Sun
,
as
it
would
have
been
needless
in
conjunction
with
such
a
Wind
,
so
he
knows
of
none
,
nor
did
he
ever
think
of
any
.
But
besides
all
this
,
at
length
he
would
find
out
an
Insufficiency
in
the
new
Hypothesis
;
as
if
the
measure
of
its
Waters
could
not
reach
to
the
Execution
,
which
was
necessary
to
be
done
upon
the
Animal
World
.
For
whereas
an
Vniversal
Destruction
was
made
by
the
Flood
;
I
would
gladly
know
,
says
he
,
how
this
could
be
in
a
fifteen-Cubit
Deluge
.
For
Birds
would
naturally
fly
to
the
tops
of
Trees
.
And
Beasts
would
retire
by
degrees
to
Mountains
.
Men
also
could
not
fail
to
retire
into
Mountains
.
Or
the
upper
stories
of
their
houses
might
be
sufficient
to
save
them
.
Or
an
house
seated
upon
an
Eminency
,
or
a
Castle
upon
a
Rock
,
would
always
be
a
safe
retreat
from
this
diminutive
Deluge
.
those
that
were
upon
the
Sea
,
in
Ships
,
would
never
come
in
danger
.
This
is
the
substance
of
the
Answerers
Objections
,
where
he
reflects
upon
the
incompetency
of
the
new
Hypothesis
,
in
regard
of
the
Quantity
or
height
of
those
Waters
of
which
it
supposes
the
flood
to
be
made
.
But
how
easily
are
they
taken
off
?
For
the
common
unmountainous
Surface
of
the
Earth
,
Disc.
p.
301.
being
by
necessary
and
providential
contrivance
,
made
inequal
:
hence
it
will
follow
,
that
when
the
Waters
were
fifteen
Cubits
higher
than
the
highest
parts
of
that
common
Surface
(
which
is
the
Fundamental
Assertion
of
the
new
Hypothesis
)
they
might
be
forty
,
or
fifty
,
or
an
hundred
,
or
two
hundred
Cubits
higher
than
the
general
ordinary
Plain
of
the
Earth
.
And
when
fifteen
Cubits
Water
above
the
highest
parts
of
the
Earths
common
surface
,
would
drown
the
Level
of
it
generally
to
so
prodigious
a
pitch
;
instead
of
a
diminutive
(
as
the
Answerer
calls
it
)
here
must
be
a
most
dreadful
and
destructive
Deluge
,
both
to
Mankind
and
all
Living
Creatures
.
For
put
case
that
the
Birds
,
upon
the
rise
of
the
waters
,
flew
unto
trees
;
yet
where
are
the
trees
whose
tops
are
an
hundred
or
two
hundred
Cubits
high
?
Or
say
,
the
tops
of
some
trees
stood
out
of
the
Waters
,
as
growing
upon
the
highest
parts
of
the
Earth's
common
Surface
:
yet
could
the
poor
Fowls
be
able
to
roost
there
,
during
the
time
of
the
whole
forty
days
Rain
;
and
then
on
to
the
end
of
the
Flood
?
And
grant
that
Men
and
Beasts
retired
to
the
Mountains
,
when
the
Waters
began
to
swell
and
threaten
them
:
Yet
then
they
were
great
Mountains
to
which
they
betook
themselves
,
or
else
they
were
lesser
ones
.
If
they
were
great
ones
,
Disc.
c.
16.
§.
6.
they
could
not
run
to
a
more
improper
Refuge
.
If
they
were
lesser
ones
,
how
could
they
possibly
subsist
there
,
without
Shelter
or
Sustenance
,
till
the
Deluge
was
drawn
off
,
and
the
Earth
dried
up
?
And
the
like
may
be
said
of
those
in
the
upper
Stories
of
their
houses
.
Admit
that
the
Flood
did
not
reach
them
;
yet
how
could
they
live
there
,
to
come
down
again
at
last
,
when
their
Domestick
Stores
,
in
their
Cellars
&c.
were
all
overflowed
,
and
were
so
to
continue
for
a
great
while
?
And
as
for
them
in
Castles
,
and
high
situate
Habitations
,
if
any
were
seated
above
the
Water-mark
of
the
Deluge
;
how
could
they
shift
for
food
and
fewel
,
and
keep
themselves
from
famishing
for
a
year
together
?
For
either
they
were
well
furnisht
with
Provisions
,
or
they
were
not
.
If
they
were
not
,
they
could
not
hold
out
.
If
they
were
,
it
was
because
a
number
was
to
be
maintain'd
by
them
.
And
many
will
as
soon
devour
much
;
as
a
few
spend
a
little
.
And
where
is
the
Castle
,
that
being
well
stockt
with
men
,
as
well
us
stor'd
with
necessaries
(
which
commonly
go
together
)
does
not
fall
into
want
before
a
year
comes
about
,
where
there
is
no
kind
of
Forage
,
or
provisionary
Recruits
?
And
therefore
these
Castles
on
Rocks
,
as
to
the
Answerer's
purpose
,
are
but
Castles
in
the
air
:
for
being
on
every
side
so
surrounded
with
water
,
they
who
were
in
them
would
be
starved
to
death
.
And
methinks
there
is
one
thing
which
seems
to
insinuate
,
that
a
good
part
of
the
Animal
World
might
perhaps
come
to
an
end
thus
:
By
being
driven
to
such
streights
by
the
overflowing
waters
as
to
be
famished
or
starved
to
death
.
The
thing
is
this
.
Tho
the
Instrument
of
Vengeance
upon
the
wicked
World
was
an
Universal
Flood
;
and
tho
the
proper
way
of
that
Instrument's
killing
,
is
by
drowning
:
yet
in
all
the
sacred
story
of
the
Deluge
,
it
is
no
where
said
of
men
and
living
creatures
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
they
were
drowned
;
but
all-a-long
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
they
died
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
and
they
were
destroyed
.
As
if
the
SPIRIT
would
give
us
to
understand
,
that
all
the
living
Creatures
which
perisht
at
the
Flood
,
were
not
directly
overwhelm'd
and
absorpt
by
it
;
but
by
means
of
its
Waters
were
forced
to
die
,
very
many
of
them
,
and
were
fearfully
destroyed
some
other
way
;
even
that
which
we
have
hinted
.
And
then
lastly
as
to
Ships
,
I
will
not
deny
that
there
were
any
before
the
Flood
;
(
for
all
I
find
Hornius
does
it
positively
in
his
Introduction
;
Noachi
aevo
nullae
adhuc
naves
;
in
Noah
's
Age
there
were
not
as
yet
any
ships
:
tho
could
we
allow
them
,
at
the
Deluge
,
to
be
as
good
as
ours
,
which
are
the
best
in
the
World
;
yet
the
persons
in
them
at
that
time
,
must
needs
be
in
most
imminent
Dangers
.
For
at
first
,
for
forty
days
together
,
they
were
to
sail
in
darkness
.
And
after
that
,
for
several
Months
,
in
such
foggy
Mists
,
as
obscured
the
Tops
of
the
vastest
Mountains
.
By
the
increase
of
the
Waters
also
the
whole
World
became
one
boundless
Ocean
.
And
the
Sea
,
by
that
means
,
having
lost
its
Shores
,
the
Mariners
skill
would
be
strangely
lost
or
non-plust
too
.
For
instead
of
finding
the
Seas
in
their
usual
Figures
and
Chanels
,
and
of
making
their
Ports
,
at
the
wonted
places
and
Distances
;
wild
Waters
would
lead
them
into
unknown
Rodes
,
and
trapan
them
on
to
land
.
And
there
being
Rocks
in
great
plenty
to
split
them
,
Hills
to
stave
them
,
Banks
to
strand
them
,
Buildings
to
annoy
them
,
Woods
and
Forrests
to
hamper
and
intangle
them
:
their
dangers
being
new
,
they
could
not
apprehend
them
;
and
being
so
many
,
and
various
,
and
unexpected
,
how
could
they
avoid
them
?
And
then
we
must
consider
farther
yet
,
that
Shipping
,
at
the
Flood
,
was
very
far
short
of
that
strength
and
perfection
,
which
now
it
has
attain'd
to
.
The
first
considerable
Vessel
that
we
read
of
,
I
think
,
was
the
Argo
.
And
indeed
some
necessary
Appendages
of
a
Ship
,
were
not
found
out
,
till
about
the
time
that
she
was
equip'd
for
Colchis
.
For
famous
Daedalus
,
who
invented
the
Mast
and
Main-yard
;
and
his
Son
Icarus
,
who
invented
the
Sails
;
lived
then
.
Typhis
also
,
who
invented
the
Rudder
,
was
one
of
those
Heroes
which
attended
Jason
,
when
the
young
Gallants
of
Thessaly
,
or
the
flower
of
its
Nobility
,
went
along
with
him
in
the
Argonautick
Expedition
.
And
yet
this
Ship
,
as
Pliny
tells
us
,
in
the
Six
and
fiftieth
Chapter
of
the
Seventh
Book
of
his
Natural
History
;
was
but
a
Gally
.
And
he
adds
(
which
it
will
not
be
wide
of
our
purpose
to
recite
)
That
Troughs
or
flat
Planks
were
used
by
King
Erythras
to
cross
from
one
Island
to
another
in
the
Red
Sea
.
That
in
the
British
Ocean
were
made
certain
Wicker-Boats
of
twigs
covered
with
Leather
,
and
stitcht
round
about
.
In
Nilus
,
Boats
of
Paper
,
Cane-reed
,
and
Rushes
.
That
the
Erythraeans
made
the
Bireme
,
or
Gally
with
two
Banks
of
Oars
.
Aminacles
the
Corinthian
,
the
first
Trireme
.
The
Carthaginians
,
the
Quadrireme
.
Nesichton
the
Salaminian
,
the
first
Quinquereme
.
And
so
they
were
raised
,
by
Zenagoras
of
Syracuse
,
by
Mnesigeton
,
by
Alexander
the
great
,
by
Ptolomy
Soter
,
by
Demetrius
Son
of
Antigonus
,
by
Ptolomy
Philadelphus
,
and
by
Ptolomy
Philopater
,
till
they
came
to
fifty
Banks
or
Courses
of
Oars
on
a
side
.
So
that
here
we
have
an
account
of
Two
things
not
unworthy
of
our
notice
.
The
First
is
the
low
,
and
mean
,
and
rude
Beginnings
of
Shipping
.
In
some
places
it
commenc'd
in
Troughs
or
Hollowed
trees
.
So
it
did
in
Egypt
;
Wicker
Sciphs
,
covered
with
Leather
well
sticht
together
.
De
Bello
Civil
.
l.
1.
So
it
did
here
in
our
Country
.
For
Caesar
in
his
Commentaries
says
thus
of
the
British
ships
.
Their
Keels
and
Footstocks
were
made
of
light
timber
,
but
the
rest
of
their
body
was
covered
with
Hides
,
and
made
of
Osiers
wrought
together
.
Nor
were
the
Venetians
Ships
,
any
better
than
the
Britains
,
if
we
may
take
Lucan's
word
for
it
.
Primùm
cana
Salix
madefacto
Vimine
parvam
Texerat
in
puppim
,
caesoque
induta
juvenco
Victoris
patiens
,
tumidum
superenatat
amnem
.
Sic
Venetus
stagnante
Pado
,
susoque
Britannus
Navigat
Oceano
.
A
Ship
first
made
of
moist
hoar
Willow
twiggs
,
And
cover'd
with
a
Bullocks
Hide
;
Tho
small
it
be
,
when
it
the
Master
riggs
,
Doth
on
the
swelling
River
ride
.
Thus
the
Venetian
sails
on
the
smooth
Po
,
And
Britains
on
vast
Ocean
go
.
In
other
places
again
,
it
began
in
Rushen
,
or
Reeden
Canoes
,
and
the
Vessels
they
used
,
were
Paper
things
,
even
in
the
very
letter
.
So
it
was
upon
the
Nile
.
And
Scripture
tells
us
of
Ambassadors
being
sent
upon
negotiations
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
in
vessels
of
Bul-rushes
,
Isai
.
18.2
The
Second
thing
worthy
of
remark
,
is
that
degree
of
Perfection
to
which
Shipping
arrived
.
And
as
our
aforesaid
Author
informs
us
,
it
was
grown
up
no
higher
than
to
great
Gallies
in
Ptolomy
Philopator's
time
.
And
he
reigning
after
the
Year
of
the
World
3750
;
An.
Mun.
3080.
great
strength
,
if
we
consider
with
what
strange
Expedition
they
were
built
.
For
as
that
excellent
Historian
Florus
tells
us
,
intra
sexegesimum
diem
;
within
sixty
days
after
the
timber
they
were
made
of
,
was
cut
down
in
the
wood
.
Insomuch
that
they
might
seem
to
be
non
arte
factae
;
not
framed
by
art
,
sed
quodam
munere
Deorum
,
&c.
but
by
a
certain
favour
of
the
GODS
,
turned
out
of
trees
into
Ships
.
And
yet
that
they
were
as
strong
as
any
that
the
Carthaginians
,
or
that
the
King
of
Syracuse
,
their
Confederate
,
had
;
the
event
proved
.
For
then
it
was
that
Duilius
the
Roman
Admiral
,
so
quickly
overcame
that
Prince
,
that
he
confessed
he
was
conquered
before
he
saw
the
Enemy
.
And
having
broken
in
pieces
,
and
put
to
flight
the
Fleet
at
Lipara
,
he
was
the
first
that
was
honoured
with
a
Sea-triumph
,
as
the
same
Writer
says
.
Adding
withal
,
that
for
this
he
triumphed
every
day
;
never
at
any
time
returning
from
supper
without
Torches
and
Musick
before
him
.
Nor
is
Florus
alone
in
reporting
the
strange
and
wonderful
celerity
,
wherewith
the
Romans
of
old
builded
their
ships
.
Pliny
joins
with
him
;
within
forty
days
after
the
timber
was
felled
,
whereof
it
was
made
.
And
acquaints
us
farther
,
that
L.
Piso
left
it
in
writing
,
that
against
King
Hiero
,
two
hundred
and
twenty
Ships
were
built
and
furnisht
,
within
five
and
forty
days
after
the
timber
grew
.
Surely
these
could
be
no
very
stout
or
strong
Ships
.
And
yet
,
I
say
,
they
matched
the
strongest
in
the
World
.
For
the
only
Commonwealth
which
could
then
pretend
to
cope
with
Rome
,
was
that
of
Carthage
.
And
indeed
with
Rome
it
did
contend
in
two
very
sharp
and
tedious
Wars
(
tho
it
sell
in
the
third
)
the
first
holding
four
and
twenty
years
,
and
the
second
,
eighteen
;
between
which
,
says
Florus
,
there
was
vix
quadriennis
requies
,
scarce
four
years
respite
.
