Atheomastix clearing foure truthes, against atheists and infidels: 1. That, there is a God. 2. That, there is but one God. 3. That, Iehouah, our God, is that one God. 4. That, the Holy Scripture is the Word of that God. All of them proued, by naturall reasons, and secular authorities; for the reducing of infidels: and, by Scriptures, and Fathers, for the confirming of Christians. By the R. Reuerend Father in God, Martin Fotherby, late Bishop of Salisbury. The contents followes, next after the preface.

The Prologue to the worke. (Book 1)

CHAP. I.

1. To beleeue there is a God, is the ground of all Religion. 2. The end and purpose of this Booke, is to proue that Position. 3. This cannot be beleeued, but by the helpe of Prayer. 4. It cannot be proued, a Priorj. 5. Yet may it be shewed, a Posteriori.

THe very first foundation of all pietie and Religion,* 1.1 is To beleeue there is a God: as it is generally beleeued, and confessed by all men, both by Christians, Iewes, and Heathen, if they hold any religion. The Apostle in the Epistle to the Hebrewes,* 1.2 layeth this, as the first ground of all religion and Godlines, to beleeue, That God is. For, as Lactantius very truly noteth,* 1.3 Caput est primum Diuinae Legis, ipsum Deum nosse: It is the very first head of the law of God, to know and beleeue, that there is a God. And againe, a little after. Hic est Sapientiae primus gradus, vt sciamus, quis sit nobis verus Pater: This is the prime degree of wisedome,* 1.4 to know who is our true God and Father. Yea and Palingenius, vnto the same purpose.

—Prima est virtus, prim•• est sapientia, Regem Coelicolûm Patrem{que} hominum cognoscere— It's Mans prime vertue, Wisdom's chiefest thing, To know his Father to be Heauen's high King.

Nay,* 1.5 Pietas in Deum est super omnia, quasi culmen & corona virtutum; saith Theophilus Alexandrinus: Nay,* 1.6 Virtutum omnium principium, saith Philo Iu∣daeus. True pietie towards God,* 1.7 is not onely the highest, but also the first of all other vertues. Neither doe Christians onely reckon this,* 1.8 for the first stone in the building of Religion:* 1.9 but the Iewes doe also confirme the very same.* 1.10 Aben Ezra,* 1.11 in his Exposition of the ten Commandements, saith of the first of them, that, Hoc primum dictum, est fundamentum omnium nouem ver∣borum, quae sequuntur post ipsum. The first of the Commandements, (which prescribeth vnto vs the hauing of a God) is the very true foundation of all the other nine. Yea and the same is also confessed euen by the very Heathen.

Seneca affirmeth (and that very truly) that it is primus Deorum cultus,* 1.12 Deos credere. It is the first branch of the worship of God, to beleeue There is a God. Yea and it is primus cultus too, not onely Ordine, but also Honore: It is the first in Honour, as well as in Order. For, Maiorem virtutem religione, pietate{que} in Deum (saith Plato) nullam in humano genere inveniri, quisquam sibi per suadeat. Let no man be perswaded, that there is any greater good in the Societie of men,* 1.13 then is true pietie, and religion towards God. And therefore, it was Chrysippus his opinion that, Cognitio de Deo, principium est cognitionis & bonoru•• & malorum.* 1.14 The knowledge of this one thing,* 1.15 that there is a God, is the beginning of all other knowledges, both of good and euill things. Whence both Phocylides and Pythagoras beginne their Poems, with, Primùm, cole Deum—Remember first, Feare God thou must. So that, by the confession of all sorts of men, this is the very ground of all Religion, To beleeue there is a God.

And there can be no Religion,* 1.16 where this is not beleeued. For how can there be any godlines, where there is no God? If there be no beliefe, no opinion of God, there cannot be possibly any affection of godlinesse: no nor any effect of goodnes neither. For as cōcerning godlines, it is the obseruation of Plutarch, that the ignorance of God,* 1.17 is the root of all vngodlines. Deorū ignoratio in du∣ris ingenijs impietatem ingenerat. And as concerning goodnes; it is the obser∣uation of Silius Italicus, that the ignorance of God is the root of all wickednes.

Heu primae sc••lerum causae mortal••bus aegris Naturam nescire Deûm— Alas, the cause of sinne, is onely this, That Sinners know not, what Gods Nature is.* 1.18

Which Abraham also, in a manner, confessed, when he thought thus in him∣selfe;* 1.19 Surely the feare of God is not in this place, and therefore will they kill me for my wife.* 1.20 For where the feare of God is not, there euen, Homo, sacrares, eti∣am per ludum & iocum occiditur. There euen the killing of a man, is but a sport vnto them. So that where there groweth not true religion and godlines, there must grow of necessitie all kind of sinne and wickednesse.

2. And therefore the maine scope and purpose of this worke,* 1.21 is, to proue There is a God: and so to lay in mens hearts a foundation of Religion. Which being once well and substantially done, all the other three positions will follow in their order, euery one with great ease in the necke of another. For as Socrates collecteth in morall Philosophy, that,* 1.22 Quibus id semel persua∣sum est, nihil vt se malint, quam viros bonos esse, ijs reliquam facilem esse doctri∣nam; That he that once hath entertayned but this one resolution, that (come of it what will) he will be a good man, the learning of all other things will be very easie vnto him: so is it true likewise, in the doctrine of Diuinity; that he who once hath entertained but the first of these positiōs, in faithfully beleeuing that there is a God; vnto him all the rest will be easie to be proued. For, if he once admit, that There is a God, he must admit him to be God vnder those di∣uine properties, which are naturall, & essentiall vnto God: that is, he must yeeld him to be, both Optimus,* 1.23 and Maximus: which, by the common notion, are his proper attributes. From whence it follows, That there can be but one God: which is our second position: because Superlatiues are Singulars; & by their singulari∣tie, not communicable vnto many. Now, this being admitted, that There is but

one God: then compare Iehovah our God, with all the other Gods of the Heathen, and it vvill easily appeare, that he must needs be that one. For the Workes which he doth, they doe testifie it of him. Novv,* 1.24 this once being yeelded that our God Iehouah is the onely true God, it vvill easily be proued, that The Scriptures are his word, by the diuinenesse of that doctrine, vvhich is con∣tayned in them. And, that once being yeelded, it vvill follovv of congruitie that vve must performe those duties, vvhich in the same vvord are prescribed: vnlesse vve vvill despise, both the will, and word of God. All these points hang together, euery one vpon another, by an indissoluble Chaine. So that the vvhole consequence of all Religion, dependeth altogether vpon the pro∣uing, and approuing of this first proposition, That there is a God.

3. But this point can neuer vnto any good effect,* 1.25 be either proued by me,* 1.26 or approued by you, vvithout Gods speciall grace, and blessing vpon vs both. For it is very true, vvhich Plato affirmeth, Hoc nemo docebit, nisi Deus adiuuerit No man can euer teach it, if God himselfe doe not assist it. And therefore The∣odoret in his Sermons De Providentia, beginneth his ninth Sermon, vvith an holy inuocation, Prouidentia illa, quam impij oppugnant, in auxilium voca∣ta; calling to his assistance, in his fighting against Atheists, the same diuine prouidence, vvhich they so fight against. And so likevvise doth Epiphanius,* 1.27 in the beginning of his vvorkes: Valde time••, vt qui moliar opus non vulgare, et in∣voco ipsum sanctum Deum, &c. I ••ndertake no vulgar vvorke; and therefore inuocate the holy God, to send his heauenly light into my minde &c. And Nazianzen,* 1.28 in one of his Orations, prescrib's it for a rule, that, Quis quis vel orationem aliquam, vel negotium auspicatur, non alium meliorē, commodior em{que} ordinem, tenere potest, quam vt a Deo incipiat, et, in Deo conquiescat. Whoso∣euer doth beginne any solemne Oration, or any other kind of negotiation, he cannot possibly obserue any better order, then both to take his beginning from God, and to make his ending in God. And herein, it is a matter of ve∣ry vvorthy obseruation, to note (in this point) the pietie, euen of the very Heathen: of their Poets, Orators,* 1.29 and Philosophers:* 1.30 hovv all of them doe au∣spicate the beginning of their vvorks,* 1.31 vvith prayers and invocations vnto their Gods. Let me giue you an instance or tvvo, to this purpose. For Poets vve see it euidently both in Aratus, among the Greekes; and Virgil, among the Latin's; that both of them beginne their Poems, vvith

Ab Ioue principium

—With Ioue the Muses must begin, in plaine and expresse termes. And there is nothing more familiar amongst all the rest, then still, with the proposition of their worke, to ioyne some in∣vocation vnto their Gods, or Muses. For Orators, Pericles (amongst the Greek's) in all his Orations,* 1.32 was wont still to make a prayer for good and prosperous successe.* 1.33 And the same we may see likewise in the Orator De∣mosthenes, how in that weighty cause, his Oration De Corona, he beganne it with a prayer for a fauourable audience. Deos De••s{que} omnes precor, &c. And Plinie Iunior, amongst the Latin's, in his Panegyrical Oration vnto the Em∣peror Traian, reporteth; that it was not onely an ordinary custome, but also a religious institution of the Romanes,* 1.34 That they should beginne with prayer, not onely, in all their ciuil affaires, but also in all their solemne Orations. Yea and Protagoras (though by some esteemed an Atheist) yet he maketh Pre∣cationem,

cationem,* 1.35 to be one of the essentiall parts of an Oration. Yea, and so did also diuers other Orators beside him, as Laertius reporteth: but he maketh prayer to be the first of them in order. And for Philosophers, Plato reporteth the same of the Athenians, which Plinie before did of the Romans, that they or∣dain'd a law, to inioyne their Philosophers, to beginne all their disputations with prayers.* 1.36 Tua interest, ô Timae, invocatis (secundùm legem) Dijs, dispu∣tationem exordiri. It is your part (ô Timaeus) by calling vpon the Gods (as is appointed in our Lawes) To giue a beginning to our intended disputation. And againe, in the same Booke. Deum nunc disputationis servatorem in pri∣mis oremus. God is the true maintayner (and, as it were, the moderator) of this our disputation: and therefore, first of all, let vs call vpon him. Yea and Tullie (among the Latin's) in his second Booke De Legibus, beginneth there his Treatise with invocation vpon the Gods.* 1.37 A Dijs immortalibus sunt nobis agenda primordia: citing for his defense, the fore-cited religious example of Aratus. And this his pious imitation, is, in the same place, very greatly approued, by his Brother Quintus. Yea and Xenophon generally prescribeth Omnem a Dijs actionem auspicari oportere:* 1.38 That euery humane act ought al∣wayes to make his beginning with God.* 1.39 Yea and Theodectus likewise; vnto the same purpose A Dijs initium sumere omne conuenit. It is alwayes fitting, to take from God our beginning. Which Pietie of the Heathens, will, out of doubt, condemne the impietie of vs Chr••stians, if in our like businesses, we vse not the like Godlines.

Now, if we ought to sanctifie our ingresse, with our prayers, in all our o∣ther attempts of importance:* 1.40 then ought we, most of all, to call vpon God, when we come to dispute of the nature of God: which is an attempt of the greatest importance. And therefore Plato beginneth that his weighty dispu∣tation, wherein he sought to proue that there is a God, by inuocating the helpe and assistance of God. Agè igitur, nunc, magis quàm vnquàm, Deum omni studio invocemus,* 1.41 cùm Deos esse diligenter demonstrare conemur. Let vs now, most of all, implore the helpe of God, when we goe about to show and to proue, There is a God: because this can neuer be learned, if God him∣selfe doe not teach it.* 1.42 For, as light (saith Philo Iudaeus) cannot be showen by any other meanes, but onely by his owne naturall shining and brightnes: so God (who is the true light) can neuer be knowne of vs, vnlesse he doe ma∣nifest himselfe vnto vs.* 1.43 And therefore (as Plutarch hath very well obserued) Cùm omnia bona sint a Dijs immortalibus petenda, tum maximè Deorum ipso∣rum cognitio. As all other good things ought only to be begged, by Prayer, at Gods hands: so chiefely and principally the knowledge of God: which is the very chiefest & principallest good: quo ne{que} maius Homo accipere, ne{que} dignius homini Deus ipse dare potest. Then which neither man can receiue any greater, nor yet God himselfe bestow any better: as it followeth in the same place.

Now it is Aristotles owne collection;* 1.44 that, if God be the Giuer of the lesser goods, then must he needs much more be the Giuer of the greater. Si quod aliud est munus Deorum hominibus, consentaneum est rationi, & feli∣citatem a Dijs ipsis dari: et eò quidem magis quò caeteris humanis donis est prae∣stabilius. If God hath giuen any other good gift vnto men, it standeth with all

reason that felicitie it selfe must also be of his donation. And that so much the rather because it is more excellent then any other.* 1.45 Nam ipsum bonorum omn••um Authorem (saith Plato) cur non etiam maximi boni causam arbitrabi∣mur? For why should we not iudge, that he, who is the author of all good, should specially be the giuer of the greatest good?

Which Religious is admonition I thought good to premise vnto the Trea∣tise following, to work•• thereby, in my Reader some touch of religion: that as well he in reading, as my selfe in writing, by inuocating diuine grace, might haue Gods holy blessing shed out vpon our labours. Without which if any man dispose himselfe to reading, affying onely vpon his owne wit & vnder∣standing; it will be the next way to frustrate and make voyd, both all my paines, and his. For then, I shall say nothing so consonant vnto reason, which (by the conceit of a strange reason) he will not seeke to euerte; yea and take a pride too in it. But, if in a godly humilitie, and with a Christian studie, he prepare himselfe to reade, seeking only to edifi▪ himselfe in the truth, and following that good counsell,* 1.46 which S. Herom prescribeth, Orationi lectio, lectioni succedat oratio: Let reading succeed prayer, & prayer succeed reading; then, I doubt not, but by this my poore labour and indeauour, both he may reape great profit,* 1.47 & my selfe receiue great comfort. For (as Boetius obserueth in this very case) Sil vltra se humanitas nequit ascendere; quantum imbecillitas subtrah••t vota suppl bunt. Since humanitie cannot possibly ascend aboue it selfe, let that which is wanting in our infirmitie, be supplied by our pietie.

4. So that all the hope of good and prosperout successe,* 1.48 in the proofe of this fi••st position, dependeth especially vpon the Readers disposition. It will be a worke, to me either easie, or difficult, to proue There is a God, as the Reader is prepared, or vnprepared to receiue it. To him that is disposed to beleeue it, there is nothing more easie to be proued: to him it will be Facile, veritatem han•• ostendere, Quòd Dijsunt: as Plato truly noteth.* 1.49 But to him that will deny it,* 1.50 there is nothing more hard and difficult. Seneca indeede, in his Booke De Prouidentia, maketh no great accompt of difficultie in this Ar∣gument. Faciam reni non difficilem (saith he) causam Deorum agenti. I shall vndertake a Worke of no difficult performance, to proue, that the world is ruled by Gods prouidence.* 1.51 And it is true in very deed, as the case then stood with him. For to him that yeildeth, that There is a God; though he denie his Gouerning of the world, (as the Epicure doth, against whom hee there writeth) it is no great masterie, to demonstrate Diuine Prouidence: and so, from that which he granteth, to inforce what he denieth: because Proui∣dence (in the order of our vnderstanding) is a Consequent vnto diuine essence naturally inhering in it, as in his proper subiect. Now Consequents are easily proued: because they haue their Antecedents. But to him that denyeth, that There is a God (as the Atheist doth, against whom I doe write) it is a thing not very easie: but he may iustly vse a cleane contrarie Exordium: Fa ci•• m rem haud ••acilem▪ Deorum causam agam. For this is not a Conclusion but a Principle: yea, and that the very first of all other Principles. For as God him selfe is prima veritas:* 1.52 so this position of him is primum verum, that, There is a God. Now Principles, in all Arts, are most difficult to be proued: because they haue not Antecedents, being Prima of themselues; yea

and immediate propositions, which haue no Media to make them conclusi∣ons,* 1.53 no not in the most Demonstratiue scientificall Syllogismes: but shine one∣ly by their owne light:* 1.54 and therefore be called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, That is, truths of such dignitie, estimation, & credit, that euen for themselues, they ought to be be∣leeued. Such as, in Geometrie, that; T••tum est maius qualibet sua parte: in Arithmetique, that; Ab aequalibus si aequalia demas, remanentia erunt aequ li••: in Christianitie, that; Christ Iesus came into the world, onely to saue sinners. Of which position, Th'Apostle there affirmeth, that It is both a true saying, and by all meanes worthy to bee receiued.* 1.55 It is both 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, both sermo fidelis, and fide dignus: and so, a true patterne of a Theological axiome. And such is also this our present position, that There is a God. A truth of such clearenes, as is worthy to be receiued: but yet (euen for the cleare∣nes) the lesse able to be proued:* 1.56 as Clemens Alexandrinus expressely affirmeth. Est haec de Deo oratio omnino difficillima: quoniam cuiusuis rei principium est inventu difficillimum: Th••s our discourse of God is of all other the most dif∣fic••lt, b••cause the first principle in all things is the hardest to be found out: adding (for this principle, as concerning God) that it is omnino primum & an∣tiquissimum principium, (et ideo) difficillimum ad demonstrandum: the first and most ancient principle, and therefore of all other the most indemonstrable.

For all Principles being Prima, and Notissima of themselues, are thereby made in ••emonstrable: because whatsoeuer can be brought to proue them, must needs be obscure and posteriour vnto them. And therefore, for the admitting of Principles in all Arts, if the learner be so dull, as not to per∣ceiue the certaine truth of them, and so doe stragger in beleeuing them, the Teacher yet must begge of him, that he will admitt them: because otherwise he cannot goe on in his teaching. Whereby (through the dulnesse of many learners) the first principles of Arts, which in themselues be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, yet become vnto such, but onely 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that is, Things graunted, but vpon ••urtesie,* 1.57 not yeelded vpon nec••ssitie. This the Orator obserueth to be true in Geometrie. Solent Geometrae, non omni•• decere, sed quaedam p••stul••re, vt sibi concedantur, quò faciliùs quae volunt explicent: It is the custome of Geom••tricians, not to teach all their doctrines, but to entreate that certaine of th••m may be yeelded vnto them, that so they may the better demonstrate the rest. And th'Apostle insinuateth it likewise to be true in Diuinitie. For in the Epistle to the Hebre••es,* 1.58 he setteth downe these for two Diuinitie-Principles: That there is a God; and That he is the rewarder of them that seeke him. Which two postulata, if they be not, at the first, presumed by the Hearer, and granted to the Teacher, there cannot possibly be any proceeding vnto the other grounds and rules of Religion. And therefore he telleth vs, that Whosoeuer will come vnto God, hee first must both beleeue, That God is: and that he is a rewarder of those that seeke him. And if these two be not graunted, all is brought vnto a stand: there can then be no proceeding, neither in teaching; nor in learning: as euen Tullie sheweth most plainely in this very Case: Where he is forced to begge this postulatum of Atticus:* 1.59 That the world is ••uled and guided by Prouidence: that so he may lay a ground for the follow∣ing disputation, which, without yeelding of this, could not possibly be done. Dasne igitur hoc nobis, Pomponi, Naturam omnem di••initùs regi? Do sanè si

postulas, saith he. O Pomponius, doe you then grant thus much vnto vs, that the nature of all things is ruled by some God? I verily (saith he) will grant it if you will but desire it.

5. But here it may be obiected:* 1.60 Why then should I take vpon me to proue it, if it be, in nature, such as cannot be proued? This must needs proue all my labour to be clearely lost: especially the Aduersarie being so hard and refractarie, and so vtterly obfirmed, to denie it, as it must needs be with the Atheist: who cannot yeeld vnto this our position, without betray∣ing the very fortresse of his owne Irreligion.

But vnto this Obiection I answere,* 1.61 out of the Philosopher: That, there be two kindes of Demonstrations, or proofes. The one is a demonstrating of Causes by their effects: which is a proofe drawne a posteriori, and is called by Aristotle, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, Only a declaring that such a thing is thus and thus, without rendring any reason, or alledging any cause. The other is a demon∣strating of the Effects by their Causes: Which is a proofe A priori, and is cal∣led, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, a declaring why such a thing is thus and thus, and thus: rendring for it a good reason, and alledging a true cause. By this latter kind of Demonstration, which sheweth Propter quid sit, the Principles cannot be proued: they cannot be demonstrated, A causa, and A Priori; because they haue no prior or superior cause; being the prime causes themselues.* 1.62 But by the former Demonstration, which sheweth onely Quòd sit, they may well enough be proued: they may be proued, Ab Effectu, and Aposteriori: which is better knowne to sense, though the other be to Reason; better knowne to vs though the other be to Nature.* 1.63 To make this plaine, by a familiar example, for the better information of the simple: That the Fire is hot,* 1.64 is a Physical Principle: Of which though no man can giue a true cause or good reason, Why it should be so; yet may euery man demonstrate, and make it plaine, that it is so. Though no man can tell the cause, Why the Fire is hot, yet may euery man shew by the effects, that (surely) it is hot; because it warmeth, heateth, burneth. And so it is likewise, in this our present instance. Though no man can proue A caus••, why there should be a God; yet may euery man collect Ab Effectu, That there is a God: by that Wisedome, which we see to haue beene in the Making; that Order, in the Gouerning; and that Goodnes, in the preseruing and maintayning of the World. All which argue as effectually, That there needs must be a God, as either Warming or Burning, That the Fire must needs be hot.

Now these posterior Arguments, though they be not so strongly conclu∣dent,* 1.65 as the former; yet are they sufficient to carry the matter. For, as Aristotle himselfe noteth: Mathematica certitudo non est in omnibus quaerenda: Mathe∣matical certitudes are not required in all matters. And he practiseth according to his rule,* 1.66 in his Ethicks: holding it sufficent (in matter of Moralitie) to giue Rules, which holde not alwayes vpon necessitie; but, for the most part, or more commonly. Then much lesse is it needfull, in matter of Diuinitie, to bring such inuincible demonstrations, as reiect all haesitations. Especially not in this case: which hath layd his foundation, neither in sense, nor in science but meerely in beleef. Which (as Clemens Alexandrinus noteth,) being founded but vpon the bare authoritie of Gods word; yet begetteth (in this

point) a farre more cleare vnderstan••ing, then can be wrought in vs, by any demonstration.* 1.67 Ne{que} scientia accipitur demonstratiua: ea enim ex prioribus constat, et ex notioribus: Nihil autem est ante ingenitum. Restat ita{que}, vt diuina gratia, et solo, quod ab eo proficiscitur, verbo, id, quod est ignotum, intelliga∣mus. There is here no demonstratiue knowledge to be had: for that ariseth from those things, which are both before, and better knowne then that which we demonstrate. But before that, which is it selfe without all genera∣tion, there cannot possibly be any thing. It therefore remayneth, that by the virtue of Gods heauenly grace, and of his diuine word, we come to know euery thing, which before was vnknowne. So that Demonstrations are here vnproper and vnprofitable. And therefore, I desire that aequanimitie of my Readers,* 1.68 which Tullie (out of Plato) doth of his; euen in this very case: that Si for••è de Deorum natura ortú{que} mundi disserentes, minùs id quod h••be••••us animo cons••qu••mur; vt tota dilucidè & planè ex••rnata oratio sibi constet, et ex ••mnipar••e secum consentiat; haud sanè erit mirum, contenti{que} esse d••bebitis si probabilia dicentur. Aequum est enim, meminisse et me, qui disseram, homi∣nem esse, e•• v••s qui iudicetis: vt si probablilta diceniur, ••e quid vltra requi∣ratis: If haply in speaking of the nature of God, and of the original of the world, I cannot attaine that, which I propounded, and desired; that my whole discourse be both familiar, and eloquent, and cohaerent; it is no great meruaile, and you ought to be content, if I write but what is probable. For it is fit you should remember that, I which write, am but a man, and that you who reade, are but men yourselues. And therefore, if I bring you but probable rea∣sons, you ought not to exacte any more at my hands. For in this case, it is suf∣ficient to obtaine the cause, if those Arguments, which we bring to proue There is a God,* 1.69 be of greater certaintie, strength, and consequence, then those which the Atheist bringeth, to proue There is no God. Which, I hope, shall be made euident, in the eight and last Booke.

CHAP. 2.

1. What manner of Authorities be the weightiest in this case. 2. That, they may not here be vsed. 3. How yet, they be here vsed. 4. What be the most proper, in respect of the Aduersaries. 5. Why they be more proper then any other.

IT is good in all causes, for euery man, to vnderstand, not only his aduantages, but also his disuantages: lest expecting greater matters then the cause will affoord, he be needlesly offended, when his expectation is destituted. The Cause here in quaestion betweene Atheists, and Christians, hath two great disuantages. The first of them is this; that by the clearenes of the Position now called into quaestion, Whether there be a God; we are cut off, from the strongest kinde of our Arguments,* 1.70 which containe the causes of their owne Conclusions: as I haue already shewed in the former Chapter. The second, that (by the infi∣delitie of the Aduersarie) we are likewise cut off, from our weightiest Testimo∣nies: as I purpose to shew in this. The weightiest Testimonie that can be brought, in this cause, to proue, There is a God, is to produce (for the proofe

of it) the Testimonie of God, speaking in his owne word. This is proper, this is naturall, this is truly inhaering in the very marrow of the cause. None other in the world can haue aequal authoritie.* 1.71 And though the Pharises obiected against our Sauiour Christ, that his Testimonie was not trne; because he testi∣fied of himselfe: yet he answered them truly againe vnto that, that it was no good consequent: but that, though he testified of himselfe, yet his testimonie was true. For what can possibly be true, if the Testimonie of Truth be not? Christ is the truth it selfe: and so likewise is God: yea and so likewise is his word.* 1.72 Sanctifie them with thy Truth: Thy word is Truth.* 1.73 It is not true in Concreto, but, Truth it selfe in Abstracto, without mixture of any thing, but onely pure and simple Truth. And therefore (as Saluianus very truly col∣lecteth) Necesse est,* 1.74 quicquid incorrupta veritas loquitur, incorruptum sit Testimonium veritatis: It must needs be a Testimonie of vncorrupted Truth, that commeth out of the mouth of Truth.* 1.75 So that (as Clemens Alexandrinus affirmes) Fide dignus est Deus,* 1.76 qui sua annunciet: God is a credible witnesse, though he testifie for himselfe. Nay (as Philo Iudaeus addeth) Deus solus est idoneus,* 1.77 qui de seipso pronunciet; God is the onely fit witnesse, to testifie of himselfe. For, Cui potius quisquam credat, quàm Deo?* 1.78 saith euen the heathen man Xenophon: Is there any man in the world, whom a man ought rather to credit then God? That were vtterly absurd. And therefore (as Clemens Alexandrinus addeth, in the fore alledged place) Est ergo hoc credendum,* 1.79 ex Platonis quo{que} sententia, etiam∣si abs{que} probabilibus, aut necessarijs demonstraionib••s, per vetus et per nouum Testamentum praedicetur: We ought to giue credit vnto this, euen by the opinion of Plato himselfe, not expecting either necessarie or probable demonstrations, though it be but only testified by the old and new Testaments. Nay these two be indeed the onely fit testimonies, that can be brought in this case. Non enim relictum est hominum eloquijs de rebus Dej, praeterquàm sermo Dej: saith S. Hilarie:* 1.80 There is left vnto men, none other fit Testimonie for the things of God, but only the holy word of God. Reliqua omnia (saith he) & arcta sunt, et conclusa, et impedita, et obscur••: All things else, whatsoeuer, sauing only the holy Scripture, are both straight, and scant, and intricate, and obscure. And there∣fore it is a very good course,* 1.81 whereunto Orosius directeth vs: Ab ipso audias, ipsi{que} Deo credas, quod verum velis scire de Deo: We must heare, & beleeue God, if we will know that truth, which belongeth vnto God.

2. And yet these weighty and important Testimonies of God, and of his word,* 1.82 so proper, and natural vnto this cause, we may here in no case vse: be∣cause they be not allowed by the Atheists, our Aduersari••s. For they, as they denie that There is a God; so doe they denie likewise that The Scripture is his word. Nay they must doe this, by consequence. For, if they doe grant, that The Scripture is Gods word; they doe contradict themselues, if they say There is a God. And therefore, they doe cast God, and his holy word, both together, out of doores, as meere fables and deuises: affirming directly of the holy Scriptures,* 1.83 that they be not Diuinae, sed H••manae voces; (as is affirmed by Lactantius) They be not (say they) the Oracles of God, but the inventions of men.* 1.84 Yea and they haue no better opinion euen of those Treatises of the Heathen, which are written of God, and of his religion (as Macrobius likewise reporteth of them:) Epicureorum tota factio, aequo semper errore, a

vero deuia, et illa aestimans ridenda quae nesciunt, Sacrum volumen, et augustis∣sima irrisit Naturae seria: The whole faction of prophane and vnholy Epicures, erring aequally from all truth, and commonly scorning those things which they know not, doe vsaully deride, both all the holy Scripture, and also the most seri∣ous and important works of Nature. Which peruersenes of theirs so greatly offended the learned father Saluianus, that he will not vouchsafe to dispute the matter with them: chusing rather to leaue them in their owne infidelitie then to cast away his paynes vpon them vnprofitably. Si cum Christianis ago, probaturum me quod ago, non dubito. Si autem cum Paganis, probare contemno. Non quia de ficiam in probatione; sed quia profuturum, quod loquor, esse, despero. Infructuosus est quippe,* 1.85 et inanis labor, vbi non recipit probationem prauus au∣d••tor. If I haue to doe with Christians, I shall quickly proue the cause: But if with infidels and Pagans, I scorne to lose my paynes. Not that I am in doubt to be defectiue in my proofe, but that I am out of doubt not to speake vnto their profit. For it needs must be an idle and vnprofitable labour, when the proofe is not receiued by the euill disposed Auditor. This was the resolution of that learned Father. But it is not mine. I purpose not, in this cause, to be so perem∣ptory with them: but to win them as I can, both by disputing, & perswading. And therefore, the best way of preuailing with them, will be, onely to vrge such Arguments vnto them, as haue passage amongst them; and such Au∣thorities, as haue some credit with them. Now, that hath not the Scripture, as you heard before. And therefore, in this case, we must not proue by Scrip∣ture, that That is a God: For that would be but a foolish kinde of proofe. It would be meerely idle, to call vpon our Aduersaries to heare an Argument, from Authoritie: and then to cite such Testimonies, as with them haue none authoritie: This would make the cause ridiculous. But if we wil preuaile either with them, or against them, we must bring only such authorities, as with them haue credit and reputation, that is, not the testimonie of the holy Scriptures,* 1.86 but rather the testimonie of prophane and Heathen Writers; whom, they who∣ly accepting in all other matters, cannot wholy reiect in this. And therefore Lactantius reproueth S. Cyprian, as being greatly ouerseene, that in his dispu∣tation with Demetrian, an Heathen, he would seeke to confute him by the Authority of Scriptures: whom he should haue confuted by Philosophers, and Histories, and by naturall Reasons. Qua materia non est vsus, vt debuit (saith he:) Non enim Scripturae testimonijs (quam ille vti{que} vanam, fictam, com∣mentitiam putabat) sed argumentis, et ratione fuerat refellendus: Cyprian handled not his matter, as he ought to haue done. For he should not haue confu∣ted him by the testimonie of Scriptures (which he held for vaine, and idle, and meerely commentitious:) but rather by the strength of Arguments, and Reasons. And againe a little after. Huic oportebat quia nondùm potu••t capere diuinae, priùs humana offerre testimonia, id est, Philosophorum, et Historicorum, vt suis potissimùm refutaretur Authoribus: He ought not, vnto him to haue alledged any Diuine authorities, but onely humaine: because he was as then vncapable of them: that so he might conuince his errors, by the credit and authoritie of his owne proper authors, that is, Philosophers, and Historians. Yea, and this his castigation of the blessed Martyr Cyprian, is approued by S. Hierome, as a iust and deserued one.* 1.87 Where he prooueth by the practice of a cloude of Wit∣nesses,

both of Greeke and Latin Fathers, that it is more proper and naturall, to confute all kinde of Heathens, by the testimonie of their owne writers, then by the authoritie of the Scriptures: because, with those men, these haue small authoritie, or none.* 1.88 And therefore, saith Iustin Martyr, euen in this very case: Non ex diuinis historijs nostris, haec probare aggrediar, quibus vos nondum (propter inveteratum in animis vestris Maiorum vestrorum errorem) fidem adhibere vultis: sed ex vestrarum (nihil ad nostram Religionem perti∣n••ntium) literarum monumentis. I will not proue these things vnto you, out of our owne writers, which you doe but smally credite (through an errour implanted in you by your Ancestors) but I will proue it vnto you, out of your owne Authors, which are no way partiall vnto the faith of Christians. And Lactantius likewise, vnto the same purpose. Omittamus Testimonia Pro∣phetarum, nè minùs idonea probat••o videatur, ab hijs quibus omninò non credi∣t••r.* 1.89 Veni••mus ad Authores; & eos ipsos, ad veri probationem, testes citemus, quibus contra n••s vti solent; Poëtas dico, ac Philosophos. Let vs leaue the Testi∣monies of the holy Prophets: because they will carrie no fit probation, especially vnto such as distrust and discredite them. Let vs therefore come vnto their owne Authors; and vse those men as witnesses for the Truth, whom they com∣monly doe cite and produce against the truth: I meane,* 1.90 their Poets, and their Philosophers. And againe in an other place. Ne{que} nunc Prophetas in testimo∣nium vocabo: sed eos potiùs, quibus istos, qui respuunt veritatem, credere sit necesse. I will not, as now, cite the testimonie of the Prophets: but rather of such Authors, as those men, which refuse the truth, yet haue no power to refuse. So that, neither the testimonie of God, nor of his word; though they haue in themselues the greatest strength of probation, yea and be most incompa∣rably beyond all exception; yet may be vsed by vs, in this our disputation: vnlesse we would propine, both our selues, and our cause, vnto open and iust derision. And therefore, whosoeuer will either conuert, or confute the Atheists, he must vse such Authorities, as haue some authoritie with them, not such, as be derided, or reiected by them; such as be, both the Prophets and Apostles, and all other holy Writers, all Christian Diuines, and generally, all Christi••ns. For all these, in this cause, are suspected by the Atheists, as par∣ciall and inclining witnesses. So that, by the weakenesse of our Aduer∣saries: wee are forced to forbeare the strongest of our Authorities: and (after the Apostles practice) to feede them with their owne milke, rather then with our strong meate; because, as yet,* 1.91 they bee not able to beare it. Not with the strong meate of the Scriptures, though that were better for them: but with the milke of their owne writers, because this is fitter for them.

Ista quidem meliùs, Divinis edita libris,* 1.92 Cognoscenda forent; vbi Legis in aequore aperto, Promptum esset, ventis dare libera vela secundis. Sed quoniam rudibus metus est intrare profundum, In tenui primùm discant procurrere rivo.

Saith Prosper.

This Subiect better seem's from sacred writ To spring, and better thence t' haue learned it:

Where in the Lawes broad Sea, with wind and tyde, Ther's happier saile, then any where beside. But cause to ruder Novices, it is, A province full of fearefulnes, I wis, Into the great vast deepe to venture out; Some shallow Riuer, let them coast about, And by a small Boate, learne they first, and marck, How they may come to manne a greater Bark.

3. And yet haue I here vsed them, both frequently,* 1.93 and largely: but not so much vpon hope to doe any great good vpon the Atheist with them, by pressing directly their Authoritie vnto him, as indirectly to grow somewhat vpon him, by an Artificiall circumduction of him: and that by these two reasons following.

First, because of my often allegation of the holy Scriptures consenting so fully with other Heathen writers, the Atheist may the better be able to dis∣cerne; that there is an vniuersall agreement, and a generall consent of the whole world, against him; both of Christians, Iewes, and Pagans: and there∣by see more plainely, his owne nakednes and pouertie; how bare, and weake, yea how desolate he is, and vtterly forsaken, both of God, and men: and by that meditation, be more easily drawne, to apprehend the singular follie of that his singular opinion: which hath made him such a spectacle, both to Angels, God, and Men: as it were some vncouth monster. And so in∣deed he is.* 1.94 For, Magnum est ipse prodigium, qui, mundo credente, non credit (saith S. Augustine) He is (surely) some great Monster, that will abide in Atheisme, when he seeth the whole world to beleeue, beside him. So that, in this respect, the allegation of the Scriptures, will not be meerely idle, to∣wards the very Atheists.

No, nor yet in an other: which is the second reason of my so frequent alledging them. And that is, because the holy Scriptures (beside that di∣uine authoritie, which is naturally inhaerent in them) doe oft-times, carry also great strength of reason with them: which inforce many points more strongly and effectually, against the Atheists, then the acutest reasons, brought by any of the Philosophers. As that of the Psalmist, for the proofe of Gods omniscience:* 1.95 and that he needs must (of congruitie) both heare, and see all things. He that planted the Eare, shall he not heare? and he that formed the Eye, shall he not see? What Philosopher in the world could more necessarily conclude, from the true and proper causes of the conclu∣sion, then the Scripture here hath done? And diuers such places of the holy Scriptures, the Reader shall meete with, throughout this whole Trea∣tise; which presse, yea, and euen oppresse, the Atheists with the weight of their Reason: howsoeuer the weight of their Authoritie be eleuated by them. For though those sacred Authors haue but small authoritie with Atheists, speaking as meere Witnesses: yet, when their Testimonies carry with them also reasons, those reasons must be answered, if they will de∣fend their cause. And if they cannot answer them, they must then yeeld vnto them: which is the second reason of my so often citing them.

Now vnto these two reasons, in respect of the Atheists, I may also adde a

third, in respect of Christians. And that is, that by this allegation of Scrip∣tures, & other the most learned Ecclesiasticall Writers, euen Christians them∣selues will be the better confirmed, in those points of Christian Faith, which are by them affirmed. For when they see these doctrines▪ which are chiefly here prooued by naturall reasons, and by Heathen mens authorities; yet not to rest wholly and onely vpon them; but to be such, as haue both Scriptures, & Fathers to approue them; it must needes much confirme them in their re∣ceiued Faith: yea, and that a great deale more, for the simple authority of the Scriptures themselues, then for the strongest reasons of all the learnedest Phi∣losophers. For this Authority alone, without any reason,* 1.96 ouer-swayeth both all their reasons & authorities together;* 1.97 though they were a thousand more: be∣caus••, Humana dicta argumentis et testibus egent; De•• autem sermo est ipse sibi testis (as it is well obserued by Saluianus:) The word of a man standeth neede to be fortified, both by arguments, and witnesses; but the word of God, is a witnes to 〈◊〉〈◊〉. And therefore, as in the same place, he very truely collecteth, Non necesse est, vt argumentis probetur, quod, hoc ipso, quia a Deo dicitur, comproba∣t••r: That needeth no other arguments to proue it, which is proued sufficiently, ••ecause God hath said it.

4 And yet the Authority of Gods word, as great as it is,* 1.98 is the little enough with Atheists: in whose foolish opinion, the testimony of the holy Apostles, or Prophets, haue a great deale lesse credit, then the testimony of the Hea∣then Philosophers, and Poets. And therefore, in our disputation against them, we must omit the former, and onely vse these latter;* 1.99 if we will doe good vp∣pon them: as Claudius Victor very wisely aduiseth; ascribing, by one instance a Rule of proceeding, in euery like case.

Posse Deum, quicquid fieri non posse putatur,

Ipsorum ratione proba, qui credere nolunt.

That God can that,* 1.100 that's thought it cannot be, Pro••e this by their owne saw's, that will not see.

According to which rule, Eusebius fram'd his practise. Suis testibus, Gen∣tes, non argumentis nostris, confundere instituimus.* 1.101 I will confute the Gentils, not by the Argument of Christians, but by the testimony of Pagans. Yea, and euen the holy Ghost himselfe, hath taken also the same course, disputing a∣gainst the Heathens, by the Testimony and Authority of their owne Hea∣then Writers; in three seuerall places: Yea, and in the last of them, hee ho∣noureth a Poet, with the name of a Prophet.* 1.102 Not that he thought him so; but because they esteemed him so: inforcing so, his testimony, the more strongly against them, from that credit and authority, which themselues as∣cribe vnto him.

5 Then,* 1.103 the reasons, why in this our disputation against Atheists, wee must vse the testimony of Heathen-Writers, and not of holy Scriptures, bee both many and weighty.

First, because in euery disputation, both the disputants must consent, in two generall agreements: else they can neuer bring the matter, then in que∣stion, vnto determination. The first of them, is this: That they must both a∣gree in certaine grounds and principles, which are common vnto both. For,

as two cannot talke together,* 1.104 vnlesse they haue some one common language, which they both vnderstand: so cannot two dispute together, except they haue some one common principle, in which they both consent. Now those principles and grounds, must not be principles of Religion; but of Reason. Not of Religion; because that is proper, but vnto the one part: but yet of Reason; because that is common vnto them both. The second generall a∣greement, wherein they must consent, is, Who shall be their Iudge, and vnto whom they will submit, and vnto whose decision they will referre all their Question, as to a man impartiall, and indifferent betweene them? Now that cannot be the Scripture: but it must be Heathen Writers. To the Scriptures, the Atheist will neuer submit; because then his cause is lost: but to the Hea∣thens, the Christian may submit; and yet his cause be gained. For, the truth that is spoken by the most heathenish of the Heathens, yet can neuer bee re∣pugnant to the truth of the Scriptures. Two lies and vntruthes, may con∣trary one another; but two truthes can neuer. So then, the Heathens being made Iudges of this cause, and admitted, as indifferent, by consent of both parties; there can no other testimonies be so apt, and so proper, to inforce a conclusion, as those that be produced from the writings of the Heathen.

Secondly, because the writings of the Heathens (beside the great credit, and authority which they haue with our Aduersaries) haue also greater store of artificiall Arguments, to satisfie both naturall reason, and sense: Whereas Scripture, for the most part, presseth rather the Conscience, by virtue of that diuine authority, which it hath naturally in it, then leadeth our science, by ar∣gument out of it. Sometimes it also argueth, and that very excellently, as before I haue instanced: but this very rarely, relying most commonly vpon his owne natiue authority.

Thirdly,* 1.105 because (if we seeke to conuert Atheists) the testimony of their owne Writers haue with them farre greater force and power of perswasion, then the Testimony of the Scriptures, be they neuer so plaine. And therefore (saith Tertullian) that De suis instrumentis,* 1.106 secularia pr••bari, necesse est. Yea, and improbari too: Whether we would approue, or reproue the opinion of the Heathens, we shall doe it most effectually out of their owne writings. For, fir∣mum est genus probationis (saith Nouatian) quod ab ipso Aduersario sumitur, vt veritas,* 1.107 ab ipsis inimicis veritatis, probetur: It is a very forcible kinde of proofe, which is drawne from the Aduersarie himselfe, when the truth is proo∣ued by them that oppose the truth. Not that the Atheists do giue credit to the Heathens, any more then to vs Christians, in their direct assertion and affir∣mation of God, (for therein they hold vs both to bee equally vnequall vnto their cause, and indifferently vn-indifferent vnto themselues;) but yet in their Axioms, belonging to Philosophy, and to other humane Arts, they will be∣leeue them readily, as being Maisters in those Sciences. From which (not∣withstanding) it will follow as necessarily, that there needes must bee A God, as if they had affirmed it, in direct and expresse words; as I purpose (God willing) to make plaine, in the second of these Bookes.

Fourthly, because (if we seeke to confute the Atheists) the testimonies of the Heathens are the fittest meanes;* 1.108 that so we may, eos suorum testimonijs re∣uincere, (as Lactantius aduiseth vs) conuince them by their owne authorities:

which is the strongest conuiction,* 1.109 that can fall vpon them: as is truely ob∣serued, by S. Chrysostome; Tunc illos maxime reuincimus, cum suorum, in eos, dicta retorquemus; we do most forcibly conuince them, when we can retort their owne saying against them: alledging this for the reason, why the Apo∣stle confuteth them rather by their owne Poets, then by the holy Scriptures. And therefore (saith Lactantius, in another place) that it is, satis firmum te∣stimonium, ad probandam veritatem,* 1.110 quod ab ipsis perhibetur inimicis: It is a sound argument, for the prouing of the truth, which is fetcht from the enemies of the truth. Yea, though it were but a weake one, in it selfe; as the Orator obser••••th in the very like case;* 1.111 Tuum testimonium, quod, in altenare, leve est; id, in tua, quoniam contrate est, grauissimum esse debet. Thy testimony (saith he) which is but light and friuolous, in another mans cause; yet is weighty in thine owne,* 1.112 when it is against thy selfe. So that (as Tertullian obserueth) Ex aemulis nonnunquam testimonium, sumere, necessarium est, si non aemulis prosit. Some∣times to deriue a testimony from the mouth of the aduersary, is an excellent help when it makes against the Aduersarie. For to confute Atheists by their owne proper Authors,* 1.113 is to cut off Goliah's head, with his owne proper sword: which is of all other the most grieuous kinde of wound. Whereas, to con∣fute them by the authority of Scripture, were, in effect, no better, then to cast holy things vnto Dogs,* 1.114 and precious pearles before Hogs, which tread them vn∣der foote. And therefore, I haue chosen to fight against the Atheists, the ••igh∣ters against God, not with a chosen company of Apostles, and Prophets (who are too worthy persons to stirre their least finger, for such vnworthy Aduersaries, which so contemne their holy writings) but rather with a company of Infi∣dels, and Heathens. By whom, notwithstanding, I hope (God assisting) to cut in sunder that band of prophane and wicked Atheists, which band them∣selues against heauen and against God himselfe. For, as God himselfe once compelled the wicked Aegyptians,* 1.115 by flyes, and frogs, and grashoppers, and other such like contemptible wormes, to confesse the power of his diuine Maiestie; not vouchsafing to adact them by any other of his creatures, more generous and worthy: so will we likewise compell these vngodly Atheists, to confesse, There is a God, by the arguments and testimonies of the Heathen Philosophers; not vouchsafing them the writings of the most holy Authors. Which weighty and important reasons, of my so frequent alledging of pro∣phane and Heathen Writers, I request the Christian Reader, to carry along with him, throughout this whole Treatise, for my perpetuall defence. The cause, you see, requireth it: the Aduersary exacteth it.

CHAP. 3.

That there is an inbred perswasion in the hearts of al men, That there is a God. 2. That this hath beene obserued, by many learned men, among the Heathens. 3. That it hath also beene obserued, by diuers learned Christians. 4. Two notable testimonies out of Tullie; asserting this perswasion, both vnto all Nations, and vnto all Conditions, and vnto all persons among men.

I Haue largely vnfoulded in the two former Chapters, both what manner of Arguments, and what manner of Authorities, are most proper to this cause,

and most effectual with our Aduersaries, either to bend them, or to break them. Let vs therfore now, come on to the laying of them open. Now they be of two sorts: they b•• either externall or internall Arguments. For as it is true one way,* 1.116 which is obserued by Seneca, that Deus et extra, et intra, ten••t opus suum: that God vpholdeth all his workes, both without them, and within them: so is it also true another way, that, Deus et extra, et intra, tenetur ab opere suo: that God is beheld of all his workes, not onely without them, but also within them: Nature her selfe lending vs light, to see the God of Nature, euen in the most obscure and interior parts of vs.* 1.117

The first Argument then, to proue There is a God, is an internall Argu∣ment: and that is taken from a naturall and inbred conclusion, which is gene∣rally ingrafted into the hearts of all men; that surely There is a God. This is the most ancient and generall praenotion, that Nature hath begotten in the mind of a man. Which naturall perswasion, though it be both bred and borne together with vs; yet must it needs be a syence of Gods owne planting in vs. For if it be true, which is affirmed by Seneca, that, Insita sunt nobis omnium artium semina, sed Magister ex occulto Deus, producit ingenia: That it is God, that hath implanted in the soule of a man,* 1.118 the first seedes and principles of other humane Arts: then must hee needes much more haue implanted in him this first seede and principle of all religion, which is the proper Art of Gods holy worshipping: an Art, of which himselfe is the true and onely Obiect. For Pie∣tas, is nothing else,* 1.119 but onely scientia Diuini cultus: an arte of worshipping God aright, as Zeno rightly defineth it.

And therefore, it is not probable, that hee, which hath replenished the soule of a man, with those notions and conceptions, that are the first seedes of all o∣ther Arts and Sciences, should onely leaue out that which belongeth to him∣selfe. But howsoeuer the Atheist be perswaded in this point, that this inward perswasion is implanted by God, or not; yet can he not deny, but that there is in mans heart such an inward perswasion: because, all the world confesseth it, euery mans experience teacheth it; and all learned men, both of Christians and Heathens, doe both know, and acknowledge it.

2 Let me giue you some instance for the demonstration of it.* 1.120 Plato, in his tenth Booke De Leg. taking vpon him to prooue by force of Argument, that there needes must be A God; hee bringeth this, as one principall pro∣bation; that there is,* 1.121 et Graecorum et Barbarorum omnium consensus, Deos esse fatentium: that there is in this point, a generall consent, both of Greekes and Barbarians, that surely, There is a God. And Xenophon,* 1.122 euen in this respect, preferres the soule of a man, before all other creatures: because none of them hath any sense of their Creator; none of them vnderstandeth, either that there is a God; or that he is the maker and Creator of the world, or of those great good things which therein are contained. Cuius alterius animalis ani∣mus cognoscit, maximarum optimarúm{que} rerum conditores esse Deos? Doth the soule of any other thing know God, to be the maker of euery good thing, but only the soule of man? No (saith the Aegyptian Philosopher) Spiritus, de animalibus cunctis,* 1.123 humanos tantùm sensus, ad diuinae rationis intelligentiā exornat, erigit, at{que} sustollit. Among all other creatures, the spirit of only man is adorned, & ere∣cted by the spirit of God, to the knowledge & vnderstanding of Gods diuine wis∣dome.

And so saith the Romane Orator. Ex tot generibus,* 1.124 nullum est animal, praeter hominem, quod habeat notiti••m aliquam Dei: ipsis{que} in hominibus, n••lla gens est, ne{que} tam immansueta, ne{que} tam fera; quae non, etiam si ignoret qualem ••abere Deum deceat, tamen habendum sciat. Among so many kindes of seuerall Cre••tures, there is none, but onely man, that hath any sense of God. But, a∣mongst men, there is none so vntractable, and savage, but, though they doe dis∣sent, what, a God they ought to haue, yet they fully doe consent, that a God they ought to haue. There is no other kinde of Creature, that knoweth this point: and yet no kinde at all of men, that are ignorant of it. For, as euen the very Heathen Poet confesseth,—separat haec nos

Agrege mutorum;* 1.125 at{que} ideo venerabile soli Sortiti ingenium, divinor••m{que} capaces▪ Religion 'tis, that doth distinguish vs, From brutish Heard. Men onely haue to know; And can with vnderstanding argue thus, A God there is; Dumbe creatures cannot so.

And this generall perswasion (as Aristotle affirmeth) hath alwayes, in all ages, beene carefully implanted into Children, by their parents: to be held▪ as a most certaine,* 1.126 and infallible truth. Vetus est fama, et haereditaria mortalium omnium; Omnia, et a Deo, et per Deum, nobis esse constituta: It is an ancient opinion deriued, among all men, from the father to the sonne, that all things are made and ordayned for vs men, both by God, and through God: agree∣ing very well with that of the Apostle, that, Of him,* 1.127 and through him, and for him, be all things: to him be glorie for euer. Amen. And this, he saith, descen∣deth, as it were an inheritance, from generation to generation: acknowled∣ging both the antiquitie, and vniuersalitie of it, to be exceeding great, that it is both vetus, and haereditaria omnium; ancient, and vniuersally haereditary vnto all Men. But yet he restraineth it, to haue had his propagation, but on∣ly from Tradition. But Iamblicus asserteth it to an higher condition; fetching the originall of it further, and affirming it to be a meere impression of nature. Ante omnem rationis vsum,* 1.128 inest, naturaliter insita, Deorum notio: Euen be∣fore all vse of reason, the knowledge of God, is naturally ingrafted, into the minde of a man. And therefore it cannot be of Institution, or Tradition.

