cient to render one opinion very credible, and the other altogether incredible. Thefe two things, therefore, I fhall endeavour to make good in the matter that is now under our confideration. 1. That there are fair proofs on our fide, and as convincing as the nature of the thing is capable of; but that there is no pretence of proof on the other. And, 2. That the fide on which there is no proof is incumbered with the greatest difficulties. ift, That there are fair proofs on our fide, and as convincing as the nature of the thing is capable of; but that there is no pretence of proof on the other. This question, Whether the world was created, and had a beginning, or not? is a question concerning an ancient matter of fact, which can only be decided these two ways; by teftimony, and by probabilities of reafon. Testimony is the principal argument in a matter of this nature; and if fair probabilities of reason concur with it, this argument hath all the strength it can have. Now, both thefe are clearly on the affirmative fide of the question, viz. That the world was created, and had a beginning. ft, Teftimony; of which there be two kinds, divine and human. Divine teftimony, as fuch, is not proper to be used in this caufe, confidering the occafion of the prefent debate for that would be to beg the first and main question now in controverfy; which is, Whether there be a God or not? which a teftimony from God does fuppofe, and therefore ought not to be brought for the proof of it. It is true indeed, that thofe effects of divine power, I mean miracles, which will prove a divine testimony to an infidel, will as well prove the being of a God to an Atheist. But when we difpute against those who deny a God, no teftimony ought to be prefumed to be from God, but must be proved to be fo. And whatever argument proves that, will also prove that there is a God. Human teftimonies are of two forts; univerfal tradition, and written hiftory. Both thefe are plainly and beyond difpute on our fide. 1. There is an universal tradition concerning the be ginning of the world, and that is was made by God. VOL. I. B And And for the evidence of this we have the concurring tradition of the most ancient nations, the Egyptians and Phenicians; and of the most barbarous, the Indians, who, as Strabo, Geogr. 1. 15. tell us, "did in many things agree with the Grecians, particularly in this, that the world did begin, and fhould have an end; and that God, the maker and governor of it, is prefent in all parts of it." And Acofta tells us, that, at the first discovery of America, the inhabitants of Peru did worship one chief God, under the name or title of The maker of the univerfe. And yet these people had not had any commerce with the other known parts of the world, for God knows how many ages. To which may be added, that the most ancient of the philofophers, and thofe that were the heads of the chief fects of philofophy, as Thales, Anaxagoras, and Pythagoras, did likewife confent to this tradition. Particularly, concerning Thales, Tully, De nat. Deorum, 4. 1. tells us, that he was the first of all the philofo"phers that inquired into these things; and he said, that water was the beginning of all things, and that "God was that mind (or intelligent principle) which * fashioned all things out of water." So likewife Strabo, Geogr. 1. 15. informs us, that the Brachmans, the chief fect of philofophers among the Indians, agreed with the. Grecians in this, "That the world was made "of water." Which agrees exactly with Mofes's account of the creation, viz. That the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters : which St Peter expreffes thus, That by the word of God the beavens and the earth (for fo the Hebrews call the world) were of oldidates cusca, conftituted or made of water, 2 Pet. iii. 5. not ftanding out of the water, as our tranflation renders it. Nay, Aristotle himself, Metaph. l. 1. c. 3. who was the great afferter of the eternity of the world, gives this account why the gods were anciently reprefented by the Heathens as fwearing by the lake Styx, because water was fupposed to be the principle of all things. And this, he tells us, was the most ancient opinion concerning the original of the world; and that the very oldeft writers of theology, and thofe who lived at the greatest distance * Vide Grot. De verit. Chrift, relig. 1. x. distance from his time, were of this mind. And in the book De mundo, c. 6. it is freely acknowledged to have been an ancient faying, and a general tradition among all men, That all things are of God, and were made by him. I will conclude this with that full teftimony of Maximus Tyrius, to this purpose: "However (fays he, differtat. 1.) men may differ in many things, yet they " all agree in this law or principle, That there is one "God, King and Father of all things, &c. This the "Greeks fay, this the Barbarians; this thofe that live upon the continent, and those that dwell by the fea; "the wife and the unwife." 2. We have likewife a moft ancient and credible hiftory of the beginning of the world, I mean the hillory of Mofes; with which no book in the world, in point: of antiquity, can contend. I frill not now go about to ftrengthen my argument, by pleading the divine autho rity of this book, for which yet I could offer good evidence, if that were proper to the matter in hand. It is fufficient to my prefent purpose, that Mofes have the ordinary credit of an hiftorian given him; which none in reafon can deny him, he being cited by the most ancient of the Heathen historians, and the antiquity of his writings never queftioned by any of them, as Jofephus, 1. 