And
Carthage
being
built
by
the
Tyrians
,
or
at
leastwise
peopled
with
a
Colony
of
Phaenicians
,
who
were
ever
well
skill'd
in
Sea
affairs
,
and
eminent
in
Shipping
:
This
City
being
older
than
Rome
[
*
](A67683-e58860-b)
*
Condita
est
urbs
haec
LXXII
.
annis
antequam
Roma
Justin
.
lib.
18.
seventy
two
years
,
and
mighty
powerful
;
was
the
most
likely
of
all
other
,
to
exceed
Rome
in
Naval
force
.
Yet
so
far
was
it
from
doing
this
;
that
the
Carthaginians
were
frequently
vanquisht
by
the
Romans
,
in
Sea
Ingagements
.
Particularly
in
that
which
the
incomparable
Livy
gives
account
of
;
eight
hundred
at
once
,
as
we
find
he
did
.
Id.
ib.
l.
16.
c.
4●
which
required
an
hundred
and
twenty
thousand
Modij
of
Lintels
for
its
Ballast
,
after
Caligula
had
kept
it
some
years
as
a
kind
of
wonder
to
be
gaz'd
at
;
Claudius
caused
it
to
be
brought
to
Ostia
,
and
to
be
sunk
there
for
the
security
of
the
Harbour
.
But
not
to
dwell
too
long
upon
this
head
.
If
so
be
we
measure
the
first
Worlds
perfection
in
Shipping
and
Navigation
,
by
what
men
in
this
World
gain'd
of
that
nature
,
in
the
like
Period
of
time
(
which
I
think
is
the
best
Rule
we
can
go
by
:
)
we
shall
find
the
praediluvians
deficient
in
,
yea
,
destitute
of
two
most
necessary
things
.
For
first
,
they
had
no
Anchors
.
And
secondly
,
they
had
none
of
the
Sea-chart
or
Compass
.
Potters
Wheel
)
was
Anacharsis
,
that
noble
Scythian
(
or
rather
that
Royal
one
,
for
he
was
brother
to
Caduides
the
King
of
Scythia
)
and
the
only
learned
man
and
rare
Philosopher
of
that
barbarous
Country
.
Which
gave
occasion
to
the
Proverb
,
Anacharsis
inter
Scythas
.
Now
he
(
being
contemporary
with
Solon
,
as
Laertius
tells
us
)
flourisht
after
the
year
of
the
World
3340.
For
then
it
was
that
Solon
wrote
the
Athenian
Laws
,
Aul.
Gell.
Noct.
At.
lib.
17.
cap.
21.
toward
the
latter
end
of
the
Reign
of
Tarquinius
Priscus
,
And
so
the
Anchor
could
not
be
found
out
,
till
such
time
as
this
World
had
out-lasted
the
other
.
And
consequently
,
according
to
the
best
Measures
we
can
take
,
the
Antediluvians
had
no
Anchors
to
their
Ships
.
And
Secondly
,
by
the
same
Rule
,
they
must
want
the
Compass
too
;
that
being
a
much
later
Invention
than
the
Anchor
.
For
however
some
will
have
it
to
be
ancient
,
their
opinion
is
certainly
without
all
good
grounds
.
As
for
the
Comaedians
Authority
,
4.
Plaut
.
in
Merc.
Advers.
li.
20.
ca.
4.
which
Lev.
Lemnius
alledges
,
cape
modo
versoriam
;
it
is
of
no
force
.
For
by
Versoria
,
he
might
mean
the
Rudder
only
;
or
as
Turnebus
expounds
it
,
and
some
Dictionaries
render
the
word
:
funis
quo
vertitur
velum
,
the
Rope
that
turns
the
Sail
to
the
Wind-ward
.
Nor
is
there
the
least
mention
made
of
this
Compass
(
that
I
find
)
amongst
any
of
the
Ancients
,
be
they
Philosophers
,
Historians
,
or
others
.
Yea
,
instead
of
that
,
divers
modern
Authors
of
note
,
make
it
the
Discovery
of
latter
Ages
.
So
does
Bodinus
;
usum
ejus
plane
divinum
Antiqui
ignorarunt
:
The
Ancients
were
ignorant
of
the
Divine
(
or
excellent
)
use
of
it
.
And
so
does
Blondus
,
in
his
Description
of
Italy
.
Certum
est
id
navigandi
auxilium
priscis
omnino
fuisse
incognitum
:
Certain
it
is
that
help
of
navigating
was
altogether
unknown
to
the
Ancients
.
Cardan
also
declares
,
his
tribus
tota
Antiquitas
nihil
par
habet
.
All
Antiquity
has
nothing
equal
to
these
three
things
.
Of
which
the
Mariners
Compass
was
one
,
the
other
two
being
Guns
,
and
Printing
.
And
therefore
Voyages
heretofore
could
be
performed
only
by
crossing
over
some
narrow
Seas
,
or
else
by
Coasting
it
along
by
the
Shores
side
,
from
one
Country
to
another
.
And
for
this
reason
King
Solomon's
Navy
was
three
years
in
making
a
Voyage
to
Ophir
;
because
for
lack
of
the
Compass
they
were
fain
to
creep
along
close
by
the
Shores
,
and
durst
not
venture
to
take
a
shorter
Cut
,
by
lanching
out
into
the
main
Ocean
.
Nor
could
those
Glorious
Voyages
not
long
since
made
(
as
well
by
the
English
as
other
Nations
)
ever
have
been
accomplisht
,
without
the
help
of
this
admirable
Instrument
;
which
yields
a
most
strange
direction
,
and
thereby
a
sutable
safety
unto
Sailors
.
And
thus
I
think
enough
has
been
said
,
to
show
that
the
circumstances
of
men
in
Ships
,
at
the
coming
in
of
the
Flood
,
were
not
only
dangerous
but
desperate
.
For
if
we
consider
aright
,
that
their
ships
were
much
weaker
than
ours
are
;
and
that
those
weak
Ships
had
no
Anchors
;
and
that
they
themselves
had
no
Compass
;
and
that
the
Seas
they
navigated
had
no
Shores
,
by
which
they
used
to
steer
their
course
:
And
so
tho
they
could
stop
no
where
,
yet
their
motion
carry'd
them
they
knew
not
whither
;
even
amongst
Rocks
and
Clifts
,
and
Hills
,
and
Mountains
,
and
Cities
,
and
Trees
,
and
Villages
.
If
this
,
I
say
,
be
rightly
considered
,
we
may
well
conclude
their
condition
hopeless
.
And
not
only
that
all
hope
of
their
being
saved
was
taken
away
,
as
it
was
from
them
in
the
Ship
of
Adramyttium
,
Acts
27.
but
likewise
all
possibility
of
their
being
so
.
But
if
after
all
,
any
hill
,
or
Castle
,
or
house
,
or
Ship
,
could
be
able
to
save
any
creatures
from
the
Deluge
;
we
need
but
flie
to
Extraordinary
Providence
,
(
as
the
Answerer
does
often
)
and
the
power
of
that
would
effectually
dispatch
them
.
When
Heaven
was
pleas'd
to
give
Satan
leave
,
he
caused
the
fire
to
consume
Job's
Sheep
,
and
caused
the
Wind
to
destroy
his
Children
.
And
how
easily
could
those
Spirits
,
that
are
Ministers
of
GOD's
vengeance
,
have
made
the
waters
of
the
Flood
(
in
that
terrible
day
of
general
execution
)
fatal
to
those
Creatures
that
might
have
escap'd
them
,
if
any
could
have
done
it
.
For
when
GOD
thinks
fit
to
appoint
him
to
the
work
,
there
's
never
a
one
of
those
Spirits
,
but
really
is
,
(
what
Homer
so
commonly
calls
Jupiter
)
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
a
Gatherer
of
Clouds
.
And
so
with
greatest
ease
,
could
so
drive
,
and
thrust
,
and
squeeze
them
together
;
as
to
force
them
to
discharge
themselves
in
such
mighty
Defluxions
,
as
would
not
fail
to
drown
men
,
and
all
Land-animals
,
in
whatever
Securities
they
were
lodged
.
And
now
(
as
it
is
high
time
)
let
us
see
what
the
Answerer
says
,
to
our
notion
of
the
Fountains
of
the
great
Deep
.
Caverns
in
Rocks
and
Mountains
.
But
to
this
notion
he
opposes
,
first
,
That
we
alledge
but
one
single
text
of
Scripture
to
support
it
.
one
single
text
to
support
it
.
And
yet
how
easie
were
it
to
cite
seveval
texts
of
Scripture
,
that
fall
in
most
naturally
with
our
sense
?
I
will
instance
but
in
two
.
He
layeth
up
the
Deeps
in
treasuries
,
Psal.
33.7
.
And
what
could
these
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
Treasuries
be
,
so
properly
,
as
huge
Caverns
in
Rocks
and
Mountains
;
where
GOD
,
by
the
hand
of
Nature
,
did
of
old
,
and
still
does
lay
up
Deep
Waters
?
And
Pro.
3.20
.
GOD
says
,
by
his
knowledge
the
Depths
are
broken
up
,
or
cleaved
.
And
to
what
can
this
Text
be
applied
more
fitly
,
and
of
what
can
it
be
understood
more
fairly
,
or
expounded
more
emphatically
,
than
these
Caverns
?
Which
as
they
were
more
generally
broke
up
at
the
time
of
the
Flood
,
according
as
GOD
in
his
Wisdom
thought
fit
;
so
at
certain
times
,
and
in
certain
places
,
many
have
been
cleaved
or
opened
since
.
Sometimes
miraculously
,
as
in
Rephidim
and
Cadesh
;
and
sometimes
otherwise
by
ordinary
Providence
;
New
Springs
breaking
forth
and
running
continually
out
of
the
opened
Caverns
.
Whence
as
some
Water
issued
or
flowed
out
?
other
again
was
still
generated
within
,
by
the
Resolution
of
Vapours
drawn
up
from
the
Great
Deep
below
,
to
which
the
Roots
of
many
high
Rocks
and
Mountains
may
descend
.
Yea
,
if
they
did
not
go
down
below
the
bottom
of
the
Deep
;
how
could
we
come
by
the
Metals
that
we
have
?
Next
he
intimates
,
that
the
Text
we
alledge
,
generally
understood
otherwise
.
And
so
have
many
Texts
which
he
alledges
in
favour
of
his
Hypothesis
.
And
yet
he
thought
that
they
might
be
interpreted
to
his
sense
,
and
were
very
applicable
to
his
purpose
.
the
Excepter
,
by
all
means
,
will
have
these
holes
in
the
Rocks
,
to
be
the
same
with
the
Mosaical
Abyss
,
or
Great
Deep
,
that
was
broken
up
at
the
Deluge
.
This
is
a
meaning
quite
beyond
our
intention
:
For
we
mean
only
this
.
That
our
Caverns
were
but
the
fountains
of
the
great
Deep
,
broken
up
at
the
Flood
;
not
the
Great
Deep
it self
.
And
this
is
evident
from
several
Expressions
;
three
of
which
occur
in
the
same
page
where
our
Notion
is
delivered
.
What
those
Fountains
of
the
Great
Deep
were
,
which
at
the
time
of
the
Flood
were
cleaved
,
&c.
The
breaking
up
of
the
Fountains
of
Tehom
Rabbah
,
or
the
great
Deep
(
which
the
Theory
insists
so
much
upon
)
was
no
more
than
the
breaking
up
of
such
Caverns
.
And
presently
after
,
the
breaking
open
of
the
Fountains
of
the
great
Deep
,
and
the
cleaving
of
those
Rocks
in
the
Wilderness
,
Psal.
78.15
.
were
in
effect
but
the
same
thing
.
Still
the
great
deep
Caverns
of
the
Mountains
,
may
very
well
pass
for
the
Fountains
of
Moses
's
Tehom
Rabbah
.
So
that
whereas
it
is
said
(
p.
312.
supposing
that
the
Caverns
in
the
mountains
were
this
great
Deep
,
&c.
And
where
speaking
of
the
Psalmist's
great
Deeps
,
and
Moses's
great
Deep
;
it
is
said
,
the
same
thing
might
be
meant
by
both
:
it
is
plain
that
by
those
Caverns
and
the
Psalmist's
Great
Deeps
,
must
be
meant
,
that
they
were
the
same
with
the
Fountains
of
Moses's
Tehom
Rabbah
,
or
Great
Deep
;
and
not
that
Great
Deep
it self
.
And
whereas
it
is
said
in
our
Discourse
(
p.
153.
)
that
the
great
Deep
,
or
the
fountains
then
broken
up
,
had
no
relation
to
the
Sea
:
it
is
to
be
understood
that
they
had
no
such
relation
to
it
,
as
that
the
breaking
them
up
,
should
occasion
the
proud
waves
of
the
Sea
to
pass
their
bounds
in
making
the
Deluge
;
the
thing
there
spoken
of
.
And
lastly
tho
Moses's
word
be
Deep
,
and
the
Psalmist's
word
be
,
Deeps
;
yet
as
the
different
Numbers
they
use
,
need
not
set
them
at
variance
?
so
according
to
our
meaning
,
in
effect
(
as
was
said
even
now
)
but
the
same
thing
.
As
much
the
same
,
as
fountains
rising
from
a
Spring-head
,
and
that
Spring-head
can
be
the
same
.
And
we
may
observe
(
in
concent
with
this
)
that
Moses
does
not
say
that
the
Great
Deep
was
broken
up
,
but
that
the
Fountains
of
the
great
Deep
were
so
.
And
what
true
Fountains
of
the
Great
Deep
,
were
our
Caverns
of
Water
?
For
the
waters
that
filled
them
,
might
all
be
drawn
up
(
by
the
influence
of
the
Sun
)
out
of
Moses's
Great
Deep
;
and
then
when
Providence
cleaved
these
Caverns
,
and
set
them
a
flowing
;
how
properly
and
really
might
it
be
said
,
that
the
Fountains
of
the
Great
Deep
were
broken
up
?
seeing
that
might
be
the
Source
,
from
whence
originally
the
waters
of
these
Fountains
were
extracted
.
The
Answerer
adds
,
was
not
one
thing
,
or
one
continued
Cavity
,
as
Moses
represents
it
,
but
ten
thousand
holes
separate
and
distant
from
one
another
.
Tho
our
Great
Deeps
were
many
,
and
separate
,
and
distant
from
one
another
;
yet
they
do
not
hinder
Moses's
Great
Deep
,
from
being
one
continued
Cavity
:
for
ours
were
but
the
fountains
of
his
.