Which yet may further be gathered, by an obseruation of AElian: that though the Greekes (of all other men) haue beene commonly most carefull of their Childrens institution;* 1.129 yet, that moe of the Graecians haue proued no∣table Atheists, then could euer yet be found among all other nations, though most Barbarous and sauage. Nemo Barbarorum, ad contemptum Deor••m, vn∣quàm excidit: ne{que} in du••ium vocant, Sintne Dij, an non sint? et curentnè res humanas, an non? Nemo, ne{que} Indus, ne{que} Celta, ne{que} AEgyptius, eam cogitationem in animum induxit, quam, vel Euemerus Messenius, vei Dionysius Phryx, vel Hippon, vel Diagoras, vel Socias, vel deni{que} Epicurus. There is none of the Bar∣barians, that euer yet brake-out, into contempt of the Gods, There is none of them that euer called into quaestion, Whether there be Gods, or no: or whether they re∣gard the things of men, or no? (These be the Graecians problemes) No Indian, No Celt, no AEgyptian, did euer admit any such cogitation, as either Euemerus the Messenian, or Dionysius the Phrygian, or Hippo, or Diagoras, or Sosias; yea or

euen as Epicurus. Whereby it appeareth, that the very Barbarians, which lacke all good instruction; yet are further from Atheisme, then the Graecians, which haue all. And therefore, it is neither institution, that giueth; nor lacke of institution that depriueth of Religion: which is nothing else, but a na∣turall impression; as immediately giuen, by God, vnto the soule, as the soule is immediately, by God, vnto the body. So that (as Caecilius very truly affirmeth) Omnium Gentium,* 1.130 de Dijs immortalibus (quanvis incertasit vel ratio, vel origo) manet tamen firma consensio: There is a strong consent, that there needs must be a God, dispersed through all the nations of the world: and yet we can∣not vnder stand either the reason, whereupon that consent should be grounded; or the originall, from whence the same should be raised. But all know, that, so it is: yea,* 1.131 and that, among all Nations. Insomuch, that Seneca expressely pronounceth, that Nulla gens vsquam est, adeò extra leges mores{que} proiecta, vt non aliquos Deos credat: There is no nation so devoyd both of good Lawes and manners, but that it entertayneth some or other of the Gods.

3 Which generall consent,* 1.132 and agreement of all men, in beleeuing There is a God; is not onely recorded vnto vs, by the Heathens, but the same hath beene also obserued, euen by Christians. Clemens Alexandrinus directly tel∣leth vs, that, Dei manifestatio erat, apud omnes, omnino naturalis: That the knowledge of God,* 1.133 is naturally ingrafted into the minds of all men: referring the Originall of this generall perswasion; not, as Aristotle, vnto Tradition: but, as Iambl••••us, vnto Natures information. In which point, Arnobius a∣greeth fully with him.* 1.134 Quis quamnè est hominum, qui non, cum istius Principis notione, diem primae nativitatis intraverit? cui non sit ingenitum, non affixum, im••, ipsis poenè in genitalibus matris, non impressum, non insitum; esse Regem ac Dominum, cunctorum, quaecun{que} sunt, moderatorem? Is there any man, that doth not bring a notion of this great Prince, into the world with him? Is there any man, in whom this is not naturally begotten, to whose brest it is not nay∣led, nay, in whose heart it is not printed, and (as it were) ingrafted, euen whilest he is yet in the bowels of his Mother, that surely there is a King, and a Ruler, who is the Gouernour of all things, all the whole wide world ouer? Note his earnestnesse in this point, by the multitude of his words, Ingenitum, Affixum,* 1.135 Impressum, Insitum, Inbred, Infixed, Imprinted, Ingrafted. Maca∣rius likewise consenteth with both of them. Abs{que} Scripturis, homines, natura∣li ratione sola, cognoscunt esse Deum. Men doe know there is a God, euen by naturall reason, of it selfe, though without any testimonies out of the holy Scrip∣ture. Haec est enim vis verae diuinitatis (saith Beda,) vt Creaturae rationali, iam ratione vtenti,* 1.136 non omninò et penitùs possit abscondi. God the Creator, cannot totally be hid, to any reasonable Creature. The same is affirmed likewise by Prosper Aquitanicus.* 1.137

Qua iacet extremo Telius circundata Ponto, Et qua gens hominum diffusa est corpore mundi, Seu nostros annos, seu tempora prisca revoluas, Esse omnes sensere Deum, nec defuit vlli Authorem Natura docens.— Where farthest Sea encompasseth the land, Where euer men doe dwell in worlds great wa'st;

Let our late yeares, let ancient times be scan'd, There is a sense of God still vndefac't. This Lesson Nature-selfe hath all men taught, Whereby to know their Author they are brought. And againe a little after. Innatum est cunctis, genitorem agnoscere verum. It is innate to all, to owne Their father true, by Nature knowne.

So likewise Theodoret. Veram theologiam,* 1.138 ab initio, hominibus Natura tra∣didit: diuina subinde eloquia confirmarunt. True diuinity, from the begin∣ning, was first taught to men by Nature; and afterward confirmed vnto them by Scripture. By which alledged authorities, both of Christians and Heathen, it doth euidently appeare, that there is hardly a greater consent of all men, in beleeuing There is a God; then there is in obseruing this consent of their be∣leefe. And it is also a thing not vnworthy the obseruing, that so many learned men, of so distant times and places, and so different in opinions; yet should vtter and expresse, one and the same sentence, in so many formes of words.

4 Which yet may be made a little more euident,* 1.139 by addition of two o∣ther places, out of Tullie, that expresse the whole notion, a great deale more excellently: which I haue purposely reserued vnto this last place: because they doe affoord a notable gradation, whereupon I haue founded the whole Discourse ensuing. The first of them is in his first Booke Of the Nature of the Gods: the second, in the first Booke of his Tusculan Questions. His first place is this. Quae est gens,* 1.140 aut quod genus Hominum, quod non habeat (sine do∣ctrina) anticipationem quandam Deorum? quam appellat 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Epicurus, What Country is there, or what kinde of men, which haue not in their mindes (without any teaching) a certaine preconceiued opinion of God? Which Epicu∣rus calleth a Praesumption, or Praeception. Marke the steps of his gradation, Qu••e gens? Quod genus? What nation of men? or what condition of them? His se∣cond place is this.* 1.141 Nulla est gens tam fera, nemo omnium tam imm••nis, cui••s mentem non imbuer it Deorum opinio. There is, neither any nation so barbarous, nor any person so sauage, but that his minde is indued, with some opinion of the Gods. Marke here againe, Nulla gens, Nemo omnium: No people, nay, no man at all. From whence we may gather, by these two places of Tullie compared together, that this praenotion of God, is so generally spred, that there is nei∣ther nation, nor condition of men, no nor any singular person; (neither gens, nor genus, nor vllus) but he hath in him this perswasion, That their is a God. Let vs treade in his owne steppes; and see the truth of this his consident as∣sertion; and whether he be deceiued in any one of them. And first, as con∣cerning Nations; then, Conditions; and finally, Persons.

CHAP. 4.

That there is not any Nation, but it hath his Religion. 1. Ancient Histories insinuate it. 2. New Histories affirme it. 3. Trauellers confirme it. 4. A generall surueigh of their Gods, declareth it. 5. A particular surueigh of their tutelar Gods, proueth it.

YOu have seene before,* 1.142 how confidently it is affirmed, both by Heathens, and by Christians; That there is not any Nation but it hath his Religion; not any People in the world, but that they haue their God. Let vs now come to see, how this saying can be pro∣ued. For, it is easie to say any things. But those things that are sayd, if they be not duly proued, may, with the same facilitie be reiected, that they be affirmed. So that, we cannot, in equitie, exacte a beleefe, where we doe not exhibite (if not en exact) yet a competent proofe. But in this case now present, easie proofe will be competent. For, it requiring nothing of vs, but an historicall faith, we neede exacte no more, but an historicall proofe: because historicall positions, are sufficiently proued by historicall pro∣bations. Why then, the highest proofe that wee can vse in this case, is to confirme it by the testimonie, of either such Historiographers as haue credibly related it, or else, of such Trauellers, as haue visibly seene it. They two will be sufficient. For these two in this case be more authenticall witnesses, then either Philosophers, Orators, or Poëts; yea or then Diuines themselues: because, this resteth onely vpon the credit of History: Wherein we haue testimonies in very great plenty. For, looke into all the most ancient Historiographers, who haue either Geographically described the Regions, or Histo••ically the Nations of the whole world, so farre as it was open, and known in their time; & yet you shall finde none of them, that haue certainely or assertiuely branded any nation with the marke and stigme of Atheisme▪ nei∣ther Herodotus, nor Diodorus, nor Strabo, nor Ptolomee, nor Mela, nor Solinus, nor Plinie, nor Iustine, nor any of the rest. They which haue marked, with very great curiositie, the memorable things of euery Countrie; yea and haue noted the Atheisme of some particular men; would neuer haue lefte it vnnoted vpon any generall nation,* 1.143 if they could haue inured any such vpon them. It is true that Strabo writeth of the Cala••ci;* 1.144 a rude and a sauage people of Spaine; that, Calaicis Deum nullū esse, quidam aiunt; that some affirme, that they haue no God. But yet,* 1.145 he neither affirmeth so of them; nor yet telleth vs, who they were that affirme this of them himselfe; nor yet subscribeth vnto their affirmation: but leaueth all in the vncertaintie of, Quidā, & aiunt; which is a very weake proofe. For, if such vngrounded reports might goe for proofes, Christians themselues should be Atheists:* 1.146 who (as Caecilius reporteth) doe, et Templa despicere, et Deos despuere: both despise the Temples, and despite the Gods. The nations that haue beene most infamed with imputation of this point,* 1.147 are the Mas∣sagetae, and Scythians: who (by the vulgar) in old time, were thought to be destitute of all pieti•• and Religion, because they were so farre from ciuilitie and reason. But,* 1.148 Herodotus expressely freeth them both from that impietie. For,* 1.149 the Scythians, acknowledged diuers of the Greekish Gods: Iupiter, Tel∣lus, Apollo, Venus, Mars, and Hercules. Hos cuncti Scythae Deos arbitrantur, saith he: These all the Scythians hold for Gods. Lucian addeth, Diana; vnto whom (as he reporteth) they were wont to offer Men: But, their owne peculiar God, whom they chiefly worship, aboue all the rest, is euery mans old Sword: ferreus acinaces,* 1.150 qui singulis vetustus est. Id{que} est Martis simulachrum: cui an∣nuas hostias offerunt, cùm aliorumpecorum, tum equorum: et plus huic acinaci quam caeteris Dijs: They call it the image of their great God Mars: and they

offer vnto it their yearely sacrifices, both of horse, and other beasts; yea and more to this alone, then to all the Gods beside him. This was the religion of the ancient Scythians. And, for the Massagetae their neighbours; he testifieth of them likewise, that though they renounced all other Gods; yet, that they held the Sunne,* 1.151 for a God. Ex Dijs vnum Solem vener antur, cui equos immolant: Among the other Gods they worship the Sun, and they sacrifice their Horses vnto him. So that, in the writings of all the an∣cient Historiographers, we cannot, as yet, meete with any Nation of Atheists: vnlesse we should beleeue the fictions of the Poëts, in their reporte of the Cyclopes.

2 And the same may be likewise obserued in the Neoterickes. Munster,* 1.152 in his Cosmographie, hath notably described the vniuersall world, so farre as (in his time) it was knowne, and inhabited: and Ortelius, in his Theatrum Or∣bis; hath placed the same, as it were, vpon a Stage, to be plainely seene of all men: yea and both of these two writers haue deliuered vnto vs, not onely a Chorographicall description of all countries, but also a Morographical descrip∣tion of their manners. In all whose large volumes, yet neither of them (so far as I remember) hath noted any Nation, to be without all Religion; none to be profest in Atheisme. So that, wee cannot finde, by authoritie of Historie, either ancient or moderne, that euer the sinne of Atheisme ouerspred any whole Nation: as yet diuers other sinnes haue done. For, if there had euer beene any nation of Atheists, throughout the whole world, they should surely haue beene noted. And, if wee can neither see, nor heare, nor reade, that there were euer any such; why should wee be so light as to beleeue there should be such?

But, because an argument from Authoritie, doth not follow negatiuely; let vs goe one steppe further, and proue it affirmatiuely. There be published to the world, two notable Bookes, of great learning, and good vse. The one by Master Samuel Purchas: which hee calleth his Pilgrimage: the other by Master Edward Grimestone: which he intituleth, The Estates and Empires of the world. In both which, are excellently described, not onely the Geographi∣call site of all Regions, but also the Conditions of all their Inhabitants: their riches, forces, gouernments, commodities, histories; and (amongst the rest) their Religions, Yea, and before the rest, in the first of those two Authors; who maketh their religions, the very first of his purposes; and all the rest but as se∣conds and thirds. So that (by the commendable paynes of those two industri∣ous writers) the Aheist cannot name vnto vs any nation, but wee can name againe vnto him their religion and that they be not of his. Or, if any be (haply) omitted by them; it is not, because they haue no religion; but, because their Religion is, as yet, not fully knowne. None are noted, as knowne, to be without all religion. For all people inhabiting vpon the face of the whole Earth,* 1.153 are either Christians, who worship the holy Trinitie; or Mahometanes and Iewes, who worship God the Creator; or pure Gentiles, who worship the Starres, and other Creatures; or Idolaters, who worship Images. Into these foure sects, the whole world is quartered, and all these to be found, in euery quarter of it: though Christians doe hold the praedominance, in Eu∣rope; Mahometans, in Asia; Gentils, in Africa; and Idolaters, in America. So that all of them be worshippers: and all of them haue their Gods.

3 And,* 1.154 that those fore-named Writers doe neither abuse vs, nor yet haue beene abused themselues, in their fore-named relations; wee finde all to bee verified, by the report of Trauellers, who haue seen it with their eyes: which is the surest foundation, and ground of all Histories. Wherein wee can haue no better testimonies, then those of our owne Trauellers: who haue taken more paines, in searching out the world, then any other people of the world: as we may plainely see, by the commendable, and industrious Trauells, of Mr. Richard Hackluyt, in collecting our English Voyages. Amongst which, there is relation of two worthy Gentlemen, of this our owne nation: who haue compassed the Globe of the whole Earth about. Which notable exploit hath not by any other Nation, as yet, beene twice atchieued. The first of which,* 1.155 was Captaine Drake; who, in his furthest trauell vnto the North-west, taking land in Noua Albien, he saw there the Sauages busied about a Sacrifice: who, when they had tasted of our mens liberalitie, they supposed them to bee Gods, and diuers times offered vnto them their sacrifices. Which they neuer would haue done, but that both they were perswaded that There is a God: and that, offering of sacrifice is a part of his worship.

The second of those Gentlemen,* 1.156 was Captaine Candish, who, in his fur∣thest trauell vnto the South-East, taking land in the Island of Capul, obserued the Inhabitants, to be the worshippers of the Diuell. And the like may be ob∣serued in diuers other of their voyages: who, euen in the furthest and most remote parts, could neuer, as yet, finde any Nation of Atheists. They neuer yet tooke landing, but if they once found men, they found also some religion: which they neuer brought with them when they came; nor carried with them when they went; but both found it there before them, and left it there be∣hind them. So that, no Traueller could euer out-trauell religion: but, (as Maximus Tyrius affirmeth) Quanvis ad Oceanilitora accesseris,* 1.157 ibi quo{que} Deos invenies. Hos quidem, prope Orientes; illos verò prope Occidentes. Though a man should trauell all the skirts of the Ocean,* 1.158 he shall still find, There be Gods, both rising in the East, and setting in the West. Which is almost all one with Anaximanders opinion:* 1.159 Natiuos esse Deos, longis intervallis, et orientes & occidentes: That there is a kind of natiue Gods, who in distance of time doe sometimes rise vp, and sometimes fall againe. For, it is Plutarch's obseruation, that, if a man should trauell throughout the whole Earth; though hee might haply meete with some people without Gouernors, yet should he not euer meet with any without Gods. Siterras obeas, invenire possis vrbes, Muris, Li∣teris, Regibus,* 1.160 Domibus, Opibus, Numismate▪ carentes, Gymnasiorum etiam & Theatororum nescias; Vrbem, Templis Dijs{que} carentem, quae precibus, Iureiuran∣do, Oraculo non vtatur; non bonorum causa sacrificet, non mala sacris avertere nitatur; nemo vnquàm vidit: If thou walkest through the world, thou maist happen to finde, some City without walls, without letters, without Rulers, without Houses, without Riches, without Coynes, without Schooles for exercise, without Theaters for playes: but yet none at all, without Temples for their Gods. None, but they haue their Prayers, their Othes, their Oracles, their Sacrifices, for either the obtaining of such things as are good, or for the declining of those that are e∣uill. A City without these things, was neuer yet seene with mans eyes. Which ob∣seruation of his, is likewise confirmed, euen by our owne Trauellers: who in

what place soeuer they set foote vpon ground, in any of the inhabited partes of the world; wheresoeuer they haue found Cities, they like∣wise haue found Temples, and Altars, and Priests, and sacrifices, and vowes, & invocations, and other the* 1.161 Essentials of religion. And yet in their voyages, both to the East and West Indies, they haue met with diuers people, without Law, without Gouernement, without Order, without Garment,* 1.162 walking o∣p••nly starck naked,* 1.163 etiam sine subligaculo; and yet are not ashamed: but that, not vpon impudencie, as the Adamite Heretiques, but vpon meere simplicitie, as Adam himselfe in the time of his innocencie: who, though hee then were na∣ked, yet was he not ashamed, nor euer sought this subligaculum, vntill sinne had brought in shame. They meete (I say) in diuers Countries, with many people, without Garments, without Lawes, and without all ciuill orders; but none at all, without Gods: as Paulus Ventus obserueth of the people of Ferl••ch: Nullam habent legem, sed bestialiter viuunt: quicquid tamen ill is ma∣••è primùin occurrit, adorant. They haue no Rule of Lawes but liue like Beasts, re∣ligiously adoring what they first meete euery morning.

They finde no people, no Country, no Nation, either so disordered in their affection, or so despoyled of all reason,* 1.164 as to be without religion;* 1.165 or to be without a God, though neuer so base, or bad; though but a sticke with a nicke, as the Samoeds haue of the riuer Ob. Which seuerall Gods of seuerall nations are largely recorded by Alexander ab Alexandro, in the sixt of his Bookes of Geniall dayes. c. 261. p. 321. b.

4. Which base and vile things,* 1.166 no man would euer worship, but that there is a radicall and fundamentall conclusion, vnmoueably grounded in the heart of a man, that he ought to haue a God. And so not knowing where to finde him, hee will rather worship any thing, then hee will worship nothing. Hence some of the Heathen doe worship the Sunne,* 1.167 the Moone, the Starres: some the Fire, the Water, the Earth, the Ayre; some vnreasonable Beasts; as Oxen, and Horses: some hurtfull Serpents; as Crocodiles, and Vipers: Yea and some the very Deuill himselfe, Cacodaemones, as Clemens Alexandrinus there noteth: Daemonem Soradeum, as Athenaeus reporteth of the Indians:* 1.168 nay ipsum 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,* 1.169 in figura sua, sine vlla dissimulatione; as Lactantius spea∣keth in this very case: They worship the deuill, in his owne proper forme, with∣out any dissembling: Yea and that in the most ougly, that they can possibly imagine. Which idolatrie continueth in those Easterne Countries,* 1.170 very common and familiar,* 1.171 euen to these our owne dayes. A thing almost incre∣dible, that the eye of Mans reason should be so cleane put out; but that euen the Holy Scriptures doe avouch it for a truth, that the Deuill heretofore hath so blinded the mindes of wicked men, as to make them to worship, euen him for their God: as he most impudently attempted it, euen with our Sauiour Christ,* 1.172 his Lord & his God; whom yet he would haue had to haue worship∣ped him, for his God. And though with our Sauiour he could not preuaile, but receiued a foule foyle, yet preuailed he with the Heathens, and brought almost all of them to forsake God, and to worship him. For, as the Prophet Moses testifieth:* 1.173 The Heathens when they worship their Idols, vnder the name of Gods, worship indeed nothing elss, but only the Deuil himself. The Heathen (saith he) do offer vnto Deuils, & not vnto God. And, that this is very true, we may

euidently see, by comparing the old Testament, with the new. For, that same Idoll Beelzebub,* 1.174 which in the Old Testament is called the God of Ekron, is called in the New,* 1.175 The chiefest of the Diuells. So that it appeareth, that, ra∣ther then a man will haue no God at all, he will worship the very Diuell. He will worship euen the meanest of the creatures of God, rather then hee will lacke a God:* 1.176 A Weasell, as the Thebanes; A Mouse, as the Troians; yea, euen an Onion, or a Leeke, as they did once in Egypt.

Porrum,* 1.177 et caepe, nefas violare, ac frangere morsu. A Leeke, an Onion, O 'tis wickednesse! These once to violate; and to eate, no lesse.

Which their notorious folly, hee scoffeth and derideth, in the same place wost worthily:

O sanctas gents, quibus haec nascunt••r in hortis Numina.— Sweete Saints they are, and holy ones, I trow, To whom their Gods doe in their gardens grow.

Deos ollares,* 1.178 as such ridiculous Gods are called in contempt by Aristo∣phanes.* 1.179 Yet such is the force of Religion in a man, that it will make him wor∣ship any thing. He will Monstra quo{que} colere, as it is noted by Plinie: He will worship the foulest monsters: yea, hee will carry his Gods vpon his very fingers, as he addeth in the same place: yea, he will fall to worship his own very mem∣bers: Humerum dextrum,* 1.180 aut sinistrum, aut Capitis dimidium, as is noted euen by Lucian. He will worship his owne hand, if he haue none other God; yea, or the worke of his owne hand, or any thing whatsoeuer commeth next vnto his hand. For the Bramenes in the East,* 1.181 and the Lappones in the North, doe both of them worship,* 1.182 for the God of that day, the first thing that they meet, when they rise vp in the morning,* 1.183 whatsoeuer it be, though but a Mouse, a Worme, a Fly. In another Prouince of the East-India, they adore and worship the Tooth of an Ape: and haue made bloody warres to be possessed of it.

In another prouince of the northerne Climate, called Baida, they doe wor∣ship for their God a piece of a red clout, tied vnto a crosse sticke, in the man∣ner of a Banner.* 1.184 Neither can they giue any good account, why they should worship such a God, but onely that it hath beene left vnto them by an olde Tradition, by their Ancesters before them. It may seeme in probability, some relique of Christianity, and some remembrance of Christs Crosse; since that region once was Christian; though now the true vse of it be corrupted through time: it differing not much in the out-ward forme, from that Banner, which we reade to haue beene made by great Constantine in the representati∣on of our Sauiour Christs crucifying. For we reade of a like example, in the Islands of Acusamil, where they doe worship a Crosse, for the God of the Raine; and yet cannot tell who made it, nor from whence it came. But, it is very likely, to be some monument of Christianity, left there by some Christi∣ans, who haue heretofore taken landing in that place: for in diuers others they doe meete with like signes, which are likewise abused by those simple In∣dians. Those foolish gods, doe those foolish Nations worship; more foo∣lish indeed, then the gods whom they worship. The Athenians, not much in this point wiser, did consecrate, amongst their Gods, Contumeliam, and Imp••∣dentiam:

which Tullie very iustly reproueth in them,* 1.185 that they should, Viti•• consecrare: That they should consecrate for their gods, the very vices of Men. But,* 1.186 aboue all, the follie of the Romanes doth well deserue the Bell. For they worshipped, not onely many idle and ridiculous gods; as, Fortunam, Victo∣riam Volupiam:* 1.187 but also, diuers Bawdie gods; Floram, Venerem, Faul••m, and Priapam:* 1.188 Yea and some Beastly gods two; as, Cloacinam, and Sterquilinum: in∣somuch that (as Clemens Romanus reporteth) they did, Crepitus ventris vene∣rari pro Numinibus.—A filthy Dunghill of stincking gods,* 1.189 well deseruing that reproch, which is cast vpon some of them, by Aristophanes, that they be but Dij merdiuori. For, so, their Cloacina may be truly sayd to be. And so the Prophet Moses calleth them, in expresse and plaine words, Dunghill gods, as the Originall is rendred by our last Translators.* 1.190 And diuers other such absurd gods they worshipped, which it is almost a shame but to haue named, as Sybilla hath truly noted.

—Haec adoratis,* 1.191 Et alia multa vana, quae sanè turpe fuerit praedicare, Sunt enim Dij hominum deceptores stultorum. These foolish gods, and many more Like vaine, Ye worship and adore, Which filthy were to name in Schooles, Such filthy gods deceiue but Fooles.

And therefore I ouerpasse them with S. Augustines transition; Non omnia commemoro, quia me piget, quod illos non puduit: These gods make me halfe asha∣med to name them,* 1.192 although they themselues were not ashamed to worship them. Which seemeth to me little lesse then a wonder, that the Romanes, so wise and so seuere a nation, yet should shew themselues so foolish in the vse of their Re∣ligion. But this sedulitie of mans soule about such false gods, must needs importe vnto vs, that it thinkes there is a true one. And thus you plainely see by all the former instances, that there is no Nation so Barbarous, but it will haue a God, though neuer so ridiculous. Which euidently proueth, that this one conclusion [That there is a God.] is a generall principle, throughout the whole world, wherein all kinde of people remaine still of one language, euen after the generall confusion of tongues: conspiring more fully in this one common principle, then they doe in any other, either of Art, or Nature. For which I referre you, to the next insuing Chapter.

5. Let me onely here (for the Close of this present) giue you but this one note. That I find it obserued,* 1.193 by diuers of the learned, that, beside those great and most renowned gods, which were called Dij maiorum Gentium, and were worshipped generally throughout the greatest part of the world; euery seuerall Countrie (and almost euery Citie) selected to themselues,* 1.194 their pe∣culiar gods, which they called, Deos Tutelares, that is, the Guardians, and De∣fendors, and Patrons of their Countries: of whom Tullie giueth vs some in∣stances, that, the Alabandians, did worship for their Patron, Alabandus;* 1.195 the Tenedians, Tenes; the whole Countrie of Greece, Hercules, AEsculapius, Ca∣stor and Pollux: and these he calleth nouos & ascriptitios Cives, in Coelum re∣••ceptos, that is to say, new gods, taken lately into heauen, as new Citizens are

receiued into their new Citie.* 1.196 So Lucian. Per Regiones, illos distributos colunt, ••••s{que} velut in ciuitatem suam receptant: As the Gods haue gratified Men, in receiuing some of them amongst themselues into heauen: so Men haue regratia∣ted them againe, in receiuing of them into their Cities vpon earth, as their proper and peculiar Gods. And then he giueth some instances: Apollinem, Del∣phi Delij{que} Minervam, Athenienses; Argivi, Iunonem; Migdonij, Rheam; Venerem, Paphij; Cretenses, Iovem. And a great many other he reckoneth vp in Ioue Tragaedo. Tertullian,* 1.197 he giueth vs diuers other instances. Vnicui{que} Pro∣uinciae, & Ciuitati, Deus suus est: vt Syriae, Astartes; vt Arabiae, Disares; vt Norici, Belenus; vt Africae, Coelestis; vt Mauritaniae, Reguli sui: There is no Country, no Citie, but it hath his proper God: the Syrians, Astartes; the Arabi∣ans, Disares; the Noricians, Belenus; the Affricans, Coelestis; and the Maurita∣nians, their owne Kings. And then he proceedeth to declare, that this is not onely the generall Religion of euery Countrie, but also the particular of e∣uery Citie: whereof he hath also giuen instances vnto vs. Crustuminensium, Belventinus; Narni••nsium, Viridianus; Asculanorum, Ancaria; Volsiniensium Nersia; Ocriculanorum, Valentia; Sutrinorum, Nortia; Faliscorum, Curis; &c. naming the neighbour Cities round about Rome it selfe: who yet, not con∣tented with the generall Gods of their Countrie, would needs haue their peculiars,* 1.198 euery Cittie for it selfe.* 1.199 Lactantius yet addeth other instances vn∣to these. Summa veneratione coluerunt AEgyptij, Isidem; Mauri, Iubam; Ma∣cedones, Cabyrum; Paeni, Vranum; Latini, Faunum; Sabini, Sancum; Romani, Quirinum; eodem vti{que} modo Athenae Mineruam, Samos Iunonem, Paphos Ve∣nerem, Lemnos Vulcanum, Naxos Liberum, Delphi Apollinem. The AEgypti∣ans doe worship their Cabyrus: the Carthaginians their Vranus: the Latines their Faunns: the Sabines their Sancus: the Romanes their Romulus: and so the Atheni∣ans their Minerua: the Samians their Iuno: the Paphians their Venus: the Lemni ans their Vulcane: the Naxians their Bacchus: the Delphians their Apollo. And the like no doubt they could easily haue shewed of all the other Nations and Cities of the world, if they had purposely intended a set worke vpon that point, which here they haue touched but lightly by the way, as wee may partly see by that rabble of them, which Rabshakeh so rouled out, in his luxu∣rious and Asiaticall Oration vnto King Hezechiah.* 1.200 Where is the God of Ha∣mah, and of Arpad? Where is the God of Sepharuaim, Heuah, and Ivah? But a great deale more plainly in that reprehension of Ieremie, wherewith he per∣stringeth the idolatrie of the Iewes,* 1.201 that; according to the number of their Cit∣ties, was the number of their Gods. Whereby it appeareth, that they con∣tented not themselues with their owne God, Iehovah, though he were, vnto them,* 1.202 both Deus Patrius, The God of their Fathers, The most ancient God; and Deus Tutelaris, The God of their Countrie, their most carefull God, The Keeper of Israel,* 1.203 Protecting and defending them,* 1.204 and watching ouer them, a great deale more vigilantly, then euer any Watchman doth ouer his owne Citie: as the Prophet Dauid hath expressely testified. But yet, for all that, they would haue (beside him) ouer euery seuerall Citie, a seuerall God: else could he not haue sayd, that the number of their Gods had equalled the number of their Cities. Which vanitie they affected, vpon an itching humor,* 1.205 to be like vn∣to their nei••••bour Nations, as well in this, as in many other things. And

this also may be gathered, by those High Places, which Salomon builded for his idolatrous Wiues: wherein they worshiped the seuerall Gods, of their seuerall Nations: Ashtareth, the Goddesse of the Sidonians; and Milcom, the God of the Amorites;* 1.206 Chemosh, the God of the Moabites; and Molech, the God of the Ammonites: and so likewise for all the rest of his Out-landish Wiues, which burnt incense and offered vnto their Gods. Whereby it ap∣peareth, that euery seuerall Nation had a God of his owne.

As yet further may be seene by the practise of those Nations, which Sal∣manezer transplanted into the Samaritane Cities: of whom it is recorded, that,* 1.207 thogh they feared the Lord, yet they worshipped euery one his owne peculiar God:* 1.208 Of whom there is a Catalogue in the same place set downe;* 1.209 The Babilo∣nians, Succoth-Benoth; the men of Cuth, Nergal; the men of Hamath, Ashima; the Auites, Nibhaz & Tartak; the Sepharuites, Adrammelech & Anammelech.

Neither did Nations and Cities onely affect, to haue euery one vnto themselues, their owne peculiar and seuerall Gods,* 1.210 as their Patrons and Defenders: but the same was likewise followed, euen by all their seuerall families: who still had their Lares, and their Deos Penates, that is, their House∣hold gods; as the Protectors of their families: whom, because they set vp in the secret, and most inward parts of their houses, the Poets vse to call, Deos Penetrales. And with how great a religion they adored them, we may part∣ly see in Plautus:* 1.211 where, a Lar familiaris expresseth his worship thus.

—mihi cotidiè, Aut ture,* 1.212 aut vino, aut aliquî, semper supplicat: Dat mihi coronas.— Or Wine, or incense She lay's downe: She offer's something euery day. Her Garlands doe mine Altars crowne: And alwayes to me she doth pray.

And the same we may likewise collect, by that wonderfull perturbation, which is reported to haue bene, both in Micah,* 1.213 and Laban, when their House∣hold Gods were stolne from them. Yee haue taken away my Gods, and my Priests, and goe your wayes, and what haue I more? Yea, and (as Plinie repor∣teth) not only seuerall families had their seuerall Gods, but also euery seuerall person would adopt a seuerall God of his owne: insomuch that he thought th•• number of Gods to be multiplyed aboue the number of men. Maior Coelitum populus, etiam quam Hominum in telligi potest, cùm singuli quo{que}, ex semet-ipsis,* 1.214 singulos Deos faciant, Iunones, Geniós{que} adoptando sibi. We may see greater multitudes of Gods, then of Men: seeing euery man adopteth, as he pleaseth, both greater, and smaller Gods, vnto himselfe.

And thus, you plainly see, that there is neither Nation, nor City, nor Family, in the world, but that it is perswaded, that There is a God; and that they cannot containe, but that they needs must worship him, at the least in their intention, howsoeuer there be error or imperfection in their action. So that, for the first branch of Tullies gradation; you see he erred not, That there is not any Nation, but it hath his Religion: None of them all so wicked, but beleeueth There is a God. Quod quidem non solùm fatetur Graecus,* 1.215 sed & Barbarus; sed & Insularum, & Continentis habitator; & ipsi

deni{que}, qui sapientiam abnegant: as Maximus Tyrius affirmeth. This (saith he) is confessed both by Greekes and Barbarians; both by Islanders, and Continen∣ters, yea, euen those which renounce al vnderstanding and wisedom; yet do not re∣moue Religion; but hold that fast within them. And as, in a like case, by Se∣neca it is obserued:* 1.216 Totus populus in alio discors, in hoc conuenit. All the peo∣ple of the world, though dissenting in all other thing, yet consent, There is a God. Let vs therefore now proceed vnto Tullies second instance, and see whether, as all Nations, so all conditions of men, be inwardly perswaded, that There is a God.

CHAP. 5.

That all sorts of men, of all degrees, and orders, do beleeue, There is a God, is particularly declared by instance of Poets. 2. Of Law-giuers. 3. Of philo∣sophers. 4. And of all other seuerall Arts and Professions.

OF all those generall Notions which are begotten in the minde,* 1.217 and are thought to be the first grounds of the very law of Na∣ture; there is not any one of them, which is either so early bred, or so largely spred, or so deepely rooted in the hearts of all men, as is this one conclusion; That There is a God. Nay, a Conclu∣sion it is not (if we will properly speake) but rather a Principle, yea and that so naturally bred in the soul: that (as Aristotle affirmeth) it needeth not any corporeall instrument, to make it beleeue it. Anima intelligit Deum scientiâ ••uiusmodi,* 1.218 quae non est per organon corporale. Nay, the name of a Principle is not sufficient for it: It is Ante Principium, rather then Principium: or (as A∣quinas calleth it) Praeambula ad Articulos: A Praeamble vnto the first Articles of Christian beleefe.* 1.219 For, many men beleeue this, that beleeue none other Ar∣ticle in the body of our Creede.* 1.220 Nay all men agree, in the beleefe of this one point, who agre not in any other, either of Art, or Nature: not in Lawes: for many men doe liue without any rule of Law; as in the old time, the Cyclops: yea, and sometime, the very Israelites themselues: Not in marriage: for many haue liued as licentiously,* 1.221 and loosely, as if they were bruite beasts, hauing on∣ly the name of Marriage, as a couer for their lusts: as the 1 Babilonians, and 2 Lacedemonians, the 3 Gindanes, and 4 Tyrrheniaus. No not in Society it selfe: for diuers people, in diuers nations, doe liue, as meere Nomades: that is, Strag∣glers and Wanderers: Hic non habentes manentem ciuitatem, as the Apostle speaketh, not hauing any fixedor certaine place of abiding. Only therein do al agree,* 1.222 in all the corners of the Earth, that they will haue a God, such an one as he is. And this we haue seene verified, by all the knowne Nations and Ci∣ties of the World.* 1.223 Let vs now goe one step further, and see; whether, as wee haue found the truth of this in all Nations, so we can finde it likewise in all Conditions of men:* 1.224 which was Tullies second instance.

For our better & more orderly proceeding wherein,* 1.225 I will tread in Plutarch's steps:* 1.226 who hath named vnto vs three speciall sorts of men, that are knowne, of all other, to agree least together: and yet, in this one point, of beleeuing, There is a God, doe so notably consent, as if they all were led but by one and

the same spirit: that is, Poets, Lawgiuers, and Philosophers. Omnes Poetae, Legum∣l••••or••s, Philosophi,* 1.227 vno∣ore dicu••t, Deum esse. All Poets, Lawgiuers, and Phi∣losophers, doe affirme, There is a God, with one consenting voyce (saith he.) Let vs looke into the parts of this Enumeration, and examine the truth of euery one of them.

And first, concerning Poets:* 1.228 I haue shewed you before, that all of them, in the beginning of their Poems, doe vsually call vpon, either the Gods, or the Muses: as may easily be demonstrated out of all their writings, especially in their greater and more solemne workes: and is generally obserued of them, by Lucian, in his booke De Sacrificijs. Which euidently proueth, that they had within them a grounded opinion, that There is a God. For no man is so mad, as to inuocate any thing, that he thinketh hath no being. But, as concer∣ning Poets, it is commonly beleeued, both by themselues and others, that their very Art hath a more speciall and immediate dependence vpon a di∣uine influence, then any other of all the Arts beside. In which point let me de∣liuer vnto you the opinion of Plato, who handleth it ex professo, in his Dia∣logue called Io: where he deliuereth expresly, these three positions, vnto vs. First, that,* 1.229 Ipsa Musa Poetas diuino instinctu concitat, That the Muses them∣selues doe vse to stirre vp Poets,* 1.230 by an inward and a diuine instinct: whereupon they be called by Tullie, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, A Musis tacti: or (in some sense) de coe∣lo tacti; as the Prophet Isaiah was, when as one of the Angels had touched his lippes.

His second position is, that, Omnes Poetae in signes, non arte, sed diuino in∣flatu, praeclara poemata canunt: That all notable Poets make their excellent po∣ems, not by vertue of their owne arte, or former instruction, but onely by meanes of a diuine inspiration.* 1.231 Whereupon they are called Vates, à vi mentis (as I∣sidore obserueth) out of Varro: and by Ennius,* 1.232 Sancti: because they bee diui∣no quodam spiritu afflati. His third, That therefore priùs canere non possunt, quam Deo pleni sint:* 1.233 They be not able to make any poëm, before they be euen fil∣led with the breath and spirit of God: as Pipes cannot make any musicall har∣mony, if the breath of some Musition be not breathed into them. And there∣upon (in another place) he called them, Deorum Prophetas: as S. Paule like∣wise doth; that is, the Prophets of the Gods,* 1.234 or Speakers outwardly of those di∣uine things, which before haue inwardly beene inspired into their minds: for so the name of a Prophet signifieth. Whereby he insinuateth, that the whole faculty of Poets dependeth much more vpon a diuine incitation, then either vpon any naturall gift, or any artificiall instruction and teaching. And this he there confirmeth, by two obseruations. The first whereof is this, that diuers of the Poets, being (at their beginning) but very ignorant Bardes; yet haue had on a suddaine, a notable faculty infused into them, whereby they haue made very excellent Poems: as in the same place he instanceth in Tynnichus Chalcidensis.* 1.235 (And Maximus Tyrius affirmeth the same of Hesiodus.) From whence he there collecteth, Poetas nihil esse aliud quàm Deorum interpretes: That Poets are nothing else, but onely Gods Interpreters. The Poems they make are his; and they, but the Reciters. Quod quidem Deus ostendere volens, de industria, per ineptissimum Poetam, pulcherrimam cecinit melodiam (saith hee in the same place,) Which God being willing to make knowne, he purposely in spired

the simplest Poët, to make the excellentest poeme. The second of his obseruations, is this: That in all Poesie (if it be good and worthy) there must be, not only an incitation, and commotion; but also an elocation, and emotion of the minde. The Poet must be, extra se positus, & a mente alie∣natus. Nam quamdiû quis mente valet, ne{que} fingere carmina, ne{que} fundere oracula quis quam potest. As long as a man is in a calme, & setled estate of his mind, he can neither make verses, nor giue out oracles. From whence he insi∣nuateth, that it is not he himselfe, but his inward God that speaketh. Which his two obseruations,* 1.236 may further be confirmed, by a third of Ficinus, in his Argument of that Booke: That oftentimes, many Poets, when they reade their owne poems, do hardly vnderstand themselues; or, what they meant, in many verses, apt enough vnto the matter, and plaine enough vnto their reader, yea plainer then to themselues: which could not haue fallen out, if those verses had bin made, by their owne proper spirit, and not by some o∣ther, within them;* 1.237 yet working far aboue them. And Iustin Martyr alledgeth this for one reason, why Sibilla'es verses be not made in true members: be∣cause, being spoken in an extasie, she knew not what she sayd, and that motion being ended, she could not amend them, hauing not the same spirit.

Yea, and euen the Poëts themselues haue the very same perswasion, that their whole Art dependeth vpon a diuine inspiration. From which only opinion, groweth all their forenamed so frequent inuocation, to haue their Gods to breathe into them:

—Dijcoeptis—* 1.238 Aspirate meis— Ye Gods, aspire To my desire.

acknowledging expressely, that all their faculty is from them.

Ab Ioue principium Musae—* 1.239 —illi mea carmina curae. My Muse beginn's by Ioue's behest: He mak's my Verses in request.

Yea, and Plato, in the forealledged place, affirmeth, that the Poets hold them∣selues to be,* 1.240 as it were, but the Bees of the Muses: a Musarum viridarijs, col∣libus{que}, carmina decerpentes;* 1.241 quemadmodum mel ex floribus apes: Gathering their Verses, out of the hills and medowes of the Muses, as Bees vse to do their hony, out of flowers. Which we may see to be true by Lucretius his con∣fession, vsing the same comparison. Whereby they insinuate, that, as Bees be not the Makers, but the Workers of their hony, which naturally falleth with the dew from heauen: so they be not the makers, but the bringers of their Verses:* 1.242 instar apum volantes, ad nos afferunt: (sayth Plato) but the verses themselues they do distil from heauen; as Manilius confesseth of them.

—Coelo carmen de••cendit ab alto.* 1.243 The golden shower of Poëts sweetest straine, Dropp's downe from Heauen, and so it flowe's amaine.

It it not the worke of the Poëts, but of the Gods. Yea,* 1.244 and Martial also insinuateth the same, euen in his scoffing and carping at Tullies versifying.

Carmina quòd s••ribis,* 1.245 Musis, & Apolline nullo, Laudari de bs, hoc Ciceronis habes. No sparke of Muses fire shine's in thy straine, That's thy chiefe praise, for loe, 'tis Tullies vaine.

Ascribing the cause of his ill successe in Verses, to be lacke of the assistance of Apollo, and the Muses: who are the proper, and tutelar God of Poëts. Now they, that are possessed with this religious opinion, that their owne Art proceedeth from an immediate inspiration; and who vse, in all their poems, to begin with inuocation; how is it possible, that these men should be tainted with Atheisme? Nay, Poets are so far from the sinne of Atheisme, that they haue bin the chiefest broachers of the sinne of Polytheisme.

2 Let vs now come to the second of Plutarch's instances;* 1.246 that is, vnto Lawgiuers; and see, whether any of them haue beene Atheists? or any so vn∣godly, as to be without a God? For which point, it is a thing that is worthy obseruation, that, though diuers of the Lawgiuers haue beene so carried, with an inward emulation, that, onely vpon meere enuie, they haue often-times condemned, what their neighbours haue allowed; and often-times allowed, what their neighbors haue condemned; as we may euidently see, by the con∣trary Constitutions of the Lacedaemonians, and Athenians: yet, that no enuie, no aemulation was euer able to worke so great a distraction betweene any of them, as to make them decerne, there should be no God, because their neigh∣bors had allowed it. But,* 1.247 In tanta pugna, ac dissonantia, nusquàm gentium cer∣nere est, aut leges, aut rationes, non in hoc saltem omnes conuenire, Quòd vnus Deus, princeps ac pater omnium existat (saith Maximus Tyrius:) In all their great dissention, both about their Lawes, and about the reason of their lawes; yet they still consent in this, That there is a God, who is both the Ruler, and the fa∣ther of the World. All of them in this are fully of one minde, that they will haue a God; as knowing well ynough, that Piteie is the bond of all humaine societie, and Religion the foundation of euery Citie, both gathering men, and holding them vnanimously together; who else would quickly shatter cleane asunder.

And therefore (saith Plutarch) that,* 1.248 In constitutione Legum, opinio de Diis et primum est, et maximum: That in the making of Lawes, both the first, and the greatest point, is to plant in mens mindes an opinion of the Gods: without which, he there affirmeth, Facilius vrbem condi, si••e solo, quàm civitatem coire, sine opinione de Deo: That it is not more impossible, to builde a Citie without a foundatiou, then to gather Citizens without Religion. And therefore, all wise Lawgiuers do place those Lawes first, and (as it were) in the front of their Tables, which they haue ordayned for the honor of God: and then those that belong to the good of the kingdome:* 1.249 as we may see, in Moses Lawes, whose first law is this; Thou shalt haue none other Gods but me. This is Gods owne method, and that both in speaking, and in wri∣ting of his Lawes: and the same hath likewise beene followed by diuers o∣ther Lawgiuers, euen of the very Heathen. Zaleucus beginneth his Lawes with this preface:* 1.250 Omnes homines, qui vrbem & regionem inhabitant, per∣sua••os esse oportet, esse Deos: All the Men in the world, that either inhabite a∣ny Citie or any Countrie, ought firmely to be perswaded, That there is a God.

And then he proceedeth to set downe certaine Rites and Ceremonies, for the worshipping of the Gods, before he praescribe any, for the societie of men. And so likewise Tullie in the setting downe of his Lawes: the first whereof be these.

Ad Diuos adeunto castè.* 1.251 Pietatem adhiben••o. Opes amovento. Qui secùs faxit, Deus ipse vindex erit. If any man doe otherwise, God himselfe will revenge it. Come chastly and purely vnto the Gods. Vse Pietie, when you are come. Doe things comely, but not costly.

These be his first Lawes: which (as you see) directly belong vnto God. So, those Fragments of the twelue Tables, which, as yet, are to be found; haue the first of them, belonging vnto God. Sacra priuata perpetuò manento: esta∣blishing, not onely those holy Constitutions that haue beene ordayned by publique Lawes; but also, euen those likewise, that haue beene appointed by priuate families,* 1.252 for their owne proper religions. Yea and euen those Lawes, which are referred to the ancient Romane Kings, long before those twelue Ta∣bles; yet haue the first of them belonging to the Gods.

Ne quid inauguratò faciunto. Let nothing be done but by sacred diuillation. Patres, sacra Magistratús{que} soli peragunto, ineunto{que} Let onely Senators be Magistrates,* 1.253 and performe holy actions.

Both appointing sacred actions, and who shall be their Actors. Which argu∣eth, that none of them haue beene without their Gods:* 1.254 either vpon piety,* 1.255 or,* 1.256 at least, vpon policie. Pharaoh would not buy the lands of the Priests, though he bought all the rest. Hippodamus gaue the third part of the whole land vnto them: and both these, in honor of their gods. Yea, and this also is a thing that is very obseruable, that all the ancient Lawgiuers, haue giuen out vnto their people; that in the making of their Lawes, they haue beene assisted, by some or other of the gods. By that meanes, both to bring vnto their Lawes greater re∣uerence; & to work their people towards them, vnto greater obedience, as Dio∣dorus Siculus collecteth, who reckoneth vp a whole Catalogue of those Law∣giuers, who haue fathered their Lawes vpon the Gods: as namely, Menes, the Lawgiuer of the Aegyptians; who perswaded that people, that he receiued his Lawes frō the learned god Mercury. So Minos, the Lawgiuer of the Cretians; who perswaded that people, that he receiued his Lawes from the mighty god Iupiter. So Lycurgus, the Lawgiuer of the Lacedaemonians; who perswaded that people, that he receiued his Lawes from the wise god Apollo. So Latray∣stes, the Lawgiuer of the Arians (or Arimaspians, for so the Greeke is) perswa∣ded that people, that he receiued his Lawes from the mighty god Iupiter. So Lycurgus, the Lawgiuer of the Lacedaemonians; who perswaded that people, that he receiued his Lawes from the wise god Apollo. So Latray∣stes, the Lawgiuer of the Arians (or Arimaspians, for so the Greeke is) perswa∣ded that people, that he receiued his Lawes from a certaine god whose name is not expressed. So Zamolxis, the Lawgiuer of the Getians; perswaded that people, that he receiued his Lawes from the holy goddesse Vesta. And he addeth also Moses, the Lawgiuer of the Iewes, who perswaded that peo∣ple,* 1.257 that he receiued his Lawes from the holy goddesse Vesta. And he addeth also Moses, the Lawgiuer of the Iewes, who perswaded that people, that he receiued his Lawes from the mouth of God Ioa:* 1.258 alluding, as it seemeth, to the Hebrew word, Iah. Yea and he might well perswade them so: for they themselues heard God himselfe when he spake to them with his owne mouth. Vnto which Lawgiuers, thus named by him, I may adde diuers other, who are named elsewhere:* 1.259 as namely, Numa Pompilius, the Lawgiuer of the Romans; who perswaded that people, that hee receiued his Lawes from the

M••ses, and from a Nymph called Egeria. And so likewise Zaleu••us, the Law∣giuer of the Locrians,* 1.260 perswaded that people,* 1.261 that he receiued his Lawes from the goddesse Minerua.* 1.262 And generally the Greekes ascribed their Lawes vn∣to the making of Iupiter, as to their supreme Lawgiuer: as it may be gathered out of Homer: where Achilles swearing by his Scepter, he saith, it is Insigne Praiorum Principum, in iure populis dicundo, & in custodiendis ex Ioue Legibus. The Ensigne of the Graecian Princes, both in iudging of their Subiects, and in keeping of their Lawes, receiued from Iupiter, the chiefest of their gods. So that they thought a••l their Lawes to draw their first originall from Iupiter, as from their first Author; though conueyed to particular Countries, and Cities, by the ministery of other inferior gods. But vnto gods they all ascribe them: the wiser sort, vnto the Author; the simpler, vnto the Messenger. Whereupon Architas calleth the gods, parentes, ac Principes scriptarum Legum: The Lords and parents of the written Lawes.* 1.263 And therefore,* 1.264 saith Hierocles, that we ought to obserue the Lawes of our Countrey, as if they had in them a kinde of di∣uinity. Oportet Leges Patriae, tanquam alteros Deos obseruare.* 1.265 For, as Plato truely noteth in the very beginning of his Booke. De Legibus: It is Deus. et n••n Homo, qui legum condendarum est causa. It is not Man, but God, that is the true cause of the making of good Lawes. Which honour is a∣scribed to God himselfe, euen in the holy Scripture:* 1.266 By me Kings reigne, and Princes decree Iustice, that is, make iust Lawes. Iniustice they may decree of themselues (and there is a woe pronounced against such wicked Law-ma∣kers) but they cannot decree Iustice, but onely by him. So that, it is truely sayd in Iob: that Nullus ei similis in Legistatoribus: There is none like vnto him, amongst all the Lawgiuers. Nay, he is indeed the onely true Lawgiuer;* 1.267 &, in the whole world, there is not another: as the Apostle S. Iames plainely testifieth vnto vs: There is but one Lawgiuer, who is able to saue, and to destroy,* 1.268 and that is he. So that, all other Nations, as well as the Iewes, may truly pro∣fesse; The Lord is our Iudge,* 1.269 and the Lord is our Lawgiuer, or (as it is in the Hebrewes) Statute-maker: Howsoeuer the Heathen Lawgiuers haue robbed the true God of that honour, and ascribed it falsely vnto others. But thus you see, that all Lawgiuers, as it were, by a compact, haue agreed together in this common sense, to ascribe all their lawes, vnto the making of their Gods. And therefore, none of them could possibly be Atheists, at least in outward profes∣sion; no not euen by their profession, in that they were Lawgiuers.

