II. C. 10. II. esteem in the world; which may be reduced to these CHAP. four: 1. Such as suppose the world to have existed as it is from all eternity. 2. Such as attribute the formation of the world as it is to God; but withal assert the preexistence and eternity of matter. 3. Such as deny any eternity to the world, but assert the origin of it to have been by a casual concourse of atoms. 4. Such as endeavour to explain the origin of the universe, and all appearances of nature, merely by the mechanical laws of the motion of matter. I begin with those who assert the eternity of the world as it is, among whom Aristotle hath borne the greatest name, who seems to have arrogated this opinion to himself; for when he enquires into the judgment of the philosophers who had wrote before him, he says of them, γενόμενον μὲν οὖν ἅπαντες εἶναί φασιν, all the philosophers as Aristot. de serted that the world was made, though some one way, Cœlo, l. i. some another. And were this true which Aristotle saith, it Ed. Par. would be the strongest prejudice against his opinion; for if the world had been eternal, how should it come to pass that the oldest philosophers should so readily and unanimously embrace that opinion which asserted the production of the world? Was it not a strong presumption of the novity of the universe, that all nations to whom the philosophers resorted had memorials left among them of the first origin of things? And from hence it is observable, that, when the humour of philosophizing began to take the Greeks, (about the 40th Olympiad, when we may suppose Thales to flourish,) the beginning of the world was no matter of dispute; but, taking that for granted, the enquiry was, out of what material principle the universe was formed. Of which Thales thus delivers his opinion in Tully; Aquam dixit esse initium rerum, Cicero de Deum autem eam mentem, quæ ex aqua cuncta fingeret; Nat. Deor. wherein he plainly distinguisheth the efficient from the material cause of the world. The prime efficient was God; the material principle, water. It is a matter of some enquiry, whether the first principles of philosophy among the Greeks were not rather some traditional things conveyed to them from others, than any certain theories which they had formed from their own experiments and observations. The former is to me far the more probable on many accounts, but chiefly on this; that the first principles of the two founders of the chief sects of philosophers, viz. the Ionic and Italic, (for all the other were but the various issues of these two,) did come so near to that which we have the greatest reason to believe to have 1. i. c. 25. BOOK been the most certain account of the origin of the world. III. For this opinion of Thales seems to have been part of that universal tradition which was continued in the world concerning the first principles of things; for I do not see any reason to aver, with so much confidence as some do, that those philosophers who spake any thing consonantly to Moses, must presently converse with the Jews, transcribe their opinions out of the Scriptures, or have them conveyed to them in some secret cabala of the creation, as it is affirmed of Pythagoras and Plato, and may with no less reason of Thales. But this I suppose may be made evident to any considerative person, that those philosophers of Greece, who conversed most abroad in the world, did speak far more agreeably to the true account of things, than such who only endeavoured by their own wits to improve or correct those principles which were delivered by the other philosophers; which I impute not so much to their converse with the Mosaic writings, as to that universal tradition of the first ages of the world, which was preserved far better among the Phoenicians, Egyptians, Chaldeans, and others, than among the Greeks. For which we have this evident reason, that Greece was far more barbarous and rude in its elder times, than those other nations were, which had means of preserving some monuments and general reports of the first ages of the world, when the Grecians wanted them: and therefore we find that Greece, from its beginning, shined with a borrowed light; and saw not by an extramission of rays of knowledge from itself, but by an intromission of those representations of things which were received from other nations. Those who formed Greece first into civil societies, and licked it into the shape of well ordered commonwealths, were such who