Tho
enough
was
said
besides
,
to
take
off
the
edge
of
this
Objection
,
Disc.
p.
305
,
306.
where
we
shewed
that
Scripture
does
use
the
singular
and
plural
Numbers
promiscuously
,
sometimes
putting
one
for
the
other
.
Were
there
not
above
ten
thousand
Quails
about
the
Hebrews
Camp
,
when
they
fell
round
about
it
as
it
were
two
Cubits
high
?
and
the
Quail
came
up
,
Exod.
16.13
.
As
if
(
as
many
as
they
were
)
they
had
been
but
one
.
The
Answerer
proceeds
;
Neither
must
the
Great
Deep
,
according
to
him
,
signify
a
low
place
,
but
an
high
place
.
For
he
confesses
these
Caverns
were
higher
than
the
common
level
of
the
Earth
.
the
Fountains
of
the
Great
Deep
falls
in
most
fairly
with
the
Scripture
Doctrine
of
the
Original
of
Fountains
.
For
that
makes
them
to
come
from
the
Sea
,
or
Great
Abyss
;
and
we
suppose
ours
to
be
derived
from
thence
.
Let
these
things
be
duly
weighed
,
and
I
hope
it
will
appear
,
that
the
Answerer
had
no
reason
at
all
to
charge
us
,
with
breaking
thorough
so
many
plain
Texts
of
Scripture
.
And
thus
we
come
to
his
concluding
Objection
against
our
Caverns
.
What
reason
have
we
to
believe
,
that
there
were
such
Vessels
then
,
more
than
now
?
To
this
we
have
spoken
so
very
fully
,
Disc.
p.
306
,
307
,
308.
that
nothing
more
needs
here
be
added
in
way
of
reply
.
Who
would
have
thought
there
had
been
such
fountains
in
the
Rocks
of
Rephidim
and
Cadesh
;
if
God
had
not
opened
them
?
But
he
draws
out
the
Objection
farther
,
thus
.
If
the
opening
the
Abyss
at
the
Deluge
,
had
been
the
opening
of
Rocks
,
why
did
not
Moses
express
it
so
:
and
tell
us
,
that
the
Rocks
were
cloven
,
and
the
waters
gushed
out
;
and
so
made
the
Deluge
;
This
would
have
been
as
intelligible
if
it
had
been
true
,
as
to
tell
us
,
that
the
Tehom
Rabbah
was
broken
open
.
But
there
is
not
one
word
of
Rocks
,
or
the
cleaving
of
Rocks
,
in
the
History
of
the
Flood
.
To
which
we
reply
,
first
;
Moses
does
not
say
,
that
the
Tehom
Rabbah
was
broken
open
,
but
only
the
fountains
of
it
were
broken
up
.
And
what
fountains
belonging
to
the
Tehom
Rabbah
,
could
more
properly
be
so
broken
up
,
than
these
Caverns
?
Secondly
,
the
Intelligibility
of
a
thing
,
is
no
reason
why
it
must
needs
be
expressed
.
How
many
things
are
passed
by
with
silence
in
Scripture
,
even
where
occasion
is
offered
to
speak
of
them
;
which
yet
are
true
,
and
had
they
been
expressed
,
might
easily
have
been
understood
?
And
thirdly
,
the
same
Objection
which
he
throws
at
the
Excepter
;
rebounds
back
with
violence
upon
himself
.
If
the
breaking
up
of
the
Abyss
,
at
the
Deluge
,
had
been
the
Disruption
and
fall
of
the
Earth
into
the
Abyss
which
lay
under
it
(
according
to
the
Vital
Assertion
of
the
Theory
,
in
that
case
;
)
why
did
not
Moses
express
it
so
:
and
tell
us
that
this
Disruption
and
Fall
of
the
Earth
into
the
Abyss
which
lay
under
it
,
made
the
Deluge
?
This
would
have
been
as
intelligible
,
if
it
had
been
true
,
as
to
tell
us
that
the
Fountains
of
the
Jehom
Rabbah
were
broken
up
.
But
there
is
not
one
word
of
this
Fall
of
the
Earth
,
in
the
History
of
the
Flood
.
Thus
have
we
seen
the
Assaults
that
are
made
upon
the
new
Hypothesis
for
the
Explication
of
the
Deluge
:
But
so
far
are
they
from
overthrowing
it
,
that
they
seem
to
me
,
not
to
shake
it
in
the
least
.
And
I
cannot
but
own
,
that
I
am
never
so
inclinable
to
believe
it
may
be
true
,
as
when
I
consider
how
weak
the
answers
are
to
the
reasons
and
arguments
alledg'd
to
confirm
it
;
and
how
inconsiderable
the
Objections
against
it
.
But
yet
I
do
no
more
affirm
it
to
be
true
now
,
than
I
did
at
first
.
Tho
I
am
apt
to
think
it
may
as
well
pass
for
true
,
and
may
as
easily
be
maintained
to
be
true
,
as
that
Hypothesis
to
which
it
is
compared
,
and
which
arrogates
to
it self
,
the
glorious
Title
,
not
only
of
a
true
piece
of
Natural
History
;
but
also
of
the
greatest
and
most
remarkable
,
that
hath
yet
been
since
the
beginning
of
the
World
.
CHAP.
XVI
.
THE
principal
matter
,
and
the
only
thing
to
be
noted
in
this
Chapter
;
is
what
our
Author
omitted
in
its
proper
place
,
and
is
here
thought
on
by
him
to
be
answered
.
According
to
his
usual
way
of
mistaking
,
one
objection
,
tho
there
be
two
very
distinct
ones
.
He
answers
the
last
first
,
and
therefore
I
begin
with
that
,
If
the
Abyss
under
the
Earth
(
to
wave
the
other
things
mention'd
)
had
been
the
great
Deep
meant
by
Moses
;
it
had
not
had
any
true
or
proper
Fountains
in
it
.
And
so
what
will
become
of
all
the
Fountains
of
the
great
Deep
?
His
Answer
is
,
there
were
fountains
in
the
Abyss
,
as
much
as
Windows
in
Heaven
.
The
word
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
rendred
,
Windows
;
signifies
as
well
,
Cataracts
;
and
it
might
have
been
rendred
so
more
properly
.
And
indeed
in
the
Margent
,
Gen.
7.11
.
it
is
rendred
,
Floodgates
;
which
in
signification
is
somewhat
nearer
to
,
Cataracts
Tho
that
,
I
say
,
would
have
been
the
properest
reddition
in
this
Text.
For
Cataracts
are
high
and
broken
places
,
from
whence
waters
do
impetuously
rush
down
.
And
therefore
thick
,
and
broken
Clouds
,
condensed
into
hardness
or
an
Icy
consistency
,
from
which
,
prodigious
waters
,
(
by
falls
from
one
concameration
of
them
to
another
)
came
tumbling
down
in
excessive
quantities
,
and
at
last
were
discharged
hideously
on
the
Earth
,
in
many
places
,
especially
about
the
lofty
Mountains
;
were
at
that
time
true
coelestial
Cataracts
,
which
by
ALMIGHTY
GOD
were
then
opened
even
in
a
literal
sense
.
And
therefore
these
Cataracts
(
or
Windows
of
Heaven
)
by
some
learned
Commentators
,
are
expounded
to
be
,
Nubes
densae
&
Copiosae
;
thick
and
huge
Clouds
.
But
now
in
the
inclos'd
Abyss
,
there
were
no
answerable
Fountains
broken
up
;
no
such
real
Fountains
,
as
these
were
real
Cataracts
of
Heaven
:
and
therefore
the
Answer
given
,
is
not
home
to
the
purpose
.
The
other
Objection
was
this
.
Whereas
it
is
said
,
the
Earth
broken
down
into
the
Abyss
was
never
made
up
again
.
He
answers
;
those
were
shut
up
;
that
is
,
ceas'd
to
act
,
and
were
put
into
a
condition
to
continue
the
Deluge
no
longer
.
But
then
if
the
Stoppage
of
these
Fountains
was
Figurative
,
the
Fountains
themselves
must
be
the
same
.
And
so
they
were
not
so
real
as
the
Cataracts
of
Heaven
were
.
Nor
could
they
be
stopped
so
properly
as
our
Caverns
might
be
:
the
thing
that
we
argued
for
,
and
the
drift
of
our
Objection
was
to
make
it
out
.
And
as
for
this
answer
,
it
rather
strengthens
the
Objection
,
than
takes
it
off
.
CHAP.
XVII
.
IN
justification
of
that
Positiveness
wherewith
he
was
charged
;
in
the
beginning
of
this
Chapter
,
he
makes
profession
of
his
belief
of
the
Theory
.
And
let
them
that
can
do
it
,
envy
him
the
satisfaction
and
benefit
of
it
.
But
if
he
has
no
better
proofs
of
its
certainty
,
than
what
he
has
produced
;
when
by
his
faith
he
apprehends
it
for
a
Reality
,
he
may
do
no
better
than
he
did
,
who
embrac'd
a
shadow
for
the
Goddess
.
There
are
many
thousands
and
they
not
unlearned
,
who
take
Legends
,
for
truths
;
and
equal
Tradition
to
the
written
Word
.
Who
put
Apocryphal
Books
into
the
holy
Canon
;
and
give
fullest
assent
to
that
pregnant
absurdity
,
the
Doctrine
of
Transubstantiation
.
But
this
is
so
far
from
changing
the
Nature
of
the
things
,
that
it
only
betrays
the
folly
of
the
Persons
.
For
it
evidently
shows
the
blindness
of
their
Minds
,
that
they
are
so
strangely
impos'd
on
;
and
the
weakness
of
their
Judgments
,
that
can
be
led
captive
into
such
gross
and
groundless
Errors
.
And
from
these
and
other
Instances
we
may
infer
;
that
a
strong
faith
and
confident
assurance
,
may
be
no
arguments
of
the
objects
truth
;
but
of
the
Believers
Credulity
.
It
is
a
notable
word
that
Demosthenes
spake
in
his
Third
Oration
to
the
Olynthians
.
Disc.
p.
358.
'T
is
easiest
of
all
to
deceive
ones
self
;
For
that
which
every
one
wills
,
he
phantsies
,
is
:
But
the
nature
of
things
is
often
otherwise
.
The
eloquent
Man
gave
this
hint
in
another
Case
:
but
it
is
not
inapplicable
to
that
in
hand
.
Our
Answerer
believes
his
Theory
to
be
true
.
But
may
he
not
here
practise
that
upon
himself
,
which
is
so
easie
to
be
done
?
The
Man
that
would
fain
have
a
thing
be
real
,
will
soon
believe
it
is
so
;
strong
inclination
being
equivalent
to
evidence
.
And
(
which
we
may
well
wonder
at
)
as
one
symptom
of
the
strong
faith
he
has
for
his
Hypothesis
;
he
declares
,
that
his
believing
his
Theory
to
be
no
more
than
a
Romance
or
phantastical
Idea
,
would
be
both
to
bely
his
own
Conscience
,
and
to
mock
the
World
.
Now
in
short
,
if
his
Theory
be
not
true
,
it
is
but
a
Romance
or
phantastic
Idea
.
And
if
it
be
true
,
I
speak
it
with
reverence
,
the
HOLY
GHOST
,
the
SPIRIT
of
truth
,
must
be
no
longer
so
;
and
GOD
did
most
certainly
mock
the
World
,
the
thing
which
our
Answerer
is
asham'd
to
do
.
For
He
granted
to
Adam
,
and
his
Off-spring
,
a
Dominion
over
the
Fish
of
the
Sea
,
as
well
as
over
the
Fowls
of
the
Air
,
and
the
Beasts
of
the
Earth
:
and
the
H.
GHOST
recorded
as
much
,
Gen.
1.28
.
But
when
GOD
passed
that
Grant
to
Adam
and
his
Posterity
;
if
there
was
no
Sea
nor
Fish
,
for
him
,
or
them
,
to
command
,
or
come
at
,
in
the
Primitive
Earth
;
must
not
this
be
down
right
Mocking
of
the
first
World
?
And
yet
if
he
did
not
pass
that
Grant
,
the
H.
GHOST
,
for
recording
it
done
,
must
be
as
was
said
,
and
what
I
love
not
to
repeat
.
Tho
at
last
this
Grant
could
never
pass
and
take
place
,
unless
the
Theory
be
a
Romance
and
phantastic
Idea
.
For
it
asserts
expresly
of
the
first
Earth
,
that
it
was
without
a
Sea
.
Yea
,
this
is
put
amongst
its
Vital
assertions
,
and
therefore
if
it
fails
,
the
Theory
dies
,
and
the
whole
Hypothesis
is
ruin'd
at
once
.
But
how
much
better
is
it
,
that
this
piece
of
Natural
History
(
as
true
,
and
great
,
and
remarkable
as
it
is
,
in
its
Authors
esteem
)
should
prove
a
Romance
;
than
that
any
piece
of
the
Divine
History
should
prove
an
untruth
;
and
the
H.
GHOST
,
and
the
HOLY
GOD
should
be
suppos'd
to
do
such
unworthy
things
,
as
would
mightily
disgrace
any
honest
man
.
The
next
Passage
that
presents
it self
to
notice
,
is
this
.
I
remember
I
have
heard
a
good
Author
once
wish
,
that
there
were
an
Act
of
Parliament
,
that
whoever
Printed
a
Book
,
should
,
when
he
took
a
License
,
swear
,
that
he
thought
the
Contents
of
his
Book
to
be
true
,
as
to
the
substance
.
And
I
think
such
a
method
would
keep
off
a
great
many
impertinencies
.
Had
our
Honourable
Senate
a
power
to
over-rule
the
minds
of
men
,
and
to
enact
that
none
should
think
things
true
,
which
in
themselves
are
false
;
I
doubt
not
but
they
would
soon
secure
us
by
Law
,
from
erroneous
impertinencies
:
But
so
long
as
Authors
can
believe
their
Writings
,
and
think
them
true
;
when
if
they
be
so
,
even
in
the
substance
of
them
,
the
Word
from
Heaven
must
be
false
:
There
is
little
hope
that
the
wished
Act
imposing
such
an
Oath
,
should
be
an
effectual
Expedient
.
However
it
might
keep
off
some
impertinent
errors
,
many
would
come
on
;
and
the
greatest
and
most
remarkable
Natural
History
,
would
have
been
a
proof
and
pregnant
exemplification
of
as
much
;
had
such
an
Act
been
passed
.
After
this
,
he
compares
his
own
Positiveness
,
with
my
Partiality
:
Wishing
the
Excepter
had
not
more
to
answer
for
,
as
to
that
;
than
the
Theorist
hath
for
the
other
.
Here
I
am
most
ready
to
join
Issue
with
him
,
and
to
go
to
Trial
immediately
at
any
Bar.