Neither could the people that were vnder them be of any other dispositi∣on: both because of that inward naturall instinct, which inforceth euery man to worship some God; and because, by nature also, all Subiects are Imitators of their rulers; and because againe, all rulers praeserue their owne Religion by coerciue Lawes: as Iosephus instanceth in Socrates, Anaxagoras, Diagoras,* 1.270 and Protagoras, all of them seuerally mulcted for the opinion of their impieties against the Gods. So that, if any man would not be religious, for loue; yet durst he not be irreligious, for feare.

3 Let vs now proceede vnto Plutarch's third instance, that is,* 1.271 vnto Philoso∣phers; and see, whether any of them haue beene Atheists. Wherein it cannot be denied, but that those infamous persons, who haue beene noted by their name, to be Atheists; haue, all of them, beene, by their profession, Philosophers.

But yet this againe may be truly affirmed of them: that, howsoeuer some per∣ticular men of that profession, may haply haue beene infected with Atheis∣me; yet that there was neuer any Sect or Familie of them, but that it was of a cleane contrary profession. There was neuer any sect of Philosophers that were professed Atheists: No, nor yet neuer any, but professed the cleane con∣trarie. And yet, it cannot be dissembled, but that all the Philosophers haue had so infinite auiditie, and appetite of glory; that none of them could say any thing, though with neuer so great reason, but that some other would oppose it, and hold the contrary vnto it, were it neuer so absurd. Yea, and this fell out, as well among their whole families, as amongst priuate per∣sons: the Stoicks, perpetually opposing the Epicures; the Peripatetikes, them both; the Academikes, them all. Insomuch, that their contentions and digla∣diatious grew to be so notorious, as made them all ridiculous: as that bitter scoffe of Seneca very notably declareth; That, Faciliùs inter Philosophos, quàm inter horologia convenit: That Philosophers agree together like Clocks. But yet in this grand point of acknowledging a God,* 1.272 there is amongst them all an in∣credible agreement.* 1.273 Here, the Clocks strike all together. You may see a Cata∣logue of all their opinions, in Tullies first Booke of the Nature of the Gods, representing vnto vs so notable a discord, in their particular conceits, What this God should be, that neuer Clocks iarred more: but yet so great a concord, in their generall opinions, That a God there is, as neuer Clocks agreed bet∣ter. There, euery man venteth his owne priuate conceite, what he thought to be his God: No man denieth him, No man adorneth disputation against him, Nay, no man so much as once doubteth of him: No not, euen Protagoras himselfe, if he be rightly construed: though his words were rackt vnto it, and for that cause he exiled. For he said not, that he doubted, whe∣ther there were gods, or no, but, that he would not, as then, dispute, whether there were any, or no? De Diuis, ne{que} vt sint, ne{que} vt non sint, habeo dicere: gi∣uing onely a reason of his silent praetrition.* 1.274 And therefore,* 1.275 Caecilius doth secretly perstringe the Athenians iniustice, & excuseth Protagoras, that he did consultè potius, quàm prophanè disputare: He spake more warily, then wickedly. So that, all these recited doe affirme, There is a God. There is no man saith of God, as some doe of the Soule, Nihil esse omninò Deum, et hoc esse totum inane nomen:* 1.276 That God is a thing of nothing, and that the name of God is but an empty name: but they all doe acknowledge both the Name and the Thing.

Now looke into these foure seuerall sects of Philosophers, which are the most noted, and noble of them; and you shall see, that they doe all notably agree in this, though in very few things else. Plato, the father of the Acade∣mikes,* 1.277 not onely affirmeth,* 1.278 that There is a God;* 1.279 but he also confirmeth it, by inuincible reasons. Yea, and euery where almost, he speaketh so diuinely, of Gods diuine Maiestie, that (as Eusebius reporteth) he was called Moses At∣ticus, that is, the Athenian Moses: as if he had seene God face to face, as is reported of the Hebrew Moses, as Iustin Martyr noteth. Plato perindè at{que} coelitùs descenderit, at{que} ea quae sursum sunt accuratè didicerit, ac peruider it om∣nia; Summum Deum, in ignea essentia esse dicit: Plato, as if he were newly dropt downe out of heauen, and had there learned exactly those things that are aboue; he maketh his God to be of a firie substance. Yea and euen therein also hee a∣greeth

in some sorte, with Moses: The Lord thy God is a consuming fire.

Aristotle, the Father of the Peripateticks, affirmeth,* 1.280 not only That there is a God; but also, that he is both the Maker, and the Sauiour of the world. Deus, sine dubio, Seruator omnium est, et Parens eorum, quae in mundo conficiuntur: God, without all doubt, is both the Conseruer, & Creator of all things in the world. A most diuine saying of an Heathen man! And many other the like there be throughout that whole Booke. Which hath occasioned some men,* 1.281 to doubt of the credit and authoritie of it, as not being truly his; grounding vpon but sleight and very weake coniectures. I may not stand to discusse vp∣on euery Authoritie: whether the Booke then alledged be the Authors pro∣perly? For then we should haue so many, and so great digressions, as would turne to be transgressions. And therefore in all places, I take them, as I finde them, without any curious or strict examination: knowing, that euen those Bookes, which are thought to be supposed; yet are, for the most part, both ancient, and learned: and that, if they appeared in the name of their owne Authors, they would be no lesse approued, then they be now in theirs, vpon whom they be fathered: as I could plentifully instance. Yea, and Viues con∣iectureth,* 1.282 euen in this present instance, that though it were not Aristotles; yet it might be Theophrastus his. But, both Lucius Apuleius, in his Booke De Mundo; and Augustinus Eugubinus, asserteth it directly, vnto Aristotle him∣selfe: Yea, and Eugubinus affirmeth it to haue beene,* 1.283 as it were,* 1.284 his Retractation. Wherein he hath both recognized, and epitomized all his owne former wri∣tings; reforming his owne errours: and reporting both the opinions of other Philosophers more truly; and his owne more plainely, then in all his other workes. But, howsoeuer this be: though this booke were none of his; yet doth he affirme as much in his Metaphysikes, which are,* 1.285 without all quaestion, his. For there he saith directly, that Deus est rerum omnium, et cause, et principium: That God is both the cause, and the beginning of all things. A direct and plaine Confession.

So Zeno the Father of the Stoicks (as Tully expressely calleth him) doth not only beleeue, That there is a God; but also, That there is but one only God: and that he is the Maker and Creator of the world, who is sometimes called Mens, sometimes Fate, sometimes Ioue, and by diuers such like names. Vnum Deum esse;* 1.286 ipsum{que} & Mentem,* 1.287 & Fatum, & Iouem, mult••s{que} alijs appellari nominibus. And then he proceedeth to declare, in what order, this one God created the world. Yea, and, a little after, he defineth God, to be, Animal immortale, rationale, perfectum, ac beatum; a malo omni remotissimum; pro∣uidentia sua Mundum, & qu••e sunt in Mundo, administrans omnia. A sub∣stance liuing, euerliuing, reasonable, perfect, and blessed; farre remoued from any euill; ruling, onely by his prouidence, both all the whole World, and all the things therein contained.

And so likewise Epicurus,* 1.288 the Father of the Epicures: Qu••m nihil puden∣dum pudet, tamen Deum negare pudet: as one very wittily writeth of him: Though he were not ashamed of any shamefull thing, yet was he ashamed to deny There is a God: as reckoning this the greatest shame that can be: because all the whole world affirmeth the contrary. Euen he (I say) though he deny, that God ruleth the world; yet doth he not deny, but That there is a God: Nay,

he affirmeth that: accompting it a lesse absurdity to haue a God that is idle; then to be so idle, as to haue none at all. Their Notion of the gods was, that they were Beati, & Aeterni: sed nec habere ipsos quicquam negotij, nec exhibere alteri: That they were blessed, and eternall: neither hauing any businesse to do of themselues, nor yet exhibiting any vnto others.* 1.289

Thus all the foure Patriarchs of the chiefe Philosophers were fully of one minde, that there needs must be a God. And Iosephus affirmeth the like of all the rest. Et Pythagoras,* 1.290 & Anaxagoras, & Plato, & post illos Philosophi Stoici, & paenè cuncti videntur de Diuina sapuisse Natura: Nay, not paenè cuncti, but planè cuncti:* 1.291 as Maximus Tyrtus affirmeth: Opiniones Deorum a cunctis Phi∣losophis receptae sunt. Both Pythagoras, and Anaxagoras, and Plato, and the Stoicks▪ and almost all the other (nay altogether all the other) haue had some vn∣der standing of the Diuine Nature. In this point, euen the Philosophers them∣selues are Christians.* 1.292 And therefore Tertullian calleth God Philosophorum Deum: because they did so generally, all the sorts of them, confesse him.

So that we may truly say with Varro: Ecce, ad nos accedit cana veritas, At∣tic••e philosophiae alumna: Behold, the ancient truth commeth now directly to vs, euen from the Philosophers of Athens:* 1.293 the very Heathens in this point, agree∣ing with vs Christians. Nay, Christians themselues agree not so well about many points, euen of their owne Religion; as in this point the very Heathens consent and agree with them.* 1.294 For (as Tertullian obserueth) Alij de Idolo∣thyto edendo, alij de mulierum velamento, alij de nuptijs vel repudijs, nonnulli & de spe resurrectionis disceptabant: de Deo, nemo: Euen of professed Christi∣ans, some haue doubted, and disputed, of meate offered vnto Idols; some of wo∣mens vayles and wimples; some, of marriages and diuorces; yea, and some of the hope euen of the Resurrection: but yet none at all of God. No man here makes any doubt, no man moueth any question, no man adorneth any kinde of dis∣putation: not onely no Christians amongst themselues; but none of all the Philosophers,* 1.295 neither one against another,* 1.296 nor yet any against Christians. They that in al other things are like Cadmus his men, euery one of them killing and striking downe another; yet all here agree together, all fully doe consent, in admitting of a God. Yea, and not onely the Philosophers among the Greeks, but euen the Magi, in the extreamest East, among the barbarous Indians; and the Druides, in the extreame West, among the barbarous Gaules: as Laertius obserueth, Gymnosophistas, ac Druidas, obscurè, ac per sententias philosophari, Colendos Deos—Magos Deorum vacare cultui. The Gymnosophists and Druides do teach in obscure sentences; That we ought to worship God—Yea and so doe the Magi too.

4 And the like consent there is also among all other Arts; as Tyrius Max∣imus obserueth.* 1.297 Si Artes omnes in consilium vcces, iubeas{que} simul vno decreto, de Substantia Dei sententiam ferre; censesnè, aut Pictorem, aut statuarium, aut Poetam, aut Philosophum, diuersa, intellecturos? Sed nec Scytha, nec Graecus, nec Persu, nec Hyperboreus dissentiet. If thou shouldest call all the Arts vnto one generall Councell, and bid them speak their minde, as concerning God: dost thou thinke that the Painter would tell thee one tale, and the Caruer another, the Poet another, and the Philosopher another? No, they would agree all together. Yea, there would be amongst them so ful a consent, that neither S••ythyan, nor Graecian

nor Persian, nor Hyperborean would dissent. In the first part of which sentence, you may obserue the generall consent of all Arts; in the second, of all Nati∣tions, and nominatim of the Scyth••ans▪ who haue bene held for Atheists: So that in this point, there is an incredible agreement, not onely of all Na∣tions, but also of all Conditions, of all Arts and Professions: who yet agree in nothing else, as he obserueth in the same place. Alij tamen aliter de rebus alijs, nec idem, sed diuersa sentire videntur: vt non modò gens genti, ciuitas ciuitati, domus domui, viro vir, sed nec quisquam sibi ipsi demùm consentiens sit. Yet diuers men iudge diuersly in all other matters, insomuch, that not onely no Countrey agreeth with another, but no City with City; no house with house; no man with man: but in all things almost therebe, Quot homin••s, tot sententie: So many men, so many mindes. Nay more mindes then men:* 1.298 for euery man hath many minds almost of euery thing: Nec quisquam sibi ipsi demùm consen∣tit: as it followeth in that place of Tyrius. Yea, and Augustinus Eugubinus ob∣serueth, euen of the wisest and learnedest Philosophers, who haue founded their opinions vpon the soundest reasons; yet that still they finde new reasons, which make them to forsake their old opinions, and entertaine new in their steads. As Plutarch obserueth,* 1.299 both in Aristotle, Dem••critus,* 1.300 and Chrysippus: Qu•• nonnulla prius sibi probata decreta, abs{que} tumultu, dolore{que}, & quidem liben∣ter, dimiserunt. Who did willingly forsake diuers of those opinions that before were allowed by them, not holding it any disgrace vnto them.

Insomuch, that it may be obserued, in the most of them, that they doe not onely retract many opinions in their age, which they defended in their youth, but also, that almost euery sixe or seuen yeares, they betake them vnto new opinions. Which hee ascribeth, not so much vnto the imconstancie of their iudgement; as to a greater experience, & further parefaction of the truth that reformeth it. But yet, in this one point, of beleeuing there is a God; there is neither difference of opinion between nation & nation, profession and profes∣sion, person and person; no, nor change of opinion in any singular man: but, as all men agree in this, in all places; so doth euery man agree with himselfe, at all times; when he is himselfe, and not, by the violence of inordinate passion, transported out of himselfe. Onely this change we may obserue: that some men, who in their youth haue denied God, haue changed their opinion; and in their age confessed him: as we shall see hereafter, in a seueral Chapter.* 1.301 But no man, that in his youth confessed God, did euer change his opinion. So that, though the Philosophers (as it were a kinde▪ of Gentile Pharisies) desire the preheminence,* 1.302 & prioritie in all things, and to be the ringleaders into all opi∣nions: Yet in this one Opinion, That there is a God, they are content to be followers, and therein to subscribe, euen vnto the poorest and ignorantest Artizans: Who, though of infinite diuersitie in their trades and professions; yet haue no diuersitie at all in their iudgements and opinions, as concerning this one point, to beleeue, There is a God.

And this may euidently be seene by this one obseruation; that there is almost none of them,* 1.303 no not euen the very meanest, but, beside the generall gods of their countries, who were worshipped by them all, they had some particular gods of their owne,* 1.304 whom they worshipped in speciall, as the Pa∣trons, and Tutelar gods of their Arts. Senators and Counsellers had their

Consus▪* 1.305 who did in consultando iuuare.* 1.306 Poets,* 1.307 their Muses;* 1.308 Orators,* 1.309 their Mercurie;* 1.310 Phisitians, their AEsculapius; diuiners, their Apollo; Merchants, their Mercurie againe; Soldiors, their Mars; Husbandmen, their Pan; Smiths, their Vulcan; Mariners, their Portunus; Shepheards, their Pales; Gardiners, their Flora; Bakers, their Iupiter Pistor; Costermongers, their Pomona; Yea, and euen Theeues, their Lauerna.

—Pulchra Lauerna da mihi fallere: Ladie Lauerna, teach me to steale.

And so likewise, in those Arts, that are exercised by women: Midwiues, had their Lucina; Nurses, their Cunina; Maydens, their * 1.311 Aucula. And diuers such like, which it were tedious to reckon vp: but yet are reckoned, by S. Au∣gustine; and by Arnobius, who setteth downe both their names, and their of∣fices: which, euen without his interpretation, might well be gathered by their names. So that, there was no Arte or profession, amongst all the Heathen, but they had both their generall and their speciall gods. And therefore none of them could possibly be Atheists. Much lesse could those Artificers that are professed Christians: of whom Tertullian truly writeth, that, Deum quilibet opifex Christianus et inuenit, et ostendit. That euery Christian being a Christian, can easily both finde out and shew forth God. Besides, it is a thing that is worthy the noting, that, of all the Arts in the World (though there be innumerable of them) yet there is not any one that is founded vpon Atheisme. No Arte is grounded vpon this supposition, that There is no God; No Arte dissolued, by beleeuing, there is a God. But many Arts and profes∣sions are grounded vpon the contrary supposition; that There is a God: and presently dissolued, by beleeuing, There is no God; as all Priests, and Prophets, Diuiners and Sacrificers, and all those other Arts, which either depende vpon Temples, or Altars. All which as they haue their immediate foundation, in mens beleeuing, That there is a God: So haue they their immediate dissolu∣tion,* 1.312 in beleeuing There is no God. As we may see in Baals Priests; it being once beleeued, that Baal was no God; you see how his Priests were all pre∣sently destroyed. And so likewise, when by S. Pauls preaching, it beganne to be beleeued,* 1.313 that Diana was no goddesse; in what a feare was Demetrius, and the rest of his Siluer-Smiths, that their Art would be dissolued? So that, there is no Arte, which either hath his being, by beleeuing ther is no God; or, which loseth his being, by beleeuing there is a God: but there be many Arts, which both haue their being, by beleeuing there is a God: and which lose their being, by beleeuing there is none. And therefore no Artist (as an Ar∣tist) is fit to be an Atheist: because religion and piety is the very maintainer of many Arts immediately; and of all the rest mediately. For all Arts haue their very being, vpon the coalition of humane society: which if it were dissolued, all Arts must (by consequent) of necessity perish with it. And pe∣rish it surely would, if religion did not hinder it. For the chiefest tye, and bond of all humane society, is neither reason, nor speech, nor indigency; but religion, and piety. Qua sublata, confusio ac perturbatio vitae sequitur (saith Lactantius) Take but away Religion, and there will follow in mans life, great disorder & confusion.* 1.314 Nay the Orator goeth further:* 1.315 Haud scio, an pi∣etate aduersus Deos sublata, fides etiam, et societas generis humani, et vna ex∣cellentissima virtus, Iusti••ia tollatur. I know not (saith he) whether if pietie,

and religion towards God, were remoued, both faith and iustice, yea, and euen society amongst men, would not presently be dissolued. So that, all Arts what∣soeuer, depending vpon society, and society it selfe depending vpon religi∣on; it followeth that no Artificer whatsoeuer, can fall into Atheisme; but he needs must dig vp his owne foundation.* 1.316 And therfore Ficinus setteth downe this position, that, Nulla ars aduersari Deo potest: That there is not any Art, that is opposed vnto God. No Art can resist his working; much lesse refute his being. And thus you see the second branch of Tullies assertion verified; that as there is Nulla Gens;* 1.317 so there is nullum genus hominum: There is no sort, no order, no condition of men: neither Iewes, nor Gentiles, Greekes, nor Barbarians, Learned, nor Vnlearned, Ciuill, nor Rude; None at all (I say) from the highest Ruler to the poorest Artificer, but they are inwardly per∣swaded, that There is a God. So that (as Saint Augustine affirmeth in ano∣ther like truth) Hoc ita manifestum est, vt nulla huic doctorum paucitas, nulla indoctorum turba dissentiat:* 1.318 This is truth so manifest, that neither the paucity of the learned, nor the multitude of the vnlearned doc dissent from it. And therefore, let vs now proceede vnto his third; that, as there is no sort of men, so there is no Man.

CHAP. 6.

That there is no particular person in the World, but that (in some degree) he beleeueth, There is a God. 2. No Swearer. 3. No Blasph••mer. 4. No Idolater.

AS I finde it obserued, by diuers of the learned; that it is a com∣mon Principle,* 1.319 in euery people, to beleeue, There is a God: so is it likewise obserued by them; that this Principle hath his force, not onely in all Nations, and in all sorts of m••n; but also in all persons, that liue amongst them. And this may euidently be seene,* 1.320 in the most of those sentences, which before I haue al∣ledged, from the generality of this naturall impression; that they extend and stretch themselues, not onely to all Nations, but also to all persons, vpon the face of the earth. Aristotle sayth, that it is haereditaria fama, ••or∣talium omnium; omnia & a Deo, & per Deum, nobis esse constituta.* 1.321 It is an haereditarie tradition which is common amongst all men; that all things are praedecreed vnto men by God. Marke, mortalium omnium: common vnto All men. Tullie sayth that Nemo omnium tam immanis, cuius mentem non imbuer it Deorum opinio.* 1.322 Amongst men there is not any so sauage and barba∣rous, whose soule is not possessed with an opinion of the Gods. And againe in the same place: Omnes, esse vim & naturam Diuinam, arbitrantur: All men haue a perswasion, that there is a certaine power and nature Diuine. Who can be excepted, out of these two so absolute generalities, of Nemo, and Omnes? of No man, and All men? So Clemens Alexandrinus:* 1.323 Dei mani∣festatio erat apud omnes, naturalis. There is a naturall manifestation of God vnto all men.* 1.324 So likewise Arnobius: Quisquamnè est hominum, qui non, cum Dei notione, diem primae natiuitatis intrauerit? Is there any amongst men,

that brought not in with him a notion of God euen with his first entrance into the world? So Beda:* 1.325 Naturaliter omnis homo habet cognitionem Dei. Euery man hath naturally some knowledge of the Deity. So likewise Prosper:* 1.326

Esse omnes sensere Deum; nec de fuit vlli, Authorem Natura docens.— All men haue found a God to be; Nor euer wanted Nature, To teach this Truth; that only He, Of euery thing is Author.

Now vnto these Testimonies, alledged before (though to another purpose) I may adde diuers others, as yet not alledged; as namely that of Sibilla:

Omnibus en patet is, clarús{que} & apertus inerrans. Loe God, so cleare▪ so knowne, so ope doth lie, That he doth enter into euery eye.

And that likewise of Aratus, cited also in the same booke, by Clemens Alex∣andrinus:* 1.327

A Ioue principium: assiduis quem laudibus omnes Concelebrant homines: for a sunt Iouis omnia plena. Compita cum pagis,* 1.328 omnes & cum aequore portus. Begin with God, whose praises All Men sing; All Cities, Streets, all Villages of Him Are full; All Seas, Shores, Hauens, euery thing.

MARKE:

Omnes Concelebrant Homines—All celebrate his praise.

So likewise that of Ennius.* 1.329

Aspice hoc sublime candens, quem inuocant omnes, Iouem. Behold this bright and lofty skye; Here all Men pray to Ioue most high.

Marke: Quem inuocant Omnes: To whom All men direct their Prayers. Yea, and this he spake, assensu omnium, as is noted in the same place, that is, with the generall assent of all men. And yet he called him there both Iouem, and Dominatorem rerum, & omnia motu regentem: & patrem Diuûm{que} Ho∣minúm{que}; & praesentem ac praepotentem Deum: Both the great God Iupiter, the great Ruler of all matters, the onely Mouer of all things: the Father both of Gods and Men; yea, and himselfe, both a present, and a potent God. All which high Titles he ascribeth vnto God, with all mens generall applause and consent: affirming, in the same place, that God is as cleare and as euident as the Sun: and adding, that, Hoc qui dubitet, haud sanè intelligo, cur non idem, sol sit, an nullus sit, dubitare possit: That he, which doubteth, whether there be a God, may, with as great reason, doubt; whether there be a Sunne. So cleare doth that Orator make the matter vnto all men. Yea, and euen prophane Lucian,* 1.330 though he reproue this generall opinion; yet is forced to confesse it; Omnes homines & Gentes turpiter decipiuntur, Deos esse existimantes: All persons and nations are fouly deceiued in beleeuing there be Gods. Reprouing it as the error, not onely of all Nations, but also of all Persons: but yet con∣fessing, that it is an opinion, which is commou vnto all of them: though in

〈◊〉〈◊〉 shew, for the present, he would seeme to condemne it.

2 And ••et there be three seuerall sorts of men, who may seem (it any other) the most likely to deny him,* 1.331 because they so little honour him. The first are, Common swearers, who vse to rend and to teare him. The second are; Blas∣p••emers, who vse to curse and reuile him. And the third, Idolaters, who a∣base and dishonour him, by ascribing diuine honour vnto an Idoll, their owne Creature. These three (••xcept the Atheist, for whom I doe reserue a speciall Treatise by himselfe) are the most direct enemies that God indeed hath. But yet none of all these, if they duly be considered, can iustly be numbred, as de∣nyers of God. For indeed, all their sinnes are absolutely grounded vpon this supposition; that There is a God: without which they were no sinnes. For, how should either swearing, or blaspheming, or idolatrizing, be sinne; if there were not a God, against whom they were committed? Nay, all these seuerall vices, considered of themselues (though not as sinnes, but as actions) yet are done vpon supposall, that There is a God, God is the very obiect of euery one of them: as we may euidently see, if we will seuerally examine them. For, first, as conc••rning swearing; it is Plutarch's opinion; that Oathes doe as necessarily presuppose There is a God; as either Temples, or Sacrifices, or inuocations. Vrbem, Templis, Dijs{que}▪ carentem;* 1.332 quae precibus, Iureiurando, or aculo non vtatur, n••••o vnquam vidit. A Citie without Temples, without gods, without prayers, without Oathes, without Oracles, was neuer seene by any man: reckoning all these (euen Oathes amongst the rest) as equally belonging vnto God: and all of them presuming, that there must needes bee one; else should they haue no being.

And this point, as concerning Oathes, may yet further be confirmed, by di∣uers other Arguments: as namely, first, by the very definition of an Oath, de∣liuered [ 1] by Aristotle,* 1.333 that Iusiurandum est cum diuina veneratione dictio proba∣tionis expers. That an Oath is, an affirmation aboue all probation, pronounced with a feare and reuerence of God. He maketh an Oath the highest kinde of proofe:* 1.334 as the Apostle doth likewise, when hee saith, that an oath is an ending of all strife, Secondly, the same appeareth by the forme of an Oath: which [ 2] is, a calling of God himselfe to witnesse. So S. Paule, God is my witnesse, whom I serue: So he againe. I witnesse before God, that I lye not.

Yea and this forme the Heathans held, as well as the Christians.* 1.335 So Plautus.

—summum Iovem,* 1.336 Deós{que} detestor. Itestifie, The God most high.

So againe.

Id vt scias, louem supremum, testem laudo. To make thee well assur'd of this, The highest God my witnesse is.

So Tullie. Est Iusiurandum affirmatio religiosa.* 1.337 Quod autem affirm••tur qua∣si D••o teste promiseris, id tenendum est: An Oath is not a ciuill, but a religious affirmation. Now, that which we promise, calling God to witnesse, ought faith∣fully and religiously to be performed of vs. Whereby it appeareth, that the common and vsuall forme of their Oathes, was to cal God to witnesse. Third∣ly, [ 3] the same appeareth by that nuncupatiue title, wherewith both Heathens and Christians haue honoured their Oathes, in calling their swearing, an Oath

of God.* 1.338 So Ennius:

O fides alma, ipta pinnis, & iusiurandum Iovis: O vncorrupted faith, mounting with heauenly wings: Ioues sacred Oath before his Throne it brings.

So Moses:* 1.339 An Oath of the Lord shall be betweene them. The one of them calleth it, an Oath of Ioue; the other of Iehovah. Because the Infidels doe vse to sweare by their false gods, the faithfull by the true one: as may be euident∣ly seene in the Oathes of Iaacob and Laban.* 1.340 But yet, both of them sweare by that, which they esteemed for their God. Fourthly, the same appeareth by that Ceremonie, which was commonly vsed, in taking of an Oath; to lay his hand vpon the Altar, as acknowledging that he spake in the presence of God: and that he offered vp the inward truth of his soule, vpon the Altar of God. This Ceremonie Tullie mentioneth, in his Oration pro L. Flacco: where he saith of Falcidius* 1.341 (as if his name had beene Falsidicus) that Huic, si aram tenens iura∣r••t, nemo crederet: That no man would beleeue him, although he should sweare, holding the very Altar. So Plautus:* 1.342

Tene Aram hanc-Deiura. Hold th' Altar here, Let's see thee sweare.

Whereby it appeareth, that it was a common ceremonie amongst the Ro∣mans, to take hold vpon the Altar, when they solemnely sware. Vnto which Roman custome there seemeth to be a kinde of allusion, in the Gospell of S. Mathew: where our Sauiour Christ reproueth the Doctrine of the Pharisies, for making it a light matter, to sweare by the Altar. Where the Greeke Text hath 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and the vulgar Latin,* 1.343 in Altars: Whosoeuer sweareth in the Altar, or vpon the Altar. Fifthly, the same appeareth, by that great Religion, which euen the very Heathens haue placed in Oathes: yea, and that both on the part of him that taketh it, and of him that exacteth it. First, for the swea∣rer••: they vtterly detested him for a villaine, that vnder the religion of an Oath,* 1.344 durst avouch any false thing, as violating, & Deorum & Hominum fi∣dem: both the truth of God and Men: as it is censured by Xenophon: making God himselfe a lyer: as auouching of him, as a witnesse vnto their lye. Yea, and they placed so sacred a Religion in an Oath, that they held it a prophane∣nesse, but euen to dally with it; as bringing the most holy thing into con∣tempt: insomuch, that they condemned Socrates vnto death, nominatim for this (among his other crimes) quia nova iuramenta iurauit (as Iosephus* 1.345 repor∣teth) because he vsed to sweare by vnlawfull Oathes. For their vsuall swearing was, by Iupiter and the Gods: as appeareth in Plautus.* 1.346

Per Iovem adiuro patrem:* 1.347 I sweare by God our father.* 1.348

And againe: Per Iouem, Deos{que} omnes adiuro: I sweare by love and all the other Gods.

But Socrates was wont to sweare by a Dogge: per Canem: as appeareth in Plato. Which prophanation of an Oath, they interpreted, as an impiety a∣gainst their Religion: and therefore, that (in piety) they oug••t to condemne him. And, as they reposed great Religion in an oath, in 〈…〉〈…〉 of the Actor: so did they likewise, respect of the Exactor: accounting it a kinde of pro∣phanenesse in any man,* 1.349 when an Oath was orderly performed, not to giue cre∣dit to it: as Stobaeus collecteth out of Antiphanes:

—Cùm aliquis contemnit iurantem▪

Tum ille mihi Deos ipsos contemnere videtur. Whos'ere he be, contemnes a man, when taking solemne Oath: He doth contemne, not man, but God; nor God and man; them both.

And therefore, Menechmus, in the fore-alledged place, when hee had taken his Oath:

Per Iovem, Deos{que} omnes adiuro, Vxor. I sweare by Ioue and all the Gods, good wife,* 1.350

He addeth immediately:

Satin' hoc est tibi? Let this suffice, for ending of our strife.

Pleading, that hauing so religiously protested, he ought to be beleeued. For, as the reuerence of God ought to adact the Swearer, to the speaking of the truth: so likewise, the Hearer, to the beleeuing of the truth.* 1.351 An Oath ought to be the stinting of all strife.

Sixtly, the same appeareth by a secret Religion, which entreth into the Swearer himselfe, euen in the taking of his Oath. And that is twofold: the one towards men; the other towards God. Both obserued by Soph••cles, in one and the same sentence.

Apposito iureiurando, cautior & diligentior Animus fit.* 1.352 A duobus enim sibi tum cavet; Et, ne laedat amicos; et, ne peccet in Deos. Mans very soule, by sacred oath adiur'd, More wary proues, and circumspect by ods: For then he dreads this double forfeyture, T offend his friends, & sin against the gods.

Seuenthly, the same appeareth, because that euery Oath hath a secret execra∣tion annexed to it, and a curse against the swearer, if he sweare not the truth, For (as Plutarch truly noteth) Omne iusiurandum in ex••crationem peri••rij desinit.* 1.353 Est autem execratio res tristis, & mali ominis: Euery Oath (saith he) doth end in a latent execration against periury. Now euery execration is a ve∣ry heauy and discomfortable thing, and f••ll of euill forecasting, and significati∣on. And this wee may see in the forme of diuers Oathes, recorded both in Scriptures, and in Heathen Writers. We reade oftentimes in Scriptures. God doe so, and more also: implying a tacite and latent imprecation,* 1.354 if they doe not thus and thus. So in Plautus:

Quid si fallis? Ly. Tum me faciat quod vult magnus Iupiter.* 1.355 It may well be rendred by that phrase of Scripture; then God doe so and more vnto me. Yea and the Romans in their solemne Oathes; were wont to vse this ceremonie, as Rhodiginus obserueth out of Servius. They vsed to throw a stone out of their hand, with this execration: Si sciens fallo,* 1.356 qui me despicit (salua vrbe ac arte) bonis eijciat, vt ego hunc lapidem. If I willingly deceiue thee; then God that is a∣boue me (preseruing the Cittie) caste me out from all good men, as I caste out this Stone. And the like execrationis also pronounced by, Abigail, against the enemies of Dauid. The soule of thine enemies shall God cast out, as out of the ••iddle of a sling.* 1.357 And so God also did vnto impious Capanaeus; who boa∣sting that God himselfe should not be able to hinder him, he was presently stroken with lightening, and cast from the top of the wall, as it were out of the middle of a sling. For so Euripides expresseth his falling.

—à scalis autem Deijciebatur, velut è funda.* 1.358 He was cast downe the Scale with such a fling, As if a Stone were throwne from out a Sling.

By all which weighty Reason, both out of the Heathen writers, and out of Holy Scriptures, it euidently appeareth, that all men in their swearing, both presume, There is a God; and that he truely heareth, whatsoeuer is spoken; and that he will reuenge him, of the impietie of those men, that by their false swearing dishonour his holy name. And therefore, no Swearer can be pos∣sibly an Atheist, euen by the very nature of his owne proper act, if hee thin∣keth as he sweareth. For the very act of swearing, presupposeth there is a God, not onely in the inten••ion of the exactour, but also in the extension of the performer, be hee whosoeuer; yea though the veriest Atheist, that euer liu••d in the world. For, though in his heart, he may (haply) beleeue there is no God: yet, in his act, he would seeme to beleeue, there is one: euen by his action of swearing, he would haue other men to beleeue, that he belee∣ueth, there is one. Because, the congruitie of very Reason requireth, that he, which sweareth by God, should certainely beleeue, that There is a God, to by sworne by: or else he sweareth vainely. Nay, he that sweareth by God, if he thinke that there is none, disableth the very force of his owne asseueration For, no man would euer sweare, but to be the better beleeued for his Oath. But, he that desireth to be beleeued for his swearing by God, if hee thinke, There is no God, is as vtterly absurd, as if he should desire, that men should beleeue him, when he professeth before hand, that hee sweareth by nothing: and, as impu••ent, as if he should request them; I pray you to beleeue me, for I sweare (By nothing) that this I say is true. His iust reward in swearing by nothing, should be to be beleeued in nothing. Thus Swearers (as you see) if they properly be Swearers, they cannot properly be Atheists: the very action of swearing, destroying directly the opinion of Atheisme. And there∣fore,* 1.359 whereas Socrates, in Aristophanes, professed, that he beleeued not the vsu∣all gods: Strepsiades presently replyed, Quomodo iuratis igitur? An per num∣m••s ferreos, si••ut Bizantij? How then doest thou sweare, if thou beleeue not the gods? Doest thou sweare, like a Bizantian, by their yron pence? Accompting it most iustly, for a very grosse absurditie, that any man should outwardly sweare by the gods, that inwardly beleeueth, that there is no God: or, that any man should sweare by any thing, but onely by God. And therefore, when Toxaris the Scythian sware, Per Ventum, et Acinacem: M••esippus derided him for swearing by such things,* 1.360 as were no gods: but he defended himselfe, that among the Scythians, those two were held for gods. So that it appeareth by the concurring opinion both of the reprehender, and of the reprehended, that nothing is to be sworne by but onely God And consequently that all Swearers must presuppose There is a God.* 1.361

3 And the like may be also sayd of Blasphemers, that is, of such as are Re∣uilers or Cursers of God: for vnto that vse onely the word is now restrayned: as S. Augustine hath obserued:* 1.362 Est blasphemia, cùm aliqua mala dicuntur de bonis. Sed iam vulgò Blasphemia non accipitur, nisi mala verba de Deo dicere. De hominibus nam{que} dubitari potest: Deus verò fine controuer sia bonus est. Blas∣phemie

is to speake any euill of good. But now commonly, Blasphemie is to speake onely euill of God. For of Men, we may doubt, whether they be euill or good: But of God we cannot doubt, but that he must needs be good. So that, the word Blas∣phemie hath two significations: the one a lardger, which is to speake euill of good: the other a stricter, which is to speake euill of God. Against the first of those Blasphemies, God hath pronounced a woe: Woe vnto them that speake good of euill, and euill of good:* 1.363 but against the second of them, he hath or∣dayned a Law: Thou shalt not rayle vpon the gods: no not, vpon the earthly gods, much lesse vpon the heauenly. Yea and that vnder a penaltie: Whosoeuer cu••seth his God, he sh••ll beare his iniquitie, that is, He shall be surely punished,* 1.364 for so the Chaldee Paraphrase readeth it: Sustinebit poenam suam: Yea and that seuerely too. For it followeth, in the next words, He that Blasphemeth the name of the Lord, shall be put to death; the Congregation shall stone him. The executi∣on of which Law, we may reade in the same place: where the sonne of the Is∣ra••litish woman was stoned for blaspheming; giuing occasion very iustly, of the making of that notable Law against Blasphemie. Wherein we may obserue, that the Blasphemer was no Atheist. And that, by two reasons: the one drawne from his person; the other from his action. For first, for his person: he is sayd to haue beene the sonne of an Israelitish woman, and of an Aegyptian: by neither of which parents hee could be instituted in Atheisme. For first,* 1.365 for the A••gyptians; they were so farre from being Atheists, that they were of all other the most palpable Polytheists. And for the Israelites; though they were the worshippers of an invisible God; yet had hee shewed amongst them so many visible signes of his omnipotent power and goodnesse, as that hee was confessed, euen by the very Heathens: and therefore could not be denied by any of the Israelites. Blaspheme him they might (as this Israelite in his furie,* 1.366 and impatience did) but denie him they could not; the euidence of his wonderous workes was so great. And this is the first reason, why hee could not be an Atheist. The second is this: that this Law against Blasphemie, being made by occasion of this Blasphemers fact, and forbidding onely that, which he had committed, doth euidently shew that hee was not an Atheist. For then, the Law would haue runne against the denying of God: Whosoeuer denieth God, let him be stoned. But, because this mans sin was not a denying vn∣to God a being (which is the sin of Atheisme) but a cursing of that God whom he beleeued to be; therefore the law was made, not against the denying, but a∣gainst the cursing of God: He that blasphemeth the name of God, shall be stoned. And therefore, blaspheming doth not suppose a denying, nor the blashemer, vpon neccessitie, to be a denyer of God. Nay, indeede, it directly supposeth the contrary: it supposeth there is a God: As may plainly be collected, both by the beginning & the end of that irreligious passion, which begetteth in them the sin of blaspheming. For, first, from the beginning of their passion: it is a sodaine anger conceiued against God, vpon a supposition, of either some euill re∣ceiued from him, or of some good denied by him. For blasphemare (as Aquinas defineth it) est contumeliam vel conuitium inferre,* 1.367 in iniuriam Creatoris: To blaspheme, is, to offer, either contumelie, or obloquie, by way of dishonor, vnto the Creator. Which necessarily supposeth, that he needs must haue a being. Otherwise, hee must needes confesse, that hee is angry with Nothing: and

so might,* 1.368 as iustly be derided, as that foolish Polyphemus, who raued for that wrong that was done to him by Nullus. Againe, the same may be col∣lected, from the ende of their passion: which is, desperately to prouoke God to be angry with them: because they before haue beene angred by him, and so to quitte him with his owne. Which likewise must needes inferre, that they thinke he hath a being. For, otherwise, they should be as vtterly ab∣surd, as if they should endeauour to moue Nothing, vnto anger; spending all their rayling, as foolishly against him, as the Doggs doe their barking, when they howle against the Moone. And therefore it followeth not, that though some men doe Blaspheme, and raile against God; that therefore they thinke that there should he none: but rather, that there is one: Which they ma∣nifestly acknowledge, euen in their very rayling; vnlesse, they will make themselues to be knowne for noted-fooles. Who would raile vpon a thing, which they thinke to haue no being? Yea, and diuers of the Heathens were so farre from supposing, that rayling and blaspheming should inferre, there is no God; that they made it the essentiall worship of diuers of their gods. For Nazianzene reporteth it of the Lindianes,* 1.369 that they worshipped their Her∣cules,* 1.370 onely with railings: Deum illum, non alio, quàm conuitiorum et male∣dictorum honore, afficientes: And Plinie reporteth the same, of their god∣desse Fortune: Conuitijs colitur. Shee is worshipped with rayling and blasphe∣ming. And therefore Blasphemie doth not inferre impietie: Nor, that hee which blasphemeth God, must of necessitie denie God. For, of necessitie hee granteth him, though of impotencie hee blaspheme him. So that, neither common Swearers, nor yet Blasphemers, be Atheists. That they be great of∣fenders, it cannot be denied: but that they be Atheists, it cannot be affirmed. Their sinne is not Atheisme: it is of another kind. The Blasphemer, is not Atheus, but rather Antitheus: as Lactantius speaketh. And his fault is not Atheisme,* 1.371 or lack of religion; but outrage against the true Obiect of religion. Which yet (in a large acception) may be called Irreligion: though it bee not a priuation of all religion; because it is an impugning of the true religi∣on. For, as Tertullian affirmeth of the Romanes: Non modò n••gligendo, quin insuper expugnando verum Deum,* 1.372 committitis crimen verae irreligio fitatis: Not onely by neglecting, but also by oppugning him that is the true God, you truely incurre the crime of Irreligion.

4 Let vs now come to Idolaters: which is the third of our instances: and see,* 1.373 whether they can be numbred as Atheists. But that indeed they cannot, their very profession is against it. For what can be more distant, then Po∣lytheisme, and Atheisme? then impietie, and idolatrie? I meane priuatiue impi∣etie, which depriueth men wholy, of all sense of Religion. Idolaters bee Polytheists and therefore not Atheists. They worship many gods: and therefore they cannot denie, that there is a God. Nay they must needs confesse one, that admit many. They cannot exclude one, that confesse many. And therefore, (as I sayd before, of Swearers, and Blasphemers) so may I now, of Idolaters: that they are taught, by their profession to denie and renounce Atheisme; and by it strictly tyed, to beleeue There is a God. As we may euidently see, in all the seuerall degrees of Idolatry. For, would a man euer worship, either the Sunne, or the M••one, or the Starres; as did the

most Nations both of Greekes and Barbarians (which diuers of the Hea∣thens haue confessed to be but Creatures) but that he is perswaded,* 1.374 that There is a God?* 1.375 Surely, he neuer would. But it may be alledged; that hap∣ly, the glory and beauty of these Creatures preuailed more with men,* 1.376 to oc∣casion them to worship them; then did the strength of this inward conclu∣sion. For much is insinuated in the booke of Wisdome: where hee both re∣porteth, and reproueth this opinion:* 1.377 and yet partly excuseth those, that were deceiued by them; though not a toto, yet a ta••to: that though it be a great fault, to worship any thing but God: yet that it is a lesse faulte, to worship those Creatures, that are of Gods making; t••en to worshippe those Idols, that are of mans making. But, to take away this excuse,* 1.378 which is grounded vpon their beauty; would a man euer worship the Fire, the Water, the Earth, and the Aire (as the Persians did) but vpon this perswasion, that, There is a God? These be not of such blazing beauties. But it may be sayd againe: that, though not the beauty; yet the commodity,* 1.379 which men re∣ceiue by these things,* 1.380 were the chiefest inducements, to consecrate them for gods. For, that was Prodicus his opinion (at the least his relation) That whatsoeuer thing was profitable vnto the life of man, might iustly be reckoned, as his God. Therefore to take away this Obiection also: Would a man euer worship a Wolfe,* 1.381 or a Crocodile, as the Aegyptians did, but that hee is perswa∣ded; That there is a God? These be not things of profit. But yet, euen for these things, something may be sayd: namely, that, though it were not the hope of any profit by them;* 1.382 yet was it the feare of receiuing hurt from them, that caused men to worship them.* 1.383 For* 1.384 as they had their good Gods, whom they worshipped for loue: so had they their euill gods, whom they wor∣shipped for feare: Deos quosdam vt prodessent, celebrant; quosdam ne obessent, placabant: sayth A•• Gellius. They did worshippe some gods, to receiue some profit by them; and they serued others, to escape euill from them. Well, be it so. Yet hereby it appeareth, that, euen the very Heathen, in worshipping things of so diuers natures, were inwardly perswaded in their mindes; that the nature of God was glorious, and therefore to be honoured; liberall, and therefore to be loued; powerfull, and therefore to be feared: which manifestly argueth, that they beleeued, there was a God. But, to remoue all those Obiections at once, wherein those fore-named considerations, may seeme to be the ground of their Religions; and, to instance where none of all these can be found, but where onely the hidden sense of this inward conclusion, that There is a God, doth carry the whole sway: would a man euer worship a Stocke, or a Stone, made by his owne hand in some artificiall forme; but that this is a burning conclusion in his heart, That there is a God? This woodden god, can haue neither any glory, to allure him; nor any profit, to perswade him; nor any feare, to constraine him.* 1.385 For (as the wiseman teacheth) it is but a knotty peece of wood, and indeed the most thri••••les and vnprofitable part of all the whole Tree, whereof it is made; yea more vprofitable then the very chipps,* 1.386 that are hewed away from it. For by them yet the Carpenter warmeth himselfe. So that they are good for something: but the Idol it selfe is good for iust nothing, as the Prophet Isay directly affirmeth. But it may yet be obiected: that the artificiall beauty, and workmanship of the

Idol, may haply preuaile to make men worship it, as a God; though in it selfe,* 1.387 it haue none other good. For so indeed Saint Augustine collect••th. Ducit, & affectu quodam interno rapit infirma corda mortalium, forme similt∣tudo,* 1.388 & membrorum imitata compago. The likenesse of the forme, and imita∣tion of the members, which men doe see in Idols, doth, with a strong affection, steale away their weake hearts. And againe in the same place: Plus valent simulachra, ad curuandam infoelicem animam, quòdos habent, oculos habent, aures habent; quam ad corrigendam, quòd non loquuntur, non vident, non au∣diunt, non ambulant: An Idol hath greater force, to infect a simple soule, in that it hath a mouth, it hath eyes, it hath eares; then to instruct it, in that it hath no speech, no sight, no hearing, no mouing. T••••refore, to take away this obiection too, as well as all the rest: Would a man euer worship informem, & rudem lapidem; as the Romans did vnder the name of God Terminus;* 1.389 but that they are perswaded, that a God there is? This God hath neither forme, nor beauty, to allure them to worship him. No forme; for it is in∣formis. No beauty; for it is rudis, as Lactantius noteth. Whereas euerie God ought to haue such perfect beauty,* 1.390 that Tully reckoneth it as a foule ab∣surdity, not onely that any other thing should be more beautifull then God; but also, that among the gods, any one of them should be more beautifull then another. They ought all so to excell in the highest degree of beauty. And therefore so rude and vnformed a god, as this Terminus is, a man would neuer worship; but that hee must needs bee worshipping of some God; and so, not knowing what is best to worship, hee worshippeth that which is neerest vnto hand.* 1.391 And therefore (as Tully defineth of Atheists) that it is vnpossible, for any of thē to be superstitious: so it is true in Idolaters (who are all of them superstitious) that it is as impossible, for any of them to be A∣theists. For, Idolaters yeeld two Arguments, which necessarily conclude, that they think there is a God. The first is, the enormous pride of some of them. The second, the abiect basenesse of other some. For the first. We reade of diuers men, who haue bene so monstrously ouerswolne with pride and vanity, that they haue inuented a strange kind of Idolatry; to idolatrize themselues, and to make themselues gods; or rather indeed Idols, vnder the name of gods; as Nabuchodo••osor, Caligula,* 1.392 Domitian; and diuers others of the Romane Em∣perours. Which honour, no man would euer haue affected, but that hee is both perswaded himselfe, and would haue others too, perswaded, That there is a God. So that, this kind of Idolaters declare by their pride, that they thinke, There is a God. For Autotheisme cannot possibly be Atheisme. The other kinde of Idolaters, declare the same, by their basenesse. For man, being by nature so proud and ambitious, that no honor can suffice him, but that hee wil•• affect euen the name and place of God: what is it, that can make this gallant so to stoope, and to abiect himselfe so basely vnto a Stocke, and a Stone, as to creepe and kneele vnto them; but, that onely the force of Reli∣gion adacteth him? telling him within his bosome, both that There is a God; and that he is purposely created for his worship: Who, because (through his pride) he giueth it not where it is due; he leaueth him (through his basenes,) to giue it where it is not due. So that, euen Idolatry it selfe, though it be both the nurse and mother of lyes; yet teacheth it this truth, to beleeue, There

is a God. And though it selfe dishonour him; yet teacheth it vs to honour him. For whatsoeuer the Idolater worshippeth for his false God, it tea∣cheth vs muc•• more to worshippe the true God.* 1.393 Yea, euen Iupiter himselfe (as Clemens Alexandrinus noteth) Etiam ipse Iupiter, qui Poetarum ver sibus canitur, in Deum refert cogitationem. Euen Iupiter himselfe, whom the Poets make a false god, yet erecteth our thoughts vnto the true God. And thus you plainly see, how Tullies obseruation is perfectly verified in euery branc•• of it: and that there is no Nation, neither ciuill, nor rude; no condition of men, neither learned, nor vnlearned; no seuerall person; though neuer so pro∣phane, neither Swearer, Blasphemer, nor Idolater, but he is inwardly perswaded That there is a God. And that therefore the Atheist, in seeking to deny it,* 1.394 doth (as Plutarch truely censureth him) immobilia mouere; & bellum inferre, non tan••ùm longo tempori, sed & multis hominibus gentibus, & familijs; quas reli∣giosus D••orum cultus, quasi diuino furore correptas, tenuit: Hee seeketh to shake that, which cannot be moued; and boldly biddeth battaile, not only to many men, but also to many Nation, Countries, and Families; whom the religious worship of God hath so deepely possessed, that it hath almost euen rauished them: fighting so, himselfe alone, both against all Antiquity, Vniuersality, and Consent, which doe make a three-fold Corde,* 1.395 not easie to be broken.

CHAP. 7.

That a great discord may be noted among the Heathens, as concerning the wor∣ship of their seuerall Gods. 2. Yet that this discord doth not infringe the generall opinion, as concerning God. 3. But that it much confirmes it.

PLutarch, in his first booke Of the Opinions of the Philosophers, af∣firmeth, that the first propagation of Religion among men, and the first spreading of this opinion, as concerning God, hath bin brought to passe by some one of these three meanes: aut natu∣rali forma,* 1.396 aut fabulosa, aut legum testimonio. Naturalem Philo∣sophi, fabulosam Poetae, docent; Leges autem suas, singulae habent Ciuitates: that is, either by meanes of such naturall reasons as haue bin deliuered by the lear∣ning of Philosophers; or by such fabulous adumbrations, as haue beene deuised by the wit of Po••ts; or by such politicall constitutions, as haue beene inioyned by the authority of Magistrates. And it is true indeed, that (for traditionall di∣uinity) it was among the Heathens especially propagated, by some one of these three meanes. But there was a naturall Theologie, ingrafted in the soule before them all: ante omnem rationis vsum (as Iamblicus affirmeth) euen be∣fore all vse of reason,* 1.397 and all capacity to receiue instruction: whereby they were disposed, and in a sort prepared, to admit any one of the fore-named instru∣ctions, though it came but single of it selfe. But in the former discourse,* 1.398 I haue ioyned them all together: shewing, by a generall consent of all Philoso∣phers, all Poets, and all Lawgiuers, that There is a God. So that there is not so vniuersall an agreement in any one thing in the world, as there is, in belee∣uing, that There is a God.