had been traders for know. ledge into foreign parts. To which purpose Diodorus Diodorus, Siculus informs us, that Lycurgus and Solon, as well as 1.i. c.96. the poets Orpheus, Musaeus, Melampus, and Homer, and the philosophers, afterwards Pythagoras, Plato, and others, had gained most of their knowledge and wisdom out of Egypt; nay, he saith in general, oro Tv wap' "Eaano. δεδοξασμένων ἐπὶ συνέσει καὶ παιδείᾳ, παρέβαλον εἰς Αἴγυπτον ἐν τοῖς ἀρχαίοις χρόνοις, ἵνα τῶν ἐνταῦθα νομίμων καὶ παιδείας μετ τάσχωσιν. Táoxwow. All those who were renowned among the Greeks for wisdom and learning, did in ancient time resort to Egypt, to be acquainted with their laws and knowledge. On this account, therefore, we are not to seek for the ancient and genuine tradition of the world from the native Ed. Wes seling. V. Euseb. Præp. Evangel. 1. x. II. and homebred Greeks, such as Aristotle and Epicurus, CHAP. but from those who took the pains themselves to search into those records which were preserved among the elder and more knowing nations: and although the nations they resorted to sought to advance their own reputation in the histories of their ancient times, of which we have already given a large account, yet they were more faithful in the account they gave of the origin of the whole universe. For it appears from Diogenes Laertius, that the Egyptians did constantly believe that the world had a Diog. Labeginning, and was corruptible; that it was spherical, and ert. Procem. the stars were of the nature of fire; that the soul was of P- 7· an immortal nature, and did pass up and down the world; which Laertius cites from Hecatæus and Aristagoras. So that we need not make Pythagoras acquainted with such a cabala of the creation, which in all probability neither the Jews nor he ever dreamt of: we find a fair account may be given of most of the opinions of Pythagoras, and whence he derived them, without forcing the words of Moses into such a sense, which the plainness and perspicuity of the writings of Moses argue them not capable to admit of. But I will not deny, from those concurrent testimonies of Hermippus and Aristobulus, besides Ori- V. Selden. gen, Porphyry, Clemens Alexandrinus, and others, that deJure Nat, Pythagoras might have had an opportunity of conversing apud Ebræ with the Jews, (which it is most probable was in Chal- os, 1. i. c. r. dæa, after the captivity, at which time Pythagoras was there among them;) but that Pythagoras should converse with the successors of Elisha on Mount Carmel, as Vos- Voss. de sius thinks; or that Moschus, the Sidonian philosopher, ?losoph. c.6. in Iamblichus, should be Moses, as others fancy; or that sect. 5. preexistence of souls should be part of the Mosaic cabala; or that the Pythagoric numbers, as they are explained by Nicomachus Gerasenus in Photius, should be adequate to the days of the creation, cabalistically understood, are fancies too extravagant and Pythagorean to be easily embraced. If Pythagoras was circumcised, it was more for love of the Egyptians than the Jews, among whom he spent twenty-two years; if preexistence of souls be a rational hypothesis, we may thank the Egyptians for it, and not Moses; if numbers be so expressive of the work of creation, we are beholden to the arithmetical hieroglyphics of Egypt for them. But although Pytha- V.Mathem. goras might not be acquainted with such a philosophic Hierogl. cabala of the creation, which none of the Jews, as far as Kircheri, we can find, understood, till one more versed in Plato and Oedip. B 3 et Gen. Sectis Phi tom. iii. Egypt. III. BOOK been the most certain account of the origin of the world. For this opinion of Thales seems to have been part of that universal tradition which was continued in the world concerning the first principles of things; for I do not see any reason to aver, with so much confidence as some do, that those philosophers who spake any thing consonantly to Moses, must presently converse with the Jews, transcribe their opinions out of the Scriptures, or have them conveyed to them in some secret cabala of the creation, as it is affirmed of Pythagoras and Plato, and may with no less reason of Thales. But this I suppose may be made evident to any considerative person, that those philosophers of Greece, who conversed most abroad in the world, did speak far more agreeably to the true account of things, than such who only endeavoured by their own wits to improve or correct those principles which