And
let
the
Judge
be
even
who
he
will
,
so
he
be
no
more
partial
,
than
the
Excepter
has
been
.
Then
I
shall
fear
neither
his
Examination
,
nor
yet
his
Sentence
:
let
the
one
be
as
strict
,
and
the
other
as
severe
,
as
Justice
can
make
them
.
Then
he
comes
upon
us
with
a
double
charge
,
defective
and
partial
Citations
;
and
our
not
taking
notice
of
the
last
Edition
of
the
Theory
:
to
which
we
have
sufficiently
answered
already
,
that
is
,
in
the
last
Paragraph
save
one
,
of
the
seventh
Chapter
of
this
Reply
.
But
his
pursuing
us
thus
with
this
clamour
,
of
our
not
taking
notice
of
his
last
Edition
;
minds
me
of
what
a
certain
Friend
did
once
suggest
.
Who
observing
how
many
particulars
were
left
out
of
that
Edition
,
which
were
censured
in
my
Exceptions
;
and
understanding
that
those
Exceptions
in
writing
,
were
about
the
Town
(
where
at
last
they
were
printed
)
for
above
a
year
and
half
together
at
one
time
,
long
before
his
Edition
came
forth
:
would
fain
perswade
me
,
that
during
that
time
,
my
Exceptions
straggled
into
the
Theorist's
hands
;
or
that
by
one
or
other
he
was
made
acquainted
with
them
;
and
so
shifted
as
many
of
his
Errors
as
he
conveniently
could
,
out
of
the
way
,
as
being
sensible
they
could
not
bear
that
blow
,
which
he
foresaw
was
coming
.
Our
want
of
Meekness
,
is
a
new
crimination
;
and
he
proves
it
by
this
fierce
Charge
,
as
he
calls
it
,
in
our
Preface
.
The
Theorist
hath
assaulted
Religion
,
and
that
in
the
very
foundation
of
it
.
If
any
thing
like
fierceness
can
be
found
here
;
it
must
be
forced
out
of
the
form
of
the
words
.
And
that
,
I
do
declare
,
is
not
owing
in
the
least
to
any
heat
of
Spirit
;
but
meerly
to
the
real
truth
of
the
Matter
,
which
in
other
terms
,
could
not
be
better
exprest
.
For
I
hope
it
will
be
granted
,
that
holy
Scripture
is
the
Foundation
of
our
Religion
.
And
then
,
of
necessity
,
Contradicting
Scripture
,
must
be
assaulting
that
Foundation
.
And
there
was
no
more
of
Fierceness
,
(
let
him
assure
himself
,
)
than
there
is
of
Falseness
,
in
our
Assertion
.
But
I
plainly
see
,
that
he
who
touches
a
Sore
,
tho
with
greatest
tenderness
,
and
with
no
other
intention
than
purely
to
heal
it
;
must
have
hard
words
,
as
well
as
heavy
complaints
,
from
the
Party
affected
.
But
this
charge
,
it
seems
,
ran
too
high
.
For
here
,
I
expected
to
have
found
two
or
three
Articles
of
the
Creed
assaulted
or
knockt
down
by
the
Theory
.
I
must
tell
him
freely
(
and
I
do
it
meekly
)
that
contradicting
Scripture
(
the
burthen
of
our
charge
)
is
the
readiest
way
not
only
to
knock
down
two
or
three
;
but
even
all
the
Articles
of
the
Creed
at
once
.
Undermining
the
Foundation
,
must
needs
sink
the
whole
Building
.
But
what
course
does
the
Doctor
take
,
to
free
himself
from
this
Charge
;
which
because
it
lies
justly
against
him
,
lies
heavy
upon
him
?
Why
,
he
makes
Two
faint
Offers
at
removing
it
.
Let
us
remember
,
that
this
contradicting
Scripture
,
here
pretended
,
is
only
in
natural
things
.
And
is
his
contradicting
Scripture
then
,
but
pretended
only
?
I
heartily
wish
,
for
his
sake
,
that
it
were
so
.
But
what
is
said
in
the
Eighth
Chapter
of
this
Reply
,
makes
it
too
real
and
apparent
.
To
extenuate
it
therefore
,
he
here
remembers
us
,
that
his
contradicting
Scripture
,
is
only
in
natural
things
.
And
now
I
must
confess
my self
to
be
at
a
stand
.
I
have
often
been
surpriz'd
at
occurrencies
in
his
Writings
;
but
now
I
am
almost
amaz'd
:
To
see
that
so
wild
a
word
as
this
,
should
come
from
the
Pen
of
a
Christian
Doctor
.
That
he
should
alledge
for
himself
,
as
a
kind
of
defence
,
that
he
contradicted
Scripture
only
in
natural
things
.
As
if
when
the
H.
SPIRIT
spake
of
such
things
,
he
did
not
mind
what
it
was
he
said
;
or
men
might
interpret
it
even
as
they
list
,
and
turn
it
to
a
contrary
meaning
if
they
please
,
without
offence
.
As
if
it
were
lawful
in
some
things
to
give
GOD
the
lie
,
so
we
but
allow
him
to
speak
truth
in
others
.
Believe
it
,
I
take
no
pleasure
at
all
in
these
expressions
;
but
yet
I
cannot
forbear
neither
,
to
think
the
Oracles
of
Heaven
should
be
thus
treated
.
I
formerly
minded
him
of
too
bold
an
affront
to
Scripture
,
and
how
he
might
approach
towards
another
enormity
:
and
,
GOD
knows
,
I
did
it
in
meekness
and
kindness
.
And
however
it
was
taken
,
't
is
now
plain
,
only
in
natural
things
.
As
he
bids
us
remember
this
,
so
I
hope
he
will
remember
it
seriously
.
Else
by
the
memento
he
here
puts
in
,
he
will
but
heat
a
Brand
as
it
were
,
to
mark
himself
for
extravagance
.
And
truly
admit
but
this
one
Extravagance
of
contradicting
Scripture
in
natural
things
:
and
it
will
draw
such
a
number
of
others
after
it
,
and
those
so
notorious
;
that
no
tongue
can
be
able
either
to
reckon
them
up
,
or
represent
them
.
It
would
even
match
the
Doctrine
of
Transubstantiation
;
that
Hydra
of
non-sensical
errors
,
and
monstrous
Jargon
of
absurdities
.
As
a
specimen
of
this
,
take
what
follows
.
From
the
very
beginning
,
as
Scripture
assures
us
,
the
Sun
shone
in
the
Heavens
;
the
Light
filled
the
Air
;
and
Day
and
Night
were
alternately
on
the
Earth
.
But
these
were
Natural
things
;
and
may
we
venture
therefore
to
contradict
Scripture
in
them
,
and
say
they
were
not
so
?
Then
how
could
the
World
possibly
subsist
?
As
Scripture
informs
us
,
the
Ground
yielded
trees
,
and
trees
brought
forth
fruits
,
and
of
one
sort
of
fruit
did
our
first
Parents
eat
(
tho
it
was
forbidden
them
.
)
But
these
were
Natural
things
;
and
may
we
therefore
presume
to
contradict
Scripture
,
and
deny
that
they
were
thus
?
Then
how
came
these
Products
into
being
,
which
gave
occasion
to
the
sin
and
fall
of
man
?
As
Scripture
instructs
us
,
Adam
begat
some
Children
,
and
they
begat
others
,
and
they
again
others
,
and
so
on
.
But
these
Generations
were
Natural
things
;
and
may
we
therefore
take
upon
us
to
contradict
Scripture
,
and
say
there
was
no
such
way
of
propagation
?
Then
how
could
Mankind
be
increas'd
and
multipli'd
?
As
Scripture
teaches
us
,
the
Body
of
our
LORD
was
flesh
and
blood
.
But
flesh
and
blood
are
Natural
things
;
and
may
we
therefore
be
so
bold
as
to
contradict
Scripture
,
and
say
that
his
body
was
not
carnal
?
Then
how
can
his
blood
cleanse
us
from
our
sins
?
or
how
shall
we
ever
be
saved
by
his
Cross
?
And
when
to
such
a
monstrous
and
mischievous
pitch
of
absurdity
,
contradicting
Scripture
in
Natural
things
,
would
rise
;
this
aloud
proclaims
it
to
be
an
evil
practice
,
and
a
method
too
licentious
,
to
be
allowable
.
And
farther
;
Natural
things
may
be
matter
of
divine
Declarations
and
Promises
in
Scripture
.
And
when
they
are
so
,
to
contradict
Scripture
,
by
saying
they
are
otherwise
than
that
declares
or
promises
they
should
be
;
must
be
indirect
impeachment
of
the
Truth
,
Fidelity
,
and
Righteousness
of
Heaven
.
Thus
,
for
example
,
it
was
of
old
declar'd
or
promis'd
to
Noah
,
that
while
the
Earth
continueth
,
seed-time
,
and
harvest
,
and
summer
,
and
winter
,
shall
not
cease
,
Gen.
8.22
.
But
therefore
should
we
say
that
these
various
Seasons
shall
not
be
constant
,
and
run
parallel
with
this
Earthly
Worlds
existence
;
but
shall
either
be
suspended
by
discontinuance
or
interruption
;
or
else
cease
by
praemature
abolition
or
expiration
:
by
contradicting
Scripture
in
these
tempestival
Natural
Vicissitudes
,
we
should
break
in
too
rudely
upon
GOD's
most
glorious
Attributes
aforesaid
.
We
may
very
easily
bring
this
home
,
to
the
Dominion
over
the
Fish
of
the
Sea
.
That
was
a
Priviledge
which
GOD
declared
or
promised
should
be
Adam's
.
He
therefore
that
denies
the
being
of
a
Sea
,
till
long
after
his
death
;
by
contradicting
Scripture
in
a
Natural
thing
,
must
reflect
dishonourably
upon
that
GOD
,
Who
keepeth
truth
for
ever
,
Psal.
146.6
.
In
spite
of
this
his
Character
(
which
I
would
not
should
fail
for
ten
thousand
Worlds
)
he
makes
him
at
once
to
be
false
to
his
Word
,
unfaithful
to
his
Promise
,
and
unjust
to
his
Creature
.
But
as
He
that
is
righteous
in
all
his
Ways
,
must
needs
abhor
to
be
thus
;
so
we
must
abhor
to
think
it
of
him
.
And
farther
yet
;
should
GOD
evidently
violate
,
but
one
express
Declaration
or
Promise
he
has
made
,
tho
in
Natural
things
;
what
a
Damp
would
it
cast
upon
mens
belief
of
him
in
Celestial
Concerns
?
What
a
jealousy
might
it
raise
,
and
what
a
vehement
suspicion
might
it
justly
create
in
them
,
as
to
all
his
highest
promissory
engagements
;
making
them
apt
to
question
whether
he
would
stand
to
any
,
if
not
ready
to
conclude
that
he
would
keep
none
.
And
thus
again
the
evil
,
of
contradicting
Scripture
,
in
Natural
things
,
will
discover
it self
.
He
was
pleas'd
to
signify
,
Gen.
3.15
.
that
the
seed
of
the
Woman
should
bruise
the
Serpents
head
.
Of
how
high
a
Nature
,
and
of
what
infinite
Consequence
,
was
this
most
gracious
Declaration
or
Promise
?
It
was
the
authentic
Patent
of
Heavens
renewed
kindness
to
Sinners
;
and
the
grand
Assurance
the
Praediluvians
had
,
of
its
Spiritual
and
Eternal
favours
.
But
if
Adam
and
his
Children
of
the
first
world
,
had
found
by
experience
,
that
the
GOD
who
made
it
,
could
break
faith
with
men
;
why
should
they
regard
it
?
And
what
convincing
experience
had
they
of
this
,
if
when
he
promis'd
the
Dominion
over
Sea-fish
to
them
,
he
did
so
grievously
tantalize
and
abuse
them
,
as
to
hide
both
the
Sea
,
and
all
its
Fish
from
them
,
to
the
end
of
that
World
?
Manifest
it
is
,
that
He
assur'd
the
Inhabitants
of
the
primitive
World
,
as
much
of
Dominion
over
the
Sea
;
as
he
did
of
the
benefit
of
an
incarnate
Saviour
:
but
then
if
he
cheated
them
so
egregiously
at
present
,
how
could
they
in
prudence
trust
him
for
the
future
;
and
take
his
word
to
be
what
the
Psalmist
styles
it
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
the
word
of
righteousness
,
Psal.
119.123
?
or
as
some
render
it
(
and
not
improperly
)
the
word
of
bounty
,
or
kindness
.
Fraudulent
dealing
makes
Confidence
shie
;
and
they
that
have
been
chous'd
,
will
be
cautelous
after
it
.
If
one
says
he
will
give
me
but
two
Guineas
,
and
basely
deceives
me
;
when
he
tells
me
he
designs
a
thousand
for
me
,
in
reason
I
must
think
he
puts
a
trick
upon
me
.
So
if
GOD
brake
promise
with
the
Antediluvians
,
in
a
lesser
matter
;
how
could
they
expect
he
should
perform
a
greater
?
His
unfair
disappointing
them
of
a
temporal
blessing
;
would
rather
have
flung
them
into
fatal
despair
of
his
everlasting
Mercy
.
His
imposing
on
them
so
openly
once
,
would
have
aw'd
their
faith
into
such
fear
and
diffidence
:
that
they
could
no
more
have
reli'd
upon
his
broken
fidelity
.
No
more
than
they
could
believe
,
that
he
made
Adam
and
them
,
to
be
Lords
of
the
Fish
,
and
Soveraigns
of
the
Sea
;
when
neither
he
nor
they
,
saw
one
or
the
other
,
to
their
dying
day
.
And
thus
for
the
Credit
of
contradicting
Scripture
in
Natural
things
,
we
see
what
the
tendency
of
it
is
,
and
how
excellent
the
products
of
it
will
be
.
It
turns
the
most
solemn
Grants
of
Heaven
,
into
shameful
Mockeries
;
and
besides
the
dishonour
it
brings
to
GOD
,
le
ts
in
fatal
despondency
upon
men
.
So
much
for
the
first
piece
of
his
apology
:
the
second
part
of
it
follows
.
And
here
in
way
of
farther
answer
to
the
Charge
of
contradicting
Scripture
;
observe
,
how
far
the
Excepter
himself
,
in
such
(
natural
)
things
,
hath
contradicted
Scripture
.
And
because
the
Excepter
us'd
dreadful
Sentences
towards
the
Theorist
,
he
goes
about
to
show
,
that
he
hath
made
himself
obnoxious
to
them
:
And
that
this
might
be
done
the
more
fairly
,
we
must
(
says
he
)
state
the
case
truly
.
And
he
does
it
thus
.