But yet, I finde it againe obserued,* 1.399 that there is not in any thing so great a disagreement; as there is, in defining, what that God should be. Res nullà est (saith Tullie) de qua tantoperè,* 1.400 non solùm indocti, sed etiam docti dissentiant:

There is nothing, wher in there is so great a discord, not only amongst the vnlear∣ned, but also among the learned. And he maketh good his assertion, by a parti∣cular enumeration of the seuerall opinions, of all the Philosophers. Which are seuerall indeed; yea, and so distantly seuered, that no two of them doe agree in any one opinion: some worshipping the Heauens, some the Stars some the El••∣ments, some one thing, some another. So that (as one wittily obserues of them) Colebat quis{que} quod volebat:* 1.401 Euery man worshipped whatsoeuer he would. Onely, this seemed to be the common study and endeauour of them all, that none would haue that god whom any other had. Nay, by and by after, he will haue another god, then he himselfe had before; as we may euidently see, in the fore∣alledged place of Tullie; both in Plato, Aristotle, Theophrastus, and Cleanthes, and in diuers others.* 1.402 So that,* 1.403 if any where, the prouerbe here is verified; that, Quot homines, tot sententiae: So many heads, so many wits; so many men, so many mindes. For (as Tertullian obserueth by them) Alij incorporalem asseuerant, alij corporalem; vt ••am Platonici, quàm Stoici: alij ex atomis, alij ex nume∣ris;* 1.404 vt Epicurus, et Pythagoras: alij ex igne; qualiter Heraclito visum est. Et Pla∣tonici quidem, curantem rerum: contrà, Ep••••urei ociosum et inexercitum, & (vt ita dixerim) neminem humanis rebus. Positum verò extra mundum Stoici, qui, figuli modo, extrinsecus torqueat molem hanc: intra mundum Platonici, qui, gubernatoris exemplo, intra illud maneat quod regat. Some of the Philosophers make God to be spirituall, some other of them, corporall; as the Platonicks & Sto∣icks. Some make their god of Atomes, and indiuidual moates; some of diuidual nū∣bers; as Epicurus, and Pythagoras. Some make him all of fire; for so it seemed to Heraclitus. The Platonicks make God prouident, and wonderfull carefull, that all things may go well. The Epicures make him idle and sloathfull, and as good as no body in all humaine affaires. The Stoicks, they place God without the world, turning about the Heauens, as Potters vse to doe their wheeles: the Platonicks within the world, ruling it within it, as Pilots vse to rule their ships. And many other like differences are set downe betweene them,* 1.405 both by Tullie, in the fore-alledged place; and, by Plutarch, in his fore-alledged Booke. So that there is not a more notable consent of all sorts of men, in the generall notion, of Gods existence and being, then there is a notable dissent amongst them, in the particular notion, what this God should be. Which difference in opinion, prophane Lucian snatcheth, as a fit occasion, to deride both God & all his reli∣gion:* 1.406 A gentium opinione, quam de diis obtinent, màximè licet intelligere, quàm nihil firmum & stabile in se habe••t, quae de Dijs fertur oratio. Multa enim est, & conturbata opinionum confusio: ac planè alij alia opinantur. By the opinion of all Nations as concerning their gods, we may easily conceiue how much they are deceiued, and how fondly they build vpon a weake ground: so great a confusion may be seen in their opinions,* 1.407 and so great a difference between their defenders. And then he proceedeth to set down the dissention that he finds among thē: Scythae, acinaci sacrisicant; Thraces, Zamolxidi, homini fugiti••o, quem ex Sa∣mo ad illos delatum esse constat; Phryges autem, Lunae; Aethiopes Diei; Cyllenij, Phaleti; Columbae, Assirij; Persae, Igni, Aegytij, Aquae. Caeterùm priuatim, Mem∣phitis quide••••, Bos Deus est; Pelu••iotis verò, Cepe: Iam, alijs, Ciconia; aut Croco∣dilus; alijs, Cynoeephalus; aut seles, aut Simia. Pra••tereà, vicatim; his quidem, dexter humerus; caeteris verò, eregione habitantibus; sinister: item alijs, dimi∣dia

pars capitis; alijs, poculum samium, aut catinus. The Scythians doe sacrifice vnto their sword; The Thracians, vnto a certaine fugitiue, called Zamolxis, who fled vnto them, out of Samos; The Phrygians, to the Moone; The AEthiopians, to the Day; The Cyllenians, to Phaletes; The Assyrians, to a Doue; The Persians, to the fire; the AEgyptians, to the Water. Yea, and more priuatly, for their Cit∣ties, The Memphiàns worship an Oxe, for their God; the Pelusians, an Onion; others, a Storke; some, a Crocodile; others, a Beast that had an head like a Dogge; a Calt, or an Ape. Yea, and yet more particularly, for their seuerall Villages; some, doe worship their right shoulder; and some other againe, their left: some do worship, the one halfe of their head: some, an earthen Pot; and some other a Plat∣ter. Vpon all which he concludeth, Nonne haec tibi videntur risu prosequen∣da? Are not these to be derided? He seeking from this difference and dissension to make but a mock, and a scorne of all Religion: as though this generall opinion of God, were but onely a matter meerely fayned, and deuised.

2 But, that Conclusion doth not follow from this dissension. It infringeth neither the generalitie;* 1.408 nor yet the veritie of this notion, That there is a God: Nay, indeed it confirmes them both. For first, as concerning the generalitie of it; that followeth, by necessitie, vpon the affirmation of the particularitie. Qui Socratem dicit, Hominem dicit. He that affirmeth Socrates to be, hee must needs affirme, a man to be because, Socrates is a man. And so, hee that affirmeth either Iupiter, or Apollo, or Mars, or the Sun, or Moone, or Stars, or any other particular either Person, or Thing, to be a God; he must needs, by consequence affirme the generall, That there is a God. Yea, and though a thousand should dissent, as concerning this or that particular God; yet, if euery one of them doe name some one particular God, though he denie all the rest; yet, euen in that one particuler, hee must needes conclude the generall, that There is a God. As for example: if one man should say, that Socrates were no Philoso∣pher, but yet grant that Plato is; another, that Plato were none, but yet that Aristotle is one; another, that not he, but Xenocrates; and so in infinitum: all these agree in the generall, that A Philosopher there is: though they disagree in the particular, Who he is. And so it is likewise, in the opinions of the Hea∣thens, as concerning their gods. Though they particularly denie this, or that thing, to be God; yet, in affirming some other particular, they doe generally affirme, that there is a diuine nature. Their dissent in destroying of this, or that particular, doth not argue a consent, in destroying of the generall; no nor a dissent of any one of them from that; but a generall consent in it. As well may bee obserued, both in Tullie, and Plutarch: who, in the same sentence and complexion of words, wherein they report the generall dissent of all men in their particular gods; yet confesse their generall consent, in hauing of some God. So Tullie. Multi,* 1.409 de Diis praua sentiunt: id enim vicioso more effici solet; Omnes tamen, essevim, et Naturam Diuinam, arbitrantur: Many men doe thinke many euill things of the Gods: for that they haue learned by wicked ex∣amples. But yet all men doe confesse, That a God there is. So Plutarch. Omnes hoc vno ore dicunt,* 1.410 esse Deos. De Numero eorum, Ordine, Natura, Potestate, maxime sunt inter ipsos dissensiones. All men doe confesse, as it were with one mouth, that gods (surely) there be: herein they all agree. But, for their Number, their Order, their Nature, their Power, they doe vtterly disagree. So that their

disagreement, as concerning the number, and order of their gods, dissolueth not their agreement, in their being and essence; but that herein they all agree. Omnibus innatum est, et quasi insculptum;* 1.411 esse Deos, sayth Tullie againe. Quales sint, varium est: esse, nemo negat: It is naturally ingrauen into the mindes of all men, to beleeue There is a God; What an one hee is, is doubted of many: but that one there is, is not denied of any. And yet againe, in another palce. Nulla gens est,* 1.412 ne{que} tam immansueta, ne{que} tam fera: quae non, etiamsi ignoret qualem habere Deum deceat, tamen habendum sciat. There is not any people so feirce and vnciuil; but, though they may be ignorant, what they ought to make their God, yet they fully are perswaded, that they ought to haue a God. Whereby it appea∣reth;* 1.413 that (as Iustin Martyr noteth) Non differunt inter se, in vniuersali Dei cognitione, sed in speciali opinione: They differ not among themselues, in the ge∣nerall Position of hauing a God; but in their particular Opinion of hauing this, or that God. So that, this dissension doth make no opposition against the vni∣uersalitie of the former opinion.

No more doth it neither, against the veritie of it. For, it followeth not, by so much as a colour of consequence, that there should therefore be no God, because men cannot agree about this or that God: as though Gods being, or not being,* 1.414 depended vpon mens agreeing,* 1.415 or not agreeing. It is not mans opinion, that either giueth, or destroyeth, or altereth, the being of any thing in the world: and then, much lesse of God. But, all things are, as they are; whatsoeuer we thinke of them: they change not their being, for our change of opinion. For, as it is truly obserued by the Poet.

Nostrum scire quidem, aut nescire, nihil variat res. Things still persist, and varie ne're a iot: Whether we know them, or we know them not.

And therefore, if there were ten thousand differing opinions as concerning any thing; yet all they could not alter any whit in his being. How many differing opinions are reckoned vp by Aristotle,* 1.416 as concerning the soule: and how many moe by Tullie? yea, and those in great varietie. Hath a man there∣fore no soule; because the Philosophers cannot agree what it is? or, hath the soule no being; because Pherecrates affirmed the Soule to be Nothing? Or, may we beleeue that a man hath a soule; notwithstanding their dissension a∣bout the soule? And may we not beleeue, There is a God; notwithstanding their dissension and strife about God? This were against all reason. Or, may we not beleeue, that there be Starres in Heauen; because of their* 1.417 dissensi∣on, about the substance of them? Whether they be burning Stones, or shining Clowdes, or polisht Cristals or such like? This were against all sense. And yet is, neither the former opinion more directly against reason, nor this a∣gainst sense; then it is against them both, to beleeue there is no God; because of Mens dissension, who, or what should be that God. For, how can either Mens soules giue greater euidence vnto reason, or the starres themselus vnto sense, of their true being and existence; then God doth of his, vnto them both? If the soule sheweth his true being vnto the eye of Reason, by those notable operations, which it worketh in our bodyes, and in all the parts thereof; doth not God, much more shew his, by those glorious operati∣ons, which he worketh in the world, and in all the parts thereof? Againe, if

the Starres doe shew their being vnto the eye of sense, by the glorious bright∣nesse and shining of their bodyes; doth not God much more shew his, by his shining in those bodyes? who (as Ecclesiastious testifieth) is ten thousand times brighter then the Sunne.* 1.418 And therefore he that doubteth whether there be a God, or no, may as iustly doubt whether there be a Sunne, or no:* 1.419 as the Oracle collecteth: Quid enim est hoc, illo euidentius. Therefore, neither the generality, nor the verity of this grounded opinion, that There is a God, is any whit impaired by the particular dissention, that is among men about it. Be∣cause it may truely be affirmed of them (as Plutarch doth in the very like case) Singulos non recte pronuncia••se:* 1.420 That though in their particular, they haue eu••∣ry one erred, yet that in their generall, they are not deceiued.

3. Nay,* 1.421 it is thereby greatly fortified. For, as Saint Chrysostome collecteth in another like case; that the differences of the E••angelists in some smaller matters, proueth their consent in the greater, to be the voice of truth; and that they did not, ex compacto, agree all together, by an excogitated and composed tale, to deceiue the world: (For then they would in all points haue morefully agreed, polishing and concinning their History, so smoothly, that there should not haue bene found the least note of diuersity) so may we likewise collect, from the dissension of the Heathen, in the particular Hypo∣thesi•• of this or that God; that their consent in the Thesis, of hauing some God, must needs be the voice of truth: in that one nation did not borrow their opinion from another; for then they would haue accorded better, and that God which one had, the rest would all haue followed. But now, there being such a iarre and contention among them, as concerning their particu∣lar gods, euery one of them scorning the gods of another; and yet in the generall, agreeing all together, That some God they will haue; this sheweth (as the Orator very wisely collecteth) that, Hoc non collocutio hominum, aut con∣sensus efficit;* 1.422 non institutis ••st opinio confirmata, non legibus: but onely, Lege Nature: That this opinion of hauing a God, is not begotten in the mindes of men, either by conference or consent of one Nation with another; not yet im∣planted ••n them, by the Lawes and discipline of their owne priuate Nation; but it is inwardly begotten, by that generall Nature, which they haue all in com∣mon. It is a Principle of Nature, which is equally imprinted into the mindes of them all, none following by imitation anothers example. For, it cannot be the policie of the Greekes, or Romanes, or other ciuiller Nations, that hath so largely diffused this opinion of God: because wee see the most barbarous Nations, who neuer had trade or commerce with them, yet to bee possessed with this same opinion. Againe, it cannot be the rudenesse of the barbarous Nations (abused in their ignorance) that hath dispersed it so wide: because we see the ciuill learned Nations to be possessed of it likewise; who would scorne to take vp their opinion of the barbarous. The learned Na∣tions would not borrow their opinion of the rude, whom they held in such contempt: and the ruder could not borrow their opinion of the learned, from whom they were so distant. For how could the opinions of the Greekes, or Romanes, pierce into the extreamest India's: where their names were neuer heard? especially into the Westerne India's? Where yet, they haue their gods. Therefore the Orator directly concludeth, that cùm non instituto ali∣quo,

aut more,* 1.423 aut Lege, sit opinio constituta; maneat{que} ad vnum, omnium fir∣ma consensio; intelligi necesse est, esse Deos: quoniam insitas corum, vel potiùs innatas cognitiones habemus: Seeing this generall opinion of God, is not grounded vpon any instruction, any custome, any law; but that all men do con∣sent in it, as if they were but one man; we may hereby vnderstand, that surely There is a God: because there is so generall a notion of him, not grafted into our minds, but naturally bred in our mindes. So that this great variety of idolatrous Nations, in their particular opinions, as concerning their proper and peculiar gods, is rather an argument of the verity of that generall con∣clusion,* 1.424 That there is a God; then of the falsity of it. As Plutarch likewise insinuateth, from the very same grounds: where he saith, that it is vetustissi∣ma opinio, a sacrarum rerum professoribus, & legumlatoribus deriuata, authore incognito, sed fide firma; non in sermonibus tantùm, & rumoribus, sed & in mysterijs, & sacrificijs, tam Barbaris, quàm Graecanicis, extans; non casu ferri, & a Fortuna pendere Vniuersum hoc, Mente, & Ratione, & Gubernatore destitu∣tum: That it is a most ancient opinion, deriued by Priests and Lawgiuers from an vncertaine Author, but yet beleeued with a most certaine faith; not founded vpon rumors, but vpon the generall practice both of Greekes and Barbarians, in their mysteries and sacrifices; That the world is not ruled by chance, but by Prouidence. Yea, and Plutarch, in the same booke, is so farre from conclu∣ding, from the dissension of Nations about their seuerall gods, that therefore There is no God; that he rather collecteth from this their dissension, that they all intended, That there was but One: and that all, with ioynt consent, had a purpose to worship him; though in those diuers Countries hee were called by diuers names; as the Sunne is, and the Moone: Which yet, in their owne nature, are but one and the same, and to all alike in common. Ne{que} verò alij, apud alios,* 1.425 sunt Dij, aut Graecis quidem sui, Barbaris autem sui: alij Septentrionalibus, alij Austrinis. Sed quemadmodum Sol, Luna, Coelum, Terra, communia sunt omnibus: tantùm, aliter ab alijs appellantur: ita, vnius Mentis hoc Vniuersum temperantis—alij apud alios honores, alia nomina, legum insti∣tuto, habentur: There be not diuers gods among diuers Nations: The Greekes haue not theirs, and the Barbarians theirs: the Northerne men one sort, and the Southerne men another. But, as the Sunne, the Moone, the Heauen, the Earth, are the same vnto all; though they be in diuers places called by diuers names: So likewise it is, with that diuine Spirit, which gouerneth the World: though he be one in himselfe; yet hath he, in diuers Nations, both differing honors, and differing names, and those appointed by the Lawes. And so likewise, Maximus Tyrius. Aliter at{que} aliter nuncupatus est Deus. Perindè, vt alia at{que} alia Maris pars,* 1.426 dicitur, Aegeum, Ionicum, Myrthoum, ac Cretense; cùm tamen omnes, Pela∣gus sint, ••iusdem generis &c. God is diuersly called, in diuers Countries; as the Sea it selfe is; which in one place, is called the Aegean sea; in another place, the Ionian; in another, the Myrthean; in another, the Cretian; and yet all those Seas are but one, and the same. And so likewise is God; though he be cal∣led by diuers names. But howsoeuer this be: whether they all intended to worship but one God, vnder diuers names (as those Authors insinuate;) or whether they applied the incommunicable name of God, vnto diuers things, as the Apostle teacheth,* 1.427 that though there be indeed but one God, yet were there

many, that were called gods: Yet hereby it appeareth, that their dissent in their opinions, as concerning their gods, did not argue a consent in denying of God; but rather, in accepting him. And thus (as Lactantius well obser∣ueth) Difficile non est,* 1.428 paucorum hominum prauè sentientium, red ••rguere men∣dacia, testimonio populorum at{que} Gentium, in hac vna re non dissidentium. It is an easie matter, to confound and ouerthrow, the false opinions of a few wicked Atheists▪ by the Testimonies of so many whole people and Nations; especially con∣senting and agreeing all together, more fully in this one thing, then they doe in any other. For; as Seneca affirmeth in another like matter; Omnes in hoc vrbes,* 1.429 omnes ctiam ex Barbaris regionibus Gentes conclam••bunt. In hoc, bonis malis∣{que} conueniet; Omnes hoc vno tibi ore affirmabunt; & in hoc tam discors turba consentiet. All Cities, all Countries, all Nations, euen those that are most barbarous, yet doe consent in this. In this, both good and bad agree. This all men affirme with one and the same mouth: yea euen the rude rabble of the common people doe subscribe vnto this truth.

CHAP. 8.

Certaine Obiections touched, impugning the generality of the fore-named con∣sent, as concerning God. 2. The first of those Obiections opened, directly de∣nying it. 3. The same Obiection answered.

I HAVE shewed the generality of this naturall praenotion,* 1.430 That there is a God, by the vniforme consent of all the Nations of the world, both ciuill and barbarous; both Christians, Iewes, Mahometans, and Gentils. By the like consent againe, of all sorts of men, both learned and vnlearned;* 1.431 both of Poets and Philoso∣phers, Lawgiuers, and Artificers. And finally, by the same consent, of all par∣ticular persons; yea, euen of those that may seeme to be Gods directest ene∣mies; namely, Swearers, Blasphemers, and Idolaters.

All these consent in this, to beleeue, That there is a God; as in the short Epitome of our humane Creede. And this I haue confirmed by a cloud of witnesses, both Grecians, and Romans; both Christians, and Pagans. So that he, which dare gain-say a thing so generally receiued, and set himselfe to stand against so strong a torrent, may iustly be censured to bee impudent: and that (as Clemens Alexandrinus noteth him) hee doth omnem exuere verecundiam aduersus veritatem:* 1.432 He shaketh off all shamefastnesse, against the truth. But yet, if we will be equall iudges, and esteemers of matters, we must be content, to heare, as wel what can be said against them, as what can be said for them. Now against the generality of this consent alledged, there be three exceptions ob∣iected by the Atheist. The first, that there is no such generall consent, as is pre∣tended; no not, euen among Nations, and much lesse, among persons. The second, that if there were, yet were not this a naturall, but an artificial consent. The third, that there haue alwayes beene some men of a contrary opinion, who could not be denyed to haue beene very learned, and counted among the number of Philosophers: howsoeuer by them blemished with the name of Atheists.* 1.433 All which Obiections must both be opened and answered, before our cause can be sufficiently confirmed.

2 First therefore, for the first of them. It is familiarly knowne,* 1.434 vnto those that are conuersant in the writings of Tullie,* 1.435 that he,* 1.436 oftentimes, vnder the per∣son of an Academick, doth play the part of a very Atheist. Hee bringeth this praecognition and anticipation of God, as a very good argument, to proue, There is a God: and he againe bringeth Exceptions against it, seeking vtterly to disable it, playing so vpon both sides, and abusing the liberty of that licen∣tious profession (which was to speake for and against euery thing) to the vtter ouerthrow of all Religion. And he beginneth with the infringing of this na∣turall praenotion, which is the first foundation of all piety and Religion. The summe of his exception against it, is this. That it is, cùm leue per se, tum etiam falsum: That it is, both a light argument, and a false. The lightnesse of it, hee lightly ouerpasseth: but vpon the falsenesse of it, he somewhat more insisteth. And that he seeketh to proue by these foure reasons. First, because we cannot know the opinions of all Nations. Vnde tibi notae sunt opiniones Nationum? Secondly, because he was verily perswaded, that there were diuers Nations, which had no opinion of God. Multas esse gentes sic immanitate efferatas, vt apud e••s, nulla suspicio Deorum sit. Thirdly, by the naming of diuers speciall Atheists, that openly denied, that There was a God: where he pointeth vpon Diageras, Theodorus, and Protagoras. And fourthly, by the instance of sacrile∣gious and periured persons, and such like wicked liuers: who, if they had be∣leeued, that there were a God, they would neuer haue dared to be so impious and wicked.

—Tubulus si Lucius vnquam,* 1.437 Si Lupus, aut Carbo, aut Neptuni filius— Putasset esse Deos; tam periurus, aut tam impius fuisset?

This is the short summe of his whole Obiection.

3 Let vs now come to answer it,* 1.438 and euery part of it. And first, for his Leve, that it is but a light argument: I am sure, that this is but a light answer vnto it. An answer, then which there cannot be a lighter: which hee would neuer haue giuen, if he had had a better. Hee himselfe, in another place, ma∣keth this argument as weighty, as here he makes it light. Firmissimum hoc est cur Deos esse credamus: quòd nulla gens tam est fera, nemo omnium tam imma∣nis, cuius mentem non imbuerit Deorum opinio. This is the strongest argument, that can possibly be brought, why we should beleeue, that there is a God: because there is no Nation so vnciuill, no person so vile, whosi mind is not possessed with the opinion of some God: Here you see no light account made of this Argu∣ment: but a great and weighty testimony for the weightines of it. And there∣fore, all the lightnesse is rather in the disputant, then it is in the Argument, that turne••h off that so lightly, which he here esteemes so weighty. This is lightnesse indeed. For if he had any weight, when he alledged it for weigh∣ty; then hath not it, but he lost his weight, when he accounts so lightly of it: contrarying his owne praeceeding iudgement. So that the same censure, which he passeth of Antiochus, may as iustly be passed vpon himselfe: that Quanuis fuerit acutus vt fuit,* 1.439 tamen inconstantia leuatur authoritas: that though he were very witty (as he was indeed most certainely) yet by his inconstan∣cy, he lighted his authority. And therefore, passing ouer his Leve thus lightly, let vs now come to his Falsitie, that it is not onely Leve, but also Falsum:

which may truly be affirmed to be a false Exception.

But yet this he seekes to proue, by foure seuerall Arguments: vnto which it is behooffull, to giue their seuerall answers. The first whereof is this, That we cannot come to know the opinions of all Nations: and therefore cannot say, that all agree in one. But, vnto this I answer, that we may as surely know the Religions of all Nations, as they can know their Regions. For the same meanes, which can serue to instruct vs in the one, can with the same facility in∣struct vs in the other. For, whereby doth the Atheist know, that there be such and such Countries, Scythians, Barbarians, Indians, and other such like Nati∣ons, whose eyes he neuer saw? If he answer, that he knoweth it by the credible relations of Histories, and Trauellers, that haue seene them with their eyes: we may answer him againe, That by the selfe same Authors wee know also their Religions: yea, and their generall consent, in this generall ground, that they all will haue a God:* 1.440 as I haue already proued.

Now, for his second proofe; that there be such sauage Nations, as hee ve∣rily is perswaded, not to haue so much as the least conceit of God: as hee af∣firmeth it very weakely, Equidem Arbitror: so he confirmes it much more weakely,* 1.441 naming not so much as one; which evidently proueth, that he had not one to name. for else, he would as well haue recited the seue∣rall names of particular Nations, as he doth, in the next, of particular persons. And we may note the same defect in Plinie likewise:* 1.442 who saith, that, Alijs est nullus Deorum respectus: that with some there is no respect, no reuerence at all of God. But yet he nameth none (though he affirmeth some) neither there, nor yet throughout his whole Booke; though in all other matters, he be most∣ly very curious. But indeed, he could not name any particular Nation: and therefore contents himselfe with this generall assertion, of Alijs; without ad∣ding any instance. Now here must needs be very small store of good proofes: when as Arbitror, and Alijs, are the strongest Arguments.* 1.443 For I haue shewed before, that there is not, in the whole world, any Nation of Atheists: No Author, either old, or new, doth certainely report it. And therefore it is Libe∣rum Arbitrium indeed, vpon his owne bare Arbitror, to affirme it.

For his third proofe,* 1.444 by instance of diuers named Atheists, I will quit him with his owne words, euen in this very case. Placetnè igitur tantas res, opinio∣ne stultorum, iudicari? Are Fooles, the fittest Iudges, to determine so great mat∣ters? This Obiection he himselfe maketh, against both the generall consent of all men, and praescript of all time, as though all the world (excepting onely Atheists) were now turned fooles. Are all those wise Lawgiuers, who haue giuen Lawes and orders to all people and nations, on a sudden become fooles; because they beleeue a God? And are all the great Philosophers, whose wisedom and learning the whole world admireth in all other matters, become also fooles, for this onely cause? And is onely the Atheist wise, because he denieth God? Is this the onely wisedome, to deny there is a God? We should then haue a wise world.* 1.445 For then it would fall out indeed (as Aristotle imagined) that if all the world were fooles, and but two or three wise men in it; they should be counted fooles, and all the rest to be wise. And so it is indeed; if the Atheists be the wise men: for they are condemned for fooles,* 1.446 by the generall consent of all other men: as we shall hereafter see.

Now, for those noted Atheists, whom he nameth in that place, Diagoras, Theodorus, & Protagoras: It may be, that none of these could be truely counted Atheists, though they all were called so, by the censure of the vulgar: who strictly examine not the proper application of names vnto their things. For, Diagoras (as I finde it reported of him) did potiùs Gentilium Deos ridere,* 1.447 quam Deum negare: He rather derided false Gods, then denied the true.* 1.448 And Clemens Alexandrinus maketh the same defence, for all the rest of them; free∣ing them all expressely, from the crime of Atheisme. For Theodorus, though at the first he was noted of Atheisme;* 1.449 yet at the last, he fell into Autotheisme: professing himselfe a God, as Laertius recordeth. Now this he could not haue professed, if he had maintained that there was no God. Yea, and it may bee gathered out of Plutarch, that, euen in his former opinion of Atheisme, hee might be mistaken.* 1.450 For, euen he himself complaineth of the iniquity of his au∣ditors, that he did rationes suas dextra porrigere, illos verò laeua accipere:* 1.451 That he deliuered his speeches with the right hand, but his hearers receiued them with the left. In which place also, Plutarch, rendring the reason, why he was called Atheos, alledgeth no more, but this, Quòd Deos esse videretur negare: Because he seemed to deny, that there was any God. Was not here a faire proofe thinke you? And, for Protagoras, he neither denied God, no, nor so much as doubted of him. He did but onely professe, that he would not as then, entertaine the disputation, Whether there were a God or no? Which Coecilius ascribeth not vnto his prophanenesse,* 1.452 but rather to his warinesse. He saith, that in declining that slippery Question, he did Consulte potiùs, quàm prophanè disputare; as be∣fore I haue noted. So that none of all his instances doth handsomely fit his purpose.

And for his fourth Exception, of sacrilegious and periured persons; they cannot properly be reckoned in the number of Atheists. They may iustly bee condemned,* 1.453 as prophane and wicked persons, who dishonour God, yea and perhaps contemne him: but yet not properly as Atheists, who simply deny him. So that, no part of his Obiection concludeth for pure Atheists.

CHAP. 9.

The second Obiection, against this vniuersalitie of Consent, vnfoulded: That Religion is no better, but an humaine inuention. 2. That Obiection confu∣ted, by the Antiquity. 3. Vniuersality. 4. Consent. 5. Perpetuity of Re∣ligion.

AS there is nothing in the world, wherein all the whole world doth so generally consent, as they doe in beleeuing that There is a God: so is there nothing againe, wherein they doe se∣condarily so generally consent, as they doe in the acknowledge∣ment of that generall Consent. All men doe beleeue, that There is a God, and all men doe beleeue, that all men do beleeue, that There is a God. As the beleefe it selfe is generall: so is the beleefe of the beleefe generall: the Atheist only exempted: who, as he is an Aduersary vnto God himselfe, so is he likewise an Aduersarie vnto this consent. And, as he denieth the one: so doth he likewise denie the other of them: knowing, that if this consent be granted,

it will from thence follow, that there needes must be a God: as you shall see hereafter proued in the last Chapter of this Booke. And therefore, hee figh∣teth against this consent, with no 〈◊〉〈◊〉 indeauour, then hee doth against God: seeking to expugne the veritie of the one, by oppugning the Vniuersalitie of the other. And so, he chardgeth vpon this consent, with three seuerall Ob∣iections; as it were, with three Bands.

The first of his three Obiections against it, is a simple and categoricall deny∣ing of it: that there is not among men any such generall consent, as is gene∣rally imagined, and commonly praetended: vnto which, in the former Chap∣ter, I haue answered.

The second (vnto which I am now to answere) is this:* 1.454 That, though there were such a generall consent, as is conceiued; yet, that this is not a naturall, but an artificiall consent: not begotten in mens harts, by a naturall instinct, but implanted in them, by the cunning of euill arte. For that, all diuine reli∣gion, is indeed nothing else, but an humaine inuention; artificially excogita∣ted, to keepe men in awe: that they, who will not liue vertuously, for the loue of i••stice; yet might shunne to liue wickedly, for the feare of vengeance. This doth the Atheist make to be the true foundation of all Religion: reducing it so, from a diuine infusion, to be in truth no better, then an humane illusion.

And indeed this is a very sore Obiection, striking at the roote and the heart of all Religion. Which, though it be in truth but a mere idle fiction, conceiued without all ground of truth or reason; yet hath it obtayned a farre greater credit, with many learned men, then ought to bee affoorded to so vaine a suspition.* 1.455 Wherein, the cheifest Ring-leaders are these three: Euripi∣des, the Poet; Tullie, the Orator; and Seneca, the Philosopher. Euripedes, a se∣cret and concealed Atheist, not daring directly to vent out his Atheisme, for feare of the law, deuised an artificiall meane, how to broache that impietie in another mans person, which he durst not in his owne. And so he suborned, in his Tragoedie, the person of Sisyphus, to expresse all his vngodlinesse, and to teach it from the Stage: telling by him a long and a formall Tale; How the life of men in old time, was like the life of beasts: the stronger, by violence, oppressing the weaker; vntil, at last, men were forced to deuise seuere lawes, for the repressing of such iniustice. But when they found (vpon some triall) that all those lawes could do•• small good; because they could only take hold vpon such, as were open and publique offences, and not vpon close and secret ones; there step't vp among them a subtile politique man, who taught them a meane to prouide for that mischeife too: and to praeuent close offences, as well as open, ones. And that (saith he) is this; If they will but teach the people, and beate in to their heads:

Quòd sit perenni vita aliquis vigens Deus, Quicernat ista, et audiat, at{que} intelligat. An Euerliuing One, there is, whom God we call, And he both hear's, and see's, and vnderstandeth all.

This Tale tells Euripides, by the mouth of Sisyphus: Veritati tenebras menda∣cio offundens, seeking to obscure the truth with the darkenes of his lie (as Plu∣tarch very truly censureth his bad artifice) seeking so to teach the people that

impietie from the Stage, which he durst not from the Pulpit: and that by a fey••ed person, which he durst not in his owne. An vsuall practice of all dis∣guised Atheists (as Plutarch instanceth againe in the person of Herodotus) who secretly intending to blaspheme the gods,* 1.456 he expresseth his owne impie∣tie in the person of Solon; Dijs maledicens sub persona Solonis: Rayling vpon the gods, vnder Solons name.— And so likewise doth Lucian.* 1.457 He suborneth in one place,* 1.458 Cyniscus, a Cynick; in another, Damis, an Epicure, to dispute against God, in the person of Iupi∣ter. But, in this kinde hath Tullie playd his parte, most artificially. For hee, (fearing the rigour of the Lawes among the Romanes, as Euripides did before among the Athenians) hath imitated his policie, in expressing his impietie: and suborned Cotta, as an Academike, to dispute against God: who, by the li∣bertie of that licentious profession,* 1.459 might more safely doe it. For, the sect of the Academikes would determine nothing: but yet did professe, that they would freely dispute, both for, and against euerie thing. And so, by that occa∣sion, he divulged that impietie, in the person of Cotta, which he durst not haue done, in the person of Cicero: as euen he himselfe, in a manner, confesseth. For, being demanded, An sint Dij? he answereth, that it is, Difficile negare, si in concione queratur;* 1.460 sed in privato sermone et confessu, facillimum. If the Question (saith he) be moued, Whether there be a God? it would be dangerous to denie it, in the praesence of the multitude: but yet, safe ynough, among the wise and learned. Whereby he insinuateth, that the most part of the learned did propende to that opinion; though, for feare of the multitude, they durst not publish their irreligion. And therefore, by the forenamed Cotta, he insinu∣ateth,* 1.461 that there were not a few; Qut dixerunt, totam de Dijs immortalibus opinionem, fictamesse ab hominibus sapientibus, Reip: causa; vt, quos ratio non posset, eos ad officium Religio duceret: There be diuers, that haue affirmed, that this whole conceite as concerning God, is indeed nothing else, but a witty inventi∣on, deuised by wise men, for the publique good, to holde those men in their dutie, by the awe of Religion, that would not be restrayned by the rule of reason. Yea, and Seneca giueth countenance vnto the very same Opinion: ascribing vnto them, the title of wise men, that were the first Authors of that inuention. Ad coercendos animos imperitorum,* 1.462 sapientissini viri indicauerunt ineuita∣bilem metum, vt supra nos aliquid timeremus. V••ile erat in tanta audacia scele∣rum, aliquid esse, aduersùs quod nemo sibi satis potens videretur, Ad conterren∣dos igitur eos; quibus innocentià, nisi metu, non placet, posuêre, super caput, vindicem, et quidem armatum: wise men haue invented, for the terror of the ig∣norant, That there is aboue their he••ds a power greatly to be feared, and not to be avoyded. For it was indeed convenient, that in so huge a license and boldnesse of offending, mens mindes should be possessed with a certaine perswasion; That there is a Nature omnipotent, which cannot be resisted. And so, for the terrour of those men that regarde not vertue but onely for feare, they haue placed aboue them, not onely a most rigorous and seuere reuenger, but him also armed with lightening and thunder. These be the cheifest Patrons of this impious fiction, That Religion is no better then an humane inuention. Let vs now proceede to answere them.

2 Now, that it is but a meere fiction [That Religion should be a fiction]

hauing neither any substance, nor good colour of Reason; it appeareth by many Reasons: as namely, by these foure, among diuers other, to wit, the Antiquitie, Vniuersalitie, Consent, and Perpetuitie of Religion. All which are Arguments of the Veritie of it: and that it is not a fiction deuised.

First,* 1.463 for the Antiquity of it: that may be considered two seuerall wayes: either particularly, as it is in euery seuerall man: or generally, as it is in the ge∣neration of al men. Both which two Antiquities, do notably confute the fable of Euripides.* 1.464 For the first of those Antiquities, I haue shewed you before, that there is no notion so ancient in the mind of a man, as is the notion of Religion.* 1.465 Which Arbobius affirmeth to be begotten in vs, euen whilst we are in the wombe of our mothers, ipsis penè in genitalibus Matris. Where, I am sure, we could heare no such politique old Tales, as Euripides affirmeth to be the first be••••tters of Religion in vs. Yea,* 1.466 and Iamblicus, an Heathen, affirmeth of Religion; that it is implanted into the minde of a man, Et••am ante omnem rationis vsum: Euen before hee haue any vse of reason: as before I noted of him. Which, if it be true, then could not Religion be a politique inuention, to beguile the simpler sort of men. For, how could it then be im∣printed into Children? yea, and that before they haue the vse of reason? When as Aristotle affirmeth of politique doctrine, that it is too high for the reach of any young men:* 1.467 then much more of young Children. For, if Iuuenis be not idoneus auditor ciuilis Disciplinae; then much lesse is Infants. And therefore it hath not any colour of reason, that Religion (being so time∣ly begotten in them) should be first implanted by the meanes of such a fabu∣lous instruction. There is (I say) no colour of reason in this reasonlesse fiction.

Now for the generall Antiquity of Religion, and that ancient possession, which it hath had in the world,* 1.468 Plutarch sayth, that it is so ancient, that no man can tell the first originall of it. And hee applieth to this purpose those verses of Sophocles:

Non nunc enim, ne{que} heri sunt ista prodita: Semper valuêre, nec quando inierint, liquet. These things were not of yesterday or lately brought to passe: They euer were, and no man knowes when their beginning was.

But, for the true Antiquity of it, let vs but follow the stepps of it, as they be expressed to vs in the word of God, and we shall finde, that Religion is more ancient, then any fiction; and the practise of piety, then any deuised lye. For, when there were but three men in the vniuersall world,* 1.469 we reade, that two of them offered vp their sacrifices vnto God: when as yet there was neither cause of the making of lawes against publique oppressions, nor, of diuising such fables against secret offences. And therefore, Religion could not grow from either of those causes. Nay, it appeareth euen in their examples, that oppression (though per accidens) grew rather from religion, then religion from oppression. For, before those two Brothers had offered vp their sacri∣fices, there was no oppression: but when they were once dispatched, it pre∣sently followed; the one brother violently oppressing the other; yea and that meerely vpon this one emulation, because he was better accepted in his re∣ligion.

Whereby it appeareth, that religion is almost as ancient as man; nay, altogether as ancient. For the very first man is sayd to be cre••ted in the image of God:* 1.470 which the Apostle Paul expoundeth to be, in righteousness and holinesse: which are the two essentiall parts of religion, his matter, and his forme. Nay, religion is yet more ancient. It is more ancient t••en man. It is as ancient as the Angels: as is plainely insinuated in the booke of Io••. Where wast thou,* 1.471 when the starres of the morning praised me together? and when all the sonnes of God shouted for ioy? Here was the vs•• and practise of religion, euen before the making and creation of man. And therefore, religion could not be an humaine inuention, vnlesse either there was a man, before there was a man;* 1.472 or that man was able to inuent, before he was made. For, as Tertullian hath very well obserued: Prior anima, quàm litera; & prior sermo, quàm liber; & prior sensus, quàm stilus; & prior homo, quàm Philosophus, & Po∣eta. There was a soule, before there was a letter; a speech, before ther was a book; a sense, before ther was a stile, a man, before there was, e••her a poet, or philosopher.

And yet, there was Religion before there was a Man. And therefore, it could not be an huma••ne inuention.

So that Time, which prescribeth against all humane inuentions, and which chalengeth the honour of Antiquity from them; yet it selfe is prescribed a∣gainst by religion, and loseth the honour of priority with it: because reli∣gion is as 〈…〉〈…〉* 1.473 latuit:* 1.474 semper illuxit: etiam ante Romulum, sayth Tertullian. Yea, and ante Ho∣mulum too, as before I haue shewed you. God hath bene knowne from all be∣ginning: he neuer lay hid: hee euer was manifest, euen before the first King: euen before t••e first thing.

And therefore, if his owne Rule be true: Idem esse verum,* 1.475 quod••un{que} pri∣mum; id adulterinum, quodcun{que} postcrius: That that which is the ancientest, must n••eds be the truest: then cannot Religion be an humane inuention: be∣cause it is more ancient then man. And consequently, that Euripides his Tale, whereby he seek••th to discredite Religion, must needs be a false, and an idle f••ctio••, without ground of truth, or reason: it being but a late, and a posteri∣our inuention. Yea, and such, as hath ••or it, not any, either knowne or cer∣taine Author, to credite it. So that, it may more iustly be numbred among thos•• Be••••eselenas,* 1.476 those headlesse Old-wiues Tales, which Plutarch in the same place so iustly derideth; then Religion it selfe can; which it seeketh to deride, vnder that very name. But, the true Antiquity of Religion doth free it from any such base imputation, and declare it to bee a lesson of Gods owne first teaching:* 1.477 b••cause it was practised by Adam, the first man, who could haue no other man to ••each him. From which obse••ation, Iustine Martyr collecteth, Quòd, ante errorem, veritas obtinuerit: That Religion is

more ancient then superstition. Yea, and in the same place, he bringeth this substantiall reason; that Malum posterius est bono: qui••, nihil est aliud, nist boni deprauatio: That euill is posteriour vnto good, because it is nothing but the corruption of good. So then, the Antiquity of Religion doth proue, that it can∣not be an humaine inuention.

3 Yea, and so doth likewise the Vniuersality of it. For there was neuer yet any humaine inuention, so generally spred, as the vse of Religion: no not those, that seeme most necessary for the vse of men. Not cloathing of our bodies, which is for meere necessity: nor couering of our shames, which is for publique honesty. For, we meete with diuers nations, among the west Indians,* 1.478 which neither cloathe their bodies, nor couer their shames; and yet can meete with none, but that they haue their gods. Which sense of Religion, could not possibly be implanted into euery Nation, either by imitation from their neighbours; because some be so wilde and sauage, that they do not admit of any entercouse or commerce: Nor yet by institu∣tion among themselues; vnlesse we should imagine, that in euery Nation, there should sodainely steppe vp such a politique wise man; and (as it were by fate) tell the same Tale of Religion: or that Euripides his man had com∣passed the whole world about, like the Sunne, and read his prophane lecture in euery Nation. Both which suppositions were idle and ridiculous. And therefore it is apparent, that Religion cannot be of humane institution; but that the same common Nature, which hath giuen vnto all men their hearts, hath also giuen Religion into all their hearts,* 1.479 to be among them, as common, as their naturall forme. For so indeed doth Lactantius esteeme it. He ac∣compteth Religion, to be the most proper and essentiall difference, betweene a man and a beast; more, then either Risus, or Ratio, or Oratio; then either Laughing, or Speaking, yea, or Reason it selfe. All which he there proueth to be (in some degree) communicated vnto Beasts; but Religion to bee proper and peculiar vnto Men: and yet common vnto all men. But, that, neither by domesticall instruction at home; nor yet, by mutuation, or imitation a∣broad: but only, by that naturall instinct and disposition, which God hath ingrafted, into the hearts of all men: as Alexander ab Alexandro,* 1.480 hath very truly obserued: Primi mortales, nulla doctrinae schola, Ratione, aut Lege; sed suo quis{que} ingenio, numina coluerunt. The first men, were neither taught by any learning, nor perswaded by any reason, nor compelled by any law; but onely, of their proper and naturall inclination, betooke themselues vnto the worshipping of gods. Yea, and that so generally, throughout the whole world; that there is not any nation vnder heauen excepted. Which vniuersality of religion, de∣clareth that it is not an humane inuention, but a diuine impression; yea, and a Diuinity-lesson, of Gods own heauenly teaching. As we may see by his schoo∣ling of the first man Adam,* 1.481 whom he catechised vnto the obedience of God, both by giuing him a commandement, and by annexing to it a punishment.

4. And the same may likewise bee proued by that vniform•• consent,* 1.482 which is among all men, as concerning Religion, of whatsoeuer degree or condition. Which in this one thing is farre greater, then it is in any other of what nature soeuer: as I haue shewed before. We see by experience,* 1.483 that not only diuers Nations haue diuers fashions, and diuers conceits, and opi∣nions

in most things; but that, euen in the same Nation, that diuers Cities haue diuers guises, behauiours, habits, speeches, and manners: as our Coun∣try-man Sir,* 1.484 Iohn Mandeuile well obserued, in his trauell. And yet, in belee∣uing that There is a God, there is no difference at all, throughout the whole world: no City iarres with Citie, no Country with Country: but among them all an vniuersal agreement: wherein, both the learned and vnlearned do consent.* 1.485 From which head, Tertullian concludeth the verity of Religion. For, Quod apad multos vnum invenitur, non est erratum, sed traditum. The consent of all men, as concerning God, doth shew it to be no erring humane in∣uention; but a most certaine diuine tradition. For, if Religion were no bet∣ter, but a politique deuice and inuention of man, it was a very marueilous fe∣licity in lying, that he had, which first deuised the tale of Religion: that he should tell his fable in such a fortunate howre, as to beguile the whole world with it, and that for euer after. This was a cunning Iuggler indeed, that could cast so cunning a glaucoma,* 1.486 and such a 〈◊〉〈◊〉 mist before the eyes of the wisest; as to dazle,* 1.487 not only the vnlearned and simple Idiots, but also the wisest and grauest Philosophers: as Lactantius well obserueth. Quae tanta felicitas men∣tiendi, vt 〈…〉〈…〉 indoctos, sed Platonem quo{que} & Socratem fallerent? & Pythago••am, Zenonem, Aristotele••, Maximarum Sectarum Principes 〈◊〉〈◊〉 facile deluderent? What a strange kind of efficacy had that man in his lying, that could bewitch with one Tale, not only the vnlearned; but also Plato, and So∣crates, and Pythagoas, and Zeno, yea, and Aristotle himselfe, the principallest Masters of all the learned Sects? This lie was begotten in a strange constel∣lation, if it were a lie, that one wise man should make fooles of all the wise men of the world: and yet, by all their wisedome, neuer be descried. There∣fore, we may conclude with Seneca,* 1.488 that if Religion were a siction; Non in hunc furorem omnes mortales consensissent, alloquendi surda numina, & in∣efficaces Deos: Surely, all the whole world would neuer haue conspired in this madnes, to call vpon such deafe and idle gods.

Beside, as Lactantius truely noteth in the very same place, (where he doth, ex professo, dispute this very case) He could not be a wiseman, that was the Au∣thor of this so false a fiction. For the end of true wisedome is to draw men out of error, and not to leade them into it, as this false impostor did. And therefore he concludeth from this so generall a consent in Religion, that it could not be possibly an humane inuention.

5 And yet the same may be further declared by the perpetuall succession,* 1.489 and propagation of Religion: which hath thriuen, from the beginning, with such admirable prosperity, that it hath not decayed in any Country, or City: but, wheresoeuer it hath bene planted, there hath it euer florished, and could neuer be supplanted. Which sheweth it to be a Plant, both by God himselfe first planted, and graciously euer since, with the dew of his blessing, watered.

For,* 1.490 as Christ himselfe teacheth vs, Euery plant, which the heauenly Father hath not planted shall be rooted out. And therefore, if Religion had beene but a plant of mans planting and setting, it would long since haue beene blasted, yea, and vtterly starued. For, no humane inuention, had euer, either such a prosperous increasing; and such a long, & a firme continuing in the world, as

Religion hath had: but all the conceits of men, though for a time they may shoot-out, and haue a kinde of flourishing; yet doe they quickly decay againe; time blasting and withering them,* 1.491 as the grasse which growes vpon the topps of houses. For, as the Orator hath very truely noted: Ficta omnia, celeriter, tan∣quam flosculi, decidunt: All fayned deuises, come quickly to an ende, as flowers shattered by the wynde. And againe in another place vnto the same purpose: Opinionum commenta delet dies,* 1.492 Naturae iudicia confirmat: Time destroyeth all those fancies, which haue none other ground, but only humane opinion; but, it strengtheneth all those iudgements, which are founded vpon truth, and sound naturall reason. As for example. The particular conceite of all the heathen gods, hath time now deuoured; because that was nothing else, but opinionis commmentum: But, the generall beleefe, that There is a God, it hath in all places confirmed; because this beleefe is Naturae iudicium. And therefore Religion, which thus growes stronger and stronger by time, and hath conti∣nued so firmely, from the very beginning, without any decaying, must needes haue a better ground,* 1.493 then a meere humane opinion. For, as Seneca hath well obserued; Falsa non durant: False things continue not. And there∣fore this thriuing of religion, and this perpetuall succession of it, haue euen the Heathen collected, to be a true argument, of the infallible truth of it: and that it is vnpossible, that it should be no better then a fiction deuised: Quòd,* 1.494 et omnium esset, et quotidiè cresceret: because it was both so generally receiued, and beleeued of all men, and so prosperously continued from the very beginning: concluding no lesse, from the Perpetuitie of it, then from the Vniuersalitie; that it is a plant of natures owne breeding: and therefore can∣not be any politique inuention. And consequently, that Euripides, in his for∣ged inuention, That Religion should be nothing but an humane inuention, did (as Plutarch truly censures him) mendacio veritati tenebras offundere:* 1.495 Hee sought onely, to obscure the truth, with a lie. And therefore, for this his pro∣phanesse, in this his deuice against religion and piety, he better deserueth that inured note of Tullie [Capitalis Euripides] then for his iniustice against right and equitie,* 1.496 in that his other sentence:

Nam si violandum est ius, regna••di gratia Violandum est; alijs rebus, pietatem colas. If Iustice may be wrong'd at all, then for a Crowne it may: Except a Kingdom's case, in all, let Pietie thee sway.

Here yet was, in some things a conseruation of equitie: but his Tale against Religion imported in all things, an extirpation of pietie: as the Orator obser∣ueth,* 1.497 and that very truly: Qut dixerunt totam de Dijs immortalibus opinionem fictam esse—Omnem Religionem funditùs sustulerunt: They that shall affirme all opinion of the gods to be but a fiction, doe vtterly take away the summe of Religion.

Now these things considered, it euidently appeareth, that it is not Religi∣on, that is a fraudulent inuention, to beguile and deceiue men: but rather this slander of Religion, that it should be but a fraudulent inuention, this is a fraudulent inuention indeed: yea, and that a very wicked one: as euen Tullie himselfe insinuateth,* 1.498 nay plainely expresseth, when hee saith of their Reli∣gions; that, Periculum est, ne, aut his neglectis, impia fraude, aut susceptis, anili

superstitione obligemur: That there is no little danger, lest either on the one side, by neglecting of Religion, we be circumuented by the fraud of Atheists; or on the other side, by accepting of Religion, we be intangled with the superstition of old wiues. Where I cannot imagine, what other fraud of Atheists he should rather meane, then this, of their affirming, that religion is nothing else but an humane inuention: which is indeed a very fraudulent suggestion, and a fable artificially inuented, and composed against religion: But, so is not religion against the truth. It is not, fabula, arte composita, as S. Pe∣ter truly teacheth.* 1.499 But that this was falsly fayned, I hope I haue plainely proued.

CHAP. 10.

The third Obiection against the Vniuersalitie of Consent in Religion, propoun∣ded: viz. That is hath beene oppugned, by diuers both wise and learned Phi∣losophers, though called by the name of Atheists. 2. That Obiection answered from the smalnesse of their number. 3. The weakenes of their learning. 4. The mistaking of their opinion. 5. And their inconstancie in their assertion.

THere is yet a third Obiection behind,* 1.500 which may be made by the Atheist, against the Supposition of this so vniuersall a consent in Religion: and that is this following: That though it could not be denyed, that both all Nations, and all professions of men in the world, doe beleeue There is a God: yet that it cannot be affirmed, that all seuerall persons haue also therein consented. Because, there be recorded, in the writings both of Heathens and Christians, the very names of diuers men, that haue directly denied it; yea, and openly defended, That there is no God. Amongst whom, though they haue beene branded with the name of Atheists, as with a note of infamie, as crossing the current of that generall opinion with among other men was receiued, & beleeued most confidently; yet were they not denied to haue bin both wise and learned; as ranked, euen by their aduersaries, amongst the number of Philosophers. And therefore, their opinion cannot (in common reason) but haue farre greater weight, then the whole multitude of the vnlearned: because (as Lactantius very truly obserueth,* 1.501 Plus est momenti in paucioribus doctis, quàm in pluribus imperitis: There is a great deale more weight, in a few, that are learned; then in a many, that are ignorant. So that, a multitude of the vulgar, are not able to counterpoise so much as one Philosopher: their iudgement being branded with that note of infamie,* 1.502 that Nihil est 〈◊〉〈◊〉, quàm nihil sapere, vulgare: That there is nothing so common, as for the common people to vnderstand nothing. And therefore, notwithstanding all the crye of the vulgar (who obtaine their opinions, not by reason, but by clamor) that may fall out in this case,* 1.503 which is noted by the Orator: vt altera res verbosior sit, altera verior. That the one part may bee the truer, though the other bee the lowder.

2 But now vnto this Obiection,* 1.504 I answer three things. First, that for their number, the Atheists doe well not to stand vpon that plea; but to disclaime it vtterly, and not to vie with their Aduersaries in that point, for the victorie.