were delivered by the other philosophers; which I impute not so much to their converse with the Mosaic writings, as to that universal tradition of the first ages of the world, which was preserved far better among the Phoenicians, Egyptians, Chaldeans, and others, than among the Greeks. For which we have this evident reason, that Greece was far more barbarous and rude in its elder times, than those other nations were, which had means of preserving some monuments and general reports of the first ages of the world, when the Grecians wanted them: and therefore we find that Greece, from its beginning, shined with a borrowed light; and saw not by an extramission of rays of knowledge from itself, but by an intromission of those representations of things which were received from other nations. Those who formed Greece first into civil societies, and licked it into the shape of well ordered commonwealths, were such who had been traders for knowledge into foreign parts. To which purpose Diodorus Diodorus, Siculus informs us, that Lycurgus and Solon, as well as 1.i. c.96. the poets Orpheus, Musaus, Melampus, and Homer, and the philosophers, afterwards Pythagoras, Plato, and others, had gained most of their knowledge and wisdom out of Egypt; nay, he saith in general, oro Tv wap "Erano δεδοξασμένων ἐπὶ συνέσει καὶ παιδείᾳ, παρέβαλον εἰς Αἴγυπτον ἐν τοῖς ἀρχαίοις χρόνοις, ἵνα τῶν ἐνταῦθα νομίμων καὶ παιδείας μετ Tάoxwow. All those who were renowned among the Greeks for wisdom and learning, did in ancient time resort to Egypt, to be acquainted with their laws and knowledge. On this account, therefore, we are not to seek for the ancient and genuine tradition of the world from the native Ed. Wesseling. V. Euseb. Præp. Evangel. 1. x. II. and homebred Greeks, such as Aristotle and Epicurus, CHAP. but from those who took the pains themselves to search into those records which were preserved among the elder and more knowing nations: and although the nations they resorted to sought to advance their own reputation in the histories of their ancient times, of which we have already given a large account, yet they were more faithful in the account they gave of the origin of the whole universe. For it appears from Diogenes Laertius, that the Egyptians did constantly believe that the world had a Diog. Labeginning, and was corruptible; that it was spherical, and ert. Procem. the stars were of the nature of fire; that the soul was of P. 7. an immortal nature, and did pass up and down the world; which Laertius cites from Hecatæus and Aristagoras. So that we need not make Pythagoras acquainted with such a cabala of the creation, which in all probability neither the Jews nor he ever dreamt of: we find a fair account may be given of most of the opinions of Pythagoras, and whence he derived them, without forcing the words of Moses into such a sense, which the plainness and perspicuity of the writings of Moses argue them not capable to admit of. But I will not deny, from those concurrent testimonies of Hermippus and Aristobulus, besides Ori- V. Selden. gen, Porphyry, Clemens Alexandrinus, and others, that deJure Nat, Pythagoras might have had an opportunity of conversing apud Ebræ with the Jews, (which it is most probable was in Chal-os, l. i. c. 3. dæa, after the captivity, at which time Pythagoras was there among them;) but that Pythagoras should converse with the successors of Elisha on Mount Carmel, as Vos- Voss. de sius thinks; or that Moschus, the Sidonian philosopher, ph. c.6. in Iamblichus, should be Moses, as others fancy; or that sect. 5. preexistence of souls should be part of the Mosaic cabala; or that the Pythagoric numbers, as they are explained by Nicomachus Gerasenus in Photius, should be adequate to the days of the creation, cabalistically understood, are fancies too extravagant and Pythagorean to be easily embraced. If Pythagoras was circumcised, it was more for love of the Egyptians than the Jews, among whom he spent twenty-two years; if preexistence of souls be a rational hypothesis, we may thank the Egyptians for it, and not Moses; if numbers be so expressive of the work of creation, we are beholden to the arithmetical hieroglyphics of Egypt for them. But although Pytha- V.Mathem. goras might not be acquainted with such a philosophic Hierogl. cabala of the creation, which none of the Jews, as far as tom. iii. we can find, understood, till one more versed in Plato and Oedip. B 3 et Gen. Sectis Phi Kircheri, Egypt. |