Whether
to
go
contrary
to
the
letter
of
Scripture
,
in
things
that
relate
to
the
Natural
World
,
be
destroying
the
Foundations
of
Religion
;
affronting
Scripture
;
and
blaspheming
the
H.
GHOST
.
Now
however
he
pretends
to
state
this
case
truly
;
it
is
evident
that
he
does
it
falsly
.
For
it
is
not
going
contrary
to
the
letter
of
Scripture
,
that
draws
such
evil
consequences
after
it
;
but
going
contrary
to
the
letter
of
Scripture
,
where
it
is
to
be
literally
understood
.
This
Circumstance
therefore
(
which
was
left
out
)
should
have
been
taken
into
the
Case
.
And
this
is
the
great
oversight
of
the
Theorist
;
going
contrary
to
Scripture
in
Natural
things
,
where
it
is
to
be
taken
in
a
literal
sense
.
By
this
means
he
exposeth
himself
.
But
the
Excepter
is
guilty
of
no
such
procedure
,
and
therefore
the
Scriptures
alledg'd
against
him
,
can
take
no
hold
of
him
.
In
demonstration
of
as
much
,
let
us
but
consider
the
first
of
them
,
that
he
cites
in
his
Answer
,
which
is
,
Psal.
19.5
.
Which
is
as
a
Bridegroom
coming
out
of
his
Chamber
,
and
rejoyceth
,
as
a
strong
man
,
to
run
a
race
.
So
that
according
to
the
letter
of
this
Text
,
the
Sun
moves
.
But
says
the
Answerer
,
the
Sun
stands
still
,
and
the
Earth
moves
,
according
to
the
Excepter's
Doctrine
.
Very
true
.
But
yet
that
Doctrine
is
not
contrary
to
this
Scripture
,
for
the
reason
just
now
suggested
;
even
because
its
meaning
is
not
literal
.
For
which
reason
also
the
alledging
it
is
improper
and
insignificant
.
And
that
its
meaning
cannot
be
literal
,
it
proves
irrafragably
for
its
self
.
For
take
it
in
that
sense
,
and
what
a
numerous
throng
of
ridiculous
Absurdities
,
will
issue
from
it
upon
the
acception
?
Then
the
Sun
must
be
a
man
,
and
must
be
upon
his
Marriage
,
and
must
be
drest
in
fine
clothes
,
as
a
Bridegroom
is
.
Then
he
must
come
out
of
a
Chamber
,
and
must
give
no
more
light
,
and
cast
no
more
heat
,
than
a
Bridegroom
does
.
Then
he
must
have
life
too
,
and
he
must
have
sense
;
he
must
have
passions
,
and
he
must
have
leggs
;
else
how
can
he
rejoyce
,
and
rejoice
,
as
a
strong
man
,
to
run
a
race
?
So
that
,
in
short
,
what
is
here
said
of
the
Sun's
motion
,
needs
not
be
literally
understood
.
It
may
be
spoken
only
quoad
apparentiam
vel
ad
captum
vulgi
:
according
to
appearance
,
or
common
apprehension
.
And
the
like
may
be
said
of
the
rest
of
those
Scriptures
,
which
the
Answer
quotes
to
the
same
purpose
,
either
in
the
Body
,
or
the
Margent
of
it
.
What
therefore
was
said
before
,
we
may
think
still
;
that
the
alledging
this
Text
was
improper
and
superfluous
.
And
the
Answerer
himself
confirms
this
thought
.
For
he
says
(
p.
85.
)
that
we
all
leave
the
literal
sense
in
certain
cases
,
and
therefore
that
alone
is
no
sufficient
charge
against
any
man
.
And
thus
he
is
so
kind
or
complaisant
,
as
to
censure
and
take
off
his
own
Objection
;
and
to
save
us
the
trouble
of
confuting
his
Argument
,
by
baffling
it
himself
.
And
which
is
kinder
yet
,
he
tells
us
(
p.
84.
)
the
truth
is
,
if
we
should
follow
the
Vulgar
style
,
and
literal
sense
of
Scripture
,
we
must
renounce
Philosophy
and
natural
Experience
.
And
so
by
a
pretty
and
unusual
sort
of
method
,
the
skain
which
he
ruffled
,
he
brings
to
rights
again
.
First
he
observ'd
that
we
contradicted
Scripture
.
Then
he
show'd
wherein
we
did
it
.
Then
he
charg'd
us
for
so
doing
.
Then
he
proclaim'd
his
Charge
insufficient
.
And
lastly
he
allows
the
very
thing
he
attaqu'd
.
For
he
makes
it
necessary
to
contradict
Scripture
in
some
Cases
,
and
not
to
follow
its
literal
sence
in
all
things
;
Unless
we
will
renounce
Philosophy
and
Experience
.
A
thing
which
the
Excepter
is
loth
to
do
.
As
to
the
Instances
he
brings
,
of
the
Sun
's
raising
Mountains
,
and
the
Moon
's
hindring
the
formation
of
the
Earth
:
they
are
so
far
from
being
Arguments
against
the
Excepter
,
that
they
are
but
meer
mistakes
of
his
own
,
as
we
have
here
shewed
.
But
another
Argument
he
has
found
out
(
tho
by
an
odd
way
of
invention
)
or
mustered
up
to
bring
up
the
Rear
,
This
,
I
think
,
is
truly
to
contradict
Scripture
.
Here
therefore
,
I
trow
,
he
goes
upon
good
grounds
and
treads
sure
.
For
should
his
heels
fly
up
,
as
they
have
frequently
done
,
his
fall
would
be
the
worse
,
for
running
so
high
against
his
adversary
;
as
he
calls
the
Excepter
,
in
the
foregoing
Paragraph
.
And
pray
,
what
is
this
last
Argument
?
Why
,
the
Excepter
,
in
his
new
Hypothesis
,
makes
the
Waters
of
the
Deluge
,
to
be
but
fifteen
Cubits
higher
than
the
Plain
or
common
surface
of
the
Earth
,
Which
Scripture
affirms
expressly
,
to
have
covered
the
tops
of
the
highest
hills
.
And
again
he
vouches
it
;
The
Scripture
says
,
they
covered
the
tops
of
the
highest
Mountains
.
But
this
the
Scripture
does
not
do
.
It
does
not
affirm
expressly
,
that
the
Waters
covered
the
Tops
of
the
highest
Hills
.
It
does
not
say
,
that
they
covered
the
tops
of
the
highest
Mountains
.
And
therefore
for
the
Answerer
to
say
,
it
did
affirm
and
say
so
expressly
;
This
,
I
think
,
is
truly
to
force
and
falsify
Scripture
.
And
thus
his
ill
fortune
haunts
him
still
;
and
where
he
thought
to
have
catcht
his
adversary
in
a
Net
?
he
only
hampers
and
intangles
himself
.
For
he
relapses
unhappily
,
into
his
old
infirmity
,
and
asserts
what
is
not
.
For
where
is
it
,
that
Scripture
says
,
that
the
waters
of
the
Flood
did
cover
the
tops
of
the
highest
Hills
?
Yet
he
twice
together
asserts
it
did
;
affirm
expressly
that
they
did
.
Yet
by
this
,
the
Gentleman
gives
us
to
understand
,
that
what
the
Scripture
says
,
and
expressly
affirms
;
is
to
be
believed
,
and
ought
to
be
received
.
And
then
why
is
the
being
of
a
Sea
,
before
the
Flood
rejected
,
and
Adam's
dominion
over
its
fish
denied
?
I
instance
often
in
that
Sea
;
because
I
find
it
is
of
the
Substance
of
the
Theory
,
and
a
piece
of
one
of
its
Vital
Assertions
;
that
the
primitive
Earth
was
without
a
Sea
.
These
Observations
,
says
the
Answerer
,
I
know
,
are
of
small
use
unless
perhaps
to
the
Excepter
himself
.
But
without
a
perhaps
,
the
Replicant
finds
they
are
of
no
use
at
all
,
unless
to
the
Observator
.
May
he
that
made
them
,
make
the
best
use
of
them
.
Here
he
takes
occasion
to
reflect
upon
the
Literal
Style
of
Scripture
.
And
the
last
Head
he
speaks
to
(
and
the
only
head
that
concerns
us
)
is
of
such
things
as
belong
to
the
Natural
World
.
And
to
this
,
he
says
,
may
be
reduc'd
innumerable
Instances
,
where
we
leave
the
literal
sence
,
if
inconsistent
with
Science
,
or
Experience
.
What
meant
he
then
,
to
charge
us
with
going
contrary
to
the
Letter
of
Scripture
,
for
supposing
the
fixedness
of
the
Sun
,
and
the
motion
of
the
Earth
?
by
his
own
confession
before
,
that
charge
was
incompetent
;
and
by
his
own
Rule
here
,
it
must
be
impertinent
.
By
and
by
he
has
this
Fling
,
but
I
know
not
at
whom
.
Some
men
,
out
of
love
to
their
own
ease
,
and
in
defence
of
their
ignorance
,
are
not
only
for
a
Scripture-Divinity
,
but
also
for
a
Scripture-Philosophy
.
For
my
own
part
,
as
I
hate
too
lazy
a
Philosophy
,
so
I
despise
too
busy
a
one
.
Sound
Philosophy
is
a
noble
thing
;
and
let
all
advance
in
it
as
far
as
they
can
:
the
more
expert
Philosophers
they
are
,
the
wiser
and
better
they
are
like
to
be
.
But
still
we
must
remember
,
that
true
Philosophy
being
bounded
by
the
Light
of
Nature
,
must
never
interfere
with
Revelation
.
As
on
the
one
side
,
it
should
not
be
slothful
?
so
on
the
other
side
,
it
must
not
be
pragmatical
.
Scripture
is
no
enemy
to
Philosophy
;
and
Philosophy
by
no
means
must
affront
Scripture
.
GOD
allows
men
the
freest
use
of
their
Reason
;
but
't
is
unreasonable
they
should
oppose
it
to
Inspiration
;
and
by
using
it
confront
his
authority
who
gave
them
it
.
So
concern'd
was
Plato
to
shun
all
such
indecency
;
that
being
(
in
his
Timaeus
)
to
debate
concerning
the
Universe
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
whether
it
were
made
,
or
not
made
;
he
thought
it
necessary
to
invoke
all
the
GODS
and
Goddesses
,
that
what
should
be
said
,
might
be
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
:
agreeable
to
them
,
and
spoken
consistently
.
Change
but
the
Object
of
the
petition
,
and
the
matter
of
it
will
be
fit
for
any
Philosophers
Litany
.
Direct
the
address
to
the
One
True
GOD
,
and
there
can
be
no
fault
in
its
application
.
And
let
Notions
be
squar'd
by
the
Rules
that
it
contains
,
and
then
Philosophy
may
take
its
liberty
.
Scripture
allows
it
sufficient
latitude
,
and
the
Christian
Church
will
do
no
less
.
So
I
am
sure
she
did
of
old
.
For
then
in
her
earlier
and
purer
times
,
she
was
so
far
from
discouraging
Philosophy
,
that
she
took
mens
passing
through
its
Schools
,
to
be
a
laudable
preparative
or
qualification
for
their
preferment
.
Witness
Origen
(
cont.
Cel.
l.
3.
)
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
&c.
We
will
not
turn
away
young
men
from
those
that
teach
Philosophy
;
but
where
they
have
been
exercis'd
,
and
have
gone
the
round
with
them
,
I
will
try
to
advance
them
higher
&c.
But
if
any
will
abuse
this
noble
liberty
,
they
must
answer
it
to
him
who
is
philosophorum
Deus
(
as
Tertullian
told
Marcion
)
the
GOD
of
Philosophers
.
And
if
we
would
not
aggravate
our
account
here
,
we
must
take
heed
of
one
thing
:
Of
entertaining
Philosophy
with
trifling
Notions
.
For
if
once
we
suffer
it
to
seed
upon
such
trash
,
we
may
expect
it
will
soon
get
a
surfeit
,
and
fall
sick
of
Phantsy
;
and
that
's
a
Disease
which
commonly
rises
up
into
paroxysms
of
extravagance
.
And
then
the
vital
heat
of
reason
,
as
I
may
call
it
,
turns
into
a
violent
and
raging
Fever
.
And
so
the
fire
that
should
be
kept
orderly
on
the
hearth
,
furiously
flies
up
to
the
house
top
.
And
the
flame
which
should
burn
only
upon
the
Altar
,
consumes
the
Temple
.
Then
he
Observers
;
Vpon
the
whole
,
you
see
,
it
is
no
fault
to
recede
from
the
literal
sence
of
Scripture
,
but
the
fault
is
when
we
leave
it
without
a
just
cause
.
As
it
is
no
fault
for
a
man
to
separate
from
a
Church
:
—
but
to
do
it
without
a
just
cause
,
is
a
real
fault
.
The
beginning
of
this
Observation
does
still
farther
justifie
us
,
against
his
late
insufficient
Charge
.
And
the
rest
of
it
gives
us
occasion
to
enquire
,
what
just
cause
he
had
to
recede
from
the
literal
sence
of
Scripture
,
as
in
too
many
instances
he
has
done
.
For
if
he
left
that
sence
without
just
:
cause
,
he
is
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
condemn'd
by
a
sentence
out
of
his
own
mouth
.
The
Letter
of
Scripture
plainly
says
,
that
GOD
made
two
great
Lights
:
that
He
gave
Adam
Dominion
over
the
Fish
of
the
Sea
:
that
Tubal
Cain
,
was
an
Instructer
of
every
Artificer
in
Brass
and
Iron
:
That
the
Fountains
of
the
Great
Deep
were
broken
up
,
and
the
Windows
of
Heaven
open'd
,
the
same
day
.
Now
,
pray
,
what
good
reason
,
or
what
just
cause
is
there
for
his
departing
from
the
Literal
sence
of
Scripture
in
these
things
?
For
to
recede
from
it
without
Cause
,
is
as
real
a
fault
,
by
his
own
confession
;
as
it
is
,
without
cause
to
separate
from
a
Church
.
And
therefore
as
causless
separation
from
a
Church
,
is
criminous
Schism
;
so
causeless
recession
from
that
sence
of
Scripture
,
must
be
culpable
desertion
.
And
so
if
any
Writer
knowingly
and
causelesly
deserts
the
literal
sence
of
Scripture
or
dissents
from
it
;
he
cannot
be
innocent
.
For
to
use
the
Answerers
own
words
,
we
all
leave
the
literal
sence
in
certain
cases
,
and
therefore
that
alone
is
no
sufficient
charge
against
any
man
:
Yet
he
that
makes
a
separation
,
if
I
may
so
call
it
,
without
good
reasons
,
he
is
truly
obnoxious
to
censure
.