For the number of those that haue denied God, is so little, in comparison of those that confesse him, that (to vse the Orators comparison) it is but stilla muriae,* 1.505 ad mare Aegeum: but as one drop of brine vnto a whole Ocean. Their multitude is so great, and so infinite aboue their opposite. Neither these one∣ly, a multitude of the ignorant and vnlearned, but also euen of the wise and learned. All the learnedest Philosophers, and all the wisest Sages, that euer were in the world, may be numbred in this multitude, that confesse there is a God. So that if any cause can gaine any estimation, either by the number, or honour of those that defend it; or by the fewnesse, and basenesse, of those that oppugne it; no cause hath more aduantage, in both these points, then this.

For first, as concerning the number of those Atheists, it is so poore and contemptible, that it is an infinite disgrace, and reproach vnto their cause, to haue beene, in all mens eyes, so abiect, and profligated, as to be able to get no moe defenders, since the world was first created: especially, being taught by such learned Philosophers, as they would insinuate. This is a foule disgrace vnto their cause, that so great learned Teachers, could get so few Disciples; especially being followed by so many Auditors: as Laertius obserueth in Bion of Boris∣thenis, one of the chiefest Atheists, that; Nemo illius Discipulus inscribitur, cùm tot habuerit auditores. So that, in all ages, there haue beene but very few, either Masters or Schollers in the doctrine of Atheists. And this Tullie obiecteth vn∣to Epicurus,* 1.506 another of their principallest Atheists. In vestris disputationibus, historia muta est. Nunquam audiui in Epicuri schola, Lycurgum, Solonem, Miltia∣dem, Themistoclem, Epaminondam nominari; qui in or•• sunt caeterorum omni∣um Philosophorum: All historie is mute in the schoole of the Epicure. We heare there, no naming of Lygurgus, Solon, Miltiades, Themistocles, or Epamniondas; which vse to rattle in the mouthes of all other Philosophers. Atheists could ne∣uer get any such men to be their Disciples: no, nor yet any other, that had ei∣ther worth,* 1.507 or number. S. Augustine saith of them, that it is, Rarum genus ho∣minum,* 1.508 qui dicunt, Non est Deus: It is rare to sinde any man that denieth There is a God. And Beda likewise, vnto the same purpose: Exceptis paucis, quibus natura nimiùm deprauata est, vniversum genus hominum, Deum, mundi huius fatetur authorem: Except only a few of a depraued nature, all mankind doth ac∣knowledge both a God, and a Creator. Yea, and he addeth there this reason: Haec est enim vis verae diuinitatis, vt creaturae rationali, iam ratione vtenti, non om∣nin•• ac penitùs possit abscondi: This is the power of the diuine nature, that it wil not be hid from any reasonable creature. By which testimonies of these Fa∣thers, it euidently appeareth, that the number of Atheists hath beene but very few: but Pauci, saith Beda; nay Perpauci, saith Augustine, in the place that be∣fore I cited out of him. Lactaentius affirmeth, that there were but two or three of them:* 1.509 Exceptis duobus, tribusvè calumniatoribus vanis, constat, Diuina pro∣uidentia Mundum regi: Except onely, two, or three vaineglorious Cauillers, all the whole world beleeueth, that the world is ruled by prouidence. And that this is not an artificiall diminution, of an extenuating Christian; it is expresly con∣firmed,* 1.510 by the testimony of an Heathen. In vniverso aeuo (saith Maximus Ty∣rius) duo, aut, ad summum, tres exortisunt, &c. There haue, of those Monsters, two,* 1.511 or three (and not aboue) beene brought forth, in all ages. Nay, Tullie saith, There haue beene none: Nemo omnium tam immanis, cuius mentem non imbu∣erit

Dcorum opinio. So that now, they are brought vnto a very low ebbe: their number is so little, that they are now, nullo numero.

And indeed,* 1.512 if we speake of Atheists strictly, and properly, for such as haue simply denied all diuinity, and denied it constantly; Tullies sentence is most true, that there neuer was any such creature in the world (nay neuer any such Monster) as simply and constantly to deny God. The name of an Atheist in this sense, is but, Nomen ociosum; A name without a thing.

If we speake of Atheists in a larger sense, for such as haue openly (though not constantly) denied the Diuinity; Maximus his sentence is true, that, of such professed Atheists, there haue not beene past two or three. Nay, if wee speake of Atheists, in the largest and most extended sense, for such as haue ei∣ther not denied Gods essence, but onely certaine of his properties, as his pro∣uidence, his iustice, his goodnesse, and such like: or, if they haue denied it, yet haue done it but weakely, rather vpon some sudden passion, then any setled re∣solution: yet, euen so, their number hath scarcely amounted vnto a dozen, or a score; I meane of such open Atheists, as haue made any publique profession of their Atheisme, though but euen in these secondary points. As wee may partly see in Aelian,* 1.513 who hath made a lyst of them, and named all he knew: and yet (God knowes) they are but very few. There be not aboue sixe of them: who yet, all of them did not deny God himselfe; but some of them, his proui∣dence, and some other his praedictions; as appeareth by those Dogmata, which, in that place, he recounteth. Now, if we should search into the monuments of all Antiquity, both of Greeks and Latins, we should scarcely be able to adde halfe a dozen more, vnto those that are named by Aelian before. Whereby it appeareth, that, for their number, they be miserable: God, in his mercifull pro∣uidence, ordai••••i••g, that there should not, in all ages, be found many Atheists; as not many Basilisks, and destroying Serpents.

3 And, as their number was but little,* 1.514 so their learning was not great. They were of no great value, neither numero, nor pondere. The value of their wisedome they haue shewed, in the choyce of their foolish opinion: which hath made them no lesse scorned then abhorred of all men, and iustly to in∣curre that note of derision, which the Prophet Dauid hath imprinted vpon them,* 1.515 that they iustly may be esteemed, to be rather Fooles, then wise men. At the least-wise, farre vnworthy of the name of Philosophers: as Laertius (for the like cause) censureth the Poet Orpheus.* 1.516 Equidem is, qui de Dijs talia com∣mentus est; an Philosophus appellandus sit, nescio. Videant certè, qui ita volunt, quo sit censendus nomine: Surely he, that deuised such things of the Gods, I know not whether he iustly may be called a Philosopher. Let them looke vnto it, that will haue them so called, whether that name be fit and properly applied.

And for their learning, though it cannot be denied, but that diuers of them were learned; yet was not their learning in any such excellency, as was able to sustaine their impiety and arrogancy. And beside, if they be com∣pared with those learned men, of the contrary opinion, which either liued with them, or before them, or after them, their learning will come as short in proportion, as the light of a candle doth, of the brightnesse of the Su••ne. For what comparison can Diagoras hold with Pythagoras? or Protagoras with A∣naxagoras? or Euemerus with Empedocles? or Theodorus with Theophrastus?

or Bion with Chilon? or Epicurus with Epicharmus? or Pherecides with Parme∣nides? To be silent of Socrates, and Plato, Aristotle, and Zeno, Xenocrates, and Demetrius, Cleanthes, and Democritus, Diogenes, and Melissus; and very many others, which can finde no parallels, among all the Atheists, beeing so eminent aboue them,

Quantùm lenta solent inter viburna Cupressi:* 1.517 As much as loftiest Cedars show, The lowest Shrubs doe ouergoe.

So that, if this cause be esteemed, by either Number or Learning▪ the Atheists (as you see) can hold no comparison.* 1.518 Non est enìm quisquam (saith Lactanti∣us) qui Diagorae, Theodori{que} sententiam praeferre audeat, vel authoritati illorum septem priorum, qui sunt appellati sapientes; vel Pythagorae, vel Socrati, vel Platonis, caeterorum{que} summorum Philosophorum, qui esse Prouidenti••m iudica∣uerunt: Ther is no man that dares prefer the foolish opinion of Diagoras & The∣odorus before the authority of those seuen that are called the Wise men: no, nor yet before either Pythagoras, or Socrates, or Plato, or the rest of the Philosophers which haue all of them acknowledged and confest a diuine Prouidence. So that, whether we consider their Number, or their Learning, their cause reapeth both waies an infinite disreputation, their Aduersaries do in both points so mighti∣ly ouersway them. Lactantius censuring Diagoras and Theodorus (which were the chiefest Patriarchs of the Atheists) he saith, that they liued but in an age of ignorance; cùm iam Philosophia defloruerat,* 1.519 when Philosophie had lost the chiefest lustre of her glory; and that they themselues were accordingly but on∣ly Minuti & inertes Philosophi, a simple and an ignorant kind of Philosophers. And Tullie passeth (in effect) the very same censure vpon Epic••rus, another of their pillars. For he saith,* 1.520 he was a man without all manner of learning. Ho∣mo sine arte, sine literis, insultans in omnes, sine acumine vllo, sine authoritate, sine lepore. A man without Art, and without all good learning, and yet insulting ouer all men: but, without any wit, without any grauity, and without any good con∣ceit. Yea,* 1.521 and Lactantius saith of him, that, Hoc sano & vige••e, nullus aeger ineptiùs delirauit: No man euer so doated in his raging sicknesse, as this man did in his florishing health: deriding L••cretius for bestowing such enormous commendations vpon him. These were their very Principalls, and the Lea∣ders of the others. Now if their chiefest were none other, the rest (surely) were no better. So that, as the smalnesse of their number bringeth great dis∣aduantage, so the weakenesse of their learning bringeth but small aduantage, vnto the cause of Atheists.

4 But now,* 1.522 it may be doubted (yea, and that not without some probability of reason) whether those men, whom the Heathen haue so branded for Atheists, were pure Atheists indeed, or no? For the pure Atheist (according to the pro∣priety of that name) is he, which generally and constantly denieth all Diuini∣ty;* 1.523 and beleeueth, as he saith. The Prophet Dauid affirmeth in generall, that the Atheist is a Foole, which saith in his heart, There is no God. And indeede, he that properly is an Atheist, must both say generally, There is no God; and be∣leeue it constantly in his heart. For, if either he beleeue any one God, though he deny all the rest; or confesse God in the end, whom in the beginning hee denied; he cannot truely and properly be said to be an Atheist. But such an

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

Atheist was none of all those, whom the Heathen haue called Atheists, and whom they haue proclaimed to deny all that is called God. There was none of them, such pure and absolute Atheists, as simply to deny all Deitie. As wee may easily see, if we will but looke into their causes; and examine (but euen by their owne records) those seuerall crimes and actions, that haue beene laid against them, in their seuerall iudgements.

And first, for Diagoras; who was (in their reckoning) the most noted man of all of them, and the first Antistes of their impious profession: all the rest of the Atheists being counted but his followers,* 1.524 Diagorae sectatores, as Theodor•••• affirmeth: insomuch, that his name was growne prouerbiall among them. For, when they would note any prophane and impious person, they would call him prouerbially,* 1.525 Diagoras the Melian. Diagoras Melius, de prophanis, & per••idis, & impijs dicitur, saith Suidas. And yet, the Action which the Athe∣nians commenced against him, was no more but this; that he did eliminate, and divulge the mysteries of their gods;* 1.526 and,* 1.527 by deriding of them, auert and turne men from them, as he noteth in the same place. Which two crimes, though very farre in nature differing; yet were (among the Heathen) indiffe∣rently comprehended, vnder the name of Atheisme; as though they were both one; which is a very large acception of Atheisme. So that Diagoras his crime was not, that he denied all Gods: but, that hee derided the Athenian gods. For so Iosephus reports it: Aduersùs Diagoram, talentum decreuerunt, si quis eum occideret; quoniam eorum mysteria deridere ferebatur: They appoin∣ted a talent to him that should kill him; because he derided their Religion. Now this he might iustly doe, and yet not be an Atheist. Hee might iustly deride the foolish Orgies of their false gods (as Elias did the follies of Baals Priests) and yet therein not be an Atheist,* 1.528 as Elias was not. For their Rites were so vn∣holy, and their sacrifices so bloody, that any man might (euen by common reason) collect, that he, which was delighted with such a wicked kinde of wor∣shippe,* 1.529 could not be possibly indeed a true God: because they were, Sacra, Sacrilegijs omnibus tetriora: Holies, more vnholy then Sacriledge it selfe: as Coecilius speaketh,* 1.530 though to another purpose. Of which impure Holies, Lac∣tantius hath giuen vs a notable instance, in the feasts of their Floralia. And therefore, Plutarch, in some sort, excuseth those men, that haue reuolted vnto this kinde of Atheisme, vpon the contemplation of the filthinesse of their Ce∣remonies, and the barbarousnesse of their Sacrifices: affirming direct Atheisme to be a better religion, then so lewd and prophane a kinde of worshipping. Lustr••tiones impurae,* 1.531 sordidae castimoniae, Barbarica & iniusta in Templis suppli∣cia, occasionem praebuerunt nonnullis, dicendi; Praestare, nullos esse Deos, quam qui talia probent, ijs{que} delectentur: Their impure purgations, their vnchaste cha∣stities, their cruell and vniust Sacrifices, haue giuen many men occasion to say; that it were better, That their should be no Gods, then such as are delighted with such prophane worships. Yea, and in the same place, he seemeth to allow of their sentence. So that Diagoras, by these meanes, might easily discouer, the Heathen gods to bee but false; though (perhaps) he could not light vpon, and find out the true one. Which yet, gaue him iust occasion, to scorne and deride them, as Lactantius wel obserues:* 1.532 Impugnatae sunt a prudentioribus falsae Religiones; quia sentiebant esse falsas: sed non est inducta vera; quia qualis, aut vbi esset, ignora∣bant.

Wise men haue alwayes impugned, and derided false Religiòns; because they perceiued them to be false: but yet haue not alwayes found the true one; be∣cause they neither knew it, nor where they should seeke for it. But, that Diagoras was not a meere Atheist, it euidently appeareth in the beginning of his Ver∣ses; where he maketh this profession (which is the foundation of all Religi∣on) Quòd a Numine summo,* 1.533 reguntur omnia: That all things are ruled by one most high God. Which, (if it be true) Diagoras could not possibly be such an absolute Atheist, as he was commonly reputed.

Let vs therefore come from Diagoras, vnto Protagoras, whom the Athe∣nians, in like sort, condemned for an Atheist: yet not for denying God; but for seeming to doubt of him: Because, in the beginning of his booke he pro∣pounded this probleme: De Dijs quidem statuere nequeo; ne{que} an sint, nec ne: Adding there also this reason:* 1.534 Sunt enim plurima, quaeid scire prohibeant; quippe & summa rei incertitudo, & breuis hominis vita. As concerning the gods, I cannot resolutely determine, neither whether they be, nor whether they be not; Because there be many things, that let the knowledge of it; namely, both the vn∣certainty of the thing it selfe, and also the breuity and shortnes of mans life. This report doth Laertius make of his doubting.* 1.535 But, by Tully it is exprest, a great deale more fauourably. But yet, by this his seeming doubtfulnes, the Athenians were so incensed, that they mulcted him with exile, and decreed, that his bookes should be publiquely burned. And yet, that Protagoras was not a pure Atheist, we may probably gather, by two Arguments, out of that description of his life, which is written by Laertius. The first of them, that he maketh precationem [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉],* 1.536 that is, Prayer, and Inuocation to be the first fundamentall part of an Oration: which I haue formerly shewed,* 1.537 to haue bene put in practice, by all the most renowned Orators. Therefore, he could not thinke, that there was no God. For, he would neuer pray to nothing. If he had bene perswaded, that the name of God, were but an idle name, and that there were no thing, that were answerable to it, he would neuer bestow his prayers vpon it.

Againe, among his workes, there was one of his Bookes inscribed, De ijs que sunt apud inferos.* 1.538 Now, if he thought that there were Inferi, he must needs thinke that there were Superi. For Infra, and Supra, haue so necessary a relation, that the one of them can neither stand, nor yet be vnderstood without the other. And therefore, in admitting of the one, he must needs admit of both. As Socrates plainely proueth: If there be Damones, there must needs be Deus.* 1.539 Eiusdem viri est, Daemonia simul, & Diuina putare: It necessa∣rily belongeth vnto the same man, that will beleeue there be Deuills, to beleeue, that ther is a God.* 1.540 And, as Mornaeus reporteth, vnto the same purpose Legimus, quibusdam, qui non nisi visa crederent, arte Magica Daemonas exhibitos: his conspectis, Deum etiam credidisse: As we reade of some men, who would beleeue nothing but what they haue seene; that, Deuills being shewed them by the power of Art Magicke, they then presently beleeued, That there was a God. So that, for any thing that hath hitherto bene sayd, Protagoras was no Atheist: he was not a denier, but a doubter of the gods, at the most. Now, doubting implieth not Atheisme. For, diuers of the Prophe••s themselues, haue some∣times doubted. Iob, in one place, doubteth of Gods al-seeing prouidence:

How should not the times be hid from the Almighty?* 1.541 And Dauid, in another place,* 1.542 doubteth of his Iustice and vprightnes; Verily, I haue Alense•• my heart in vaine, and washed my hands in vaine. This doubting, might argue their weake faith in God (especially for the present) but it could not conclude their denying of God. And, no more could it in him: especially his other writings implying, that he beleeued him.

Let vs yet proceed further, and consider of Euemerus: who was con∣demned for an Atheist, no lesse then Diagoras: whose opinion Theodoret affirmeth to haue bene prophanam indeitatem, a prophane denying of God: coupling him with Diagoras,* 1.543 and Theodorus, the most infamed of the A∣theists. But yet it appeareth, that his crime was not a generall denying of all Gods, but only a denying of the heathen gods: and an affirming of them, to haue bene but men: as Saint Augustine noteth of him: affirming that he had imprinted into Virgil the same opinion,* 1.544 by reading him. So then, Eue∣merus his Atheisme was no more but this, that he affirmed of Saturne, Iupi∣ter,* 1.545 Hercules, and th•• rest (whom the Heathens adored, and worshipped for their gods) that they were indeed no gods: but either mighty Kings, and Em∣perours; or great Captaines by Land; or great Admiralls by sea; or such like great persons, in their times. And this (he sayth) he read with his owne eyes, written in Golden letters, among the Pancheans, and Triphilians. Whose report, though Plutarch there doth seeke to discredit; imagining the name of Triphilians, to be but a trifling and an imaginary name, there being no such Triphilians in the world; yet therein indeed he discrediteth himselfe.* 1.546 For, Strabo, both affirmeth that there was such a Nation, and de∣scribeth the place of their habitation, and giueth a reason of that appellation. Yea,* 1.547 and Lactantius giueth credit to the relation of Euemerus: and affirmeth, that Enntus followed his authority, in his History. So that from hence there lyeth no exception, no not against his relation; much lesse against his opinion. Which was indeed a most true one. For, if that opinion were Atheisme, then were all Christians Atheists, who confidently hold, that the gods of the Hea∣then were no better then men. Nay, then were the greatest part of the heathen themselues, Atheists: especially the wisest part of them. For they did al of them hold the same opinion. And, though they durst not openly publish it; yet did they certainly beleeue it; & now & then they would secretly confesse it, where they might securely do it. As appeareth by that letter, which King Alexander sent vnto his mother.* 1.548 Wherein he reporteth, that, in a priuate conference with an Aegyptian-Priest, he secretly confessed vnto him, that those, whom they worshipped for their gods,* 1.549 yet were indeed but men. Yea, and Athenagoras affirmeth, that diuers of them confessed as much vnto Herodotus. Herodotus, & Alexander Philippi filius, in Epistola ad Matrem (qui vti{que} in diuer sis ciui∣tatibus Aegypti, Heliopoli, Memphi, & Thebis, in colloquium cum Sacerdotibus venisse dicuntur) homines illos fuisse, ex ijs se cognouisse aiunt. Which Hero∣dotus himselfe expressely confesseth:* 1.550 Deos in Aegypto, fuisse Principes; That the gods of the Aegyptians, were but their Kings. Yea, and Tully (vnder the same benedicity) telleth Marcus Brutus▪* 1.551 That all those, whom they worship∣ped as Gods in heauen; yet had bene (in their times) but only men vpon earth•• and that this he might safely impart vnto him; because he was initiated into the

secrets of their mysteries. Quid? totum propè coelum—nonnè humano genere completum est? Si verò scrutari vetera, & ex ijs, quae Scriptores Graeciae prodide∣runt, eruere coner; ipsi illi maiorum Gentium Dij qui habentur, hinc a nobis pro∣fecti in c••elum reperientur. Quare, quorum demonstrantur sepulchra in Graecia, reminiscere: (quoniam es initiatus quae tradantur mysterijs) tum deni{que}, quàm hoc latè pateat, intelliges. The whole heauen, is, in a māner, replenished with men. And if we would search out Antiquities, & gather those secrets together, that haue bin bewrayed by the Greekes vnto vs; we should find, that euen the greatest of all the gods, haue from vs beene translated into the heauens. Wherefore, remember but with your selfe, whose Sepulchers the Greekes shew vs (for you are now initiated into the mysteries) and then you shall perceiue, how farre this truth stretcheth. Which obseruation, that here he deliuereth so couertly, is expressed by Xe∣nophon a great deale more openly. For he apertly professeth, that Saturne, Iupiter, and Hercules, were but men: and that euery country had both a Sa∣turne, a Iupiter, and a Hercules of their owne: the first King, in euery nation, being called their Saturne; the next, his Sonne, their Iupiter; and the third, his Nephew, their Hercules. Saturni dicuntur, familiarum nobilium, Regum, qui vr∣bes condiderunt,* 1.552 antiquissimi; primogeniti eorum, Ioves, et Iunones; Hercules ve∣rò, Nepotes eorum fortissimi: Patres Saturnorum, coeli; Vxores, Rhea, et Coelorum V••st••e. Quot ergò Saturni, tot Coeli, Vestae, Rheae, Iunones, Ioues, Hercules. Therefore, to hold this, that the Heathen gods were men, was no prophane∣nesse, or impietie; but a solide veritie: which though it might not be pub∣liquely professed; yet was it priuately vnderstood, and beleeued. Whereby it appeareth, that Euemerus his Atheisme, was not to Diuulge any vntruth against the true God; but to diuulge a truth, against the false gods. And, the rather may this be beleeued to be true; because Theophilus Antiochenus re∣porteth,* 1.553 that Euemerus did hold, not onely Animae immortalitatem, but also Dei vnitatem: not onely the immortalitie of the soule, but the vnitie of the Deitie. Neither of which points can congruously be held, by him, that hol∣deth There is no God. The word indeed which Theophilus there vseth, is but, disputarit. But, that he disputed it; not problematice, but assertinè, conclu∣ding there was a God; it appeareth by this; because he saith, that therein he was contrary vnto himselfe, in his former denying him. Which, though he doe there impute vnto his inconstancie; yet may it bee probably thought, to haue beene his palinodie: if he euer before had held, That there was no God. For I will not peremptorily define, neither for him, nor for any of the rest, that they were no Atheists; but only dispute the contrary, vpon probable grounds: and that the accusations which haue beene layd against them, doe not neccessarily conuince, that they were absolute Atheists; or that they ge∣nerally denied all gods, though they denied those, with whom they were charged in their accusations. And this interpretation, I desire to be applied both vnto all those Atheists, that haue gone before; and vnto all those, that doe follow after. Let vs therefore now proceede.

For Theodorus,* 1.554 and Bion of Boristhens: though it should be granted (as it is of them reported) That they generally denied, There was any God, yet can it not be affirmed, that they constantly denied it. For, the one of them, Theodorus, fell, in the end, into that madnes,* 1.555 as ridiculously to professe that

He himselfe was a God.* 1.556 The other of them, Bion, fell into that repentance, as to confesse those gods, at the last, whom, at the first, hee had denied. And therefore, neither of these two (being such apostates from their Atheisme) can iustly be reckoned in the number of Atheists. But both him, and Diagores, and Euemerus, and diuers others, (whom the Greekes accompted Athe••sts) doth Cl••mens Alexandrinus nominatìm excuse,* 1.557 as men of good life, and of a deeper insight in discouering the false gods, then the rest of their Neighbours.

As for Epicurus; he denied not Gods essence; hee denied onely his proui∣dence.* 1.558 He granted, that there was a God; though he thought him to be such an One, as did neither euill nor good. Placet Epicuro esse Deos; Quia necesse sit,* 1.559 praestantem esse aliquam Naturam, qua nihil sit m••li••••s: The Epicure is in∣duced to beleeue, There is a God: Because there must needs be, an excellent Nature, which is superlatiuely good. Yea, and (as it appeareth againe out of Tullie) hee himselfe writ a booke, instructing men vnto Pietie: which he in∣scribed, De Pietate aduersùs Deos: Of Religion and Pietie towards the Gods. Which argueth,* 1.560 that he thought there were gods. Nay, in that same Booke hee spake so religiously, and holily of the gods; Vt Coruncanum, aut Scaevo∣lam, Pontifices maximos, le audisse dicas (as in the same place he reporteth) as if it had beene spoken, by Coruncanus or Scaeuola; who were their high Preists.

And for Pherecydes;* 1.561 who denied to giue worship vnto any of all the hea∣then gods (whom he might easily discerne to bee no true gods) hee was therein not an Atheist, (if hee went no further:) For Daniel refused to wor∣ship god Bel;* 1.562 and the three children refused to worship the golden idol: yet made them that, no Atheists: neither likewise did it him: but, in their false opi∣nion. And that his Atheisme was nothing else, but only an inu••ighing against the heathen Idols, it appeareth by Laertius; who, in his life, reporteth that his Position was;* 1.563 Ne{que} aurum, ne{que} argentum honorandum: That neither Gold, nor Siluer, is to be worshipped: and that Hercules had commanded him this in a dreame. Now this is no Atheisme. For, the Apostle Paul telleth vs the very same,* 1.564 That the Godhead is not like vnto Gold or Siluer; nor any other such like matter.* 1.565 And Seneca likewise vnto the same purpose: Non potest, ex h••c ma∣teria, imago Deo exprimi similis: speaking of Gold and Siluer: There cannot of such matter, be any image framed, that is like vnto God. Againe, that hee was not a pure Atheist, may be gathered from the testimonie of Theopompus: who saith, that he was, Primus omnium, qui scripsit de Dijs: that hee was the first man, that wrote of the Gods. And, that hee handled that Argument not prophanely, but religiously, it may likewise bee gathered, in that they called him not Atheos,* 1.566 but Theologus: not an Atheist, but a Diuine: Yea, and Ficinus asserteth him, inter summos Theologos, & moribus diuinos: among the chiefest Diuines, and of the best life. And so likewise for Dionysius; hee in deri∣ding of those Idols,* 1.567 whom his Countrey-men did worship, was not therefore an Atheist; as Elias was not in his deriding of Baal, and in his spoyling them, he was not so much an Atheist, as diuers of those that seeme to be their most deuoted worshippers: who yet make no scruple or religion, not only of defor∣ming them, but euen of basely transforming them: De Saturno in Cacabulum, & De Minerva in Trullam,* 1.568 as Tertullian writeth of them, which is the foulest cont••mpt that can be offered vnto them. So that euen the most infamous and

notorious Atheists (for any thing that hath bin prooued against them) might all of them haue bin rather deriders of the false gods, then deniers of the true. Whom, though they perfectly knew not, yet might they ignorantly worship; as the Athenians did their vnknown God.* 1.569 Whom you ignorantly worship (saith S. Pau••••) him shew I vnto you. They might, I say (that they did so, I say not) either worship the true God ignorantly; or some other false gods idolatrously: thogh they renounced those gods which were worshipped in their countries. Either of which, if they did, they could not be counted Atheists. And; that some of them did so, it euidently appeareth in the example of Socrates: whom when the Athenians accused of Atheisme, he renounced that crime, and openly pro∣nounced, that though he did not acknowledge their Citie gods; yet that he beleeued there were other Gods. Ego Deos esse puto: ne{que} omninò sum abs{que} Deo. Ne{que} in hoc iniustèago:* 1.570 quan vis, non eos, quos habet ciuitas, sed alios esse doceam: I doe beleeue that there be Gods: neither am I my selfe without a God. Neither in this do I offend; though I hold not those to be my gods, whom the Citie holdeth to be theirs. He disclaimeth the generall deniall of all Gods, though hee pro∣claimeth his particular deniall of their gods: And therefore could not iustly be numbred among Atheists. For (as Laertius truely noteth) Impius non est,* 1.571 qui tollit mul••itudinis Deos, sed qui Dijs, multitudinis opiniones applicat. He is not an Atheist that denieth the gods, whom the people doe imagine; but rather he that appl••eth the imaginations of the people vnto the gods. And therefore it followeth not, that Socrates did generally deny all gods, because he particularly denied the Graecian gods. And the same may bee likewise ob∣serued in Damis: in whose fained person, prophane and impious Lucian hath vented all his Atheisme. For though by him he derided all the gods of the Gentils, not sparing euen Iupiter himselfe: yet when Timocles obiected, that he was a generall despiser of all the gods, and a generall enemy to their Altars and Religions;* 1.572 he detested that crime, and protested vnto him; Haud omnes aras subuerti cupio, O bone Timocles: I doe not desire an vtter subuersion of all Religion. So that (for any thing that I can finde) there is none of those Phi∣losophers, whom the Heathens haue purs••ed with such an Hue-and-Crie for most damnable Atheists, but that, if their cause be indifferently examined, they may probably bee thought to haue acknowledged a true God, in some mea∣sure and degree: howsoeuer they derided and declaimed against the false. Yea, and euen their renouncing of those false gods, was also (in some degre••) a con∣fessing of a true.* 1.573 For (as Tertullian collecteth) Subiacet intelligi, verit ••tis esse cultores, qui mendacij non sunt; nec errasse ampliùs in eo, in quo errasse se r••cog∣noscendo cessauerunt: It may well be conceiued, that they are followers of the truth, that are not followers of lies: and that they will therein erre no more, wherein they haue acknowledged their former error. At least (as Clemens Ale∣xandrinus collecteth,* 1.574 euen in this very case.) This finding of their owne er∣ror, in worshipping those false gods, was, non parvum semen, ad excitandam scin∣tillam, intelligentie veritatis: it was (as it were) a seed, or a sparckle to kindle the knowledge of the truth.

Now if none of all those men, that haue beene most noted and renowned for Atheisme, not onely by the writings of Pagans, but also of Christians, yet were not truely Atheists indeed; but that, notwithstanding their derision

of those false gods, they might well beleeue that there was a true one: then can none of their examples (no nor all of them) serue to infringe the genera∣lity of our former position: that There is no man in the world, but that at some time or other, in some degree or other, he beleeueth There is a God: no, not euen the Atheists themselues excepted. Who (as you haue partly seene here, and shall more fully hereafter) doe directly confesse,* 1.575 That there is a God.

But here now, two Questions doe come to be discussed. First, that if these men were no true Atheists indeed, why were they so condemned? and why haue they beene infamed for such, if they were not such? Whereunto I briefly answer: that this was onely through the iealousie and tendernesse of the Hea∣thens, in defending of their Countrey-gods: ouer whom they were so tender, that whosoeuer denied them, they held that he held none: and though hee professed that he beleeued others; yet they held, that he reiected all, if hee re∣ceiued not theirs. And this we may plainely see, in the iudgement of Socra∣tes:* 1.576 in whose very accusation, they layd to his charge, that he did, Priscos De∣os non colere, & novos introducere: That he denied their old gods, and brought them in new.* 1.577 Where, though they confesse, that hee beleeued certaine new gods; yet they condemned him, as an Atheist, for reiecting of the olde: as though that had beene to reiect all. And though Socrates iustly taxeth th••m, as cleane contrary to themselues, in the two maine heads of their accusation; to charge him with Atheisme, that is, a denying of all gods, in the one head; whom they discharge in the other, by obiecting his new gods: deriding this foolish intoxication, to be (in effect) as if they should haue said: Contra leges agit Socrates, Deos non putans, sed Deos putans; yet their zeale in their religion preuailed so farre, as to worke his condemnation: accounting it not much lesse impiety, to assert any new gods, then to deny all gods. As wee may see also by their catching at the speech of S. Paule:* 1.578 Hee seemeth to be a setter-out of strange Gods. And it is like enough, that if hee had stayed there, it might haue cost him his head. For, though his new God were, in truth, the true God; yet, because he disliked their old gods, they would haue held him for an Atheist:* 1.579 as they did (for the same cause) the whole sect of Christians: as Athe∣nagoras reporteth. Illi nobis Atheismum impingunt, propterea quod non eos∣dem, quos ipsi nôrunt, arbitremur esse [Deos:] They obiect euen to Christians, the crime of Atheisme; because they do not worship the same gods with them. For, this was their account, that he which reiected their gods, could not know a∣ny other; and therefore reiected them all together. And•• it may be they erred not, but that diuers of those Atheists, which reiected their gods, did it of a pro∣phane humour, not regarding any other: and therefore were iustly condem∣ned by them, of impiety and Atheisme. But if there were any such (as I will not obstinately contend, but there might be some) yet this I hold of them, that they did not constantly hold out their opinion: but that oftentimes they so checked themselues, that they could not but inwardly beleeue there was a God, though they outwardly denied it. Yea, and it may be likewise, that di∣uers of them, vpon vaine glory, or vpon studie of singularity, that they might seeme to be wiser then other men, haue outwardly professed (though not in∣wardly beleeued) that There is no God.

But then, here the second Question cometh to be resolued. To what end, this

whole worke serueth, which is written against Atheists, if they be few, or none such? Whereunto, though I haue partly answered in the preface to the Reader; yet, I here will adde this further: That though there be but few such Atheists (or rather indeed none) as resolutely and constantly beleeue with their hearts, that There is no God; yea, and not many such, as professe it with their mouthes, though not beleeuing it constantly: Yet be there very many, that beleeue it weakely: and, that being ouercome by sodaine passions and temp∣tations, do oftentimes doubt, and distrust; whether there be any God? As we see it ingeniously confessed, by Ouid.—Ignoscite fasso;

Sollicitor,* 1.580 nullos esse putare Deos. Confesse I do, and pardon crauc; I tempted am, No gods to haue.

Yea, and the same is acknowledged by Claudian, a Christian.

Saepe mihi dubiam traxit sententia mentem;* 1.581 Curarent Superi terras? an nullus inesset Rector, & incerto fluerent mortalia casu? This troublous thought hath oft perplext, and plung'd my doubtfull minde; Whether a God, or whether none, or whether Fortune blinde Did care the Earth, and rule the World, and actions of Mankinde?

And few men can escape the very same temptations. Therefore, of this sort of Atheists, there is as great a plenty, as of the first sort, a scarcity. Nay, there is almost no man, but at some time or other, he falleth within the compasse of this doubting.* 1.582 So that (as it is truly obserued by Saint Augustine) Hoc intellectu discusso, inuenietur esse in plurimis, quod in paucis, & raris, & penè in nullis, esse putabamus: In this larger signification, we shall find this sinne of Atheisme to be in very many, which we thought before, to be almost in none, or (at the most) but in a few. Therefore, many may reape profit, by the reading of this booke,* 1.583 not onely by exempting them from all impiety of doubting, but also by instructing them, in the most point of Religion, which, in some place or other of it, present themselues to be discussed. And,* 1.584 whereas in diuers passages of it, we affirme, that there be no Atheists; and yet, in other places, do acknowledge many, and dispute against them: for the auoyding of offence by this seeming contradiction,* 1.585 I desire the Reader to carry along with him this distinction: that I be not often driuen to make this repetition: namely, that when we deny that there be any Atheists, as be properly so called, which generally and constantly beleeue There is no God, and hold so vnto the end: (Of which sort there can be none, though many haue beene so reputed and taken: because (as it is truly obserued by Nouation) Deum, mens omnis humana sentit, etiamsi non exprimit: There is no man, but in his soule he doth inwardly feele, That there is a God; though hee do not outwardly confesse it.) When we confesse, There be Atheists, and dispute against them; wee vnder∣stand onely such as deny there is a God, rather by outward profession, then by inward perswasion: or, if they haue indeed any such inward perswasion, it is but onely vpon some sodaine passion: which vanisheth as sodainely, as it was conceiued fondly. And of these sodaine and passionate eruptions, may that place of the Psalmist bee vnderstood:* 1.586 The Foole hath sayd in his heart, There is no God: if we will referre it vnto practicall Atheisme.

5 And such were indeed all those renowned Atheists,* 1.587 whom we finde to be most celebrated, in the monuments & writings, not only of heathens, but also of Christians. There was not one of al them, that could constantly hold out, & maintaine his opinion, though he outwardly professed it with neuer such a co∣lour and shew of resolution. We see among Philosophers, that many other of their opinions (though very strange, and almost monstrous) yet haue bin, with great pertinacy, defended by them, & stiffly persisted in, euen vnto the end. But so was neuer Atheisme. There was neuer Atheist yet, which entertained that impious opinion against God, that could euer hold it mordicùs, and defend it constantly vnto the end. But, euen whilst they held it, they both beleeued it so weakely, and left the beleefe of it so easily, that it could not, in common reason,* 1.588 be accompted their opinion: as Laertius inferreth vpon the recantation of Bion of Boristhenes. Si quidem illud dogma tueri perstitisset, meritò dicendus esset, sensisse, vt visum fuisset, et si malè visum esset: If he had held out his opinion vnto the end, he might iustly haue bene sayd to haue meant, as he sayd; though his meaning were but bad. But now, by his reuolting, hee insinuateth, that his Atheisme could not iustly bee sayd to haue bene his opinion. For, opinionem omnem sequitur fides: nec fieri potest,* 1.589 vt ijs quisquam non credat, quo∣rum habet opinionem: sayth Aristotle. Euery opinion begetteth a beleeuing. And therefore, where there is a leauing of our beleife, there also ceaseth to be an opi∣nion. Now it is Platoes obseruation, that all Atheists, who professe in the be∣ginning,* 1.590 that they beleeue, There is no God; yet still doe forsake that beleife in the end; and so quit te their opinions. Nullus eorum, ab adolescentia vs{que} ad senectutem, in hac opinione, Quòd Dij non sunt, preseuer avit: There was ne∣uer yet any man, which beleeued, There was no God, that was able to hold out, and maintaine that opinion and beleife vnto the end. Which position of Platoes is notably confirmed, by Tullus Hostilius, a great derider of the Romane-gods, and of that Religion,* 1.591 which Numa had brought in. But yet (as Plutarch ob∣serueth of him) In hoc audaci instituto non perrexit: sed morbo graui & mul∣tiplici, ad mutandam sententiam compulsus est. Hee was not able to maintaine and to hold out his Atheisme: but was inforced by sicknesse, to change it into superstition, the cleane contrary extreame. For the contrary conclusion [That there is a God] is so deepely rooted in the hearts of all men, that sooner shall they be able to plucke out their hearts out of their bodies; then to plucke that conclusion out of their hearts.* 1.592 Which Aristotle illustrateth, by this witty comparison, that, as Phydias, that renowned Caruer of Images, did graue his owne image into the buckler of Pallas, with such singular Arte and cunning, that it could not by any meanes be remoued; vnlesse the whole worke it selfe were defaced: so God hath stampt his image, so deepely and firmely into the world, and especially into the heart of a man, that it cannot be remoued, vnlesse the heart it selfe be dissolued: though it be with neuer such cunning dissem∣bled.* 1.593 Vnto which conceite of Aristotle, Tully seemeth to haue a kinde of al∣lusion: when he telleth vs, that it is not onely, Innatum; sed etiam in animo insculptum, esse Deos: It is not only naturally bred in the mind; but it is also ar∣tificially ingrauen into it, That there is a God. It is (as the Prophet Ieremy spea∣keth) not onely written in mans heart,* 1.594 with a pen of iron; but also grauen there, with the point of a Diamond. A conclusion, which cannot possibly die, so

long as the soule it selfe doth liue.* 1.595 For,* 1.596 the very first truth which God hath ingrauen into the soule of a man, is, That there is a God. And, as the Schoole∣men teach vs: Nulla res, qualiscun{que} est, intelligi potest, nisi Deus intelligatur priùs: There is nothing, that can possibly be vnderstood, vnlesse we first vnder∣stand, That there is a God. This is Primum verum: the very first truth, which God hath taught vnto the soule of a man.* 1.597 Now, Natura suae primae institutionis non obliuiscitur: sayth the Romane Orator. Nature can by no meanes forget her first lesson. And therefore, though the Atheist doe neuer so carefully or cunningly dissemble it; yet can he not but know, that There is a God. He cannot but inwardly know it,* 1.598 though he outwardly dissemble it. For, Quis est adeò rationis expers aut animae, (sayth Philo Iudeus) vt nulla vnquàm de Opti∣mo illo, Maximoa, eum volentem nolent emuè subirit cogitatio? There is no man so deuoyd of either sense, or reason, but that he sometime thinkes of God, either willing or nilling. Nam, & nolentes sciunt, & fatentur inuiti: sayth Maximus Tyrius.* 1.599 They, euen against their wills, do both know it, and acknow∣ledge it. And therefore they cannot constantly deny it. Yea, and Clemens Alexandrinus rendereth a very good reason, why God cannot be vnknowne vnto the soule of any reasonable man: because it was inspired into him by God.* 1.600 The Soules first generation, was Gods immediate inspiration. And therefore sayth he; Longe abest, vt sit homo expers diuinae notionis, quem scrip∣tum est fuisse participem inspirationis in generatione. So that, as Lucilius ob∣serueth of Homer: that—Nemo qui culpat Homerum,

Prepetuò culpat:— Ther's none, that Homers name Still constantly doth blame:

So may it be truly affirmed of God too; that, Nemo, qui Deum negat, Perpe∣tuò negat: That, No man which denieth God, doth constantly deny him. No, nor confidently neither.* 1.601 Impudently they may: but confidently they cannot. They do, but Dubitatiuè pronunciare, as Tertullian speaketh. They speake in∣wardly, but doubtfully; though outwardly more stubbornely. Their deniall of God, is no setled resolution. It is but a weake, and a flickring opinion, which sodainely passeth through the heart of a man, and sodainely vanisheth againe; hauing no rooting, nor footing, no not euen so much as in their owne perswasion. But is like vnto those weake and vnperfect assents, which drunken men giue vnto things in their dreames; or mad men, in their fren∣zies.* 1.602 Which the Orator expresseth vnto vs, in this manner. Dicimus, non eandem esse vim, ne{que} integritatem, dormientium, & vigilantium. Ne vinolen∣ti quidem, quae faciunt, eadem approbatione faciunt, qua sobrij. Dubitant, haesi∣tant, reuocant se interdum; his{que} quae videntur, imbecilliùs assentiuntur. We may truly affirme, that there is not the same power and perfection of sense, in men, when they sleepe; and in the same men, when they wake. Neither do men, in their drunkennes, any thing with that assurance, that they do in their so∣bernesse. They doubt, they stagger, they call backe themselues; and they yeild but a feeble assent vnto all things. And such is that assent, which the confi∣dentest Atheist giueth vnto his Atheisme. He so assenteth to it, that he doub∣teth of it: or rather, by a contrary assent, cleane supplanteth it. So that, no man beleeueth; That there is no God, with that confidence and assurance, that

all men beleeue, That there is a God. No man is carried into Atheisme, with that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and fulnesse of perswasion, that he is into a sense of God, and Religion. From which (as Tertullian obserueth) there is nothing that can hinder him. Anima,* 1.603 licèt carcere corporis pressa, licèt institutionibus pravis circ••mscripta, licèt libidinibus & concupiscentijs evigorata, licèt falsis Dijs ex∣ancillata: cùm tamen resipiscit, vt ex crapula; vt ex somno, vt ex aliqua valetu∣dine, & sanitatem suam patitur, Deum nominat. The soule of a man, though it be shut vp in the prison of his body, though depraued and mis-led by corrupt and wicked teachers; though weakened with manyfold lusts and concupiscences, thogh 〈◊〉〈◊〉 trained vp in the seruice of false gods: yet when it once beginn••th to re∣collect it selfe, and to lift vp his head, as it were, out of his drunkennesse, his sleep, or his sicknesse, and attaineth his true health, then it thinketh, and calleth vpon God. This is the proper and naturall motion of the soule, to moue vpwards to∣wards God. And this course it holdeth, sometimes, euen in the very Atheists, as well as in others. And, though clogged with all the forenamed impedi∣men••s; yet breaketh it oftentimes through them all, to looke God in the face. For (as Orosius truely teacheth) Mens ratione illustrata,* 1.604 in medio virtutum, quibus genuino favore (quamvìs vitijs inclinetur) assurgit, scientiam Dei, quasi arcem, prospicit: The soule of a man being inlightned with reason, and assisted by vertue, vnto which it hath a naturall liking, raiseth vp it selfe, and mounteth vpward, to obtaine the fuller sight and clearer knowledge of God. So that, their prophane Atheisme, being Motus contra naturam, A motion against nature; and comming but now and then, onely by fits vnto them, may more iustly be esteemed, to be but onely their frenzy, or their dreame, then to be their ele∣cted or resolued opinion. For so Tullie calleth some of their opinions; which were a great deale better setled in them then this, Portenta & miracula,* 1.605 non disserentium Philosophorum, s••d somniantium. The monsters and miracles of dreaming Philosophers.

And yet, I denie not, but that there may be some men so foolish and impi∣ous, as to say, euen in their hearts, That there is no God. For the Prophet Da∣uid saith it: a man worthy to be beleeued: The Foole hath said in his heart,* 1.606 There is no God. Yea, and some may haue their hearts so hardned in prophane∣nesse, as not onely to gibe at God with scoffes and derisions, as did the Ty∣rant Dionysius;* 1.607 but also seriously to dispute against him, as did the Epicure Velleius;* 1.608 yea, and Epicurus himselfe, who, euen in that same booke, which hee wrote, De pietate aduersus deos, Of piety towards the gods; yet praeuaricated most impiously against the gods: Non manibus (vt Xerxes) sed rationibus, deorum immortalium templa & aras euertens: as is noted in the same place; He ouerthrew the temples, and altars of the gods, not by force and armes (as Xer∣xes) but by force of Arguments. But especially Diagoras, who wrote certaine Orations against the gods: wherein he reposed so singular a confidence,* 1.609 that he gaue them the title of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, quasi turrium destructrices, The de∣stroyers of Towers. Whereby it appeareth, that in these men, their Atheisme was (for the time) a setled opinion; and not any light or flickering cogitation.

But vnto all this, I answer with the Romaine Orator. Quid attinet glorio••e loqui,* 1.610 nisi constanter loquare? What boo••eth it to speake gloriously, if a man speake not constantly, and sticke not firmely vnto that which he speaketh? As

neither Dauids foole doth, who denied God; nor Diony sius, who derided him; nor Diagoras, or Epicurus, who writ their bookes against him. There is none of all these, if they intended their speeches in generall, against all Gods (and not rather in particular, against the Heathen-gods,* 1.611 *as some haue coniectu∣re••) that can constantly and resolutely thinke as they speake. There is not the lusti••st and most resolute Ath••ist, that euer liued, that can resolutely and constantly beleeue, there is no God. There be many, that sometimes (in a fit of iollity) affirme, There is no God: yea, and seeke wholly to forget him; that so they may wallow more securely in all sinne. But yet still, when the heate of that lust and lustinesse is past, and they be come againe vnto their cold blood, they doe then say in their hearts, that, Surely there is a God. Yea, and then they beleeue it too, more firmely, then they would. They doe then, with the Deuils,* 1.612 both beleeue it, and tremble at it: fearing Gods seuere iudgement, and their owne due punishment for the denying of it. So that it may truely bee said of Atheists, that though they doe, amplè, & elatè loqui; yet doe they,* 1.613 but humiliter, & demissè sentire: though they speake lustily, yet they thinke but base∣ly. They doe but, hoc in labijs,* 1.614 non in corde dicere: as S. Augustine speaketh: They speake it but with their lips, they beleeue it not with their hearts: at the least, not with a constant assent vnto it. For, as he noteth in another place,* 1.615 Difficile est, vt incurramus in hominem, qui dicit in corde suo, Non est Deus•• It is a hard thing to meet with any man, that can say in his heart, There is no God. We may meete with many that can say so with their mouthes▪ but with very few, or none, that doe thinke so in their hearts, though it bee but by short spurts,* 1.616 as Anselmus plainely prooueth. So, that the Atheist, for the greatest part of his life, is no Atheist indeed. He is an Atheist but by fits, in the time of some passion; but he is no Atheist all the calmer time of his liuing. And therefore it may be said of Atheists (as well as of Epi••ures) That,* 1.617 as all other Philosophers say better then they thinke: so these thinke better then they say. For they say, There is no God: but they thinke, There is one. Yea, and they can do no otherwise. For,* 1.618 Deus vti{que} sic verè est (saith A••selmus) vt ne•• cogitari pos∣sit, Non est: For, God so truely hath his being; that it cannot once be thought, hee should haue no being.

As for the Atheists deriding of God; it is nothing else, but Risus Sardonius: A forced and faincd laughter;* 1.619 A reioycing in the face, and not in the heart: as the Apost••e Paule expresseth it. For they cannot by all their scoffing at him, extinguish that knowledge of him, which they haue within them. For (as Tertullian truly noteth) Illum reprehendere magis possunt,* 1.620 quàm negare: They can sooner reprehend him, then truly deny him. And Orosius likewise vnto the same purpose: Deum contemnere, quilibet hominum, ad tempus,* 1.621 potest; nescire in totum, non potest: Euery man may, for a time, contem••e and scorne God: but yet no man can totally be ignorant of him. Euen then, when they scorne him, yet they cannot but know him, and feare him too. And therfore their deriding him, is but the disguising of their inward feare, with the counterfeit ••emblance of a lying countenance: such,* 1.622 as in a like case is described by Euripides.

Vultus quidem iucundus; interiora verò Tristia. Quis enìm beatus, quis foelix, Qui in metu est; & qui suspectam habens vitam,

Vitam degit? Their countenance is smooth and faire; but inward parts are sad, For who can pleasant be, and blest, that liues in feare and dread: And hauing life suspected, doth it still suspected leade?

And yet, such is the state of the Atheist, euen when he seemeth the pleasan∣test. He still feareth that Gods vengeance will ouertake his pleasa••ce••: there∣by inwardly acknowledging him, though he outwardly deny him.

And for the Atheists disputing against him: it is indeed no better then a meere 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,* 1.623 an idle altercation, and contention about words. Hee denieth the name of God: but he granteth the thing; as hee sheweth by his fearing. So that his heart neuer thinks that which his tongue speaketh. For, when his tongue saith outwardly, that, There is no God: his heart saith inwardly, that, There is a God: and so his heart telleth his tongue, that it lyeth. And when he seekes,* 1.624 by Reason, to proue there is no God:

Stat contra Ratio; & s••cretam ganuit in aurem: A stronger Reason stands against, and whispers in his e••re, His Nay is naught:—

and tells him, There is one. So that, the perswasion of Atheisme is but weake, and without all firmenesse; but short, and without all continuance; but vn∣constant, and without all assurance. And therefore, euen the very Atheist him∣selfe, is no important or materiall instance, to giue a iust exception, against the vniuersality of consent in Religion: as (beside all the fore-named arguments) I purpose to declare, by diuers others, in the next insuing Chapters.

CHAP. 11.

The two Endes of Atheisme; Not to serue, and, Not to feare. 2. The Atheist in the first of these two ends, is disappointed; becomming a base seruant vnto all his owne vices. 3. But more especially, vnto his ambition. 4. And his Belly. 5. All which seruice he referring to himselfe, he becommeth thereby, A God vnto himselfe.