1. cont. Appion. affures us. Now, this hiftory of Mofes gives us a particular account of the beginning of the world, and of the creation of it by God. Which affertion of his is agreeable: to the most ancient writers among the Heathen, whether poets or hiftorians. And feveral of the main parts of Mofes's hiftory, as concerning the flood, and the first fathers of the feveral nations of the world, (of which he gives a particular account Gen. x.), do very well accord with the most ancient accounts of profane hiftory. And I do not know, whether any thing ought more to recommend the writings of Mofes to a human belief, than the eafy and credible account which he gives of the original of the world, and of the first peopling of it. As to the account of ancient times, both the Egyp tian and Chaldean accounts, which are pretended by fome to be fo vaftly different from that of the fcriptures,, may for all that be, near the matter, eafily re B 2 conciled conciled with it *; if we do but admit what Diodorus Siculus and Plutarch, very credible perfons, and dili gent fearchers into ancient books, do most expressly af fure us, viz. that both those nations did anciently reckon months for years. And the account of the Chinese is not hard to be reconciled with that of the Septuagint. Now, in fo nice and obfcure a matter as the account of ancient times is, it ought to fatisfy any fair and reafonable inquirer, if they can be brought any whit near one another. So that univerfal tradition, and the most ancient history in the world, are clearly on our fide. And if they be, one can hardly with a more convincing argu ment. For, if the world, and confequently mankind, had a beginning, there is all the reason in the world to expect these two things. 1. That there fhould be an univerfal tradition concerning this matter; because it was the most memorable thing that could be transmitted to pofterity: and this was easy to be done, if mankind sprang from one common root and original, from whence this tradition would naturally be univerfally diffufed. 2. It may with the fame reafon be expected, that fo remarkable a thing fhould be recorded in the moft ancient hiftory. Now, both these have accordingly happened. But then, on the other hand, if the world was eternal, and had no beginning, there could be no real ground for fuch a tradition or hiftory. And if fuch a tradition were at any time endeavoured to be set on foot, it is not eafy to imagine how it fhould at first gain entertainment; but much more difficult to conceive, how ever it fhould come to be univerfally propagated. For, upon the fuppofition of those who hold the eternity of the world, the world was always peopled; and if fo, there could be no common head or fpring from whence fuch a tradition would naturally derive itfelf in.. to all parts of the world. So that, unless all the world was fometime of one language, and under one government, (which it never was that we know of fince it was peopled), no endeavour and industry could make fuch a tradition common. If it be faid, That this tradition began after fome univerfal deluge, out of which poffibly but one family Vide Dr Stillingfleet's Orig. fact, where this is fully made out. might escape, and that poffibly too of barbarous peo-ple; from whom any fond and groundless conceit might fpring, and afterwards fpread itself as mankind increa fed. This I fhall have occafion to confider in a more: proper place. In the mean time. I have fhewn, even from the acknowledgement of Ariftotle himself, that there was anciently fuch a tradition concerning the be ginning of the world. Nay, if we may believe him, he himfelf was the very firft afferter of the eternity of the world: for he fays exprefsly," That all the philofophers that were before him did hold, that the world! was made," De cœlo, I 1. c. 10. Thus much for the first kind of proof this matter is capable of, namely,, teflimony 2dly, The probabilities of reafon do all likewife fas vour the beginning of the world : As, 1. The want of any history or tradition ancienter than what is confiftent with the received opinion of the time of the world's beginning; nay, the most ancient histories were written long after that time. This Lucretius,, the famous Epicurean, urgeth as a strong prefumption that the world had a beginning; i. e. Si nulla fuit genitalis origo Terrarum et cæli, femperque aterna fuere ; : "If the world had no beginning, how is it thatt "the Greek poets (the most ancient of their writers) "mention nothing higher than the Theban war, and! ** the destruction of Troy ? Were there from all eternity no memorable actions done till about that: time? or had mankind no way till of late to recordi them, and propagate the memory of them to pofterity? * It is much, if men were from eternity; that they should not find out the way of writing in all that long dura-tion which had paffed before that time. Sure he was a fortunate man indeed, who, after men had been eternally fo dull as not to find it out, had the luck at last to hit upon it.. But it may be, the famous actions of former times. were always recorded, but that the memorials of them have been feveral times loft by univerfal deluges, which B 3 haves |