And
so
,
in
short
,
he
becomes
his
own
Judge
,
and
pronounceth
a
most
just
sentence
on
himself
.
great
result
of
all
which
is
this
.
To
have
some
common
Rule
to
direct
us
,
when
every
one
ought
to
follow
,
and
when
to
leave
the
Literal
Sence
.
And
such
a
Rule
,
it
seems
,
is
not
wanting
.
For
as
he
tells
us
in
the
next
words
,
That
Rule
which
is
generally
agreed
upon
by
good
Interpreters
,
is
this
.
Not
to
leave
the
literal
sence
,
when
the
subject
matter
will
bear
it
,
without
absurdity
or
incongruity
.
But
must
not
the
knowledge
then
of
this
good
Rule
,
aggravate
the
breaking
it
?
Ignorance
,
which
sometimes
excuses
error
,
does
always
extenuate
it
.
But
if
with
open
eyes
we
go
against
the
light
,
and
swerve
from
the
Rule
we
see
standing
before
us
;
our
senses
take
from
us
all
plea
of
oversight
,
and
our
presumptuous
enormity
will
admit
of
little
or
no
apology
.
But
yet
the
Answerer
offers
somewhat
to
clear
him
in
this
matter
;
and
it
follows
immediately
in
the
next
words
.
This
Rule
I
have
always
proposed
to
my self
,
and
always
endeavoured
to
keep
close
to
it
.
May
his
next
proposal
then
,
and
endeavour
of
this
nature
,
be
more
fortunate
.
And
to
that
end
perhaps
it
may
be
proper
they
should
be
better
inforced
.
For
must
not
his
proposal
here
be
too
slight
,
and
must
not
his
endeavour
be
too
faint
,
when
both
of
them
proved
so
insuccessful
?
For
had
the
one
been
as
serious
,
and
the
other
as
vigorous
as
it
ought
;
what
could
have
defeated
him
,
in
so
just
an
Enterprise
,
or
diverted
him
from
it
?
For
example
;
had
he
really
proposed
,
and
heartily
endeavoured
to
keep
close
to
the
letter
,
where
Scripture
says
,
GOD
made
two
great
Lights
;
or
where
it
says
,
he
gave
Adam
Dominion
over
Sea-fish
;
or
the
like
;
what
could
have
hindred
him
,
or
beat
him
off
it
?
As
for
absurditys
or
incongruitys
in
the
subject
Matters
(
the
only
Bar
(
according
to
the
Rule
)
which
can
exclude
that
sence
)
nothing
can
be
more
vain
than
to
pretend
any
here
.
For
as
we
have
plainly
seen
,
the
readiest
way
to
open
a
wide
Door
,
and
let
them
in
,
is
to
receede
from
the
literal
sence
.
'T
is
confest
indeed
,
that
the
literal
sence
,
in
these
,
and
other
cases
,
would
have
brought
in
absurdities
and
inconveniencies
upon
the
Theory
,
in
good
plenty
.
But
then
this
is
so
far
from
being
any
reason
,
why
the
literal
sence
of
those
places
should
not
be
received
;
that
it
is
a
most
clear
and
convincing
Argument
,
that
that
Hypothesis
is
to
be
rejected
.
For
by
the
Rule
laid
down
,
I
say
,
where
no
kind
of
absurdities
or
incongruitys
do
accrue
to
any
Texts
,
from
the
literal
sence
;
there
it
must
be
kept
to
.
And
therefore
if
the
Theory
cannot
stand
,
and
maintain
it self
free
from
absurdities
and
incongruities
,
without
perverting
or
depraving
the
literal
sence
of
the
now
cited
Texts
,
or
any
other
;
and
without
causing
a
needless
departure
from
it
:
it
must
sink
and
fall
.
And
then
(
as
he
somewhere
interrogates
the
Excepter
)
why
does
he
trouble
himself
,
or
the
World
,
with
such
an
Hypothesis
?
meerly
out
of
an
itch
of
Scripturiency
,
as
he
speaks
;
methinks
he
might
have
laid
that
prurient
humour
,
by
scratching
himself
with
the
briars
of
a
more
innocent
Controversie
;
or
by
scrubbing
soundly
against
something
else
than
the
holy
Scripture
.
But
some
inconsiderate
minds
make
every
departure
from
the
letter
,
let
the
Matter
or
Cause
be
what
it
will
,
to
be
an
affront
to
Scripture
.
And
there
,
where
we
have
the
greatest
liberty
,
I
mean
in
things
that
relate
to
the
natural
World
,
they
have
no
more
indulgence
or
moderation
,
than
if
it
was
an
intrenchment
upon
the
Articles
of
Faith
.
Let
them
that
are
thus
inconsiderate
in
their
minds
,
and
immoderate
in
their
ways
;
answer
this
charge
.
Prove
the
Excepter
concern'd
,
and
besides
acknowledging
his
past
fault
,
he
'll
be
cautious
of
recommitting
it
for
the
future
.
But
yet
the
greatest
liberty
we
have
,
or
may
pretend
to
,
in
things
relating
to
the
natural
World
;
can
by
no
means
authorize
us
to
go
against
the
letter
of
Scripture
in
any
case
,
where
it
is
to
be
literally
taken
,
or
may
be
so
understood
without
absurdity
.
If
we
do
,
we
go
directly
against
the
Rule
of
faith
,
and
so
shall
soon
come
to
intrenchment
upon
its
Articles
.
He
concludes
thus
.
In
this
particular
I
cannot
excuse
the
present
Animadverter
;
yet
I
must
needs
say
,
he
is
a
very
Saint
in
comparison
of
another
Animadverter
,
who
hath
written
upon
the
same
subject
,
&c.
In
this
particular
,
as
the
Animadverter
needs
no
excuse
,
so
he
asks
none
.
Yet
if
he
used
the
Theorist
so
well
;
he
again
should
have
used
him
the
better
.
But
whoever
reads
over
the
present
Answer
,
will
easily
find
,
that
he
is
treated
rather
as
a
grievous
sinner
against
the
holy
Theory
;
than
as
a
Saint
Excepter
.
Who
that
Animadverter
is
,
of
whom
he
complains
,
I
know
not
.
I
have
seen
no
other
Writings
or
Animadversions
upon
the
Subject
he
speaks
of
,
but
the
Lord
Bishop
of
Hereford's
.
And
I
own
that
his
Lordships
publishing
his
Animadversions
,
was
good
encouragement
to
me
to
Print
my
Exceptions
at
first
,
and
to
Defend
them
now
.
To
see
that
therein
I
should
follow
the
great
Example
of
a
Reverend
Prelate
;
and
in
fighting
for
the
Truth
,
against
the
Theory
of
the
Earth
,
should
militate
under
the
Episcopal
Banner
.
I
was
now
thinking
that
I
had
done
,
and
just
about
to
lay
down
my
Pen.
But
then
calling
to
mind
that
the
Answerer
quoted
a
Review
of
the
Theory
against
us
,
as
to
some
Texts
of
Scripture
,
on
which
the
Theory
is
bottom'd
or
does
depend
:
I
held
my self
oblig'd
to
take
notice
of
this
Review
.
And
because
in
it
he
offers
to
justify
his
Exposition
,
which
he
formerly
made
of
S.
Peter's
words
,
and
we
endeavoured
to
confute
;
It
will
not
be
improper
briefly
to
except
against
what
is
there
said
to
that
purpose
.
And
tho
enough
has
been
alledg'd
against
the
Theory's
sense
of
those
words
already
;
yet
,
ex
abundanti
,
we
'll
here
cast
in
a
little
more
,
speaking
to
S.
Peter's
words
chiefly
,
tho
not
to
them
only
.
And
yet
we
shall
speak
only
to
Scriptures
,
because
in
reference
to
them
alone
,
was
this
Review
cited
against
us
.
Answ.
p.
21.
and
61.
Review
.
p.
8.
In
it
he
tells
us
,
that
the
sacred
Basis
upon
which
the
whole
Theory
stands
,
is
the
Doctrine
of
S.
Peter
,
deliver'd
in
his
second
Epistle
and
third
Chapter
,
concerning
the
Triple
Order
and
succession
of
the
heavens
and
earth
;
and
is
comprehended
in
seven
verses
of
that
Chapter
,
which
run
thus
,
in
the
Review
.
Ver.
3.
Knowing
this
first
,
that
there
shall
come
in
the
last
days
scoffers
,
walking
after
their
own
lusts
.
4.
And
saying
,
where
is
the
promise
of
his
coming
?
for
since
the
fathers
fell
asleep
,
all
things
continue
as
they
were
from
the
beginning
of
the
Creation
.
5.
For
this
they
are
willingly
ignorant
of
,
that
by
the
Word
of
GOD
,
the
heavens
were
of
old
,
and
the
earth
consisting
of
water
and
by
water
.
6.
Whereby
the
World
that
then
was
,
being
overflowed
with
water
perished
.
7.
But
the
heavens
and
the
earth
that
are
now
,
by
the
same
word
,
are
kept
in
store
,
reserved
unto
fire
against
the
day
of
Judgment
and
perdition
of
ungodly
men
.
—
10.
The
day
of
the
LORD
will
come
as
a
thief
in
the
night
,
in
the
which
the
heavens
shall
pass
away
with
a
great
noise
,
and
the
elements
shall
melt
with
fervent
heat
;
the
earth
also
and
the
works
that
are
therein
shall
be
burnt
up
.
13.
Nevertheless
we
according
to
his
promise
,
look
for
new
heavens
,
and
a
new
earth
,
wherein
dwelleth
righteousness
.
But
that
such
a
triplicity
of
heavens
and
earth
,
as
the
Review
contends
for
,
is
signifi'd
or
set
out
by
S.
Peter's
words
,
is
very
unlikely
;
and
the
following
Exceptions
lie
against
it
.
First
,
those
words
are
so
opposite
to
the
first
state
of
the
heavens
and
earth
,
that
they
cannot
admit
of
it
,
unless
one
passage
in
them
be
false
:
which
is
this
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
which
the
Review
renders
consisting
of
water
and
by
water
.
This
must
be
appli'd
both
to
the
Heavens
,
and
to
the
Earth
,
as
being
spoken
of
both
.
And
if
it
be
to
be
understood
,
not
of
the
Posture
of
them
(
according
to
our
Translation
)
but
as
the
Review
interprets
it
;
it
must
be
void
of
truth
.
For
first
,
apply
it
to
the
heavens
,
and
they
must
consist
by
water
as
well
as
of
water
;
that
is
,
by
the
help
of
water
,
tanquam
per
causam
sustmentem
,
as
by
a
sustaining
cause
,
says
the
Review
.
of
water
,
as
well
as
by
water
.
But
how
did
the
first
Earth
in
order
,
consist
of
water
more
than
the
second
?
Instead
of
that
,
this
second
Earth
is
of
a
far
more
watry
constitution
than
the
first
;
half
the
surface
of
the
present
Globe
being
nothing
but
Sea
.
And
if
it
be
urged
,
that
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
of
water
,
relates
to
the
Heavens
;
and
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
by
water
,
relates
to
the
Earth
:
the
very
form
of
the
words
will
not
allow
it
.
For
as
the
H.
GHOST
has
set
them
,
both
the
Expressions
relate
as
much
to
the
Heavens
,
as
they
do
to
the
Earth
;
and
as
much
to
the
Earth
,
as
they
do
to
the
Heavens
;
and
to
both
alike
.
And
the
Review
gives
us
leave
to
refer
both
to
both
,
because
it
will
make
no
great
difference
in
its
interpretation
.
p.
21.
Secondly
,
S.
Peter's
words
are
so
opposite
to
the
second
state
of
the
Heavens
and
Earth
;
that
they
cannot
admit
of
it
,
unless
one
Passage
in
them
be
inverted
.
For
the
SPIRIT
says
,
that
the
world
that
then
was
,
being
overflowed
with
water
perished
.
And
so
plainly
makes
the
watry
inundation
,
the
cause
of
the
Worlds
destruction
.
But
grant
there
were
Heavens
and
Earth
of
a
second
Order
according
to
the
Review
;
and
the
Earth's
Destruction
or
Dissolution
must
be
the
cause
of
that
inundation
.
And
is
it
likely
that
St.
Peter
would
so
teach
Philosophy
,
that
it
should
not
be
understood
without
transposing
the
terms
in
which
it
is
delivered
,
or
drawing
them
to
a
kind
of
contrary
sense
?
Who
can
believe
that
he
allowed
this
second
state
of
heavens
and
earth
,
much
less
asserted
it
in
disputing
with
Philosophers
;
when
if
he
did
so
,
in
his
expression
(
as
properly
and
most
naturally
taken
)
he
mistook
the
Cause
for
the
Effect
;
and
made
the
Earth
to
perish
by
its
being
drowned
,
when
indeed
it
was
drowned
by
its
perishing
,
or
being
dissolved
?
Thirdly
,
the
Apostle's
words
are
so
opposite
to
the
Third
state
of
Heavens
and
Earth
;
that
they
cannot
admit
of
it
,
unless
one
Passage
in
them
be
contradicted
.
For
this
Third
state
,
which
is
the
same
with
the
new
Heavens
,
and
new
Earth
,
is
by
the
Review
,
post-pon'd
to
the
Conflagration
.
For
it
tells
us
that
the
Earth
,
by
that
fire
,
being
reduc'd
to
a
second
Chaos
;
from
that
,
as
from
the
first
,
arises
a
new
Creation
,
or
new
Heavens
,
and
a
new
Earth
.
(
p.
6.
)
And
therefore
the
Theorist's
asserting
that
these
shall
rise
before
the
day
of
Judgment
;
must
needs
be
plain
Contradiction
to
what
the
Apostle
lays
down
in
the
7th
.
verse
.
For
there
he
says
,
that
the
Heavens
and
the
Earth
that
are
now
,
are
kept
in
store
,
reserved
unto
fire
,
against
the
day
of
Iudgment
,
and
perdition
of
ungodly
men
.
And
when
he
has
said
that
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
present
Heavens
and
the
Earth
,
shall
be
kept
and
reserved
till
the
day
of
Iudgment
;
the
Doctrine
of
New
Heavens
and
a
new
Earth
to
be
introduc'd
before
then
,
must
be
downright
Contradiction
to
this
.
And
truly
the
same
it
must
be
,
to
affirm
that
these
New
Heavens
and
Earth
,
shall
be
consequent
to
the
general
Conflagration
.
Nor
is
there
any
way
to
avoid
these
barefac'd
Contradictions
;
unless
in
complaisance
to
this
pretty
Hypothesis
,
there
must
be
two
Conflagrations
,
and
two
Days
of
Judgment
,
and
two
ends
of
the
World
;
which
is
one
of
each
sort
more
than
GOD
has
revealed
.