I Haue shewed,* 1.625 in the former chapter, that the Atheist doth but weakely beleeue, There is no God: if hee beleeue so at all. But there by many strong Arguments, whereby it may bee proued, that indeed, he doth strongly beleeue, There is a God: though he outwardly dissemble it. He beleeueth it not, with such a beleefe of faith, as is able to saue him: but yet with such a beleefe of knowledge, as is able to condemne him. And this he plainely sheweth, not onely by his ••eeds, but also by his words. By his deeds, in an oblique and direct confession: by his words, in a very direct and expresse one. His deeds, whereby he confesseth, that There is a God, be two: the enormous excesse of his loue vnto himselfe: and that inward griping feare, which he feeleth within himselfe. For I finde it obserued among the learned, that the destinate ends, which the Atheist pro∣poundeth vnto himselfe, in the choyce of his impious and damnable opinion, are principally these two: Non seruire, and, Non metuere: That hee may not serue, and, That he may not feare. The first of which two Ends, is instanced

by S. Augustine. Quidam,* 1.626 propterea putant, nihil colendum esse, ne seruiant. Some men will needs beleeue, there is no God to be serued, because they would not serue him. The second of them,* 1.627 is instanced by Plutarch. Finis, non credendi Deum esse, est, metu vacare: The end of mens not beleeuing a God, is, to be free from feare. And for the attaining of these two ends [that hee may not serue, and, that he may not feare] will the Atheists needes beleeue (euen beyond all beleefe, fide sine fide) That there is no God. For, no man would euer ingage himselfe in Atheisme (so odious and so detestable an opinion) but onely to free himself from seruing, & fearing. But indeed, he is greatly deceiued in thē both; & vtterly frustrated of his hoped end. For, no man serueth more, no man fea∣reth so much. So that he manifestly proueth, by both these two means, that he thinks There is a God; by which he seeks to proue, that he thinks there is none. And so (as the Orator obserueth of Philo the Academick) In idipsum se induit,* 1.628 quod timebat: He t••rusteth his head into the very same snarewhich before he fea∣red. So that he may truly say with Iob▪ a farre more holy man; The thing that I greatly feared is fal••e vpon me: and that whi••h I was afraid of, is come vnto me.

2 For the first end of the Atheist, which is,* 1.629 Non seruire: there is nothing more certaine, then that the Atheist entertaineth his impious opinion, especi∣ally for this end: that so he may attaine to be A free man; and not either to serue, or to obserue any other man: no nor any God neither. As it euidently appeareth in Pherecides Syrus; who shamed not to glory (but his glory was his shame) That he had neuer serued any of the gods,* 1.630 all his life, and yet h••d al∣wayes led a very pleasant and merry life. So that, this was the end which hee aymed at, in his impiety, that he might not liue seruilely; as he accounted that he should, if he worshipped any God: reckoning Piety to be Seruility: which is indeed, cleane contrary*.* 1.631 It is the onely true Liberty.* 1.632 For, as S. Paule te∣stifieth, Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. And their impious Li∣berty, is indeed true Seruility; according to that of S. Peter: Whilst they pro∣mise to others liberty, they themselues are the seruants of corruption. And the Holy Ghost addes a reason: For, of whom a may is ouercome, of the same is he brought in bondage. They make themselues seruants, vnto all the corrupt fancies of their owne addle heads; and to all the corrupt desires of their owne idle bellies. For these two bee the Atheists chiefe and principall maisters: whom they serue, with more base and abiect seruility, then euer ••ny slaue ser∣ued, in the cruellest captiuity. And well may they be so. For, according to the Paradoxe of the Stoicks, mentioned by the Orator: Omnes improbi,* 1.633 serui: All wicked men are slaues. They that will not serue God himselfe, who is their onely true maister, are giuen ouer, by Gods iustice, to serue two other Mai∣sters, exacting vile seruices, The Ambition of vaine glory, and, the lusts of their owne bellie. Two most vniust & imperious maisters: insulting, and dominering ouer them, as ouer slaues: commanding, & enjoyning them euery base thing: & yet inforcing them to obey them, with no lesse exactions then the Egyptian taske-masters.* 1.634 The first of them, compelling them, as it were to gather straw, by seruing the vaine breath of the peoples fond applause: the other of them compelling them to labour in the Brick-kilne; by seruing the burning lusts of their own wicked bellies: thus detaining them in more then Egyptian slauish∣nes. So that, in their declining of the seruice of God, they gaine not that free∣dome,

which they hoped, and propounded; but fall into that thraldome, which they desired to auoyd: as Saint Augustine hath truly, and wisely ob∣serued. Nego, esse quenquam istorum, qui nihil colendum existimant; qui non,* 1.635 aut carnalibus gaudijs subditus sit, aut potentiam vanam foueat, aut spectac ulo aliquo delectatus insaniat. Ita nescientes diligunt temporalia, vt inde beat••tu∣d••nem expectent. His autem rebus, quibus quis{que} beatus vult effici, seruiat ne∣cesse est, velit, nolit. There is none of all those men, which desire to serue nothing; but that he, either serueth his owne carnall desires, or his vaine ambitions, or his giddy pleasures. So louing these outward and temporall things, that they thinke to finde in them a perfect happines. Now, euery man s••rueth all those things, will he, nill he, whereby he is in hope, to attaine vnto felicity. Concluding in the same place, that Sua sibi vitia dominari patiuntur; vellibidine, vel super∣bia, vel curio sitate damnati: They suffer, euen their owne vices, to dominere, and rule ouer them; their lust, and their pride, and their curious ambition. And this (as Saint Paul teacheth) falleth out,* 1.636 by the hand of Gods most iust ven∣geance, that They who refuse to serue their Creator, should by him, be giuen ouer, vnto their vile affections; yea, euen into a reprobate sense, to serue their owne lusts, and vncleannesse, and all manner of vnrighteousnesse; fornication, wick∣ednesse, couetousnesse, maliciousnesse, enuy, debate, deceite; and a number of such like, which, euen there, hee reckoneth vp. And therefore the Atheist is very farre, from that supposed libertie, which (in choosing of his Atheisme) he promised vnto himselfe: being thereby made a seruant, not onely of many Maisters, but also of most base and vnworthy Maisters. Turpissimus seruus, Dominorum turpiorum: a most base seruant, of more baser Masters.

3 But yet more particularly of Vaine-glory,* 1.637 and of Luxury. These two, aboue all the rest, are most serued, by the Atheist. For, first, for Vaine-glory. It is noted by the Orator, that of all sorts of men, there is none of them trans∣ported, with the winde of ambition, more greatly, then those persons, which haue beene of greatest name among the Philosophers. Who, euen in those Bookes, which they haue written against V••ine-glory, as openly condemning it; yet haue added their owne names, as secretly affecti•••• it. A••d therefore, Tertullian giueth them deserued titles,* 1.638 when he calleth the Philosophers, but Gloriae animalia, and Famae negociatores. The Creatures of ambition, and the Traders for a name.* 1.639 Vnto which two, Hierom addeth,* 1.640 that they be, Vilia po∣pularis aurae mancipia: The base Slaues of the Peoples praise. But yet, of all the Philosophers, I doe not finde any, so infinitely possessed, with the winde of V••ine-glory, as those men, that haue bene most possessed, with Atheisme: as we may see,* 1.641 for an instance, in Bion of Boristhenes. Who, seeing that by all his Lectures of Atheisme, he could not gaine, so much as one Disciple to fol∣low him: that he might not seeme, so vtterly deserted and despised, he hired a company of Saylers, to follow him vp and downe, in the habit of Scholers, through the chiefe streets of the Towne, and with them hee went ietting to∣wards the Schooles, as if he had bin followed, with a great traine of Disciples. Now, what a miserable seruant of Ambition was this man, that durst thus impotently affect it, where hee might so easily be detected? And the same seruile affectation of Vaine-glory and Ambition,* 1.642 may likewise be obserued, in all the rest of them. Insomuch, that Lactantius maketh their ambition, to be

the very fountaine of their impiety, and Atheisme. And, he giueth there for instance, Diagoras, and Theodorus, who, hauing not the wisedome, to giue ho∣nour to themselues, by any new inuention of their owne; they sought to clime vnto it, by confuting the receiued opinions of others. And so chose, for the subiect of their contradiction, that most ancient, and most generally approued opinion, That there is a God. And this (for their glories sake) they would needs confute. In the second of which two, that is, in Theodorus (who, for his notable impietie, was called cognomento, Atheos) it is a thing that is very worthy of obseruation; that, as by meere ambition, he was ledde vnto his Atheisme: so by the same ambition, he was ledde to renounce the same againe.* 1.643 And that by this witty strategeme. The Philosopher Stilpo, on a time, came vnto him: and, being willing to make a triall, whether he could inwardly be perswaded (as hee outwardly pretended) That there was indeed no God? he set vpon him, with this Question. Tell me (ô Theodorus) whe∣ther thou be such a one indeed, as thou art commonly esteemed? Hee, thinking that he had meant; Whether he were indeed, a true Atheist, or no? answered him; He was so: that hee was the very same, that the people esteemed him. Why then (sayth Stilpo) thou art surely, no Atheist; but thou art, indeed a very God: artificially insinuating, that so the people esteemed him. With which idle conceite, Theodorus being tickled, and loath to repell so glorious an as∣scription; he thought it better to renounce his former opinion. And so, from thence forward, he held, That there was no God; vnlesse that he himselfe were (haply) a God. By which his ambition, hee cast himselfe into so great a scorne; that he, which before was called in detestation, Theodorus 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,* 1.644 Theodorus the Mock-God; was called afterward, in derision, Theodorus 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Theodorus the Mockt-God. Whereby it appeareth, that the Atheist is truly a very slaue of Vaine-glory; seruing it more basely, then euer any seruant did the cruellest Tyrant. For, Tyrants can compell their seruants, but vnto outward obser∣uance: but they cannot inforce them, vnto any inward opinion, as you see Vaine-glory can. It can compell the Atheist, not onely to accept, but also to reiect his Athe••sme. And therefore, the Atheist cannot be a free man. Hee gayneth not his libertie, by all his impiety. But, though hee renounce Gods religion; because he would not serue him: yet serueth hee much more basely, vnto his owne Ambition. And in seruing of it, he serueth the Deuill himselfe: because he will not serue God. For Ambitionis via, est Diaboli adoratio:* 1.645 if we may beleeue Saint Bernard: The way of ambition, is the Deuills adoration. So that now, the Atheist hath not only a Master, but also a God to serue: though, by the choise of his Atheisme, hee sought to exempt himselfe from both of them. But in them both, hee is intangled. For that, being a base seruant, hee must needes haue a Maister, and he must needes haue a God. And so, renoun∣cing the true one, hee hath light vpon another, that is more worthy of him. A base God, and a base Maister, for a base seruant, and a base worshipper.

4 But, as yet we haue not seene all his basenesse, in his seruing. For,* 1.646 beside his owne ambition, hee serueth yet another Maister; yea, and with no lesse deuotion. And that is, his idle Belly. For, the seruing of whose appetite, it is incredible, what base and seruile paines hee doth take. He riseth vp early, and hee goeth to bed late; hee sweateth, hee freezeth, hee toyleth, hee labou∣reth,

hee lyeth in waite to spoile the heauen of all her fowles, the earth of all her beasts,* 1.647 the sea of all her fishes. And all this, to s••rue his Bellie: that so (as Saint Hierom speaketh) he may, ex cibis quàm preci••sis, stercus confi••ere. That he may turne the costliest meate, into the vilest 〈◊〉〈◊〉. For (as Sen••••a truely noteth) Omnia ist••, tam sollicitè scrutata, vari•••• 〈◊〉〈◊〉, cumsubicri•••• ventrem, vna at{que} eadem foeditas occupat. All these delicacies, that are sought so carefully, and sawc't so daintily, when they come into the belly, they are wrapt vp together, in one and the same foedity. Is not this a noble seruice? And yet all this,* 1.648 and much more, doth the Atheis•• most basely offer vnto his belly: ser∣uing it not onely with many dishes, but also with many rancks of dishes. Struices con••innat patinarias (as the Comick speaketh) He maketh such vp∣heaped piles of dishes.* 1.649 Yea, and not onely with wholesome and naturall meates,* 1.650 to satisfie his true appetite; but also with curious and artificiall saw∣ces, to procure a false appetite: prouoking lust it self, further then it prouoketh him;* 1.651 and euen oppressing it with his seruices, and thinking that he hath neuer serued it enough. But (as Seneca well obserueth) Non sunt ad P••pinam den∣tibus, & ventre, & ore contenti: oculis quo{que} gulosi sunt. They are not content, to be Epicures, onely in their teeth, or in their bellies, or in th••ir mouthes; but they affect to be gluttons, euen in their eyes.* 1.652 Yea, and euen Salomon obserueth the same kind of Epicurisme:* 1.653 Looke not thou vpon the wine, when it is red, &c. Now, he that thus seruilely attendeth to his Belly, must needs be very far from the state of true Libertie. For, Nemo liber est, qui corpori seruit; sayth Seneca. Nay, Multis seruiet, qui corpori seruit: as in another place hee addeth. He cannot be a freeman, that is a seruant to his body. Nay, he that serueth it, is a ser∣uant to very many.* 1.654 Omnibus mund•• partibus seruiunt (sayth Saint Augustine) qui proptere•• nihil colendum esse putant, ne seruiant: They become the base ser∣uants of all the Creatures in the world, who, for the feare of seruing, do refuse to worship God. Now, in thus seruing his belly with such a Religion, hee ma∣keth it, in effect, to become a god vnto him. Nay, who among all the hea∣then, doth worship any God, either so carefully, or so costly, as the Atheist doth his belly? Who maketh his Kitchin, his Temple; his Cooke, his Priest; his Caldron, his Sensor; his Nidor, his Incense; his Table, his Altar; his meate, his Sacrifice: and hee offereth it vp vnto his owne idle Belly; as it were,* 1.655 vnto the idol Bel, or Dagon: as Hugo de Scto. Victore, hath allegorized very wittily. Solent Dijs, Templa construi, Altaria erigi, Ministri ad seruiend•••• ordinari, pecudes immolari, thura a concremari: Deo siquidem ventri, Templum, est Coquina; altare, mensa; ministri, conqui; immolatae pecudes, coctae carn••s; fumus incensorum, odor saporum. And, as Ter••ullian further addeth (who lighteth into the very same Allegory, and maintaineth it most excellently) Deus illi, venter est; & pulmo, Templum; & aqualiculus, Altare; & Sacerdos, Coquus; & Sanctus spiritus,* 1.656 nidor; & condimenta, charismata; & ructus, pro∣phetia: His Belly, is his god; his Lungs, his Temple; his Stomach, his Altar; his Cooke, his Priest; his holy spirit, the fume of his meate; his Sawces, his Graces; and his belchings, his Prophecies. And so (as it followeth but a little after) Apud illum Agape,* 1.657 in caca••is seruet; fides, in culinis calet; spes, in ferculis iacet: His charity, boyleth in his K••ttles; his faith, fryeth in his victualls; and his hope, lyeth in his dishes. And thus, that which Varro affirmeth of the

Epicures, is true also in the Atheists: that, Ganeonibus, ••••lina est viuendi mo∣dulus: that the walls of their Kitch in,* 1.658 are the bounds of their liuing, and their lust their onely desire of life. For, this may be generally obserued in all of them: that he, that is an Atheist in his opinion, he is alwayes a belly-god for his Religion. And he, that hath no other God, hee will alwayes haue his owne belly for his god. Which the Apostle teacheth plainely, in telling vs, there bee some men, Whose god is their Belly. And Gregory deliuereth in a very fit allegory,* 1.659 that Princeps Coquorum destruxit muros Hierusalem: as it is recorded in the last booke of the Kings. Nabuzar-adan the chiefe Steward (or, after some translations, The chiefe of the Cookes) destroyed, and cast downe the walls of Hierusalem, that is, (in his mysticall exposition) The lust of the belly destroyeth all Piety. Quis enìm Coquorum princeps, nisi venter accipitur; cui diligentissima, a coquentibus, cura seruitur? Who is this Prince of the Cookes, but only the belly; vnto whom so many Cookes do attend, with such seruility? Muros igitur Hierusalem, princeps Coquorum destruit: quia virtutes animae (dùm non restring••tur) venter perdit. Then the Prince of Cookes destroyeth the walls of Hierusalem, whilst the belly being pampered, ouerthroweth the vertues of the minde. So that, where the belly is a god, there it will haue noue o∣ther God; and where there is none other God,* 1.660 there the belly is a god. As Plu∣tarch Obserueth in blasphemous Polyphemus: who professeth, he contemned al the other gods; and yet confesseth, that he sacrificed to his Belly, as his God: which he calleth, Geniorum maximum: the greatest of the gods. And the Orator exemplifieth the same, in Epicurus: who being once grown vnto that profane∣nes and impiety, that he did, but, Deos ioc andi causa, introducere: that he made mention of the gods, only by way of sport: he was led from thence, into that wan∣tonnesse and luxurie, that he did, with Metrodorus, Omne bonum in visceribus medullis{que} condere: that he placed both his God, and all his good, in his Belly.

Yea, and Aristophanes insinuateth the same thing vnto vs: when he maketh Diagoras (a knowne Reuiler of all their other gods) yet to be a true worship∣per of the drunken God Bacchus.

—Iaccum cantu celebrant, more Diagorae. With solemne Songs,* 1.661 they Bacchus grace, After the manner of Diagoras.

Thus the Atheist (as you see it directly proued) is neither without Maister, nor a God: but is indeed, a base seruant, both of many Maisters, and of many gods. For, though hee doe most impiously reriounce all others gods; yet serueth he, most basely, these three Belly-gods; Bacchus, Ceres, Venus. All whom, the Comicall Poet conioyneth in one sentence:

Sine Cerere,* 1.662 & Libero, friget Venus. Poore Venus staru's with cold, & soone will dye, If Wine, and Belli-cheere, make not supply.

So that, though all other gods doe frigere, with the Atheist; yet those three forenamed Belly-gods, doe incalescere plus satis: his seruice of the first two, of Bacchus, and Ceres, drawing in (of necessity) his seruice of the third; his seruice of Venus: as you see it expressed in the former sentence. For (as Saint Hierom well obserueth, vnto the same purpose) Luxuria mater libidinis est,* 1.663 ventrem{que} distentum cibo, & vini potionibus irrigatum, voluptas sequitur

genitalium. Est pro ordine membrorum, & ordo vitiorum. R••otousnesse is al∣wayes the mother of wantonnesse. For the bellie being filled well with meats, and watered with wines, begetteth the pleasure of her neighbour parts. And so there followeth an order in the vices▪ according to the order of the members. And Tertullian also vnto the same purpose,* 1.664 Monstrum haberetur libido, ••ine gula; cùm duo hec tam vnita, at{que} concreta sint; vt si disiungi omnino potuissent, ipsi priùs ventri pudenda non adhaererent. Specta corpus & vna r••gio est. Deni{que} pro dispositione membrorum ordo vitiorum: It were a plaine monster to see lust with∣out Belly-cheere. For these two vices are so straitly conioyned, that if you ••nd••••∣uour to haue them disioyned, you must cut off the parts of lust from your bodies. Consider of your bodyes, and of their seuerall Regions, and you shall finde the or∣der of those vices, to follow the order of those members.

Thus the Atheist, though he seek to make himselfe a free-man, by the choice of his Atheisme: yet is he, in very deed, the greatest bond-man in the world; seruing his owne most base and refuse parts, with all most denout and hum∣ble seruice; compelling the most excellent and imperiall parts of his soule, to serue the most abiect and ministeriall parts of his body: and honouring (in a sort) those parts, as his gods, which are scarcely worthy to bee his ser∣uants. Which is indeede, a true seruitude, yea, and a most base one too.

5 But it may be here obiected, That in all this,* 1.665 he serueth but himselfe, and not any other thing. And therefore is truely and properly a freeman. Because, Libertas, est facultas viuendi vt velis: Freedome, is nothing else, but onely a faculty, to liue as we please. So the Orator defineth it. And so the Po∣et confirmeth it.

An quisquam est alius liber,* 1.666 nisi ducere vitam, Cui licet, vt voluit; Licet vt volo viuere; non sum Liberior Bruto? Can any man be free, but he, that may liue as he list? Le me liue, so; then I as free, as Brutus as the best.

But vnto this I answer, that it may fitly be added, which there followeth in the Poet:

—Mendosè colligis, inquit Stoicus hic, aurem mordaci lotus aceto. You gather wisely, saith the Stoick here, Whose Eare is steept in biting vineger.

Nay, it is a false collection, not onely in the iudgement of those rigid Philo∣sophers, but also of all sober, and wisely-iudging Christians. For, first, he is not a free-man, that doth scruire sibi; but rather he, that doth sibi imperare: He is not a freeman that is a seruant to himselfe, but he that is a master ouer himselfe: that doth, cupiditatibus suis imperare; that ruleth & commandeth ouer his own lusts and appetites: as the Orator obserueth in the fore-alledged place. Where he describeth a free-man by these commanding actions. Refraenct priùs libidi∣nes, spernat voluptates, iracundiam teneat, coerceat auaritiam, caeteras animi la∣bes, repellat. Tum incipiat alijs imperare, cùm ipse improbissimis dominis, de∣decori, & turpitudini parere desierit. Dùm quidem his obedierit, liber haben∣dus omnino non erit. L••t him restraine his lusts, refraine his pleasures, curbe

his impatience, represse his couetousnesse, and repulse his other vices. And then let him beginne to rule ouer others, when he hath learned, not to obey those fore∣named dishonorable and most wicked maisters. For whilst he obeyeth them, hee cannot be a freeman. Agreeable vnto that sentence of Salomon: He that ruleth his owne minde,* 1.667 is better then he that winneth a Citie.

Againe, it is to be obserued, that he defineth not, Libertie to be a faculty, to liue as we lust; but to liue as we will. Now betweene lust, and will, there is this substantiall difference: that, Lust is a faculty of the vnreasonable soule: as A∣ristotle affirmeth, Fit in participe rationis voluntas; & in ratione vacante cu∣piditas at{que} ira: The will is in the reasonable part of the soule: but anger and desire in the vnreasonable part: as we may see in brute beasts: who beeing wholly led by lust, their actions accordingly bee filthy and beastly. But the Will is a faculty of the reasonable soule: as we may see in men, that are guided by discretion. For,* 1.668 Voluntas (as Aristotle expresly defineth it) est appetitus bo∣nicum ra••ione: The wil is an appetite or desire of some good thing, directed accor∣ding vnto reason. Quis igitur viuit vt vult (saith the Orator) nisi qui recta se∣quit••r? No man then liueth as he would,* 1.669 vnlesse he doth follow the thing that is good: So that,* 1.670 those things which a man doth according to his will, hee al∣wayes doth according vnto reason:* 1.671 but those things that he doth according to his lust, as they most times are contrary vnto reason; so sometimes they be contrary, euen vnto his will. As we may euidently see in the Apostle S Paul: I doe not that good thing that I would; but the euill which I would not, that do I. Now, if I doe that I would not, it is no more I that doe it, but the sinne that dw••l∣leth in me. So that, his will, that led him vnto good: his lust, and his appetite (which in that place he calleth the law of his members) that led him vnto ill, contrary to his will. Neither may this be seene onely in the Apostle S. Paul, whose will was regenerated and directed by religion; but also, in diuers of the vnregenerate Heathen; who were directed onely by their reason. Phaedra, in Seneca,* 1.672 complaineth in this fashion.

—Quae memoras, scio Vera esse, Nutrix: sed furor cogit sequi Peiora: vadit animus in praeceps sciens, Rem••a{que} frustrà, vana consilia appetens. I know those things thou saist, are true, good Nurse: But fury forceth me to follow worse. My minde is hurried headlong vp and downe, De••iring better counsell, yet finds none.

And we may see the same conflict in Medea,* 1.673 in Ouid.

Sed trahit invitam noua vis, aliud{que} cupido, Mens aliud suadet. Video melior••, probó{que}, Deteriora sequor.— Strange violent forces draw me on vnwilling, Reason perswades me this, my loue rebelling. I see, and know the better. Here's my curse: That, notwithstanding, I embrace the worse.

And so likewise,* 1.674 Lesbonicus maketh his complaint, in Plautus.

Sciebam, vt esse me deceret: facere, non quibam, miser.

Ita vi Veneris victus, otio captus, in fraudem incidi. I knew, poore soule, what me became: But yet I could not doe it. Mine idle lust me ouercame: And led me captiue to it.

Where he confesseth directly, that he yeelded vnto th••m, as a slaue and a Captiue; and not as a free man. Yea, and the Apostle S. Paul confesseth the same thing,* 1.675 that the law of his members, rebelling against the law of his minde, did leade him captiue into sinne. Now he that is a Captiue, he surely is a bond-man: He cannot be a free man. As Tullie plainely proueth, in the fore-alledged place, inforcing it out of the definition of Bondage; that, Serui∣tus est obedientia fracti animi, & abi••cti, & arbi••r••o carentis suo. Slaue∣rie is the obedience of a vanquisht and a broken minde,* 1.676 which hath not the free∣dome of his owne will and iudgement. From whence hee there inferreth, Quis igitur neget, omnes leues, omnes cupidos, omnes d••m{que} improbos, esse ser∣vos? Who can therefore denie, but that all light, all couetous, and all wicked persons, must of necessitie, be seruants? because these be the desires, not of their wills, but of their lusts, leading them violently as Captiues.

Neither doth his willingnes to continue in this seruice,* 1.677 proue him to bee no seruant: but rather to be a more seruile seruant. For, Nulla turpior est seruitus, quam voluntaria: saith Seneca. There is no so vile slauerie, as that, which is voluntarie. Because this argueth that euen his v••ry will is subdued,* 1.678 and forced to yeeld vnto it; and that the most Prince-like and Hegemonical part of his foule, which ought to rule ouer all, is now it selfe become seruile, and a slaue vnto all. So that, his willingnesse to serue such base things,* 1.679 is the great brand of his slauishnes: as it was among the Israelit••sh ser∣uants; wh••n they were content to continue still in their Bondage. When the Seruants Prof••ssed, that they so loued their Maisters, that they de∣sired not to be free from their seruice; then the Maister was appointed, to bore their eares through, with a Nawle: and so to marke them, for perpetu∣all seruants. So that the Atheists willingnes, is the very note of the extre∣mitie of his basenesse; and that hee is no better, then a perenni-seruus: as the Comick speaketh,* 1.680 a branded and a perpetuall Seruant. For, as the Apostle Paul teacheth vs: To whomsoeuer we giue our selues as seruants to obey, (though neuer so willingly) his seruants we be: Whether it be of sinne vnto death,* 1.681 or of obedience vnto righteousnesse.

As for that Obiection, that the Atheist bestoweth all this seruice, vpon none other thing, but onely vpon himselfe: I haue shewed, that to be other∣wise. But let it be granted, that the Atheist indeede, both intendeth, and extendeth all his actions, counsels, and indeauours, but onely to himselfe; making so his owne selfe, the very end of himselfe: Yet, euen from hence it will follow, that this his excessiue loue of himselfe, in thus honouring and seruing himselfe, aboue all things; and regarding nothing else, but only himselfe, and for himselfe; doth make him become a very god vnto himselfe. And so, euen this way too, he•• is not without his god. For it is a true rule, that is giuen by Origon, that,* 1.682 Quod vnusquis•• praecaeteris colit, & quod super omnia miratur, ac diligit, hoc illi Deus est: What thing soeuer any man doth most affect, and what thing soeuer he honoureth and loueth best, that same is vn∣to him a God. Which sentence is so agreeable both vnto truth and Godlines,

that it is confirmed by diuers other of the fathers,* 1.683 almost in the same words. Ad qu••mcun{que} remcor alicuius deuincitur, & quo cupido eius trahitur, illa res est eius Deus: saith Macarius. To what thing soeuer a man most straitly tyeth the desire of his heart, that same is vnto him his God. And so likewise, S••dulius: Non potest Deum suum dicere is, cui venter est Deus, aut cui gloria seculi,* 1.684 & pompa mundi, aut potentia rerum caducarum Deus est: reckoning vp nomina∣t••m, all the Atheists fore-named gods. He cannot truly say, The Lord is his God, that hath his Bellie for his god, or that hath the glory of the world, and the pompe of these earthly things for his God. What then? Hee presently addeth, Qu••c quid vnus quis{que}, sup•• a caetera colit, hoc illi Deus est. Wh••tsoeuer a man loueth and honoureth most, that he alwayes makes his God. And so the Atheist, louing and honoring himselfe most of all things, doth thereby make him∣selfe his own•• God. For, the principalitie of our loue and our seruice, is so peculiar vnto God, that hee which hath it not, is not to vs a God, although he be the true God: and that he, which hath it, he is to vs a God, although he be a false God. Why then, the Atheist, giuing the principalitie of his loue and seruice, onely to himselfe, doth thereby become a God vnto him∣selfe. And therefore cannot be sayd, to be without a God. For, in making himselfe an Idol-God, hee becommeth both an Idol-maker, and an Idol it selfe, & an Idol-worshipper: offending so, most grossely, in all the three seuerall degrees of Idolatrie. So that, howsoeuer the Atheist denieth God i•• words; yet, euen by his selfe-loue, he confesseth him in deeds, which is a more real, and a powerfull confession. For (as Leo truly noteth) Multo validiora sunt exempla, quàm verba; & pleniùs opere docetur, quam voce. Examples & actions, are more forcible then speeches; and works are a great deale better teachers,* 1.685 then words. And therefore the Atheist, affirming in his deed, That there is a God; & denying it but in word, we may iustly reiect his denial, with that scorne,* 1.686 Quid verba au diam, cùm facta videam? What should I heare his words, when as I see his deeds?

CHAP. 12.

The Atheists second end, is, to free himselfe from feare. 2. Yet no man feareth more: as he bewrayeth, at three times. 3. When hee dreameth. 4. When it thundereth. 5. When he dieth. 6. This his feare, is a cleare Argument, that he thinkes, Th••re is a God.

AS the first end, which the Atheist propounded, in the choise of his Atheisme,* 1.687 is, Non seruire: To free himselfe from s••ruing; so his second end in it, is, Non metuere: To free himselfe from fearing. Which (as the Orator hath well obserued) is another kinde of seruitude. Omnis metus servitus est. All fearfulnes is a kinde of slauishnes. Serui enim est timere: saith Diogenes: He is but a slaue,* 1.688 that liueth in feare. Yea and a base slaue too. For (as the Orator obserueth) Habet humilitatem metus:* 1.689 All fearefulnes hath in it a kinde of humble base∣nes.* 1.690 And there is indeed no slauerie, which the soule doth naturally more detest and abhorre, then it doth to liue in feare. Neither is there any libertie, that it desireth more earnestly, then it doth, to be freed from fearefulnesse and dread. Insomuch that Democritus esteemed it true Happines, for any man to haue Animum terrore liberum: To haue his soule, free from all terrour and

fearing. Without which securitie, it cannot enioy so much as a shadow of any fe••citie; nay, not of any comfort, or of any contentment: as it is very tru∣ly obserued,* 1.691 by Plutarch: Anino, gaudium aut laetitiae ingenerari non potest, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 vacuitatem metus, & fiduciam, ac tranquillitatem is pro fundamento sub∣sternat. The soule cannot haue in it, any true ioy, and comfort; vnlesse the s••me be founded, both in security, and in confidence, and in tranquility. All which do imply a vacuity from feare.

And therefore, the Atheist indeauoureth by all meanes, to shake off this yoake of fearing, as well as he doth the former yoake of seruing: hoping then, to be indeede an absolute free-man. But this freedome from feare he can ne∣uer attaine, as long as he harboureth in his heart, any sense of Religion. Be∣cause, Religion it selfe is a kinde of feare. Religion is nothing else, but the feare of some God: as the Creator himselfe hath expressely defi••ed it. Religio est,* 1.692 quae superioris cuiusdam Naturae (quam Diuinam vocant) curam ceremoniam{que} aff••rt. Religion is an affection, which begetteth a care of worshipping a certaine superior Nature, which is commonly called God. Yea and (as in the same booke he teacheth) This care is not without a feare. Religio, in metu & ceremonia Deo∣rum est Religion consisteth in the feare and worship of the Gods. Marke, not onely in the worship, but also in the feare of God. For indeede wheresoeuer there is any Religion, or any opinion, that There is a God; there goeth (vpon necessity) a feare of him with it. And therefore, it is the great complaint of all Atheists; that the religion of the gods, is a very oppression vnto the soules of men. Lucretius complaineth, that there was a time:

Humana a••te oculos foedè cùm vita iaceret,* 1.693 In terris oppressa▪ graui sub Relligione: When as with shame, mans life on earth did groane, Prest downe with burthen of Religion:

vntill a certaine Greeke, a very deepe wise man, beganne to plant in men a contrary opinion; and so to free their mindes from the terrors of their gods. And Metrodorus likewise (as Tully reporteth of him) clamat, Dijs omnium mortalium mentes esse perterritas: He cryeth out,* 1.694 that the receiued opinion of the Gods, hath filled all mens minds with feares, and affrightments. Yea, and Epicurus himselfe complaineth against all the Philosophers, that, by their be∣leeuing of a prouident God,* 1.695 they did, imponere ceruicibus nostris sempit••r∣num Dominum, quem dies & noctes timeremus. They haue set vpon our shoul∣dars an euerlasting Master, whom both day and night we cannot chuse but feare. Adding in the same place: Quis enim non time••t omnia prouidentem, & cogi∣tautem, & animadvertentem, & omnia ad se pertinere putantem; curiosum, & plenum negotij Deum? For, who can chuse but feare, a prouident, a remembring, and an obseruing God; a God so curious, and so full of busi∣nesse, that he thinketh all things to belong vnto himselfe? And therefore, the Epicare, to free himselfe from this feare; though hee be forc't by strength of reason, to confesse, There is a God: yet hath fancied such a god, as neede not to be feared: making him to be one, that neither giueth regard, nor taketh accompt of the actions of men: Nec quicquam alieni curans, nec sui: Nei∣ther regarding his owne, nor any other mans businesses,* 1.696 more negligent and supine then Aesops Incuriosus, that cared for iust nothing. So, by denying

God his Prouidence, seeking vtterly to extirpe all his feare out of himselfe. For, he that regardeth no body, needeth not himselfe to bee regarded of any But this is to be, but a Semi-Atheist. And therefore, the perfect Atheist, know∣••••g, that if a God be granted, his Prouidence cannot, with any reason, bee de∣nied; therefore (to make all sure, and to secure himselfe from feare) he thinketh it the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 way, to deny Gods essence, as well as his Prouidence: and simply to pr••nounce, that There is no God. For then it will follow, that he ne••de not to be feared, if at all he be not.

2 Thus the Atheist, to ridde himselfe from that inward feare, which rideth on his conscience,* 1.697 and which naturally accompanieth the opinion of God, if that once be admitted; he affirmeth, There is none: yea, and striueth to be∣leeue it too. But yet all this in vaine. For, as God hath ingrafted into the mindes of all men, a notion of himselfe; so hath he likewise, a feare of him∣selfe: as a sense of his being, so a sensible feare of him. As euen Lucretius himselfe confesseth. He that will not confesse, that There is a God; yet, con∣fesseth,* 1.698 that all men haue a feare of God in them.

—Est mortalibus insitus horror; Qui delubra Deûm nova toto suscitat orbi Terrarum, & ••estis cogit celebrare diebus. There is an inbred feare in all mens hearts, Which hath begotten this, on all mens parts; T'erect new Temples, and new Holy-dayes Vnto their gods, to celebrate their praise.

Making this inward feare, to bee the first beginning, of all piety and religion. Yea,* 1.699 and so likewise doth Saint Augustine.* 1.700 Pietas timore inchoatur, charitate perficitur: True Piety is begunne by feare, but perfected by charity. Yea, and the Psalmist, in effect, confesseth the same: where he tells vs, that, The feare of God is the beginning wisdome. And, Lactantius confirmeth it, when he sayth, that, Religio nulla esse potest, vbi metus nullus est: That there can be no Religion, where there is no fearing. And therefore, Isidore deriueth the Greeke word, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which signifieth God,* 1.701 from another Greeke word, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which signifieth Feare: Quòd, eum colentibus, sit timor: because, they that worship him, do also ••eare him. And so likewise doth Festus. In which signification of the name of God,* 1.702 they may seeme to allude, vnto that appellation, of the Patri∣arch Iacob; where he calleth the true God,* 1.703 (as it were by periphrasis) The feare of Isaac his Father. Because, as God hath imprinted into the hearts of all men, a naturall perswasion, That there is a God: so hath he likewise implanted in them,* 1.704 a naturall reuerence, and feare of that God. So that, Terfullians question hath an easie solution. Vndè naturalis timor animae, in Deum? Whence commeth this naturall feare of a God, which euery man feeleth within his owne minde? Surely, it commeth onely from that God, who ought onely to bee feared, as the Prophet Ieremy hath expressely testified. And therefore,* 1.705 Statius affirmeth, that by this inward feare, the Heathens first were moued, to beleeue, and worship God.

Primus in orbe Deos fecit timor. Feare was the first,* 1.706 that gods begot: Till feare began, the gods were not.

And so likewise doth Dares Phrygius: who calleth Feare, the father of the gods, D••o r••m Genitorem.

Quippe,* 1.707 D••ûm Genitore Metu, mens caca creavit Ditem Vmbris, Coelo Superos, & Numina Ponto. Through god-begetting Feare, Mans blinded minde did reare, A Hell-god, to the Ghosts; A Heau'n-God, to those Hosts; Yea, gods vnto the Seas; Feare did create all these.

Whereby it appeareth, that the feare of God, is as naturally ingrafted, into the mindes of all men, as is the opinion of his being: this being a true conse∣quent vnto that, and following it as naturally, as the shaddow doth the body: And that generally in all men, without exception.

But yet,* 1.708 most specially in the Atheist, aboue all other men. They ••aue, in∣deed, the true feare of God which begetteth Religion, a great deale lesse then any other men: but, that seruile feare, which begetteth confusion, a great deale more. It is not all their Atheisme, that can free them from his slauish feare: but it begetteth it in them rather. There is no man that feareth God so much, as they that would seeme to feare him least: no man so basely feareth him, as those men that seeme the most to cont••mne him. For, it is the worke of Gods iustice, that they which refuse to feare him as his Sonnes, shall bee compelled to feare him as his slaues. And so indeed they doe. For (as Eli∣phas teacheth in the booke of Iob) There is a continuall sound of feare, in his eares▪ and a contin•••••• sword before his eyes: the feare of Gods wrath,* 1.709 and the sword of his iustic••:* 1.710 which, like Dam••cles his sword, hangeth still ouer his head. Yea, and not onely so (for these things they haue great and iust cause to feare) but (as the Psalmist further teacheth) They are oftentimes afraid,* 1.711 where no fea••e is. So that (as King Solomon obserueth) The wicked flieth, e∣uen when no man pursueth: Omnia tuta timens: being chased by the terrors of his owne guilty minde, as it were, by hellish furies. Thus bee there no such base cowards, as those lus••y Gallants be, which would seeme so couragious, as not to feare euen God himselfe: whereas indeed, they feare the shaking of euery little leafe. For, God himselfe seemeth, euen in scorne and derision, to sport himselfe, with the Atheists, his enemies; and with that panick feare, which he hath cast vpon them,* 1.712 and appointed continually to infest, and to chase them.

Vs{que} adeò res humanas vis abdita quaedam Obterit, & pulchros fasces, saevás{que} secures Proculcare, ac ludibrio sibi habere videtur,

saith the Poet.

There is a certaine secret power vnknowne, Which humaine powers treads and tramples on. It Princes Scepters, Crownes, all State of men, But scornes, and spurnes, and makes a sport of them.

For, as the Psalmist plainely teacheth, When the Kings of the earth, and Prin∣ces of the world,* 1.713 doe band themselues together against God, He that dwelleth in

the Heauen, doth laugh them to scorne, and the Lord hee hath them in d••rision. And this is also confessed by another Heathen Poet:

Ergo Deus, quicun{que} aspexit, ridet, & odit. God,* 1.714 which beholds it, he doth it deride, Not onely so, but hateth it beside.

So that, God is not feared by any of his creatures, with greater terror & hor∣ror, then he is by Atheists. For, it may truely and generally be affirmed of A∣theists; which Caecilius very falsly affirmeth of Christians; that, Deos, quos, ne∣gant, reformidant: That though in words they deny God,* 1.715 yet in their hearts they feare him: and consequently confesse him.

And this feare the Atheist bewrayeth, at three speciall times, more emi∣nently and euidently, then he doth at any other; as I haue obserued out of learned Writers. Namely, first, when he sleepeth: secondly, when it thun∣dreth: and thirdly, when he dieth. At these three speciall times, when hee hath not the command of himselfe, to vse that artificiall obluctation, and fa∣cing out of the matter, which he doth at other times; but that his soule ap∣peareth naked, in his true and simple forme, without any a••ting, or fained palliation; then sheweth it most plainely that inward feare of God, which be∣fore it dissembled, and artificially veyled.

3 For the first of which three times: to wit,* 1.716 the time of their sleeping: it is most certaine, that no man can endure so great trouble in his waking, though pressed with neuer so many outward euils; as the vngodly man en∣dureth in his sleeping, by those fearefull dreames and visions, which at that time seaze vpon him, and make euen sleepe it selfe, with Euripides calleth,

Morbi levamen suaue—* 1.717 The sweet asswager of ••ll other greife:

yet to become vnto them, a grieuous terror and vexation. We may partly see this in Iob: who complaineth in his Booke, that,* 1.718 when he thought within him∣selfe, that his Couch should releeue him, and his bed bring comfort to him: that then he was so feared with dreames, and astonished with visions, that his soule desired rather to be strangled, then with so great anxieties to abide in his bones. So that sleepe (euen to this good man) was but,* 1.719 Quies inquieta; a restlesse rest (as S. Augustine speaketh) because of those fearefull dreames, wherewith it was disquieted. Then must it needes much more be so, for their punishment and torment. It is surely true in them; which Plutarch hath obserued, that, Somnus, corporis quide est requies, animo interim terrores obuersantur, somnia & tumultus. Their sleepe is indeede a kinde of rest,* 1.720 vnto their bodies; but, in the meane time, they doe finde no rest in their soules, but terrors and dreames, and perturbed cogitations. As wee may plainely see, in those dreames and visions, that molested the Egyptians, in the time of their dreadfull darkenesse; with which they were so troubled, that their very soules fainted: as it is reported,* 1.721 in the Booke of Wisedome: where he notably describeth them. So that (as Plutarch very truly obserueth) Somnia, & spectra, & oracul••, & de coelo seru••∣tiones,* 1.722 & quic quid aliud diuinitùs obijci videtur, tempestatibus & t••rroribus percellit malè bi conscios. Dreames, and Visions, and Oracles, and ••ignes in the Heauens, and such like diuine tokens, doe terrifie the mindes of men of euill con∣science. And this feare groweth vnto Atheists, from a double cause; which

both of them are founded in their seruile feare of God. The first is the con∣science of their owne impietie and wickednesse: which they needed not to feare, if they thought there were no God. The second is, the terror of those nocturnall apparitions, that represent themselues vnto them in their dreames: which they might easily contemne, for vaine and idle fancies; but that they are printed deeper, then can be blotted out, with all their artificiall and forced irrisions.

For the first of those two causes, that is, the conscience of their owne wickednesse: though they can easily passe it ouer in the day time, when they wake; yet returneth it vnto them in the night time, when they sleepe: and then tormenteth and afflicteth them, with the feare of those punishments,* 1.723 which they doubt may expect them after their deaths. As Plato truly noteth: Qui multas habet, in vita, iniquitates, ex ipso somno (tanquam puer••) fre∣quenter excitus, extimescit, & in pessima speviuit. Those men, that are guilty of many iniquities in their life, are often times (like fearefull Children) wakened out of their sleepe, and leade their liues with very little comfort. And therefore Tullie (by a kinde of morall exposition) interpreteth those Furies, which are represented in Tragoedies, affrighting the mindes of impious and vngodly persons, to be nothing else,* 1.724 but the affrightments of their consci∣ehces which fall vpon them in their dreames. Impietatum nulla expiatio est —. Sed impios agitant, insectantur{que} Furiae; non ardentibus t••dis (sicut in fabulis) sed angore Conscientiae, fraudis{que} crucialu. There is no satisfaction, no sacrifice for Atheisme. For the mindes of all Atheists, are tormented by Furies; yet, not with burning Torches (as we see it, in Tragoedies) but with the griefe and anguish of their owne guilty Consciences. Now, what reason can be alledged, why they should be so perplexed and affrighted with their Con∣sciences (especially in their secret and hidden transgressions) but onely, that they know, that they will be their accusers, to lay them all open, vnto the great Iudge? This then is the first night-torment of the Atheist; the terror, which he sustayneth, from a corrupt and guilty Conscience.

The second is, the terror of diuers strange dreames, and fearefull visions; wherein God doth sometimes, onely conferre and talke with them: and sometime beside, plainely shew himselfe vnto them, not only conferring, but also appearing. For the first of those two sorts, Iob telleth vs in his Booke, that God will speake vnto a man,* 1.725 once or twice, though he see it not, in dreames and visions of the night. As we may see in King Abimelech: with whom God conferred,* 1.726 and talked in a dreame, and threatened him with death, for detay∣ning of Abrahams wife away from him. And these interlocutorie and dialo∣guising dreames, were not vnknowne, euen to the very Heathens; as it eui∣dently appeareth by that position of Possidonius: That,* 1.727 Dij cum dormienti∣bus colloquuntur: That the Gods doe oftentimes talke with men in their sleepes. Of the second of those kindes; wherein, not onely a voice is heard, but also an image and resemblance seene; we also reade in the Booke of Iob: where Eliphaz giueth himselfe for an instance,* 1.728 saying: In the thoughts of the visi∣ons of the night, when sleepe falleth vpon men; Feare came vpon me, and dread, which made all my bones to tremble. And the winde passed before me, and made all the hayres of my flesh to stand vp. Then stood one; and I knew not his

face; an image was before mine eyes, and in silence I heard a voyce. And this kinde of apparition was likewise knowne vnto the Heathen: as appeareth in Iamblicus: who describing the visions, which are sent from God, he saith, that they doe commonly come betweene sleeping and wa∣king: and that then,* 1.729 Breues audiuntur voces, quid agendum sit admonentes; & aliquando Spiritus quidam, non corpulentus, non tractabilis, se iacentibus cir∣cumfundit. Qui tamen non perspicitur, sed alio quodam sensu, & animaduer si∣one percipitur. We heare certaine short voices: which, of diuers things admo∣nish vs: Yea, and sometimes certaine Spirits (though not corpulent, nor palpa∣ble) doe compasse round about vs: which, though they be not visibly discerned, yet may they, by another kinde of sense, be perceiued. The like appeareth in Lucretius. who numbreth these fearefull visions, among the first causes, which begate in mens mindes, an opinion of the Gods.

Egregias animo facies vigilante videbant,* 1.730 Et magis in somnis, mirando corporis auctu. Their waking minde, in hideous dreames, doth see a wondrous shape, Of Bodies strange, and huge in growth, and of stupendous make.

By which appearance of God, so immediately vnto the minde, the best men are oftentimes much perturbed and troubled: though there be none other cause, but onely the Maiestie of the Creator, striking a naturall feare and awe into his Creature. As we may euidently see, in that example of Eliphaz who confesseth, his owne vision to haue bin with feare and trembling; though it contayned nothing, but a most gracious and milde instruction. Then must it needs appeare, both with terror, & horror vnto the Atheists; when it giueth them signification of Gods wrath and iudgements. Their visions, must needs be such, as the Orator describeth, that,* 1.731 Visa somniantium, sunt perturbatiora, quàm insanorum: That the visions of such men, in their dreames, are often∣times more perturbed, then the ragings of mad-men, in their fits. As we may euidently see, in Nebuchadnezzares dreame when hee saw the watchman comming downe vnto him,* 1.732 and crying, Hew downe that great Tree: He confesseth that his dreame made him sore afrayd, and troubled his thoughts, vpon his bed. And, of this kinde, are all those dreames and visions, which appeare vnto Atheists. They be alwayes the Messengers of Gods wrath and iudgements. And therefore they are alwayes tormented with them, and (as it were) set vpon the very rack by them. As the Poet Iuuenal hath notably described them, comprizing both the two fore-named causes of their feare, together in one sentence, namely, both the guiltines of their owne corrupt conscience, and the fearefull apparitions of strange sights and visions.

Nocte, breuem si fortè indulsit cura soporem,* 1.733 Et toto versata toro iam membra quiescunt; Continuò Templum, & violati Numinis aras:

There is the torment of his terrifying conscience. Now followeth the tor∣ment of his visions.

Et, quod praecipuis mentem sudoribus vrget,* 1.734 Te videt in somnis,* 1.735 tua sacra, & maior imago Humanâ, turbat pauidum, cogit{que} fateri.

Here is the torment of his terrifying visions. The summe of which verses, is, in effect, thus much.

If once his nightly cares spare him a little sleepe, If once his restles limmes their rest on bed do seeke; Then straight appear's a sight of his impiety, Temples, and Altars of the wronged Deity: And that, which most affright's his soule; in sweating Agony, Thee God he see's, in fearefull dream's, thy sacred Maiesty: A farre more glorious forme of thine, then any mortall face; The which, such terror forceth him confesse to be thy Grace.

Yea, and Plutarch hath likewise well expressed the same Argument: instan∣cing in the very same two causes of feare in the superstitious, that I haue ex∣pressed before of the impious. So that, Atheisme and Superstition, the two extremes of Religion,* 1.736 are made equall in their fearing. Obliuiscuntur herilium minarum serui dormientes: qui in compedibus sunt, ijs vincula somnus alle∣uat: inflammationes, vulnera, saeuacarnis & serpentia vlcera, dolores{que}, acer∣rimi somno mitigantur. Soli huic, nullae sunt per somnum induciae, ne{que} vnquàm quiescere animum patitur, ne{que} se colligere, acerbis & molestis, de Numine, opinionibus dimotis: sed, veluti in impiorum regione, simulachra ter∣ribilia, & visa monstrosa feruntur. All seruants, in their sleeping, forget their Maisters threatening. Prisoners, forget their shackles. Diseases, wounds, and cancers, by sleepe are greatly eased. Onely, vnto these men, their sleepe can bring no quiet, nor freedome from those feares, which they conceiue of the gods. But, as if they inhabited in the Region of impiety, fearefull visions and apparitions do infest them continually.

Yea, and this feare, which these men haue of God, begetteth a feare in them, of euery thing in the world: as Plutarch,* 1.737 in the same place, hath truly obserued. Qui Deos metuit, omnia metuit: terram, mare, aërem, coelum, tenebras, lucem, rumorem, silentium, somnium. He that seruilely feareth God, he seruilely feareth all things: the earth, the sea, the ayre, the heauens, darkenesse, and light, noyses, and silence; but especially his owne dreames: then which nothing is more troublesome, nothing more grieuous to him: partly, out of the con∣sciousnes of his owne impiety and wickednesse: and partly, by those feare∣full apparitious and visions, which God purposely sendeth him, to reuoke and deterre him from that his vngodlinesse.

4 Neither feareth he onely in the time of his sleeping;* 1.738 when hee may seeme to be destitute of his reason to comfort him: but also oftentimes, euen whilest he is waking; when he hath all his senses and reason about him: espe∣cially, when it happeneth to thunder, and lighten. Iuuenal, hauing before des∣cribed those notable terrors, which afflict the Atheists; partly out of the con∣science of their owne impiety against God; and partly out of their fearefull apparitions in the night; he proceedeth, to shew, his minde to be no lesse perturbed in the•• day; especially, if it beginne to thunder and lighten.

Hi sunt qui trepidant,* 1.739 & ad omnia fulgura pallent. Cùm tonat, exanimes, primo quo{que} murmure coeli. These be the men, that trembling quake, appall'd at euery lightning: Euery flash them lifeles strikes, and crack of euery thundring.

Yea, and in the same place, hee directly telleth vs, that all this their feare of lightning and thunder, proceedeth from none other cause, but onely from

their inward feare of Gods vengeance; though they outwardly dissemble it, and seeme to contemne it.

Hi sunt qui trepidant; & ad omnia fulgura pallent. Non quasi fortuitò, nec ventorum rabie: sed Iratus cadat in terras, & vindicet ignis. Lo these be those, that with each Thunder-clap do shake. Not so, as if blinde Chance such fearefull noyse should make: Nor, ••s if ragefull windes should bring this ratling sound: But, lest to take reuenge, Gods fire should fall to ground.