By
S.
Peter's
New
heavens
therefore
and
his
new
Earth
,
we
are
to
understand
a
new
and
excellent
state
of
things
,
upon
which
the
blessed
Saints
are
all
to
enter
,
at
the
consummation
of
this
present
World
.
And
as
to
what
the
Review
says
,
they
must
be
material
and
natural
,
in
the
same
sense
and
signification
with
the
former
Heavens
and
Earth
:
this
does
not
appear
from
the
Apostle's
words
.
The
other
sense
now
mention'd
,
may
rather
be
inferred
from
them
,
considering
the
way
or
usage
of
the
holy
Writers
.
For
with
them
it
is
common
,
in
passing
from
one
thing
to
another
,
to
carry
a
word
or
Notion
used
just
before
,
along
with
them
farther
;
or
to
rise
from
a
Literal
,
to
an
Allegorical
,
or
Anagogical
meaning
.
Such
Transitions
as
these
(
to
confine
our
Observation
to
one
sacred
Author
)
occur
very
frequently
in
the
Gospel
of
S.
John
.
Thus
(
in
the
4th
.
Chapter
)
our
SAVIOUR
discoursing
with
the
Samaritan
Woman
,
about
drawing
water
out
of
a
Deep
Well
;
carries
on
the
matter
to
Water
that
he
could
give
.
To
such
Water
as
he
that
drinketh
of
it
shall
never
thirst
;
but
it
shall
be
in
him
a
Well
springing
up
into
everlasting
life
.
But
tho
the
Well
and
the
Water
first
mention'd
were
Material
;
it
does
not
follow
from
thence
:
that
the
latter
were
the
same
,
or
that
they
could
be
such
.
So
(
Chap.
6.
)
from
speaking
of
Loaves
,
and
of
eating
bread
;
he
raises
his
Discourse
,
to
that
meat
which
endureth
unto
everlasting
life
.
But
yet
it
is
never
the
more
Material
food
;
because
the
first
spoken
of
,
was
of
that
nature
.
And
(
in
the
same
Chapter
)
the
Jews
telling
of
Manna
,
or
bread
from
Heaven
,
which
their
Fathers
eat
;
JESVS
said
unto
them
,
I
am
the
bread
of
life
,
he
that
cometh
unto
me
shall
never
hunger
.
But
this
does
not
make
our
SAVIOUR
,
real
Manna
,
nor
was
it
possible
he
should
be
Material
bread
.
Yea
,
being
but
in
the
Jewish
Temple
,
he
took
occasion
from
thence
,
to
call
his
body
by
that
name
(
Chap.
2.
)
Destroy
this
Temple
,
and
I
will
build
it
again
in
three
days
.
But
was
his
sacred
Body
ever
the
more
a
stony
building
?
And
when
this
was
the
way
of
our
Great
REDEEMER
,
what
wonder
that
his
chief
Apostle
should
imitate
him
?
And
that
speaking
of
the
old
Heavens
and
Earth
kept
in
store
,
and
reserved
unto
fire
:
should
,
in
raising
his
Discourse
to
a
future
,
spiritual
,
blessed
state
;
speak
of
it
in
the
terms
,
and
under
the
notions
,
of
new
Heavens
,
and
a
new
Earth
.
But
fourthly
,
that
the
Apostles
words
should
point
at
a
triform
state
of
Heavens
and
Earth
;
is
very
improbable
from
that
change
which
he
makes
in
the
Terms
that
he
uses
.
For
in
the
5th
verse
he
uses
the
words
Heavens
and
Earth
:
and
in
the
7th
.
verse
again
,
Heavens
and
Earth
:
but
in
the
verse
betwixt
both
,
he
says
,
the
World
that
then
was
.
Now
if
he
meant
the
same
thing
in
all
three
verses
,
why
did
he
not
use
the
same
Words
?
and
say
,
the
Heavens
and
the
Earth
that
were
then
.
This
fairly
intimates
,
that
he
intended
not
the
natural
,
but
animate
World
;
and
principally
Mankind
,
whom
he
called
,
the
old
World
,
in
this
Chapter
;
and
in
the
preceding
Chapter
,
the
world
of
the
ungodly
.
Fifthly
,
that
this
threefold
state
of
Heavens
and
Earth
,
should
be
denoted
in
these
words
,
is
not
to
be
thought
;
because
they
certify
us
,
that
the
World
that
then
was
perished
.
Now
could
that
be
true
of
the
natural
World
?
Yet
it
must
be
true
of
some
World
because
GOD
says
it
:
and
therefore
it
must
relate
to
a
World
which
could
,
and
did
actually
perish
;
which
must
be
the
Animal
World
.
Indeed
by
this
Perishing
,
the
Review
understands
a
change
only
in
the
constitution
and
form
of
the
Heavens
and
Earth
.
But
is
,
or
can
that
be
a
perishing
?
Suppose
ones
temper
or
constitution
be
changed
from
Phlegmatic
to
Choleric
;
is
the
man
therefore
perished
?
Or
suppose
the
Shell
of
an
Egg
should
crack
and
sink
inward
a
little
;
is
the
Egg
therefore
perished
?
No
more
could
the
Material
Heavens
and
Earth
perish
,
by
a
meer
change
of
their
Constitution
and
form
:
And
had
but
such
a
change
as
that
befallen
them
;
the
Apostle
would
certainly
have
express'd
it
accordingly
,
and
not
have
said
,
the
World
that
then
was
perished
.
But
since
he
has
thus
express'd
it
,
the
animate
World
must
be
here
understood
,
that
so
the
Word
spoken
may
come
up
to
the
thing
,
and
express
it
in
a
just
and
true
sense
.
But
because
he
says
,
that
the
Apostle
speaks
here
of
the
Natural
World
,
particularly
in
the
6th
verse
:
and
offers
Reasons
to
prove
that
it
perished
(
Review
.
p.
14.
)
We
shall
lay
down
the
Substance
of
these
Reasons
,
and
briefly
answer
them
.
First
,
the
ground
these
Scoffers
went
upon
,
was
taken
from
the
permanency
of
the
natural
World
in
the
same
state
from
the
beginning
.
And
therefore
if
the
Apostle
would
take
away
their
Argument
,
he
must
show
that
the
natural
World
hath
been
changed
,
or
hath
perished
.
Answ.
And
does
he
not
show
them
a
sufficient
change
in
nature
at
the
Deluge
;
when
(
as
he
minds
them
)
the
Earth
stood
so
deep
,
and
the
Heavens
so
high
in
Water
,
that
thereby
the
animate
world
perished
?
Only
this
change
was
a
change
in
the
condition
,
not
of
the
Constitution
of
the
natural
World
.
Secondly
,
these
Scoffers
could
not
be
ignorant
that
there
was
a
Deluge
,
which
destroyed
Mankind
;
and
therefore
it
was
the
Constitution
of
those
old
Heavens
and
Earth
and
the
change
and
destruction
of
them
at
the
Deluge
,
that
they
were
ignorant
of
.
Answ.
If
they
were
not
ignorant
of
the
destructive
Deluge
,
they
might
have
forgotten
it
,
Disc.
p.
137.
and
therefore
the
Apostle
minds
them
of
it
.
Or
else
they
were
ignorant
or
forgetful
of
the
divine
Cause
of
the
Flood
;
Ib.
p.
134
,
&c
:
which
he
therefore
expressly
tells
them
was
the
Word
of
GOD.
But
as
to
the
pretended
change
or
destruction
of
the
Heavens
and
Earth
,
I
doubt
not
but
S.
Peter
was
as
ignorant
of
them
,
as
any
of
the
Persons
he
reprehends
.
Thirdly
,
the
Apostle's
design
is
to
prove
the
Conflagration
,
which
will
be
a
destruction
of
the
natural
World
:
and
therefore
he
must
use
an
Argument
taken
from
a
precedent
destruction
of
that
World
.
Answ.
The
Design
of
the
Apostle
is
not
to
oppose
reason
to
reason
strictly
,
in
a
just
parity
of
Instances
;
but
fairly
to
infer
one
judicial
and
calamitous
Providence
or
Dispensation
from
another
.
And
GOD
having
drowned
the
old
Heavens
,
in
some
measure
,
as
well
as
the
Earth
;
by
the
word
of
his
power
bringing
in
the
flood
upon
the
ungodly
:
he
would
from
hence
convince
them
,
that
by
the
same
word
,
the
present
Heavens
and
Earth
are
reserved
unto
fire
;
which
shall
then
be
the
instrument
of
perdition
to
the
impious
,
and
the
whole
living
World
;
as
water
was
before
.
And
so
from
one
general
destruction
past
,
he
strenuously
argues
the
certain
futurity
of
another
to
come
.
Fourthly
,
unless
we
understand
here
the
natural
World
,
we
make
the
Apostle
both
redundant
in
his
Discourse
,
and
also
very
obscure
in
an
easy
Argument
.
Answ.
His
Discourse
,
for
this
,
will
not
be
redundant
,
but
very
close
to
his
purpose
.
For
that
is
not
only
to
mind
these
Scoffers
,
that
men
and
other
Animals
were
destroyed
in
a
Deluge
caused
by
GOD's
Power
;
but
to
represent
the
greatness
of
that
Deluge
,
which
swell'd
so
mightily
upon
the
Earth
,
that
in
some
measure
it
invaded
the
Heavens
.
And
therefore
to
what
he
said
of
the
flood
's
destroying
Mankind
,
in
the
foregoing
Chapter
,
v.
5th
;
he
adding
here
a
description
of
the
vastness
of
that
Flood
,
in
the
drowned
posture
which
the
Heavens
and
Earth
then
stood
in
;
what
he
says
,
is
far
from
being
superfluous
or
redundant
.
Nor
is
his
Argument
thus
made
obscure
.
On
the
contrary
rather
it
receives
light
from
hence
.
For
he
here
bringing
in
the
Heavens
and
Earth
into
his
account
of
the
Deluge
;
does
thereby
make
the
Greatness
,
of
it
,
he
was
representing
the
more
conspicuous
.
Fifthly
,
the
opposition
carries
it
upon
the
Natural
World
.
Answ.
The
Heavens
and
Earth
that
were
of
old
,
and
the
Heavens
and
Earth
that
are
now
,
we
grant
are
opposed
.
But
then
't
is
as
to
their
Fate
,
not
in
their
Natures
.
And
tho
the
Heavens
and
Earth
that
are
now
,
shall
perish
more
throughly
than
they
did
of
old
;
Fire
being
more
consuming
than
Water
:
yet
then
for
a
time
they
perished
too
.
That
is
,
in
S.
Austin's
sense
;
with
whose
Authority
the
Review
makes
so
loud
a
noise
to
little
purpose
.
For
so
far
as
I
can
find
,
neither
he
,
nor
any
of
the
Fathers
,
who
affirm
the
Aereal
Heavens
perisht
;
do
think
that
they
perisht
any
otherwise
,
than
by
the
Water
's
rising
up
into
the
lowest
Regions
of
the
Air.
And
that
place
of
Bede
which
the
Review
cites
,
seems
to
speak
the
common
sense
,
as
well
as
his
own
:
which
gives
us
to
understand
that
the
Heavens
perished
,
cunctis
aeris
hujus
turbulenti
spatiis
,
aquarum
accrescentium
altitudine
consumptis
:
All
the
spaces
of
this
turbulent
Air
,
being
taken
up
by
the
heighth
of
the
swelling
waters
.
According
to
which
,
the
Heavens
perished
,
just
as
the
Air
does
in
a
Vessel
,
when
it
fills
with
Water
.
But
let
out
the
Water
,
and
the
Air
immediately
returns
into
it
.
So
the
lowest
Heavens
that
perished
at
the
Flood
,
by
standing
in
the
Water
;
when
that
was
dried
up
,
presently
recovered
their
first
Aereal
Constitution
again
.
The
Last
reason
is
answered
in
the
4th
of
the
foregoing
Exceptions
.
And
from
what
has
been
here
said
,
Answers
may
with
ease
be
made
,
to
those
Considerations
which
the
Review
alledges
,
in
proof
of
a
Diversity
or
Opposition
made
by
S.
Peter
,
betwixt
the
Ancient
Heavens
and
Earth
,
and
the
Present
.
But
farther
yet
;
the
Review
observes
,
that
S.
Paul
also
implys
that
triple
Creation
which
S.
Peter
expresses
.
he
tells
us
of
a
Creation
that
will
be
redeemed
from
vanity
:
which
are
the
new
Heavens
and
new
Earth
to
come
.
A
Creation
in
subjection
to
vanity
:
which
is
the
present
State
of
uhe
World
.
And
a
Creation
that
was
subjected
to
vanity
;
in
hopes
of
being
restored
;
which
was
the
first
Paradisiacal
Creation
.
;
But
by
Creation
or
Creature
here
,
to
understand
the
Heavens
and
Earth
;
must
be
improper
.
For
first
,
it
is
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
the
whole
Creation
,
or
every
Creature
,
that
is
here
spoken
of
,
v.
22d
.
And
where
does
that
signify
the
material
Heavens
and
Earth
,
in
Scripture
?
Secondly
,
the
Creature
mention'd
,
is
capable
of
waiting
,
and
of
earnest
expectation
,
and
of
hope
,
and
of
pain
,
and
of
groaning
;
as
the
verse
cited
,
and
the
context
,
show
.
Yea
,
it
seems
to
be
capable
of
groaning
as
we
our selves
do
,
v.
23.
Which
is
above
the
power
of
Matter
,
tho
never
so
subtil
or
celestial
.
Thirdly
,
the
Creature
here
,
is
to
be
delivered
from
bondage
into
glorious
liberty
,
v.
21.
And
this
again
is
a
Character
which
falls
not
in
with
the
Heavens
and
Earth
.
He
says
indeed
that
the
Creature
that
will
be
Redeemed
from
Vanity
,
is
the
new
Heavens
and
new
Earth
to
come
.
But
how
will
they
,
(
supposing
them
come
into
the
Paradisiacal
State
)
be
delivered
from
vanity
?
For
even
then
they
can
be
in
no
better
condition
,
than
the
first
Paradisiacal
Heavens
and
Earth
were
,
(
as
coming
but
into
a
state
of
Renovation
or
Restitution
.
)
And
they
were
so
far
from
being
freed
from
Vanity
,
that
they
were
subject
to
corruption
,
and
perished
at
the
Deluge
,
as
the
Theorist
holds
.
And
truly
so
must
the
last
Paradisiacal
ones
too
,
unless
it
be
prevented
.
The
new
Earth
,
if
it
stands
long
enough
,
must
be
dissolved
and
lose
its
Form
:
and
the
new
Heavens
must
be
changed
,
at
another
Deluge
,
and
lose
their
Constitution
.
Or
if
the
day
of
Judgment
should
happen
first
,
and
hinder
this
;
yet
where
would
be
their
Redemption
or
Deliverance
here
phantsied
?
For
still
they
would
be
vain
and
corruptible
in
their
Nature
;
as
Enoch
and
Elias
were
both
Mortal
,
tho
neither
died
.
To
which
add
,
that
the
Theory
(
l.
4.
p.
219
,
220.
)
plants
Gog
,
and
Magog
in
the
New
Earth
,
and
allows
them
to
grow
numerous
there
,
as
the
sand
by
the
Sea
.
And
so
it
can
no
more
be
redeem'd
or
deliver'd
from
Moral
Vanity
and
Corruption
upon
it
;
than
from
Natural
Vanity
and
Corruptibility
in
it
.
Lastly
,
This
Creature
of
the
Apostles
is
to
be
delivered
into
the
glorious
liberty
of
the
Children
of
God
,
Thus
we
see
that
the
Theorists
Interpretation
of
this
Place
of
Scripture
,
is
not
right
:
and
therefore
of
necessity
we
must
look
out
for
some
other
Creature
,
as
here
intended
.
Nor
need
we
search
much
to
find
one
.
Preach
the
Gospel
to
every
Creature
,
said
the
H.
JESUS
to
his
Apostles
,
S.
Mar.
16.15
.
Here
the
word
is
the
same
with
S.
Paul's
to
the
Romans
.
But
Heavens
and
Earth
cannot
possibly
be
meant
by
it
,
because
to
them
there
must
be
no
Preaching
.
But
by
every
Creature
,
the
Heathen
World
may
fitly
be
understood
.
And
so
this
Precept
or
Commission
given
to
the
Apostles
,
is
parallel
to
that
in
the
last
chapter
of
S.
Matthew
;
go
,
and
teach
all
Nations
.
And
then
by
the
Vanity
to
which
the
Creature
was
Subject
,
and
the
Bondage
of
Corruption
from
which
they
were
to
be
delivered
;
we
must
understand
,
triple
State
of
Heavens
and
Earth
.
For
he
speaks
of
the
new
Heavens
and
new
Earth
.
with
that
distinguishing
Character
,
that
the
Earth
was
without
a
Sea
.
And
as
this
distinguisheth
it
from
the
present
Earth
,
so
,
being
a
Restitution
or
Restauration
,
it
must
be
the
same
with
some
former
Earth
,
&c.
To
this
we
Answer
.
The
one
and
twentieth
Chapter
of
the
Apocalyps
,
where
we
meet
with
S.
Johns
new
Heavens
and
Earth
;
consists
of
two
very
glorious
Scenes
.
The
New
Heavens
and
Earth
,
make
the
first
;
and
the
holy
City
,
or
the
New
Jerusalem
,
the
latter
.
But
this
City
being
Allegorical
;
we
have
no
reason
to
think
,
that
the
new
Heavens
,
down
from
which
;
and
the
new
Earth
,
down
to
which
it
came
,
should
be
otherwise
.
Also
this
Allegation
does
no
more
prove
The
Triple
State
of
Heavens
and
Earth
;
or
that
the
primitive
Earth
was
without
a
Sea
:
than
it
proves
there
shall
be
a
City
built
of
pure
Gold
,
whose
twelve
Gates
shall
be
twelve
Pearls
,
(
in
a
Literal
sense
)
according
to
the
tenour
of
that
chapter
.
And
now
let
us
offer
but
Two
short
Exceptions
,
which
will
not
fail
to
subvert
the
chief
Scripture-basis
of
the
whole
Theory
of
the
Earth
,
as
the
Review
calls
it
,
(
p.
13th
;
)
by
showing
that
S.
Peter's
words
,
as
well
as
S.
Paul's
,
and
S.
John's
,
are
misinterpreted
and
mis-apply'd
.
The
first
is
this
.
In
case
this
Triple
state
,
or
successive
Order
of
Heavens
and
Earth
,
be
rightly
grounded
upon
the
aforesaid
Apostles
words
;
then
those
three
most
eminent
Evangelical
Writers
,
must
implicitly
contradict
the
Doctrine
of
Moses
.
And
so
either
what
he
,
or
what
they
have
delivered
in
some
points
,
must
be
false
;
and
all
of
them
being
inspir'd
from
above
,
the
H.
GHOST
must
contradict
Himself
.
By
Moses's
Doctrine
't
is
very
plain
,
that
the
first
Earth
had
an
open
Sea
.
For
GOD
,
he
says
,
gave
man
Dominion
over
the
Fish
of
the
Sea
;
and
his
Dominion
over
the
Fish
,
appears
to
be
as
full
,
and
withal
as
soon
conferr'd
upon
him
,
as
that
he
had
over
the
Beasts
or
Fowls
.
And
therefore
if
these
Apostles
,
warrant
this
threefold
State
of
Heavens
and
Earth
,
in
the
first
of
which
there
could
be
no
open
Sea
;
their
Doctrine
must
necessarily
clash
with
Moses's
,
and
implicitly
contradict
it
.
So
again
,
by
Moses's
Doctrine
,
't
is
undeniably
plain
,
that
there
was
Brass
and
Iron
in
the
Praediluvian
Earth
.
For
,
as
he
teaches
,
Tubal-Cain
,
was
an
Instructer
of
every
Artificer
in
those
Metals
.
And
therefore
if
these
three
famous
Apostles
maintain
this
triple
State
of
Heavens
and
Earth
;
they
must
implicitly
interfere
with
Moses
again
:
because
the
first
of
these
states
could
not
possibly
produce
either
of
those
Metals
;
both
which
,
according
to
Moses
,
were
extant
in
it
.
The
second
Exception
is
this
.
In
case
such
a
Triple
state
as
this
be
truly
founded
upon
the
Writings
of
these
three
famous
men
;
then
as
all
of
them
must
contradict
Moses
implicitly
,
so
one
of
them
must
contradict
himself
expresly
.
I
mean
S.
John
.
For
speaking
of
the
state
of
the
new
Heavens
and
Earth
,
he
says
,
there
was
no
more
Sea
,
Apoc.
21.1
.
Yet
describing
the
final
Judgment
,
which
is
to
be
at
the
end
of
the
same
state
;
he
says
,
the
Sea
gave
up
the
dead
which
were
in
it
,
Apoc.
20.13
.
And
so
in
short
,
there
is
no
more
probability
,
that
there
should
be
such
a
tripple
state
as
the
Theory
has
invented
,
built
upon
these
Foundations
of
the
Apostles
laying
:
than
there
is
possibility
that
inspired
Writers
should
contradict
themselves
,
or
one
another
.
And
therefore
if
what
our
Author
says
be
true
;
that
the
principal
parts
of
this
Theory
,
are
such
things
as
are
recorded
in
Scripture
;
and
so
must
be
taken
for
granted
,
in
one
sense
or
other
(
Review
p.
1
:
)
yet
it
is
so
far
evident
,
that
he
has
not
hit
upon
the
Right
sense
of
them
,
as
it
is
evident
the
sense
that
he
puts
upon
them
,
is
not
consonant
to
Scripture
.
And
that
is
so
evident
,
that
in
his
interpreting
Scriptures
,
and
applying
several
of
them
to
his
notions
;
't
is
a
kind
of
fatality
upon
us
to
be
deceived
.
These
three
places
I
alledge
,
as
comprehending
and
confirming
the
Theory
in
its
full
extent
.
And
that
he
speeds
no
better
in
dealing
with
Prophane
Writers
about
this
Matter
;
than
he
did
in
tampering
with
Divine
ones
:
one
Instance
will
evince
,
which
we
meet
with
in
his
Review
(
p.
20.
)
where
to
show
the
true
importance
of
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
vel
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
and
how
ill
it
is
rendred
in
the
English
,
standing
out
of
the
water
,
2
S.
Pet.
3.5
:
he
says
,
that
he
that
should
translate
Plato
's
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
the
World
stands
out
of
fire
;
would
be
thought
no
Graecian
.
And
adds
,
that
Thales's
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
Cicero
renders
,
ex
aqua
constare
omnia
.
But
this
we
except
against
as
nothing
to
the
purpose
.
For
the
Authors
named
,
by
their
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
meant
that
the
World
was
made
out
of
a
thing
as
out
of
its
principle
.
But
did
the
Theorist's
first
Heavens
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
in
that
sense
?
was
water
the
Principle
out
of
which
they
were
made
?
So
far
from
that
,
that
they
were
compleatly
made
,
and
the
Earth
too
,
without
any
water
in
their
Composition
.
Yea
,
the
Sun
was
fain
to
dart
his
fiery
Beams
through
the
Earth
,
to
rarify
the
water
in
the
Abyss
below
,
and
from
thence
to
fetch
it
up
by
exhalation
;
before
so
much
as
Vapour
could
spread
through
those
Heavens
.
So
that
they
were
no
more
made
out
of
water
,
than
the
Air
is
made
out
of
Clouds
,
because
they
fly
in
it
;
or
than
a
County
is
made
out
of
a
River
,
because
it
runs
through
it
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
in
Plato's
or
in
Thales's
sense
,
has
nothing
to
do
here
.
For
besides
that
in
the
primitive
Heavens
,
there
was
no
formal
or
specific
Water
,
save
only
about
the
Poles
of
the
Earth
where
it
fell
;
but
only
Vapour
:
even
that
Vapour
was
but
passant
through
those
Heavens
,
no
Ingredient
of
them
;
no
Principle
of
their
Being
,
or
Part
of
their
Essence
.
But
this
was
that
which
,
the
Philosopher
meant
,
by
his
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
:
and
the
Orator
confirms
it
by
his
reddition
of
the
Words
.
We
cannot
conclude
,
without
making
this
plain
,
but
true
Observation
.
That
the
Theory
of
the
Earth
is
a
very
vain
and
false
Hypothesis
.
The
Vanity
of
it
is
notorious
.
For
notwithstanding
that
it
pretends
to
be
chiefly
Philosophical
;
yet
all
its
Primary
Phaenomenaes
that
we
have
considered
;
and
which
make
up
the
biggest
and
most
Philosophical
part
of
it
;
are
fain
to
call
in
the
help
of
Miracle
to
support
them
.
the
Original
of
the
Earth
from
a
Chaos
.
But
that
the
Formation
of
this
Earth
might
in
due
time
be
effected
,
it
is
supposed
to
be
done
by
the
hand
of
Extraordinary
or
miraculous
Providence
.
The
second
,
is
the
state
of
Paradise
,
and
the
Antediluvian
World
.
And
here
Miracle
must
come
in
again
:
for
that
World
could
never
have
been
peopled
,
had
not
Angels
carry'd
Mankind
over
the
Torrid
Zone
.
The
Third
,
is
the
Vniversal
Deluge
.
But
without
Miracle
,
no
Rains
could
have
been
before
the
fountains
of
the
great
Deep
were
broken
up
;
nor
could
the
falling
Ark
have
been
preserved
after
it
.
Nor
is
the
Falseness
of
the
Hypothesis
,
inferiour
to
its
Vanity
.
For
there
is
never
a
one
of
the
Phaenomenaes
aforesaid
,
but
includes
too
manifest
Contradiction
in
it
,
to
the
sacred
Oracles
,
or
else
to
it self
.
First
,
the
Formation
of
the
Earth
out
of
the
Theory's
Chaos
,
contradicts
Scripture
.
For
that
tells
us
the
Earth
was
made
the
Third
day
;
but
the
Theory
says
it
was
increased
daily
.
And
if
to
take
off
this
Contradiction
to
Scripture
,
it
be
alledged
that
the
Answerer
allows
it
might
be
made
in
six
minutes
;
this
throws
the
Contradiction
upon
the
Theory
.
For
how
could
the
Earth
be
made
in
six
minutes
,
that
was
daily
increased
?
Secondly
,
the
Paradisiacal
state
,
and
the
Antediluvian
World
Contradict
Scripture
.
For
the
one
gives
Paradise
a
Situation
Contrary
to
what
Moses
assigns
it
;
and
the
other
,
against
his
most
plain
Assertions
,
excludes
both
Metals
,
and
an
open
Sea
,
with
Adam's
Dominion
over
its
Fish
.
Thirdly
,
the
Vniversal
Deluge
contradicts
Scripture
.
For
according
to
the
Theorist
,
Disc.
c.
8.
§.
5.
Answ.
p.
31.
Reply
.
p.
67.
there
were
fourscore
days
Rain
towards
making
the
Flood
;
but
the
H.
GHOST
mentions
and
allows
but
forty
.
This
is
no
more
than
a
Recapitulation
,
or
short
Rehearsal
of
some
former
Remarks
.
Yet
they
fully
exhibit
the
nature
of
the
Theory
.
And
when
its
Primary
and
Essential
Phaenomenaes
are
such
;
what
must
its
Secondarys
and
Collaterals
be
?
If
the
Constituent
and
substantial
parts
of
an
Hypothesis
,
be
so
very
faulty
;
impossible
it
is
that
the
Coincidents
or
Appendants
of
it
should
be
justifiable
.
Yet
thus
our
Author
vouches
this
Hypothesis
,
in
his
Review
(
p.
12.
)
It
is
not
only
more
agreeable
to
Reason
and
Philosophy
,
than
any
other
yet
propos'd
to
the
World
;
but
it
is
also
more
agreeable
to
Scripture
.
Having
found
out
words
in
Scripture
,
that
is
,
somewhat
like
to
his
own
;
he
runs
directly
away
with
them
,
and
right
or
wrong
applys
them
to
his
purpose
.
Just
as
some
persons
who
listning
unto
Bells
,
think
that
they
ring
what
runs
in
their
minds
;
so
if
Scripture
phrases
do
but
chime
as
it
were
,
or
sound
to
his
sense
,
our
Author
concludes
that
they
favour
his
Notions
,
tho
all
be
but
Phantsy
.
But
let
him
make
good
that
fair
Character
,
and
I
am
ready
to
retract
what
I
have
said
against
him
,
and
to
turn
my
Exceptions
into
applause
.
In
the
mean
time
,
I
have
pursued
the
Theory
as
far
as
I
need
.
For
as
for
going
through
the
two
last
Books
,
which
he
says
will
not
be
unacceptable
to
the
Theorist
,
(
Answ.
p.
66.
)
I
deem
it
wholly
superfluous
.
Where
the
Foundations
of
an
house
are
taken
away
,
the
Superstructures
can
never
stand
.
The
upper
Stories
must
needs
follow
the
fate
of
the
lower
ones
;
and
both
will
certainly
fall
together
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
FINIS
.