Neither is ••his the foolish feare of the simple and base people; who (not able to reduce things vnto their true causes) are easily terrified with euery vncouth accident: but it is a feare, that seazeth vpon the greatest and mightiest Kings, and affrighteth them, as well as their meanest Subiects; if they be im∣pious Atheists. As euen Lucretius himselfe confesseth. For he sayth, that, when the Heauens do begin once to lighten:

—Et magnum percurrunt murmura coelum;* 1.740 Non populi gentés{que} tremunt? Reges{que} superbi Corripiunt Di••ûm perculsi membra timore: Nè quod, ob ad Missum foedè, dictúmve superbè, Poen••rum graue sit soluendi tempus adactum? When ratling Thunders runne along the Cloud's; Do not both People poore, and Princes proud, A terror feele, as strooke with feare of God? Do not their trembling ioynts then dreade his Rod? Lest, for foule deeds, and black-mouth'd Blasphemies, The rufull time be come, that vengeance cries?

Out of which sentence of Lucretius, we may gather many Arguments; that euen the most impious Atheists in the world, do inwardly beleeue, That there is a God; though they outwardly dissemble it. For he saith, that th••ybe, Divûm perculsi timore: that they be strucken, with a terror and feare of the Gods. Ergò, they must needs beleeue, That there be Gods. For no man feareth, that which he beleeueth not to be.

Nay this testimony of Lucre••ius, if it be well examined, contayneth twelue maine Articles of the Atheists Creede: which are all of them so true,* 1.741 so Or∣thodoxe, and Christian, that no man can disclaime from any one of them. Whereby it will appeare, that though the Atheist would deny both God, and all Religion, yet that hee is inwardly inforced to beleeue them: and to ho••d (euen against his will) many notable points of Christian Religion, in de∣spite of all his obstinate resolution for Atheisme. All which may naturally be collected, from his euident feare of lightning, and thunder. As namely these which follow.

First, hee beleeueth, that, There is a God: or else hee needed not to feare him.

Secondly, he beleeueth, that, God is such an one, as is to be feared: or else he would not (nay, he could not) feare him.

Thirdly, hee beleeueth, that, God is not an incurious God, (as the Epicure conceiteth him) who sitting idlely in heauen, regardeth nothing that is done

vpon the earth: but that he is a most curious and obseruing God; both seeing all that is done, and hearing all that is spoken: or else, he neede not feare the punishment, neither of his admissa, nor of his superbè dicta.

Fourthly, he beleeueth, that God is present in all places: or else hee could neither see his euill deedes, nor heare his euill words.

Fiftly, he beleeueth, that God doth not onely looke vpon things as an idle be∣holder; but also as a iust rewarder; for else he needed not to feare his behol∣ding, if afterward he intended to doe nothing. But hee feareth him as a iust Reuenger, to execute iudgement vpon euery offender. He beleeueth, both that God is,* 1.742 and that he is a iust rewarder: as it is in the Epistle to the He∣brewes.

Sixtly, hee beleeueth, that God is of that power, as is able to humble, and to inflict due punishment, vpon the greatest Prince and Pote••tate of the World.

Seuenthly, he beleeueth, that Lightning and Thunder doe not come, either by Chance, or by Nature: but that they haue God himselfe for their maker. For else, though he feared them, yet he needed not to feare him.

Eightly, he beleeueth, that God hath made those creatures, as the instru∣ments of his wrath, to strike and to punish, when hee purposeth to take ven∣geance.

Ninthly, he beleeueth, that Impiety and wickednesse do iustly deserue Gods heauy wrath and iudgements.

Tenthly, he beleeueth, that God is iust: and therefore will pay them, accor∣ding to their desert.

Eleuenthly, he beleeueth, that there is a time appointed, when this paiment shall be made.

And twel••ly, he beleeueth, that when it lightneth and thundreth, then that appointed time is come; and that God will certainely take vengeance vpon him.

All these consequents doe follow, by necessary connexion, vpon the Atheists fearing of thunder and lightning, especially, as the arrowes of Gods wrath and vengeance. And thus, the Atheist, who denieth, there is a God: yet is forced to beleeue many truths concerning God. He beleeueth his Essence; he beleeueth his Power; he beleeueth his Prouidence; he beleeueth his Omni∣presence; and he beleueth his Iustice. All this he be••eeueth, though not with a true faith, to further his saluation: yet (as the diuels themselues doe) with an inuincible perswasion,* 1.743 which worketh in them both a Feare, and a Trem∣bling.

And, this we may plainely see, not onely by the testimony of these fore-al∣ledged Poets, in a generall speculation: but also by the testimony of the most approoued Histories,* 1.744 giuing particular instances. Pharaoh, that proud King, who was as stiffe, and as vntractable, as a rocke, against the stroke of many o∣ther plagues; so that they could not make any impression into him: yet, when the plague of Lightning and Thunder fell vpon him, (which is able to breake euen the hardest stonie rocks) that also brake him, and pierced his sto∣ny heart; diminishing his former confidence, and forcing him to confesse, that now he saw, that the Lord was iust; but that both himselfe and his people

were wicked. This powerfull operation had, with that prophane man, the feare of Thunder and Lightning.

And the like effect is reported by Suetonius, to haue beene wrought in the Emperour T••••erius: whom he censureth, to haue beene,* 1.745 Negligentior circa D••os, & R••ligi••nes: A very great neglec••er of the Gods, and their Religions. And yet, that whensoeuer it hapned to thunder, hee was terrified and afraid, beyon•• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and measure. In so much, that he was wont to incompasse his head 〈◊〉〈◊〉 a Lawrell Garland, to defend him from the stroke; Because it is a commonly receiued opinion, that the leaues of the Bay-tree cannot bee t••u∣ched with Lightning.

But aboue all other, most notable is the example of Caligula,* 1.746 the Empe∣rour T••••••rius his next and immediate successor, who so greatly despised all the other gods, that he himselfe would needs be ho••oured for no lesse then a god. To which end, he commanded a Temple to bee erected, Sacrifices ap∣pointed, C••r••monies ordained, and all honour to bee exhibited, to this new Iupiter La••ialis: the old Iupiter Olympius, being so despised by him,* 1.747 that hee would oftentimes scoffe,* 1.748 and oftentimes raile at him, calling him the most per∣nicious and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of all the other gods. And yet, this new god, when hee heaad the true God to thunder, he would oftentime hide himselfe vnderneath his bed, for feare. Qui Deos tantoperè contemneret, ad minim•• tonitrua & ful∣gura, co••••ivere, caput obvoluere: ad verò maiora, proripere se è strato, sub l••c∣tum{que} cond••re solebat. He that so little regarded the Gods,* 1.749 yet feared so gre••tly the least thunder and lightning, that he would winke with his eyes, and wrap vp his head, so escape the terror ••f the clap: But, if it chanced to be a little more vehement, he would rise vp from his bed, ••nd hide himselfe vnderneath it. Now what a miserable and a slauish feare did this wretched man endure? He could not so effectually, haue declared his true beleefe of a God, by building vnto him a thousand Temples, as hee did by thus fearing his Lightnings and Thunders.

5 But yet there is another time,* 1.750 wherein much more hee feareth him: and that is, in his sicknesse, and at the time of his death. For, when hee fee∣leth himselfe attached with any grieuous sicknesse; though hee haue not, as yet, the apprehension of death, yet beginneth he to thinke that (surely) that sicknesse is sent vnto him from God, to punish and to scourge him, for his former blaspheming and denying of him. And this point is likewise deliue∣red by Iuvenal, as well as both the former. For,* 1.751 he there hath accumulated all the three of them together.

Praeterea, lateris vigili cum febre dolorem S••co••pere pati; missum ad sua corpora mor••ū, Infesto credunt a Numine: sax•• Deorum H••ec, & tela putant.— If they but'gin to feele an Agues fit, That roughly shakes them; straight they construe it, A sicknesse sent them from some angry god: These are Gods arrowes: this (say they) Gods rod.

For so Iob indeed,* 1.752 calleth his sores and his sicknesse: The arrowes of the Al∣mighty are in me, The venome thereof doth drinke vp my spirits; and the ter∣rors

of God fight against me. And so likewise doth the Psalmist: T••••ne Ar∣rowes sticke fast in me,* 1.753 and thine hand presseth me sore. There is no ••ealth in my flesh, because of thy displeasure: neither is there any rest in my bones, 〈…〉〈…〉 of my sinnes: So that, euen the very Atheist, in the time of his 〈◊〉〈◊〉, hath a right conceit, both of God, and of his sicknes. Of God; that he 〈◊〉〈◊〉 a punisher of wickednesse, and impietie: Of his sicknes; that God punish•••••• him for it, by that weakenesse, and infirmitie. And thus, euen the very A∣theist, who in the time of his health, and of his perfect strength, groweth wanton against God, and suffereth his tongue to roue through the world, setting his mouth against heaue••, and against God himselfe: yet in the time of his sicknes,* 1.754 is brought vnto a farre better temper; and to thi••••e more s••ri∣ously of Religion and pietie: as euen Lucretius himselfe obs••ru••th:

Mult••{que}, in rebus a••erbis,* 1.755 Acriùs advertunt animos ad Relligionem{que}

And a little after:

Nam verae voces, tum demùm, pectore ab i••••o Eijciuntur; & eripitur persona, manet res. Men insad taking, bitter'd with affliction, Better attend, and marke, and minde Religion. For then, true Voices issue from their hearts: Then speake they what they thinke, in inmost parts. The truth remaynes. They cast off ••ayned Arts.

And so likewise Solon:

Nos verò mortales ita cogitamus: idem valet bonus,* 1.756 & malus. Quam sententiam, vnusquisque tam diû retinet, Donec aliquid patiatur: tum rursùm luget. We men imagine, in our iolitie; That 'tis all one; or good, or bad to be. But then anon, we alterre this againe: If happ'ly we feele the sense of paine. For then, w^t are turn'd into mourning straine.

But now, if their sicknesse doe chance to bring vnto them, but any little impression, or apprehension of death; no tongue can expresse with what a terror it striketh them; not onely, of their owne present death, though that be terrible ynough of it selfe; but also, much more, with a terror of God; and what shall become of them after they be dead. This thought is that, which troubleth them. This afflicteth, and tormenteth them. No dreame, no vision, no thunder, no lightening, doth so affright the Atheist, as the thought of death doth; and what will follow, after death. Because, Lightening and Thunder doe represent vnto him, but onely a present, and a bodily death: but the cogitation of a state after death, doth strike him, with a feare of an e∣ternall death. As is noted,* 1.757 by Zaleucus, in the proeme of his lawes: Mori∣turos omnes, iniuriarum, quas commiserunt, memor••s, poenitentia invadit; & vehemens cupiditas, qua vellent, exactam sibi vitam omnem ••uisse iustam. All men, when they begin to draw on vnto their death, haue in them, a fresh remem∣brance, of all those wrongs and euills, which they haue done in their life: and there presently inuadeth them, a grieuous repentance and sorrow, for commit∣ting

them: and then, they feele in their hearts, an earnest with and desire, that all their former life had beene vertuous, and pure. Yea, and the same obser∣•••••••••• is also confirmed, by Plato. Certò scias (ò Socrates,) saith Cephalus) 〈…〉〈…〉 deuenit aliquis, vt breuì iam moriturum se opin••tur,* 1.758 inci∣dit in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 timor, & cura quaedam, eorum, quae in superiori vita neglexit. Etenim fab•••• qu•• de Inferis dicuntur, quemadmodùm eos, qui iniustè egerunt, poenas illìc d••re op••rteat, irrisaehactenùs, movent tunc animum, ne fortè verae sint, sus∣picantem. Know this (ò Socrates) for a certaine, that when a man is once come so farre, that bes••eth, he needs must die; there rusheth a maruailous feare vpon him▪ and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 anxious care, of very many things, which before, in his former 〈…〉〈…〉. For then, he beginneth to doubt with himselfe, whether those reports, that he had often heard, of Hell, and of Deuills, and of infernall pu∣nishments (which before he was wont to deride, as mere fables) now may not (h••pl••) be truths: which thought, doth very greatly afflict, and vexe his minde. So likewise, Tullie: Morbo graui & mortifero afflictis,* 1.759 occurrunt plerum{que} 〈◊〉〈◊〉 gines mortuorum: tùm{que} vel maximè laudi student, eos{que}, qut secùs quàm 〈◊〉〈◊〉, vixerunt, p••••••lorum suorum túm maximeè poenitet. When they draw ••nto their death, there doe walke before their eyes, the images of dead men: then they onely thinke of vertue, and then they deepely repent, of all those sinnes and offences, which before they haue committed. Thus they, that will not feare God, in the time of their life, are driuen to feare the Deuill, at the time of their death, and to tremble at the thought of that eternall punishment, which they feare to be after death, decreed for them, by God. As we may e∣uidently see, in Bion of Boristhenes: who seeing himselfe to be neere vnto his death, he was so afraid of it, that he would haue endured any torment, rather then to haue di••d. For,* 1.760 as Laertius reporteth it: Morbo tabescens, & mori per∣timescens; qui, Deos non esse, dixerat, Fanum non viderat, Mortalibus qui il∣ludebat, veris dùm Dijs immolarent; nec, Peccaui, dixit: cuncta tamen perpeti magis, quam mori, paratus erat. ••is sicknes increasing, and his health dimi∣nishing, and ••e fearing much to die: Though he had denied the Gods, despised all their Temples, derided all their worshippers, ••nd neuer once sayd of himselfe so much, as, I haue sinned: Yet was h•• ready, to haue suffered any kinde of grie∣••••••s torment, rather then to haue died. And why so? Not so much for the f••are of death it selfe (though it be very fearefull) as because he feared, that after his death, he should be committed by God (whom he had alwayes de∣spi••••d) into the hand of the Deuill, to bee tormented. And therefore, at his dying, he put out his hand vnto him, to bid him welcome; seeking to leni∣•••••• him, towards him, with this flattering salutation: Salue, Pluto, salue: Wel∣come Deuill, welcome. And this is that, which maketh the cogitation of death, of all other t••rribles, to seeme the most terrible,* 1.761 euen to the wicked Atheist; because, after his death, he feareth a iudgement &, a punishment. This is that, which affecteth him. This is that, which afflicteth him. This is that which tormenteth him. And this maketh, not onely death it selfe to be feare∣full vnto him, at the time of his dying; but also, the very remembrance of death, to be bitter vnto him,* 1.762 in the time of his florishing. ô Death, how bit∣ter is the remembrance of thee, vnto a man, that liueth at rest, in his riches? Bitter, not onely for the losse of all those good things, which he respecteth;

but also, much more, for the feare of those euill things that he expecteth. As Tully obserueth of Epicurus: that, though no man seemed more to contemne, both God, and Death; yet that no man feared more,* 1.763 both the one, and the other. Non quenquam vidi, qui magis, ea quae timenda esse negaret, timeret: Mortem dico, & Deos. Thus you see, that, howsoeuer some men in the time of their health, may so hoodwinke their conscience, and so obscure their owne knowledge; as (for some short time) to thinke, There is no God: yet that mist is soone dispelled; and the contrary opinion hath many returnes vnto them; and cannot bee repelled by them: but, as the Poet very truly obserueth:

Naturam expellas furcâ* 1.764 tamen vs{que} recurret. Though thou do Nature striue, with forke and force t' expell, Y••t still she will retire, and all thy force repell.

But much more, when the minde is (as it were) inforced, either by fearefull visions, or by terrible thunders, or by the dread of death. At these three times especially, the Atheist is compelled, to bewray his inward feare, of that God, whom he outwardly would seeme to hold in great contempt.

6 Now,* 1.765 t••is inward feare, which the Atheist hath of God, and outwardly bewrayeth, vpon so many occasions, is no lesse an Argument, that hee belee∣ueth, There is a God, t••en if he should plainely confesse it, in word. Nay, in∣deed a farre greater. For, this is a reall confession of God; whereas the other is but verball. That feare of God, which the Atheist hath, when he dreameth; that feare of God, which hee hath, when it thundereth; that feare of God, which he hath, at his death; are so many reall, and effectuall confessions, that he beleeueth, There is a God. And so is likewise, his feare of the Deuill. For (as Sen••ca well coll••••••••th) Non leue m••mentum apud nos habet consensus homi∣num,* 1.766 aut ••imentium inferos, aut colentium, The consent of men, in either fearing o•• worshipping of Deuills, is an effectuall Argument, to proue, that there be such. And so is it likewise, to proue, There is a God: at the least, in their opinion, that so either feare, or worship them. Their worship, shewing it directly; their feare, indirectly. But yet, no l••sse effectually: nay, indeed a great deale more. For, those sodaine s••ares, breaking out at those times, with so great a viole••ce, through all those artificiall disguisings, which they had purposely prepared to couer and hide it, are a more su••stantiall proofe, to confirme it; then if they should openly, in expresse words, confesse it. As the Ora••or col∣lecteth (vpon the like grounds) against the Catilinarian Censpirators. Cùm illa ••••rtissima visa sunt argumenta,* 1.767 at{que} indicia s••el••ris; tabulae, signa, manus, deni{que} vniuscuius{que} confessio; tum t••la mul••ò certiora; color, oculi, vultus, taci∣turnitas. Though those were very strong Arguments, and indications of their wickednes; their letters, their scales, their hands, and their confessions: Yet these were much stronger; the pal••nes of their colour, the heauines of their eyes, the sadnesse of their countenance, and the sullennesse of their silence. And then, he proceedeth to declare, certaine other signes and tokens of their guiltinesse; which he concludeth for more strong and euident Arguments, then their o∣pen and direct confessions. And so may it likewise be concluded, for those feares and affrightments,* 1.768 which I haue before vnfolded. And thus (as Maxi∣mus Tyrius obserueth) we may; Per illos, ex obliquo, Dei vestigia conspicari:

We may behold, euen in the Atheists, by a kinde of obliquity, diuers manifest foote-stepps, and acknowledgments of a Diuinity: Whom, though they would seeme artificially not to know; yet do they, by their feare,* 1.769 acknowledge: as Na∣zi••••zan well noteth. Quem nesciunt, & metuendo sciunt.

CHAP. 13.

That, beside the fore-named indirect confessions of Atheists, diuers of them, haue directly and expressely confessed God. 2. Some of them, v••wittingly 3. Some of them, vnwillingly. 4. And some of them, both wittingly, and willingly.

I Haue shewed, in the two last preceding Chapters; that (beside the confessions of all other sorts of men, of all nations and conditions whatsoeuer) euen the Atheist himselfe, though hee directly deny God; yet indirectly confesseth him: partly, by his owne excessiue selfe-loue; whereby hee maketh himselfe, a God vnto himselfe, seruing nothing but his Belly, and the neighbour parts of his Belly, Ventrem & Venerem, as the Poet noteth of him:

—Nihili pendunt animi bona;* 1.770 sola{que} ventris Et Veneris (pecudum ritu) oblectamina quaerunt. They nought esteeme the goods of mind: 'tis only Belly-cheere, And beastly lusts, their sought delight: as if brute beasts they were.

As I haue largely shewed before, in the whole eleuenth Chapter. And partly againe, by his inward feare; whereby he confesseth another God, beside him∣selfe. Whom, though in some sodaine fits of brauery, hee do sometimes de∣ny, and would resolutely seeme at all times to contemne; yet by other so∣daine fits of feare, seazing violently vpon him, and quashing all his formerly pretended iollity, he really confesseth him, whom he verbally denieth. Yea, and that in farre more base and abiect manner, then any other man in the world, whosoeuer. There is no man, that professeth the feare of God, which feareth him so slauishly, as the Atheist doth, who yet would seeme to con∣temne him most considently. As I haue likewise declared in the whole twelueth Chapter.

But yet, this is not all that the Atheist doth,* 1.771 in acknowledging of a God. For, if we looke further into the Atheists life, and surueigh the tenor of it vnto his death, we shall find, that (beside those oblique and indirect confessions, expres∣sed in the fore-named Chapters) euen the most resolute and dissolute of all that impious rancke, which glory to bee compted the deniers of God; yet haue sometimes confessed a God, as directly, as any that euer adored him most religiously; as expressely, in plaine and apert termes, confessing him, as euer they vsed in their deniall of him. Which confessions of the Atheists, may (for distinctions sake) be ranged into three diuers orders and rankes: that Some of them be made vnwittingly, and beside their will; Some of them vn∣willingly, and by an extorted will; and Some of then both wittingly, and willingly, by a free-working will.

2 For the first of those three kindes,* 1.772 the Prophet Dauid telleth vs, that,

There is not a word in the tongue of man, but that the Lord knoweth it, yea,* 1.773 and maketh it too. For King Salomon plainely telleth vs, that Though the prepara∣tions of the hear•• ••e of man,* 1.774 yet that the answer of the tongue is of God. So that no man is maister of his owne tongue, to speake at all times what hee himselfe speaketh: but he oftentimes speaketh that displeaseth himselfe, to speake what God pleaseth. He alwayes speaketh what God pleaseth, though not alwayes what pleaseth God: no, nor what pleaseth himselfe neither. For, God often∣times openeth the lippes, euen of the wicked, and maketh euen their mouth to shew forth his praise. And, though they themselues doe sometimes vainely boast,* 1.775 that their tongues are their owne, and that they will speake, for who is Lord ouer them? yet they are deceiued in all, for their tongues are not their owne, neither can they speake what they would; but they haue a Lord ouer them, who oftentimes compelleth them to speake as he would, though sometimes that which they themselues would not.

This we may euidently see, in the couetous Prophet Bal••am, who, though he were a false Prophet, yet deliuered he true Prophesies, both as concerning Christ,* 1.776 and as concerning the Israelites. Whom, though he intended for mo∣ney to haue cursed; yea, and had conceiued a curse already in his minde, yet could he neuer bring it forth: but still, in stead of a cursing, ••here came out a blessing; his tongue rebelling against his owne priuate spirit, and obeying the command of a superior Spirit. Insomuch,* 1.777 that he himselfe professeth, that he had no power to passe the commandement of the Lord, were it good, or were it bad: no not, though the King would giue him an house full of Gold. And yet, he well declared, that he would haue done all, whatsoeuer he could, for Gold.

And the same we may likewise obserue, euen in Atheists; and in those that haue beene the deriders of God; that oftentimes, when they thinke to curse, and to blaspheme him, God so confoundeth their language, and maketh their tongue, so to falter within them, that in the same sentences, they doe often∣times confesse him. Let me giue an example, or two, to this purpose. There be certaine Atheists, mentioned in the booke of Iob, who make but a scoffe at the Omnipotencie of God; asking there most prophanely,* 1.778 Who is the Almigh∣ty, and why they should serue him? and what profite they should reape, if they should pray vnto him? And againe,* 1.779 a little after: What it is, that the Almighty is able to doe for them? Where, there euidently appeareth a manifest confusi∣on, both of their speech, and of their reason. For, what can be greater madnes, then either to call him Almighty, of whom they aske, What he can do for them? or, to deny that God can doe any thing for them; when as they acknowledge him to be Almighty? Their purpose was to deny his Omnipotencie: and yet the Omnipotent so ouer-ruled their tongue, that hee made it, in the same sen∣tence, to confesse his Almightinesse: sending a spirit of giddinesse, into the mindes of his enemies; and inforcing them to speake for him, euen with the same breath, wherewith they intended to speake against him. As we may fur∣ther see, by another sort of Atheists, mentioned by Dauid: who made but a scoffe at the Omniscience of God, demanding very scornefully; whether there were any knowledge in the most High? Where note the strange precipitan∣cie of their tongue;* 1.780 how grossely it crosseth and thwarteth it selfe. They de∣ny him to haue any knowledge in him, whom yet they acknowledge to bee

the most High. Things, that cannot cohere. For, hee that is the most High, (as the Prophet Dauid testifieth) beholdeth all those things, that are done here below. Who is like vnto the Lord our God,* 1.781 who hath his dwelling so high; and yet hum••leth himselfe, to behold the things, that are done here below? Yea, and euen Wisedome it selfe affirmeth,* 1.782 that shee came out of the mouth of the most High. Which euen the Heathens themselues, do symbolically shaddow out, in fayning Minerva (who is the goddesse of Wisedome) to haue beene bred in Iupiters head; who is their highest god; and vnto whom they giue the ti∣tle,* 1.783 not onely of Optimus,* 1.784 and Maximus; but also of Summus.

—Summum Iovem —Detestor— I call the most high Iupiter, In this to be mine Arbiter.

So that, in their calling of God, The most High, they directly confesse, not on∣ly his being, but also his wisedome. They confesse that same Omniscience, which they intended to suppresse.

And the same intoxication may yet againe be seene,* 1.785 in another sort of A∣theists; of whom there is mention in the Booke of Wisedome; who make but a scoffe at the Prouidence of God, affirming, that all things doe fall out, at all aduentures: holding with Epicurus (in all naturall things) that there is, Nihil ratione in natura factum: and with Theophrastus (in all ciuill matters) that Vitam regit fortuna, non sapientia: There is nothing in the world,* 1.786 done according to reason:* 1.787 but that mans life is ruled by fortune, not by wisedome. Thus ascri∣bing all to Fortune, as though there were no God at all in heauen. And yet, in the same place, they by and by confesse him. Come therefore (say they) and let vs chierefully enioy the creatures of God. They that before affirmed, that all things fell out by chance, as though there were no God; now directly con∣fesse, that al things in the world are the creatures of God. Thereby plainely ac∣knowledging, both that there is a God, and that he is also the Creator of the world. There confessing his Essence, where they wold deny his Prouidence: nay, there confessing his Prouidence, where they would deny his Essence.

And a like inuolution, is obserued by Laertius, in Theodorus, called Atheos. Who, though he were perswaded, that there were no gods; yet hee, rayling vpon one, that before had offended him, he told him in his passion, that he was one that was hated of all the Gods. Thus pleaseth it God oftentimes to ine∣b••iate the mindes,* 1.788 and to confound the tongues of Atheists. And so to make them in one and the same place, with one & the same breath, to confesse him, when they think to blaspheme him: and directly to speake for him, when they think indirectly to speake against him. Which manner of speaking the truth so vnwittingly,* 1.789 Lactantius interpreteth to be a kinde of prophecie. Ego quidem, eos, qui vera imprudenter loquuntur, sic habendos puto, tanquàm diuinent, spi∣ritu aliquo instincti: I verily thinke of them that speake the truth they know not, as if they were inspired with some diuining spirit. And we may see his obser∣uation apparently verified,* 1.790 in Caiaphas his prophecying: who deliuered a most excellent prophecie of Christ: and yet he knew not what he said.

3 Now,* 1.791 as God sometimes worketh his enemies to confesse him, by con∣founding of their tongues, and making them to speake vnwittingly against themselues: so doth he it oftentimes, by inforcing their confessions, and ex∣torting

them from them against their willes. Thus dealt hee with King Pharaoh; who was at the first so irreligions, that, when as Moses char∣ged him in the name of God, Thus saith the Lord; hee presumptuously de∣manded,* 1.792 Who is the Lord? as holding scorne to obey him. But yet, afterward, he being scourged by the righteous hand of God, and brought vnto some better vnderstanding of himselfe, he was forced to confesse, that the Lord was iust,* 1.793 and righteous; but that both he, and his people, were wicked and im∣pious: Yea, and beseech Moses, to pray for him, vnto the same God, whom be∣fore hee had most impiously contemned, and despised. Thus dealt God likewise with Herod Agrippa: who,* 1.794 araying himselfe, one day, in most glo∣rious Apparell, spangled all ouer, and spred with plates of gold and pre∣cious Stones, assembled all the people, to speake vnto them, in a solemne Oration: wherein hee purposely so disposed himselfe, that the shine of the Sun-beames should reflect vpon his fore-said Spangles, and Iewels: through which artificiall reflexion, he seemed to shine more bright then the Sunne. With which glorious sight, and his eloquent Oration, the people being stu∣pefied, they gaue him this impudent acclamation; that His speech then vnto them,* 1.795 was the voice of a God, and not of a man. Vnto which their impious assentation, he more impiously assenting, God sent his Angell, presently to strike and to punish him. Who, quickly finding this stroke to be mortall, and that it was inflicted vpon him from heauen; though before he was silent, and would not confesse God, but was well ynough contented, that the peo∣ple should substitute him into his stead: yet now, hee confessed him, most humbly; acknowledging both the peoples error, and his owne mortalitie. Whose repentant confession,* 1.796 is notably expressed by Iosephus, in these words. Conuersis in amicos oculis; En (inquit) Ille ego, vestra appellatione, Deus, vitam relinquere iubeor; fatali necessitate, mendacium vestrum coarguente: & quem immortalem salutâstis, ad mortem rapior. Sed ferenda est voluntas coelestis Numinis. He casting his eyes, vpon his flatt'ring friends: Now behold me (saith he) whom, but euen now, you saluted for a God; how I am commanded to forsake this world: my fatall necessitie conuincing your flatterie of a lie. He, whom you blazoned to be immortall, am now carried violently vnto my death. But it is meet, to be subiect, vnto the will and pleasure of the highest God.

This notable confession, hee made before he died: which, if hee would haue made in time, hee had surely liued. Thus likewise, God dealt with Antiochus Epiphanes: who was so madded with malice,* 1.797 against the God of Israel; that he blasphemed his Name, ouerthrew his Altars, destroyed his Temple, vio∣lated his Lawes, and persecuted his People; yea and that with all the im∣manest examples of the bloodyest crueltie, that he could possibly deuise. No Atheist, in simply denying of God, could be so great an enemie vnto him, as this prophane King was, in fighting against him. But the hand of God so seazed vpon him, and smote him with so sore and incurable a disease, that it forced both his pride and his malice to submit; and to begin his forced submission with this humble Confession;* 1.798 It is meete to be subeict vnto God, & that a man, who is mortall, should not thinke himselfe aequal vnto God through pride. Making many vowes and supplications, vnto that same God, in vaine, whom before he had compelled all his people to blaspheme.

And a very like example is reported by Eusebius, of the Emperour Maxi∣minus, as furious a persecuter of the Christians, as Antiochus was before of the Iewes. Whom he answered so exactly, both in his Impietie, and in his Calamitie, and in his Palinodie; that a more perfect parallel, can hard••y be found in all Plutarchs Liues, then was betweene these two prophane & bloody Kings. For first, for their Impietie. As Antiochus, in a prophane contempt of the Israelits true God,* 1.799 caused diuers Temples to be builded, Idols to be formed, and Altars to be erected, vnto the Heathens false gods: so likewise did M••ximinus too. He did,* 1.800 Templa erigere, & delubra, temporis prolixit••te ••iruta, studiosè restaurare, & simulachrorum sacerdotes in omnibus locis con∣stituere. He erected new Temples, and repayred the old ones; and appointed, in all places, new Priests for his Idols. Secondly, as Antiochus forbade vnto all the Iewes, the vse of their owne Lawes,* 1.801 and the exercise of their Religion: so likewise did Maximinus too. Hee did, Christianis libertatem in coemeterijs conveniendi, praetextu quodam adimere. Vnder colourable praetences, he denied vnto Christians, their common assemblies. Thirdly, as Antiochus comman∣ded the Iewes to worship his Idols: so likewise did Maximinus to the Christi∣ans. Which he calleth a returinig vnto their right mindes:* 1.802 Reditionem ad rectum animi propositum. Fourthly,* 1.803 as Antiochu•• persecuted all those that re∣fused it, with all the exquisite torments that could be deuised: so likewise did Maximinus too; burning them, killing them, drowning them, hanging them, and whatsoeuer a wicked witt could inuent to torment them: Ignem, ferrum,* 1.804 crucifixiones, feroces bestias, maris fundum, membrorum amputationem, & adustionem, oculorum expunctionem, totius corporis mutilationem,* 1.805 famen prae∣tereà, & vincula. Fire, sword, crucifying, deuouring by wilde beasts, drowning, cutting off the limmes, burning, boring-out the eyes, laming the whole body, fam••shing, and shackling. Yea and as he addeth, in another place,* 1.806 Novorum suppliciorum inventione, sese insolenter efferens: He seeking to excell all other men in cruelty, tooke a pride in inuenting of new torments, as yet vnknown. And thus, in all the seuerall points of Impietie, there was so full and exact an agree∣ment,* 1.807 as though they had bin two Brothers in euill: so precisely did this latter tread the steppes of the former. So that it was a wonder, that he, seeing him∣selfe to follow him, in all the seuerall degrees of his wickednesse, did not feare he should follow him, in all the seuerall degrees of his vengeance. As Tullie expressely noteth in the very same case. Te miror, Antoni,* 1.808 quorum facta imi¦tere, eorum exitus non perhorrescere: Imeruaile, Anthonie, thou shouldest not feare their falls, who hast followed all their faults. For, Mirum non est,* 1.809 pati gravia eos, qui patrant. It is no meruaile, that they should suffer grieuous things who haue committed grieuous sinnes. And he had good cause to feare it, as the sequell plainely shewed. For, there was no one stroke of Gods vengeance, inflicted vpon the one, but that the same was after, inflicted vpon the other. So that, they might seeme to haue beene Brothers in this euill too, as well as in the former: in malo poenae,* 1.810 as well as in malo culpae; in malo supplicij, as in malo delicti: as Tertullian distinguisheth them.

For first, as Antiochus was strucken with the reuenging hand of God: so likewise was Maximinus too. Corripuit eum supplicium, diuinitùs ill atum. A punishment from heauen did sodainly attach him. Secondly, as Antiochus his

plague was seated into his bowells,* 1.811 which tormented him with an 〈◊〉〈◊〉 torture: so likewise was Maximinus his too. Sub••ta illi accidit in medijs cor∣poris arcanis suppuratio. A sodaine putrefaction did seaze ••pon his 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Vlcer: so his most secret parts.

Thirdly,* 1.812 as Antiochus his plague breake out into a 〈…〉〈…〉 like∣wise did Maximinus his too. He had, in imis partibus, vlcus sistulosum. Hee had a fester'd vlcer in the bottome of his belly.

Fourthly,* 1.813 as there issued out of the body of Antiochus, an infinite multi∣tude of most loathsome wormes: so did there likewise,* 1.814 out of the body of Maximinus: Indicibilis mul••itudo vermium ebullijt: An innumerable mul∣titude of wormes crawled out.

Fiftly,* 1.815 as those wormes of Antiochus bred so noysome a stinke, that they made him odious, both to himselfe, and others: so likewise did Maximinus his too. He did,* 1.816 laethi fi••um foetorem exhalare, vt Medicorum aliqui incredi∣bilem foetorem ferre non valentes, occiderentur. He breathed out a deadly stinke: insomuch that diuers of his Phisitions not being able to endure his abominable sauour, were killed with the very ayre. And, in these miserable torments, they both of them exhaled their execrable soules. Thus exactly did God proceed,* 1.817 from point to point, in all the seuerall degrees of their punishment; equalling the one of them vnto the other in their vengeance, as they had equalled themselues together in their wickednes. Thereby plainely declaring,* 1.818 that he is (though a patient) yet a most iust Rewarder; proportioning exactly the mea∣sure of his Iustice, according to the measure and proportion of the wickednes.

But to proceede on to the third part of our comparison; which is their confession, and repentant recantation, the point which most properly be∣longeth vnto our present Treatise. As those two profane Kings did answere one another,* 1.819 as exactly, as two faces vse to do in the water, both in their im∣piety, and in their calamity; so did they likewise in their Palinodie. For first, as Antiochus, being seazed vpon, by Gods Iustice, b••gan straightway to see his owne iniustice,* 1.820 and wickednesse: so likewise did Maximinus too. Cùm tantis malis afflictaretur, tandem sentire coepit, quae contra pios Dei cultores gesse∣rat. When hee once was afflicted with so many euills, then did hee beginne to haue a sense of those euills which hee himselfe had inflicted vpon Gods holy Seruants. Secondly, as Antiochus was inwardly perswaded,* 1.821 that all those euills inuaded him, onely for his impiety against the God of the Iewes, in persecuting his seruants: so was Maximinus perswaded, that all his euills happened, onely for his impiety against the God of the Christians, in persecuting his seruants. Haec se,* 1.822 proper insantam contra Christum praesump∣tam, meritò, & vltionis vice, perpeti confessus est. And this he confessed to haue bene iustly inflicted for his impious praesumption and fury against Christ. Thirdly, as Antiochus, repenting of his wickednesse, published new edicts, in fauour of the Iewes: so likewis•• did Maximinus,* 1.823 in fauour of the Christi∣ans. Praecepit, vt a persecutione Christianorum cessaretur; lege{que}, & edicto im∣perial••, Ecclesiae eorum restaurarentur. He commanded, that pers••cutions against Christians, should be inhibited; and their Churches againe repayred. Fourthly, as Antiochus prayed vnto that same God,* 1.824 whom before he blasphemed: so likewise did Maximinus. He did, Deo omnium, delicta sua confiteri. Hee con∣fessed

his sinnes vnto the g••eat God. Fiftly, as Antiochus besought those same Iewes, whom before he had pers••cuted, to supplicate, and pray vnto th••ir God for him: so likewise did Maximinus,* 1.825 to the Christians. Deo suo pro salut•• nostra supplicent. He entreated the Christians, to pray and entreate their God for his health. Sixt••y,* 1.826 as Antiochus now religiously vowed, that he would not, from thenceforth, haue any other God, but the God of the Iewes: so Maxi∣minus professed, that he would haue none other, but the God of the Christi∣ans: Quem, verum esse Deum, ipsa experientiase ••omperisse,* 1.827 testatus est: Whom, by 〈◊〉〈◊〉, he had ••ound, to be indeed the true God. And thus (to conclude with our owne point, of his p••linody, and confession) Christianorum Deo se 〈◊〉〈◊〉 con••iteri; & qu••s contra Deum pugn••s sus••••perat, pala•• elocutus, palmo∣diam 〈◊〉〈◊〉: as he not 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the same place. Hee confessed himselfe openly vnto t••e Christians God; acknowledging the persecution, that he h••d stirred vp against him and making a solemne ••ecantation. These notable confessions, did God, by his plagues and punishments, extort from the mouthes of these two his most notable enemies: the one of them, for the credit of his Law: the other, of his Gospell: so triumphing by his iustice, ouer their impiety and wickednesse.

Another such like extorted confession,* 1.828 did God againe force, from the Emperour Iultan; although proceeding from a farre vnlike passion. H••e, be∣ing sometimes a professed Christian, and afterward reuolting from his faith and Christianity, obtained to himself••, the name of Apostata, in a kind of si••∣gu••arity. Yea, and that very iustly. For hee, not contented to renounce the saith of Christ, but boyling with an vnplacable hatred against him, spent all the whole time of his wicked Apost••••y, in persecuting of Christians, with all extreeme cruelty. Vntill, at the last, he being draw••e by Gods veng••ance, in∣to a dangerous warr••, against the Persians, was there sodainly slaine; and yet no man can tel by whom. But the himselfe, being priuie vnto his owne impiety, and to that inwar•• hatred, which he bare against God, confessed it, to bee the stroke of his hand; and the iudgement of that Christ, whom, in his members, 〈…〉〈…〉 persecuted. And therefor••, he obiected it vnto Christ, and to none o∣ther: ag••inst whom, he threw vp his owne blood into the ayre, ending his wicked life, with this true confession in his mouth: Vicisti, Galiaee. Thou hast no•• ouercome me, ô thou I••sus of G••lilee. T••erein, both confessing his owne wickednesse and impiety, in fighting against Christ; and Christs most glori∣ous v••ctory, in subduing such an enemy. Simul tum confessus,* 1.829 & Victori••m, & blasphemi••m: as Theodoret noteth of him.

Which confession of his, drew another like confession, from another of the Heathen: and yet proceeding from another passion. For, when it was reported, in what a strange fashion, that Emperour was slaine; one of the Heathen, that then heard it, spent this biting scoffe vpon it. Quomodò Ch••isti∣ani di••unt,* 1.830 Deum suume esse patientem, & 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉? Nihil ir••cundius, nihil ho•• suror•• pr••sen••ius: ne m••dico quidem sp••tio, indignationem suam differre po••u••t. How can the Christians truly say, that they haue a pati••nt God? when ••e plainl•• see him so angry and impatient, that he could not de••e•• his anger, so much as for 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Thereby plainly confessing (though in scurr••lous heathen fa∣sh••on) that it was the God of the Christians, that gaue that blow to I••lian.

In which three last examples, it is not vnworthy of our obseruation, to note the seuerall humours, wherewith they were possessed, in making those confes∣sions: The first of them, making it, in meere sorrow and contrition: The se∣cond, in stomacke and indignation: The third, in lightnesse and derision. But yet,

—Ridentem dicere verum,* 1.831 Quid vetat?— Why may not he that laughes, Laugh out a truth?

Thus, God directed all their seuerall passions (yea, euen the prophanest of them) to draw from all of them, a true confession of him.

Another like confession, did God also inforce out of the mouth of Tullus Hostil••us: Who succeeding to Numa in his Kingdome,* 1.832 and being a martial∣minded man, made a scorne and derision of all Numa's religion, as tending to nothing else, but only the effeminating and weakening of mens minds. But he, being smitten with the stroke of Gods iustice, & cast into a grieuous & a dan∣gerous sicknes; in the end, repented him of his prophanenesse, renouncing his former vngodly opinion. Morbo graui ac multiplici, ad mutandum sententiam compulsus est. Yea, and (as Liuie expresseth his mutation, a great deale more ful••y) Adeò fracti simul cum corpore,* 1.833 sunt spiritus illi feroces, vt qui nihil ant•• à ratus esset minùs regium, qu••m sacris dedere animum, repentè, omnibus magnis parvis{que} superstitionibus obnoxius degeret, religion••bús{que} populum impleret. The extremitie of his sicknes, did so both abate his strength, & so abase his spirits; that he, who before thought nothing more vnworthy the maiestie of a King, then once to stoop vnto any action of Religion, now grew, vpon the suddaine, most seruile, & slauish vnto all superstition: which he not onely obserued himselfe, but also trans∣fused into all his Subiects. But yet, he, not seeking vnto the true God, but changing one kinde of superstition for another, was at the last, destroyed by Lightning and Thunder. Yea,* 1.834 and (as Eutropius reporteth it) Fulmine ictus, cum domo sua, ar sit. He was not onely himselfe consumed by Lightning; but also his whole house and family with him.

Yet another like confession (and by the like meanes) did God againe ex∣tort, out of Bion of Boristhenes: who was so confirmed and obstinate an A∣theist,* 1.835 that all the time of his health, he denied there was any God: but in his age, he being strucken with a most grieuous sicknesse, and finding it to be the finger of God: inductus est, poenitentiam agere super ijs, quae peccârat in Deum: He was thereby induced to repent him of all his impieties against God. Whose folly and madnesse, Laertius in the same place very sharpely perstringeth. Stul∣tus qui mercede voluerit, esse Deos. Quasi tum demum Dij essent, cùm illos B••on esse voluerit. Was not this a foole (saith he) who would thinke, there should bee Gods, when he would haue them, and none, when he would none? Thus, all those professed and noted Atheists, haue expressely confessed a God in the end; though in the beginning, they most obstinately denied him: detesting and renouncing that impiety at their death, which they practised in their life: and then, with all humility, acknowledging their prophanenesse: as Theeues vse to confesse their offences at the Gallowes, For, as I obserued before out of Lucretius:

Verae voces,* 1.836 tum demum pectore ab imo Eijciuntur: & eripitur persona; manet res. For then, true words ascend from out the deepth of heart: The maske is taken off, the truth then playes his part.

And therefore God at that time exacteth his testimony, when (of all other times) it is most ponderous, and weighty: Inforcing them vnto their con∣••ession by tortures, as he sometimes forced Deuils: and,* 1.837 as Magistrates vse to force Malefactors to the question, by stretching them vpon the Racke.

Yea, and euen the very Heathen themselues, doe insinuate, that the iustice of God so presseth the Atheists (though they be his most hardned, and con∣firmed enemies) that it not onely inforceth them to confesse him vpon earth; but al••o to proclaime him out of Hell it selfe. And from thence to confesse, both their owne sinne and wickednesse, and Gods most iust vengeance: ex∣horting all others to take heede by their examples. This Pindarus insinuateth in the person of Ixion, whom he maketh to call out in the midst of his tor∣ments,* 1.838 To take heede of vnthankefulnesse vnto our Benefactors, and to auoyde that odious vice, that had brought him vnto that place. Deorum mandatis, Ixio∣nem aiunt, hae•• mortalibus dic••re, dùm in alata rota circumqu••{que} volutatur: Bene∣sactorem placidis remunerationibus excipientes, persolvere gratiam. And this (he saith) the Gods compelled him to proclaime. And, Virgil likewise, in the person of Phlegyas, shaddoweth out the very same.

—Phlegyas{que} miserrimus,* 1.839 omnes Admonet, & magna testatur voce per vmbras: Discite iustitiam moniti, & non temnere Divos. Most m••serable Phlegyas warnes all men, And 'mongst the gastly Ghosts thus skriching cries, With hellish voyce: Admonisht now ye bene, Learne Iustice, and the Gods not to despise.

Thus doth he preach both God & godlines out of Hel; who renounced them both, while he liued vpon earth. Yea, and our Sauiour Christ himselfe repre∣senteth the very same point,* 1.840 in the historicall parable of Diues; who beeing tormented in Hell himselfe, yet desired to haue his brethren fore-warned of that wickednesse and vngodlinesse, which had worthily brought him vnto that misery and wretchednesse: The meaning of all this is no more but this; that God will force the tongues of those men, to confesse him, that haue bin most vngodly and impudent in denying him. He that made the Deuils con∣fesse him vpon the earth, will make the Damned confesse him out of Hell.

4 But yet we may meete with diuers other wicked ones,* 1.841 with whom God hath taken a more milde and gracious course: not inforcing them to confesse him by his iustice and iudgements (as he did the former) but indu∣cing them vnto it by his mercy and goodnesse: inlightning their minds with his heauenly knowledge, and so bringing them to see their own former blind∣nesse. Thus dealt he with Iethro, an Idol-Priest of Midian: who,* 1.842 though hee were not in the highest degree of Atheists, in denying of all Gods; yet might he be numbred in an inferior degree of them, in denying the true God, and worshipping prophane and wicked Idols in his stead. But yet hee wisely ob∣abseruing

those great plagues and iudgements, which God had poured downe vpon the Aegyptians, for the deliuerance of his seruants, he thereby receiued instruction, and openly brake forth into this notable confession: Now I know, that the Lord is greater then all the Gods. For as they haue dealt proudly with them, so are they recompenced. Thus dealt hee likewise, with the Apostle Paul,* 1.843 as furious a persecuter (in his small authoritie) as euer the Church had any. But yet Christ, in his great mercie, appearing vnto him, and, out of heauen, reprouing him; he likewise receiued instruction: and, reforming his former error, became afterwards, as zealous a Preacher, as euer before he had beene a persecuter. In so much, that it passed of him, as a Prouerbe, that, He which persecuted them, in times past, now preached the faith, which before he destroyed. This blessed Apostle,* 1.844 holding a diuers course, from that cursed Apostata; who destroyed the same faith, which be∣fore hee had preached. And yet, in the ende, was inforced againe, to con∣fesse the same faith,* 1.845 which he sought to haue destroyed: as before I haue declared.

The like Confessions, and recantations, may be here accumulated, of di∣uerse other of the Heathens: who haue plainely renounced their impieties and prophanesse: and, in the end, acknowledged a God, whom at the begin∣ning they denied. It is reported of Diagoras, the most renouned of all that are called Atheists, that he began his Booke of Poems, with this Exordium:

Quòd a Numine summo reguntur omnia:* 1.846 That all things are ruled by the highest God.

Which may probably be thought, to haue beene the recantation of his for∣mer opinion. For, his Atheisme and impietie (if it were truely such) he had from the common opinion of his countrie, the Island of Melos: which held a scornefull opinion of all the Greekish gods. And therefore this so direct a contradiction of his former opinion, cannot otherwise be construed, then as his retractation. And the like may be thought, as concerning Theodo∣rus; who, for the opinion of his impietie, was likewise named Atheos. And yet Laertius affirmeth,* 1.847 that euen hee himselfe had seene a Booke of his, intituled De Dijs; and that it was, Liber non contemnendus. Which iudgement hee would neuer haue passed vpon it, if hee had handled that Argument, as an Atheist. For then, both the Writer, and the writing, had beene very worthy to be contemned: which Laertius denieth. And there∣fore that Booke, being censured, to be a worke not worthy to be contemned; yea, and that by the same man who before had taxed him for his Atheisme; may also probably be thought, to haue contayned a retractation of his for∣mer opinion. And so likewise Euemerus, whatsoeuer his opinion was, which among all the Heathen was so condemned for Atheisme: Whether it were a generall denying of all the gods; or but a particular denying of the Heathen gods: yet euidently appeareth, out of Plutarch, that when he grew old, hee grew cold, in defending it. A manifest Argument, that he repen∣ted of his broching it. Which his coldnesse in asserting it, bred also a like coldnesse in the peoples assent vnto it. As it euidently appeareth in those verses of Callimachus,* 1.848 wherein he perstringeth the impietie of Euemerus.

Venite frequentes, ante muros, in fanum,

Vbi, qui vetustum, ex aere, tonantem formauit Senex loquax, cum libris impijs friget. Come hither thronging, and approach this wall. Enter this Temple. Where, now, finde you shall Th'old pratling fellow; which so scornefull was, And call'd the Thund'rer, but a peece of Brasse: For all his former fire, and stately Lookes, Well cooled now, with all his impious Bookes.

Meaning those Booke (saith Plutarch) which before he had composed, to proue There was no God. Hos dicit, quos composuit; Non esse Deos, docens. Which coldnesse, from the heate of his former opinion, may be interpreted, as (in some degree) a recantation. For, I rather apply those verses vnto his owne coldnesse, in pursuing his former opinion; then vnto the coldnesse of the people, in following it; though this might also be intended. But, vnto him I apply it: because Theophilus Antioch nus (as I haue formerly obserued) reporteth it for his opinion,* 1.849 that hee defended, Dei vnitatem; not Nullitatem. Which euidently proueth, that hee, not onely beleeued, that There was a God; but also, The vnitie of the Godhead. From whence, it must needes follow, that either the heathen were vtterly mistaken, in their con∣ceit of his opinion; and that he neuer was indeed an Atheist: or, if some∣times hee were one; yet, that, at last, hee recanted it. For Socrates; though he died for Atheisme: yet that he died not, an Atheist; it appeareth by this,* 1.850 that, at his death, he appointed that a Cock should be offered to AEsculapi∣us. Which Tertullian obserueth in him, as a renouncing of all his forme•• irreligion. And so likewise, Aristotle though all his life long, hee had ascri∣bed all things, but onely to their inferior and secondarie causes: yet lifting vp his minde much higher, at his death, hee implored the mercie of the highest and first cause: Prime causae misericordiam intentiùs implo∣rabat: as Caelius Rhodiginus writeth. It is likewise reported of Numa Pom∣pilius,* 1.851 that Priest-like King of the Romanes: who (like another Moses) was the first author and institutor of all their holy Ceremonies; yet that,* 1.852 in the end hee retracted all those false religions,* 1.853 which himselfe before had insti∣tuted: writing a Booke against them, and commanding it to be buried in his Sepulcher with him. Which Booke was not found vntill fiue hundred and fiue and thirty yeeres after Numa was dead; written onely in paper; and yet no where perished. Which, euen Pliny himselfe ascribeth to a miracle: No doubt, that the confutation of that false religion, might not be decayed, vntill it were published. And, though that Booke of his, was, by the Commandement of the Senate,* 1.854 in publique, burned: Yet (as Lactan∣tantius well obserueth) the cause of the burning of it, being publiquely knowne to be his disclayming of their Religion, who was the first founder of it, it might greatly vncertaine the mindes of the people about it, and breed in them a iust suspition, that they were not rightly founded in the true Religion. All these notable recantations of Atheists and Idolaters, disclai∣ming and renouncing their irreligious & false religions, I find in the writings of classicall Authors. Which are euident demonstrations, that true Religion hath far stronger rooting in the minde of a man, then either hath Atheisme,

or Superstition. For otherwise, men, when they dr••w neere vnto their 〈◊〉〈◊〉 would neuer, with such feruencie, seeke after the true religion, and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 their false. But then (if euer) it most of al importeth them, to find out the tr••th: then, when, if they misse it, they shall neuer after find it. And, that before they had not found it, (no not in their owne perswasions) they manifestly shew, by their forenamed recantations. Which, yet, may be further seene, by the re∣cantation of Orpheus: which (aboue all the rest) is most noble, and ingenuous. For he, hauing before bin educated, in the idolatrous religion of the Gentiles, accordingly expressed the same, in his Poems. But,* 1.855 after he had read the wri∣tings of Moses; and from them, receiued some light of the truth; he renoun∣ced his former errors, confessing them so humbly, and retracting them so wil∣lingly, and deliuering the truth so plainly, that I wonder not, to finde, that his notable confession,* 1.856 in diuers of the fathers,* 1.857 so much insisted on. For it is indeed most excellent, both for matter, and for forme. And he beginneth it thus; as his Cygnea cantio, or last exhortation, vnto his Sonne Musaeus.

Solis canto pijs; omnes procul este prophani; Tu, Musaee, audi, Luna prognate silenti. Perniciosa priùs, vitae{que} infesta futurae, Ex me cognôsti: sed nunc te vera docebo. Respectans verbum Diuinum, huic totus inhaere. Pectoris, hoc, mentem s••cri, gressus{que} guberna; Incedens rectà, Regem{que} hunc orbis adora. Vnicus est, per se existens, qui cuncta creavit. I only sing to godly soules. Profane men, all, be gone. O my Musaeus, harken thou, the Moones beloued Sonne. Thou heretofore hast learn'd of me, things most pernicious, Contrary to the life to come, starcke false, and vicious. But now, i'le teach thee truth indeed. R••spect Gods sacred word. Cleaue wholy to it, it alone. And this to it affoord; To make it th'only Guide, and Rule, of all thy thoughts and wayes. And looke thou walke in vpright paths, before him, all thy dayes. This King of all the world adore; whom thou mayst Onely call: He onely being of himselfe, who hath created All.

And then, he proceedeth, with a notable description of the onely true God; of his Prouidence, his Greatnesse, his Mercy, and his Iustice; more like an holy Prophet, then like an heathen Poet: as plainly will appeare, vnto such as please to reade it. Thus, doth God oftentimes produce, a direct and an euident con∣fession, out of very Atheists; & therby, very notably, both manifesteth and mag∣nifieth his owne diuine glory. For, what greater glory can be giuen vnto him, then that the same mouth should be forced to confesse him, which had armed it selfe, with all obstinacy, to deny him? In which examples likewise, wee may euidently see,* 1.858 the infallible truth of Plato's obseruation, That neuer any Atheist continued alwayes constant, in his impious opinion: but that, though perhaps hee maintained it stiffely, sometime in his life; yet, that he still renounced it, at the time of his death. So that, the maine ground of this first booke, is so general∣ly true [That all men beleeue, That there is a God,] that euen the Atheist him∣selfe is not from thence exempted: but that, howsoeuer hee may, for a time

(vpon some passion or brauery, or some other vngrounded fancy) run against 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ••ommon streame, in denying of God; yet that still in the end hee closeth wit•• all other men in directly confessing him.

CHAP. 14.

That, though Atheists should neuer haue confessed, neither directly, nor indirect∣ly; but alway••s, most obstinately, haue denied him: yet, that there is no recko∣ning to be made of their opinion. 2. Because, in the opinion of all wise, and Learned men, they are esteemed no better, then either Fooles. 3. Or, Mad∣••e••. 4. Or, Monsters of Men.

THE opinion of God, is so generally rooted, in the mindes of all men; that th••re is none, but doth beleeue it: none, but (at sometime or other) doth confesse it: no not, euen the very Atheist. Who, though he do not constantly, and piously con∣fesse God, as those men that do religiously beleeue him: yet is he oftentimes inforced to confesse him; euen then, when he striueth most of all to deny him. For, the beleefe of God planted in the heart of man, is like a burning fire, that cannot be quenched; but flameth out the more, the more men seeke to smoother it: being kindled more vehemently, by that Antipe∣rista••••s of a contrary renitency, in those that endeauour to suppresse it: and so, flashing out, like the Lightning, when it is in danger to be choked. And this we may euidently see, in the two holy Prophets, Dauid, and Ieremy; who,* 1.859 whenas they had obstinately resolued with themselues, to make no more men∣tion of the name of God; but to suppresse it, in their hearts: yet, Incaluit ani∣mus, exarsit ignis: Their soule waxed hot, and the fire flamed out. Their in∣ward beleefe of God, being like a raging flame, which, by a secret scortching, compelled them to confesse him. Crediderunt, & propterea locuti sunt: They bele••ued, and there••ore they could not but speake. And so is it likewise,* 1.860 euen with the Atheist too. Hee inwardly beleeueth That there is a God: yea and ••e cannot do otherwise. And therefore he cannot chuse, but sometime con∣fesse it, for all his endeauor to suppresse and smoother it. So that, euen Atheists themselues, who professe to be the Deniers of God; yet are found oftentimes, to be confessors of him: beleeuing, with a stronger and more serious per∣swasion, That there is a God; then they can beleeue, That there is none: though they vendi••ate this, as their selected opinion. For, they deny God, but wan∣tonly; but they confesse him, seriously: yea, and, euen in their denying him, they do but, contra fidem credere,* 1.861 as is noted by Saint Hilarie: They doe but seeme to beleeue that which indeede they beleeue not: as I haue shewed before.

But, be it that the Atheist had alwayes constantly beleeued, as he confidently pronounceth, That there is no God: Be it, that he had neuer, at any time, nei∣ther directly, nor indirectly confessed any: Be it, that he had alwayes stucke as close vnto his receiued opinion, as an Oyster vnto that Rocke which it grow∣eth vpon; and neither in his life, nor at his death recanted it: yet could not all this infringe the Catholike and vniuersall veritie of this generall position, that, All men beleeue, That there is a God. For, hee that denieth, there is a God,

may iustly be denied, to be a man,* 1.862 in Lactantius his opinion. Non po••est rati∣onem hominis obtinere, qui Deum, animi sui parentem, nescit: Then much lesse, Qu•• negat. He cannot iustly be ranked into the condition of a man, that is igno∣r••nt of God, who is the father of his soule.

But,* 1.863 what is the Atheist then, if he be not a man? I finde it affirmed, in the writi••gs of the learned, both of Diuines, and Philosophers, both of Christi∣ans and Pagans; yea, and that by full consent; that all impious Atheists, and deniers of God (how vainely soeuer conceited of themselues) yet are, in very deed••, no b••tter then meere Fooles. Who, being destitute of reason, (the true sp••cificall difference of a man) cannot truly be called men, but in an abusiue and vnproper acception.

And therefore,* 1.864 the Prophet Dauid affirmeth in expresse and plaine termes, that the Atheist is a Fo••le. The Foole hath said in his heart, There is no God. Which, that it may appeare to be no suddaine censure, b••t a thing well con∣cocted, and meditated by him, he iterateth (in another Psalm••) the same words againe: The foole hath sayd in his heart,* 1.865 There is no God. Et ••ur d••xit ins••pe∣ens, quòd non est Deus? saith Anselmus, Cur, nisi quia stultus, & insipiens est? Why is it, that the foole doth s••y, There is no God? Forsooth, euen f••r this ••••use, because he is a foole. But why saith he in his heart, rather then in hi•• mouth, that There is no God? Quia,* 1.866 si vel•• hoc verbis eloqui (saith Saint Hilarte) Stul∣tus esse (••••cut est) publi••i assensus iudicio ••rgueretur: Because, if he should vt∣ter it in his words, as he smothers it in his thoughts, he should publikely be known to be a f••ole, as he is; and so be commonly esteemed by a generall cons••nt. For, what oth••r account can there iustly be made of him? who (as Sai••t Bas••l ob∣seru••th) is so notably besotted with his owne grosse opinion, that hee doth, Ne{que} oracula Dei audire,* 1.867 n••{que} Naturae suae sensum recipere: That he neither will harken to the word of God, without him, nor yet to the voyce of his owne nature, within him. For, both these do•• teach him, that, There is a God: both the word of God, and the vo••ce of Nature. And yet, the Atheist (co••trary to both these) will impudently affirme, that There is no God. And therefore, very worthily, is reckoned but a Foole. For, as Aristotle obserueth out of the Poet He siodus: He that is neither able to finde out the truth himselfe,* 1.868 nor willing to receiue it when it is found out by others; may worthily be r••nked in the high••st degree of Fool••s.

Neither doe the Scriptures onely, or Ecclesiasticall Writers, account of Atheists, as no b••tter then very fooles: but, euen Heathen Writers also con∣demne them for the same. Caecilius, the Poet, expressely affirmeth that,

Deum,* 1.869 qui non summum pu••et; Aut Stu••tum, aut rerum esse imperitum, existimes. Who thinks, There is no God aboue, that all did make; Him for a foole, or silly Soule, thou well maist••ake.

This censure he pronounceth vpon him, that acknowledgeth not their Cu∣pid, for a God. Then, much more must he be such, that will acknowledge no God. He must needes be an extreame Foole,* 1.870 as you heard before, out of Ari∣stotle. For (as Clemens Alex••ndrinus very truely affirmeth) Imp••etas, & Su∣perstitio, sunt ignorantiae extrema: Athe••sme, & superstition, are the two extre∣mities of follie and ignorance. And therefore Plutarch defineth Atheisme to

be Stup••r quid••m, D••os non sentientium: A kind of senselesse sottishnesse, with∣out all touch of godlin••••se. Here,* 1.871 hee maketh it, not folly, but plaine stupidity. Yea, ••••d in another place, he is carried with so great a detestation, against A∣theists, that he protesteth it to be a kinde of violence and wickednesse, to as∣crib•• vnto such men,* 1.872 any faculty of Reason. Improbum est, & violentum, ratio∣nem ijs ascribere, qui notitia Dei ••arent. So that he counteth all them, Fooles, that count not Atheists to bee Fooles; and all them to bee violently wicked themsel••es, that doe not abhorre their impiety and wickednes. Yea, and Max∣imus Tyr••••s passeth yet, a more base and abiect censure of them. For, he saith of all Atheists,* 1.873 that they are, Abiectum genus hominum, & sine sensu. Vide cae∣tera. An abiect kinde of people, and without all sense: denying vnto Atheists, not onely all vse of Reason, but also of very sense too. And so likewise doth 〈…〉〈…〉 videntur, mentem, sensum, oculos deni{que} ipsos, non habere: They n••ither haue reason nor sense, no nor eyes. And it is true indeede,* 1.874 Quis enim, mundu•• contuens, Deum esse non sentit? saith Saint Hilarie. How can a man possibly,* 1.875 looke vpon the world, but he must needes conceiu•• presently, that, surely, There is a God? And therefore, Auicenna also affirmeth (as I finde him cited, by learned Du Plessis) that,* 1.876 Quicun{que} Deum, aut Numen non agnoscit; non ••antùm ratione, sed eti•• sensu caret. Whosoeuer confesseth not, that there is a God; he is not only destitut•• of the reason of a man, but also of the very sense of a beast. For, as Plutarch well obserueth,* 1.877 There is no beast, that differeth so much from man by nature, as one man differeth from another: especially the Atheist, who differeth from all men, and that in the maine ground, both of religion, and of reason. And therefore, is not worthy to be numbered among men.

Thus you see, how base and vile account all Atheists haue had, at all times, amongst all wise and learned men: who haue esteemed them none otherwise, then a kinde of vainely conceited fooles. Which is the worst kinde of follie, and the least to be hoped of. Seest thou a man that is wise in his owne conceit? there is more hope of a foole,* 1.878 then of him: more hope, euen of a mere Naturall: for such is the wisemans foole here. And though perhaps, those Atheists, in the hight of their pride, and thicknesse of their ignorance, make as small ac∣count of wise men, as they can doe of them; accounting them for the fooles, and themselues to be the onely wise: yet matters it nothing, whom they that be fooles, doe either esteeme to be fooles, or to be wise men: but whom wise men so esteeme. For (as the Orator very truely obserueth) Statuere quis sit sapiens,* 1.879 vel maximè videtur esse sapientis: To iudge who is a wise man, doth specially belong vnto the iudgement of a wise man. And Xenophanes likewise vnto the same purpose. Sapiens sit necesse est,* 1.880 qui norit explorare sapientem. It is fit, that hee himselfe should bee a wise man, that will assume to iudge, who is a wise man. He is not a wise man, whom a foole accounts a wise man: but he is a foole, whom a wise man accounts a foole: then much more, whom all wise men. And therefore, whenas Atheists doe either de∣ny God, or make a mock of him, they do but as fooles doe, who make a mock of euery thing: yea, euen of sinne it selfe. The Foole (saith the wise man) ma∣keth but a mocke of sinne,* 1.881 yea, and that euen of Atheisme, which is the grea∣test sinne: yea, and of God himselfe too. They make but a mocke of God, as though there were no God. Vpon whom haue ye ieasted,* 1.882 vpon whom hau••

ye gaped, and thrust out your tongue? saith the Lord by his Prophet. Are ye not rebellious children, and a false seed? Thus impudently, doe Atheists make a mocke of God himselfe. But yet, as the Philosopher, when it was told him, Hi t•• rident:* 1.883 These men deride thee: very wisely answered: Ego autem non ri∣d••or: But I am not to be derided: So may it be truly said of God: that though such fooles doe mocke at him, yet God himselfe is not mocked, as the Apostle plainely testifieth:* 1.884 but is infinitely superior vnto any such contumelie, or scur∣rility. And ther••fore, in their mocking of God so foolishly, they make but fooles of themselues, and bewray vnto the world the extremity of their folly; giuing to others iust occasion to deride and mocke at them: yea, euen to God himselfe. Who (as the Psalmist testifieth) laugheth them to scorne; hauing both them,* 1.885 〈◊〉〈◊〉 4. and their folly in extreme derision. Yea, and the same is like∣wise affirmed,* 1.886 euen by the Heathen Poet: as before I hau•• obs••rued.

—Deus quicun{que}* 1.887 aspexit, ridet, & odit. What God soeuer sees it,* 1.888 The same derides, and hates it.

He doth, in Stomacho ridere, as the Orator speaketh. He hates them, as wic∣ked men; and yet laughes at them, as fooles. Yea and, as they be ••ooles, so he makes them knowne for fooles. He both knoweth them, to be fooles him∣se••fe, and maketh them knowne to be fooles of others: Yea and so to be e∣steemed throughout the whole world. Which is a greater scourge vnto those proud fooles, that so ambitiously affect to be compted wise men, then the whip it selfe is: Which, the wise man affirmeth, to be properly be∣longing vnto the backe of fooles.

And,* 1.889 as all wise men doe accompt of Atheists, as fooles: so many of them haue esteemed them, as distracted and madd men. They make them to be, Ex stultis insanos: as the Comick speaketh. Nay,* 1.890 in that they be fooles, they be therein also madmen. For it is indeed an Orthodoxe; though it be numbred as a Paradoxe; that,* 1.891 Omnes Stulti insaniunt: that All Fooles are madd, and men depriued of their witts. And so are likewise all Atheists. They be indeed both fooles, and mad-men: though in their owne conceit, they be the only wise men, with whom wisedome doth surely liue, and after whom it will surely d••e. But what reckoning soeuer,* 1.892 those men make of themselues, and of their owne high wisedome; yet wisemen indeed haue euer reputed them,* 1.893 for no better then mad-men. Saint Paul calleth it his madnes, that he had euer beene so impious, at to persecute the Christians. Whilst hee was in that madnes,* 1.894 he compted it his wisedome, and imagined that he had done high seruice to God therein. But when God hath indued him with the light of true wisdome, then hee saw it was madnesse in him. And if it be a madnesse, but to persecute Gods seruants; then is it much more madnesse, to denie God himselfe: which is the highest kinde wherein hee can be persecuted. And therefore, not onely Christians, but also the very Heathens, haue censured all Atheists, and deniers of God, to be indeed, but madd. Plutarch saith, that, Deos esse, omnes sana mente praediti,* 1.895 arbitrantur: That all, which haue their witts, doe beleeue, that there be gods. From whence it must needs follow, that they, which denie, that there is a God, are indeed out of their wits. They be not,* 1.896 sana mente praediti. Which, the Orator al∣so affirmeth expressely: Esse Deos, ita perspicuum est, vt illud qui neget, vix

〈…〉〈…〉 It is a thing so euident,* 1.897 that there is a God; that whosoeuer denieth it, is (surely) out of his wit. Which, as in this place hee confi••meth: Quis potest esse tam auersus a vero,* 1.898 tam pr••ceps, tam me••te captus, qui neget, haec omnia, quae videmus, Deorum immort••l••m nutu, at{que}, potestate administrari? Who can there be possibly, such an ene••••e to all truth, nay of such an he ••ddy rashnes, nay of such a frantik madnes, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to de••••e, that all those things, which we see with our eyes, are ruled by the pleasure, and power of the Gods? He reckoneth of such men, not onely, as o•• rash men, but also, as of mad-men. And so likewise did Socrates,* 1.899 as appeareth in Xenophon. Si qui sunt, qui nihil a divina prouidentia putant pendere, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ille asserebat insanire. Those men that denie the power of Gods pro••idence, he plainely affirmed, to be out of their witts. And so likewise did Euripides.* 1.900

—Non conuenit vnquam, hoc priuari, Vt colas Deos: qui negat verò, Ad insaniam vertitur. This holy Rule to leaue, were too too bad, To worship God: whom who deny's, is mad.

Yea,* 1.901 and that in the highest degree of madnes; as S. Chrysostome affirmeth. Deum vel non esse, vel malum esse, opinari; non san•• hominis sed insani potiùs, imò vltimo furore perciti, meritò dixerimus. He that either denieth God to be at all, or affirmeth him to be the author of euill, he is not (sure) a wise man, but rather a mad man, Yea one that is inraged, not with frenzie, but with furie. And thus Atheists (as you see) in the opinion of all wise men, are esteemed not onely as fooles, but as madmen. Yea,* 1.902 and as Philo Iudaeus pronoun∣ceth in another like case; not onely Insani, but also insanabiles: Not com∣monly mad, but incurably mad. Now how little accompt is to be made of mad men, or of any thing, whatsoeuer they can either doe, or say, we may euidently see, in the Prophet Dauid, when hee fayned himselfe mad: Of whom, when as Achish very greatly reioyced,* 1.903 at his first sight and com∣ming; yet whenas hee appeared vnto him to be mad, he was angry with those, that had brought him before him, and asked, Whether they thought that he had any need of mad-men? So that, if Atheists, be no better then mad-men: as their professing of God, could bring him no honour; so their deny∣ing of him, can bring him no dishonour: But to proceede yet one steppe further.

4 As many wise men haue reckoned and esteemed of Atheists,* 1.904 some to be fooles, and some to be mad-men: so diuers haue esteemed them, to be no men at all; but very monsters of men,* 1.905 or beasts in mens forme. So Lactantius. Illos, qui nullum omninò Deum esse dixerunt, non modò non Phi∣losophos, sed ne homines quidem suisse dixerim: qui, mutis simillimi, ••x solo corpore constiterunt, nihil videntes animo. Those men, that haue affirmed, that there is no God; I dare boldly affirme, to haue beene no men; much lesse to haue beene Philosophers; who like vnto brute beasts, as if they were all body, could s••e and vnderstand nothing at all with their minde.* 1.906 So Tallie. Quis hunc, hominem dixerit, qui, cùm tam certos coeli motus, tam ratos astrorum ordines, tam{que} inter se omnia connexa & apta viderit, neget in his inesse ra∣tionem? Who can esteeme for a man, that seeing so constant a motion of the

heauens, so orderly a course and progresse of the Stars, and so apt a fitting and knitting of one thing vnto another, can denie this to be done, by the strength and power of Reason? Which is the vsuall word, whereby Phi∣losophers expresse the working power of Gods diuine Prouidence.

Now, if Atheists be not men, what can they be else, but monsters of men? who haue the outward shape and lineaments, but want the inward faculties and habilements, that is, the light of the minde and vnderstanding; which is indeed the true and proper nature of man.* 1.907 For, mens cuius{que} is est quis{que}: and which whosoeuer lacketh, he is not properly, but equi••ocally, a man: as Scali∣ger collecteth out of Avenrois:* 1.908 because hee hath not mans proper and speci∣ficall nature,* 1.909 and so may iustly bee reputed a monster. For, omne quod contra naturam est, monstri meretur nomen: saith Tertullian. Whatsoeuer is contrary to the order of nature, that doth iustly deserue the name of a Monster. Now, what can be more contrary vnto the order of Nature, then to haue the out∣ward shape, and figure of a man; and yet to lacke reason, which is his inward forme? This much better deserueth the name of a monster, then many of those do, at which men so much wonder. It is a farre greater monster, then, if either a man, should be borne with foure feete; or a beast, but with two. And indeed Palingenius, alluding to this comparison, hee called such impious per∣sons, but a kinde of two-footed Asses.* 1.910 O bipedes Asini &c.

specifying more particularly, what kinde of monsters they be, in his fancy: as if they were no better then meere scapes and errors of particular nature, and vnnaturally degenerating into beasts. And therefore,* 1.911 if Consensus omni∣um be vox naturae, as the Orator affirmeth; what can they be then, but monstra naturae, who refuse to heare the generall voyce of nature, teaching There is a God? Especially,* 1.912 seeing it calleth out so loud vnto them, not onely Loquendo, but tantùm non Clamando, as Theodoret affirmeth: and telleth them so constantly, by all estates, and degrees, and conditions of men, that there must needs be one. This is, most euidently, a monstrous infidelitie. And therefore, Saint Augustine doubteth not, for this hardned obstinacy in their impiety,* 1.913 to call them by the name of monsters directly. Magnum est ipse prodigium, qui, mundo credente, non credit. He, surely, is a monster, and that a very great one, that refuseth to beleeue,* 1.914 whenas all the world beside beleeueth round about him. And so likewise doth A. Gellius. Quidam fuerunt monstra ho∣minum, qui, de Dijs immortalibus, impias falsas{que} opiniones prodiderunt. There haue bene certaine monsters of men, that haue broched their false and impious opinions, against the Gods. Yea, and Tully, he goeth farther. For he not onely denieth him to be a man, that denieth there is a God; but him also, that con∣fesseth him, if, vpon the consideration of his infinite goodnesse, hee returne not vnto him,* 1.915 all possible thankfulnesse. Quem astrorum ordines, quem di••rum 〈◊〉〈◊〉 vicissitudines, quem memsium temperatio, quem ea quae gignuntur no∣bis ad fruendum, non gratum esse cogunt; hunc, hominem omninò numerari, ne{que} decet. He, whom the order of the starres, the enterchange of dayes and nights, the temper of the seasons, and the benefits which wee reape and receiue from all these, inforce not vnto thankfulnesse, he ought not to be reckoned in the number of men by vs. Note the notable pietie, euen of the very Heathen; that those, whom they noted of impiety to their gods, they likewise extermi∣nated

out of the number of men. Now, these varying opinions of so many learned men, both Christians, and Heathens, against the Atheists, in thus cal∣ling them both Fooles, and Mad-men, and Monsters of men, doth euidently declare, that they wanted words, to expresse their conceits of them, and to deliuer vnto the full, that notable detestation, and abiect estimation, wherein they held them.

So that, to recollect our intended Argument from the sentences before recited: As it may truly be affirmed, that all men in generall, haue the gift of reason; though Fooles, and Mad-men, and Monsters haue it not (who yet, in a grosse and common acception, are numbred as men:) so may it as truly be generally affirmed, that All men beleeue, that there is a God; though the Atheist deny it. Because he is to be accompted none other, then either as a Foole, or a Mad-man, or a Monster: as hath bene shewed before.

CHAP. 15.

That God, hath at all times, powred downe his iust iudgments, vpon the heads of Atheists: b•• them sensibly declaring, That there is a God. 2. Examples, out of Scriptures. 3. Examples, out of Eccle••iasticall Histories. 4. Examples, out of Heathen writers. 5. An Obiection answered, concerning the punish∣ment of those Atheists.

BVT let vs suppose, that Atheists were neither Fooles, nor Mad-men; but the wisest, and learnedest, of all other men. And a∣gaine, let vs suppose, that they were not such a poore handfull, and so contemptible for their paucity, as they be; but multipli∣ed, and increased, vnto the number of an army. Let vs yet sup∣pose further, that they had euer most obstinately maintayned their opinion, without either any wauering, hesitation, or doubting; and that they had neuer c••nfessed any God, neither sleeping, nor waking; neither in thought, word, nor deede; neither directly, nor indirectly; neither in their liues, nor at their deaths: (all which I haue euidently shewed, to be very far otherwise.) Yet God, by his exemplarie punishments inflicted vpon Atheists, more se∣uerely, and more constantly, then vpon any other wicked ones, doth euident∣ly declare, not only, that There is a God: but also that he is the King and Ruler of the world: a God, that both heareth, and seeth all their wickednesse, and that knoweth well how to reuenge him vpon all his enemies, but specially, vpon Atheists his deniers, and blasphemers; for whom, hee hath reserued his selected plagues and punishments. So that, though they deny him in words: yet he confesseth himselfe in deeds: and, by their punishments, both in∣forceth diuers of those Atheists to confesse him, who before had denied him: and all the godly to reioyce,* 1.916 who before had confessed him. The righteous shall reioyce, when he seeth the vengeance (saith the Prophet Dauid:) he shall wash his feete in the blood of the wicked. And men shall say, Verily there is a reward for the righteous; Doubtlesse, there is a God, that iudgeth in the earth.

For, if we looke with iudgement, into the liues and deaths, of those pro∣phane persons, that haue beene Gods most direct and professed Enemies, and most gloried and triumphed in their impieties and blasphemies, as

though there were no God at all to regard them; wee may easily obserue, that non•• of them hath escaped the reuenging hand of God, but that all of them haue constantly falne into great calamity, and euermore ended their vngodly liues, with vnnaturall, vntimely, and vnfortunate deathes. Which constancy, in those mens so certaine infelicity (more then in other mens, that are in other kindes wicked) doth openly proclaime, that this their punishment commeth not out of the dust;* 1.917 neither is sent vnto them by blind chance and fortune (for, there is no such constancie,) but that it onely procee∣deth from that diuine prouidence, which both heareth, and seeth, and know∣eth all things: Yea, and taketh speciall notice of those that are Atheists, as of his most daring and audacious enemies: culling them out by the head, from among all other men, to be the selected spectacles of his wrath and indigna∣tion. That they who disclaimed him in their liues, yet might proclaime him in their deathes: declaring vnto all men, that the God, whom they denied, had now, by their punishment, prooued himselfe a God indeed: As though he had made them to no other purpose, but to glorifie himselfe, by taking iust vengeance vpon their vngodlinesse. As he himselfe professed vnto Phar. oh, King of Egypt: For this cause haue I appointed th••e,* 1.918 to shew my power in thee, and to declare my Name throughout all the world. For, as the wise man also expresse∣ly testifieth,* 1.919 The Lord hath made all things for himselfe; yea, euen the wicked man against the day of vengeance.

2 And indeed,* 1.920 God hath so notably inflicted his vengeance vpon Atheists, and so directly powred downe the full vialls of his wrath, vpon the heads of them; that there can almost none of them be named, neither in the holy Scrip∣tures, nor in Ecclesiasticall Histories, nor in Heathen Writings; but that it will appeare, that the iudgement of God hath brought them vnto a fearefull and an abhorred end. As I will declare vnto you, by some two or three instances, in euery one of the three forenamed Heads.

The most renowned, for professed vngodlinesse, are these. In the Holy Hi∣storie; King Pharaoh, and Antiochus, the King of Tyrus, and the two Herods. In Ecclesiasticall Historie; Caligula, Domitian, Maximinus, and Iulian. In pro∣phane Historie; Protageras, Diagoras, Theodorus, Socrates, Epicurus, Bion, Phe∣recides, and Dionysius. Of all whom, there was not one, that died in his nest, of a faire and kindely death,* 1.921 sauing onely this last; Whose d••mnation yet slept not: being, though respited, yet not remooued. But for all the rest of them, there was not any one, but he ended his life, by the stroke of Gods iustice; either mediately pronounced by the mouth of a man; or immediately inflicted by the hand of God. For the first of them, King Pharaoh: as hee was a notable mirrour of obdured vngodlinesse so was he likewise a mirrour of Gods most iust vengeance: being purposely designed, and appointed by God, vnto none other end,* 1.922 but onely to be an example of note, and eminent document, vnto the whole world, that, Whosoeuer contemneth, and despiseth God, be he neuer so great and mighty a Potentate, shall, for his impiety, be most seuerely punished. For, so indeed he was: yea, and that not with one punishment; but with all the varieties of Gods most heauy iudgements: which were by God inflicted, not onely vpon himselfe, but also (for his sake) vpon his people and subiects. Who were,* 1.923 all of them, plagued, by blood in their waters; by tempests in their corne;

by Caterpillers in their fruites; by Grassehoppers in their grasse; by Murraine in their Cattell; by Flies, and Lice, and vlcers,* 1.924 in their owne bodyes; by the sudaine death of all their first borne Sonnes; and finally, by the drowning of themselues. Who (as Moses expresseth their destruction in his Song) did sinke downe vnto the bottome like a stone. And all this fell vpon them,* 1.925 for the onely impi∣elie of their Prince; the hardned prophanenes of an impious King, bringing a generall plague vpon his whole Kingdome. Which plagues were so exem∣plarie, and so immediatly from heauen, that euen the very Sorcerers, who were set to affront Moses, and to shew that all his miracles were but sophisticall de∣lusions; yet were forced to confesse, that they were Gods immediate plagues, and iudgements: This is the finger of God. Thereby plainely declaring,* 1.926 not onely There is a God; but also, that He is a God of so omnipotent a power, that he is able to subdue the most proud and potent of all his enemies, by the basest and meanest of all his creatures: by Frogs, Flies, Lice, and such like contemp∣tible wormes. A notable Example of that fearefull curse, denounced by Mo∣ses; that such, as will not feare and obey the Lord, shall, in euery part of their e∣state, be cursed: Cursed in the Towne,* 1.927 cursed in the field, cursed in their basket, & cursed in their dough, cursed in the fruit of their bodyes, in the fruit of their land, and in the fruit of their Cattell; cursed in their going out, and cursed in their comming in. All which curses fell apparantly vpon the Eg••ptians, as the v••ngeance of God, for their wicked Kings vngodlinesse.

Now, for the second of them, Antiochus, whose sacriledges and prophane∣nesse can hardly be recounted, they were so many and so hainous: there was neuer any man, whom the iudgement of God did cast headlong downe, from a greater arrogancie into a greater miserie. For, he purposing, in the height of his impiety and prophanenesse,* 1.928 to haue robbed the Temple of El••m••is, in Per∣sia; as he had done before of Hierusalem in Iudea: and so to haue trussed vp, Sacra in saccum, as it is in the Prouerbe; to haue sacked, and ransacked, and made good prize and booty, of all consecrated and holy things: hee was shamefully beaten, and repelled by the Citizens (as Verres, in the like attempt, was by the Agrigentines.) And vnderstanding in P••rsia, of the ouerthrow of two of his Armies in Iudea: he, breathing out fire against the Iewes, and hasting towards them to take his fierce reuenge; hee was cast downe from his Chariot, to the bruising of all his bones. But the vengeance of God not hauing yet done with him, strooke him with a most odious and incurable sicke∣nesse, which so corrupted and putrified his body,* 1.929 that loathsome wormes craw∣led out of it, in exceeding great plenty: whereby, the smell of his rottennesse grew so exceeding grieuous, that it made him odious both to his friends, and to himselfe. And so (as the booke of Maccabees concludeth his storie, noting both the two fore-named points, of his Arrogancy and his Misery,) He that a little before, thought that he might command the stoods of the Sea (so proud was he beyond the condition of a man) was now cast downe to the ground. And thus the Murderer and Blasphemer suffered most grieuously, and died a miserable death in a strange Countrey. They be the very last words of his storie.

For the third of them; the King of Tyrus: who, in the pride of his heart, called himselfe a God,* 1.930 and thought himselfe equall vnto the highest God: the highest God telleth him,* 1.931 that He will bring him downe, and that he shall die the

death of those, that are slaine in the middest of the Sea: Who are not onely killed, but also commonly drowned, and cast into the waters, as a prey vn∣to the fishes. So that, though he boasted himselfe to be a God; yet should hee finde himselfe,* 1.932 to be but a Man: yea and a miserable man, in the hand of him, that was appointed to kill him. Which fore-threatened destruction, was afterward fullfilled, vpon that whole kingdome. Yea, and that, with so great a desolation, and such incredible crueltie, as the like was neuer exercised be∣fore, vpon any Citie. Insomuch, that the Calami••••e of the Tyrians, did passe as a Prouerbe, in mens ordinarie speech. Quae, ex antiqua Tyro. These things are more grieuous,* 1.933 then those that are reported of the ancient Tyrus. Of whose fearefull destruction, Ezeckiel foretelleth, that it should be lamented, with this pitifull eiulation. Quae, est, vt Tyrus, quae obmutnit in medio mari? What Citie is like Tyrus,* 1.934 destroyed so fearefully, in the midst of the Sea?

For the fourth of them, King Herod the great; who was indeed the grea∣test persecutor, that euer the Christians had (for all other persecutors did but onely persecute Christ,* 1.935 in his members; but he persecuted Christians in their head) he strooke at the very head of Christianitie, and persecuted Christ in his owne immediate person: His impietie escaped not Gods iust, and heauie iudgement. For, as he intended, most cruelly to haue murthered the Sonne of the liuing God: so God abused his crueltie, to the murthe∣ring of his owne sonnes. Whereby, he became so infamous to the world, that it went of him,* 1.936 as a common Prouerbe, that, Melius est, Herodis esse porcum, qu••m filium. It is better to be Herods Swine, then his Sonne. But yet, here the iudgement of God left him not: but strooke him with so many, and so grieuous diseases together, that to reade, it, it is a wonder. Which Iosephus expresseth, in very fearefull manner. His words thereof, be these. Regi, morbus factus est grauior, poenam impietatis exigente Numine. Lento enim calore torrebatur,* 1.937 qui non tam externo tactu deprehenderetur, quam in∣tùs popularetur v••scera. Aderat & vehemens voracitas, cui necesse esset con∣tinuò cibos suggerere. Simul{que} vexabatur intestinorom exulceratione, & coli∣cis passionibus. Pedes tum••bant flegmate humido & pellucido, similiter{que} in∣guina. Ipsa quo{que} verenda putrefacta scatebant vermiculis, accedente foeda, nec minus molesta tentigine, non sine foetore gravissimo. Super haec omnia, ner∣vorum contractione laborabat, & difficultate anhelitus. Quamobrem, constans erat, inter Divinos & Fatidicos opinio, Regem laesae tot modis pietatis, Deo poenas expendere. Hitherto Iosephus. The Kings sicknesse grew euery day more and more grieuous; God punishing him seuerely, for his former impietie. For first, he was scorched and broyled with a lingring fire; which though it could not outwardly be felt with mens hands; yet did it inwardly eate and con∣sume all his bowells. Hee was taken, beside, with a doggish Appetite, which called for meat almost euery moment. Further, his intestines brake out into putrid vlcers, and grieuously tormented him with colique passions. His feete and flankes, swelled with a flegmatike humor, and his secrets were possessed with an vnnaturall tumor: corrupting most loathsomely into wormes, and ex∣haling continually most odious stinkes. Yet further, hee was grieuously vexed with the cramps and conuulsions, and greatly tormented with shortnes of ••reath. All which things considered, it was constantly resolued, amongst all Diuines,

and South sayers, That they were nothings else, but th•• strokes of Gods ven∣g••ance, inflicted vpon him for his former vngodlinesse. Here was a perfect patterne of a miserable man tormented vnder the hand of God: hauing none of all his members exempted from his plagues; but euery seuerall part, hauing his seuerall torment: dying, in a liuing death; and liuing, in a dying life. A mirror of that infernall punishment, which God hath in hell appoin∣ted for the Atheist.

And, not much an vnlike iudgement, fell likewise vpon the fift of them, H••rod called Agrippa: Who making (vpon a time) an eloquent Oration; the people (after the manner of their hyperbolicall flattering) applauded him with this blasphemous encomion,* 1.938 That he spake, like a God, and not like a man. Which excesse of commendation,* 1.939 though hee knew to be most impi∣ous; yet (as the Orator speaketh in another like case) Alieni facinoris munus∣••ulum non repudiavit: He would not refuse their present vnto him, though hee knew it was their sinne: It being so kindly offered he would not vnkindly re∣fuse it;* 1.940 but (though it were their blasphemie) yet did willingly accept it. Hanc impiam adulationem nec castigans, nec repellens, as Iosephus punctually obser∣ueth: Neither repelling, nor rectifying, this their impious adulation. But God who is iealous of his honor, and, who will not giue his glory vnto any other,* 1.941 he sent his Angell to punish that impious intruder: who smote him with so grieuous a disease, that his body corrupted all into wormes. And thus was his end.

3 Let vs now proceed vnto those other Examples,* 1.942 which before I haue named out of Ecclesiasticall Histories. Of whom, the first, Caligula; as he was a cruell Tyrant, in all his other gouernement: so, in the end he grew vnto that madnesse, as to assume the highest diuine honors vnto himselfe. Whose im∣pietie and prophanesse,* 1.943 Iosephus expresseth in these words vnto vs. Inflatus potentiae magnitudine, oblitus est se esse hominem; & contumeliosus in superos, ad reliquam insaniam, divinos etiam honores vsurpare ausus est. He being puf∣fed vp with the greatnesse of his power, forgate himselfe to be a man: and grow∣ing proud against the gods, added this vnto all the rest of his madnesse; that he presumed to appoint vnto himselfe diuine honors.* 1.944 Templum numini suo proprium, & sacerdotes, & excogitatissimas hostias instituens: as Suetonius, addeth. He appropriated a speciall temple vnto his owne godhead; Yea and ap∣pointed both Priests and sacrifices for it: accepting euen the title of Iupiter Latialis. But, what was the ende of all this wicked glory, and of his pro∣phane consecrating himselfe for a God? Did God leaue it vnreuenged? No. But, as Salomon,* 1.945 when he had forsaken God, God likewise (in some degree) forsooke him, and out of his owne Seruants stirred vp many dangerous ad∣uersaries against him: so did he likewise with this man; permitting him to fall into their hands,* 1.946 and to be murthered of them, with no lesse then thirty grieuous wounds; as Iosephus reporteth them. Confecerunt eum, illatis certa∣tìm crebris ictibus.

For the second of them; Domitian; whom Eusebius affirmeth,* 1.947 to haue bin the true successor of Nero, for his impietie, and Theomachie: and who (as Au∣relius Victor reporteth) more Caligulae, Dominum se, Deúm{que} vocari, coegit: Who, like impious Caligula, commanded himselfe to be called, both Lord, and

God: but with the same successe. For, as he was an imitator of Caligula's im∣piety: so was he likewise his successor in his misery:* 1.948 being murthered (as hee was) by his owne seruants, and slaine, with no fewer, then with seauen deadly wounds. And this was the end of that immortall god.

For the third of them, Maximinus, a perfect aemulus of the bloody King Antiochus, both in the impiety of his life, and in the misery of his death; I haue largely extended that parallel betweene them,* 1.949 in many points of the comparison: both of them being strucken with most horrible sicknesses; and both of them confessing, the stroke to be Gods. Onely, with this note of dif∣ference, that this Maximinus, before his loathsome sicknesse, by which hee lost his life, was strucken from heauen with lightning; by which hee lost his eyes.* 1.950 And this (as Eusebius affirmeth) was the stroke of Gods iustice. That he, who before had burned out the eyes of many faithfull Christians, should now himselfe haue his owne eyes burnt out.

And for the fourth of them, Iulian; whose infamy will neuer die, for his blasphemy against Christ,* 1.951 and crueltie against Christians: he was very strange∣ly killed, in his warre against the Persians; being sodainly strucken with an vncertaine hand, but yet making a certaine wound. Peraduentnre by one, who, in his simplicitie, shot his arrow at randon; not purposing, either to hurt him,* 1.952 or to hitte him (as it fell out in Ahab, another profane King:) but, without peraduenture, God directing the shooter, and leuelling the shotte, at his owne appointed marke: which hee failed not to hit, and to strike home, so sure,* 1.953 that (as Abishai sayd) hauing strucken himonce, he neede to strike him no more. And so there he died, directly ascribing his death vnto Christ: as before I haue obserued.

4 And diuers such like fearefull iudgements,* 1.954 do euen the Heathens themselues report, to haue hapned vnto Atheists: as may euidently be seene, in all those men, whom before I haue reckoned vp, by their names; as infamed in their writings, for the principallest Atheists. For the first of whom, Prota∣goras; though his fault were nothing else, but a seeming to doubt, whether there were a God? yet, euen that scepticall impiety, escaped not the censure, of the Areopagitae; but, by their decree, receiued the punishment, not onely of infamie,* 1.955 but also of banishment; they sentencing, that his bookes should be publikely burned, and himselfe perpetually exiled. Yea, and where humane punishment left him,* 1.956 there diuine ouertooke him. For sayling ouer the sea, in the time of his banishment, he was by it deuoured, and swallowed vp.

For the second of them, Di••goras: who is noted, as one of the principal∣lest Atheists, in the writings, not onely of Christians, but of Heathens. He, in his impietie, was so publike, and notorious, that hee was not onely con∣demned, but also proscribed,* 1.957 by the people of Athens: Who propounded a Ta∣lent, vnto any man, that should kill him; and two, vnto any, that could bring him forth aliue. Which punishment, though, at that time, hee escaped by flight; yet could he not escape from the punishment of God. No flight could saue him from it. For, hee attempting diuers times to haue taken the Sea, it euer, vpon his first entring into it, grew so raging and violent, that hee still was forced againe to forsake it. Vntill, at last, he aduenturing, and putting all vnto the hazard, to auoid the ••ruelty of his fierce pursuers; he (as Protagoras

before) was swallowed vp of the waues: God taking his punishment, into his owne hands. For this,* 1.958 euen Athenacus obserueth, as the worke of Gods Iustice, inflicting due punishment vpon his vngodlinesse. Yea, and Tully re∣porteth, that, when hee was in the tempest,* 1.959 and before hee was drowned; those that were in the shippe with him, obiected it vnto him, that it was for his vngodlinesse, that that tempest so afflicted them: (euen as in a like case, the Saylers obiected it,* 1.960 vnto the Prophet Ionas.) And though for the present, he turned it off, with a scoffe; yet he payd for that profanenesse, with the losse of his life: All the rest of the Company, being punished by God, for one Atheists impiety. A thing, which so commonly falleth out,* 1.961 that (as Xenophon obserueth) all men, in their sayling, desire, for their Companions, to haue rather religious persons, then Atheists. Qui nauigationem eligunt, cum pijs potiùs eligere solent, qu••m cum ijs, qui impium aliquid perpetrârunt. And they doe wisely in it; lest through other mens impietie, they bee punished for company: as it fell out,* 1.962 both with Ionas, and Diagoras. Whereas, on the contrary, S. Pauls pietie preserued all his Companie.

For the third of them, Theodorus; who,* 1.963 for his notable profanenes, was sur∣named Atheos, as (before him) was Diagoras: he, for that his impietie, being questioned publiquely, was, by the sentence of the Iudges, both condemned, and executed; being forced to drinke a cup of deadly wine, as it is in the Psalme. For, that was the punishment appointed by their Lawes, for the death of such profane and impious persons: That they, which had made others drinke in the poyson of their wicked opinions, should themselues, by drink∣ing poyson end their owne wicked liues.

For the fourth of them, Socrates; though he were a man, so rare and ex∣cellent, for all morall vertues,* 1.964 that he is said to be the first, that euer called Phi∣losophie downe out of heauen, and brought it to bee familiar, and to conuerse among men: yet, because his morall vertue was not seasoned with the Theo∣logicall vertue of true Piety; but, that hee was esteemed (though falsely) to be a derider of all the Gods; the same Law, which before had seazed on The∣odorus, tooke hold likewise on him: and sentenced him to the same condem∣nation, whom it held to be guilty of the same crime. And so, hee drinking of the very same Cup, did end his life also with a draught of poyson.

Now, if any man do thinke, that the iudgments of those forenamed per∣sons, are not rightly ascribed, to bee the iudgments of God; because they were pronounced, by the mouth of men; he is greatly deceiued, in his opini∣on. For (as the Prophet Moses very truly affirmeth) The iudgment is the Lords,* 1.965 whose soeuer the mouth be. He (as the Psalmist testifieth) not onely standeth among the Gods; but also iudgeth among the Gods: as not onely pre∣sent with them, but also president among them. So that, though their iudge∣ment was framed in the Councell of men; yet was it decreed by the counsell of God. He it was, that decreed the sentence, though he appointed the mouth of a man to pronounce it. The same God, who gaue the sentence; that,* 1.966 that Blasphemer should be executed, among the Iewes; was he, that gaue the sentence, that Theodorus, and the rest, should likewise be executed among the Athenians. So that, though they died by the iudgement of man; yet died they, not without the iudgment of God. But, to proceede with the rest.

For the fifth of them, Epicurus: though he denied Gods prouidence, yet he died not without Gods prouidence: but had such a death befallen him, as was most repugnant vnto his opinion. For, whereas he placed his whole feli∣city in pleasure; he ended his dayes in most miserable torture; being tor∣mented in the Bladder, for foureteene dayes together. For the easing of which paine, he so excessiuely dranke wine, that thereof he died drunken: as Laertius testifieth in his funerall Epigram.

—sitientiùs hausit Suaue merum:* 1.967 hinc Stygias cbrius ••ausit aquas. Whilst he sweete wine full fast did swallow downe: The Stygian Lake his drunken soule did drowne.

And so, as he liued like a Swine, he died like a Swine: wallowing in all fi••thy pleasure in his life, and dying drunken at his death. For the sixth of them, Bion, a great derider of the gods: he was smitten with a very grieuous, and a most painefull sicknesse. Of which, after many paineful remedies attempted in vain, hee finally died in extreame paine and torture:* 1.968 ascribing all his torments to bee Gods most iust vengeance, for his former vngodlinesse.

For the seuenth of them, Pherecides; who boasted himselfe in the presence of his Schollers,* 1.969 That though he neuer offered vnto any of the gods, yet would he leade as happy, and as pleasant a life, as those that should sacrifice their fattest H••catombs: he vpon this his vaine-glorious and blasphemous ostentation, was suddainely strucken with a most horrible sicknesse; so grieuous and so loathsome, that he was faine to auoyd the society of men, and to shut vp him∣selfe (as it were) in a close prison. So that, whenas any of his friends resorted to visite him, he was growne so deformed, and so ashamed of himselfe, that he would neuer be seene of them. But when they called to him, and inquired of his health; he would shew them his finger through the rift of a doore, most miserably consumed and eaten vp with lice: and then tell them that his whole body was iust in the same case. And this, AElian reproteth as the iust ven∣geance of God, inflicted vpon him for his former impiety and irreligion.

And, for the eighth of them, Dionysius; it is true, that hee was a most impi∣ous and notorious Atheist: and that he had not onely sacrilegiously despoy∣led,* 1.970 but (that which is worse) irreligiously derided all the sorts of their gods, not sparing euen Iupiter himselfe. And it is also true, that hee was so prospe∣rous, and so fortunate in his wickednesse, that he was neuer punished, neither by fire, nor sword, nor sicknesse, by any of the gods; though he had blasphemed them all. In so much, that Tullie pleadeth his prosperity in his impiety, as a notable instance against diuine prouidence: insinuating, that if there had bin any, it would surely haue reuenged such sacriledge and blasphemy. But yet, for all that,* 1.971 Valerius Maximus obserueth, that his prophanesse scaped not, but had his due punishment: which fell vpon it, in the time of his Sonne, though it did not in his owne. Tame••si debita supplicia non exoluit; dedecore, tamen fi∣lij, mortuus poenas rependit quas viuus effugerat: He sustained that punishment after his death, which he escaped in his life, and had it payd home in the person of his Sonne, which fell not immediately vpon his owne person. For, his Sonne being driuen out of his Kingdome, and carried away (as a Captiue) to Corinthus, was forced to liue there (as a priuate man) inglorious:

and in the end, to take vpon him, the teaching of a Schoole, for lacke of better ••••intanance. From which,* 1.972 he being also expelled for his notable tyranny and plagosity; he was forced (for his last shift) in most contemptible manner, to beg his liuing from dore to dore, with a Pipe and a Taber. Now, what death, or what torment could haue possibly beene so bitter vnto that olde Tyrant, as to see this great misery of his Sonne, if he could haue fore-seene it. No drow∣ning, no burning, no rotting, of any of all the fore-named Atheists, could haue beene so grieuous vnto his owne person, as this great calamity, which fell out vnto his owne Sonne. For, it is the heauiest of all Gods heauy punishments, when he visiteth the iniquity of the fathers vpon the children, especially in the next generation. And such eminent calamity of the children,* 1.973 doth Aristotle himselfe affirme to be effectuall, if not euacuate, yet greatly to shake the felici∣ty of their Parents, euen after their deathes.

So that, none of al the fore-named Atheists escaped the stroke of Gods reuen∣ging hand; but all of them haue died such miserable deathes, as were due vn∣to their wicked and vngodly liues. Now,* 1.974 when God striketh men with such vntimely and vnnaturall deathes, that they be not permitted to liue out their dayes, it is a great argument of his wrath: as the Prophet Moses, in this very case concludeth: If these men dye the common death of all men; or,* 1.975 if they bee visited after the visitation of all men; the Lord hath not sent me. But, if the Lord make a new thing, and the earth open her mouth, and swallow them vp, with all that they haue, and they goe downe quicke into the pit; then yee shall vnder∣stand, that these men men haue prouoked the Lord. Concluding, that their strange and vncouth death, is, not onely the worke of God, but the worke of his wrath. Yea, and Plutarch (vpon the like occasion) insinuateth the same. For he noteth it, as the iudgement of God, not onely vpon Tullus Hostilius (who was an open Atheist) but also vpon all those other his Successors, that were wicked Kings; thar,* 1.976 Nullus eorum obijt, secundùm Naturae leges: That none of them had their deathes according to Natures lawes. Which may, much more generally be affirmed of Atheists, then of any other sort of vniust and wicked persons: that none of them doe die faire and naturall deathes; but all violent and vnnaturall. By which immediate iudgements of God, falling downe so certainely, and so directly vpon the heads of Atheists, more then vp∣pon any other wicked ones; yea, and so generally too, vpon euery one of them, without all exception; God doth much more effectually prooue him∣selfe to be, in the euidence of those workes; then all the Atheists in the world can prooue God not to be, by the efficacy of their words.

5 But, here it may be obiected, that diuers of those men,* 1.977 whom I here condemne of Atheisme, and produce, as examples of Gods wrath against A∣theists, haue bene heretofore, by my selfe excused, and proued to be no Atheists indeed: howsoeuer in the receiued opinion,* 1.978 they were commonly so esteemed. Whereby it may be thought, that either there or here, I haue done wrong vn∣to the truth. For, if they were not Atheists; why were they by God punished? If they were indeed Atheists; why were they by me excused? For the better remoouing of which semblance of contradiction, I answer; that mine excu∣sing them in that place, was not simply to free them from all those degrees of Atheisme,* 1.979 which God might in iustice punish; but onely to free them from

that highest degree of Atheisme, which in the vulgar opinion was imputed vnto them: Namely, from being such desperate and obdured Atheists, as simply & constantly denied there was any God. For, it is very true, which Plato affirm∣eth, that there was neuer in the world any such kinde of Atheist; but that,* 1.980 All of those who denied God in the beginning, yet still confessed him in the end. And that therein he held a very true opinion, I plainely exemplified, by all those knowne Atheists, that haue beene most noted and branded for such: who haue all of them, at sometime, and some of them, at all times acknowledged some gods: notwithstanding they denied the gods of their owne countries; to be truly gods. So that, mine excusing of them, was not, to free them a toto, but a tanto. Not to free them vniuersally, from the whole sinne of A∣theisme; (which hath a great latitude, and is a body consisting of many parts and members: as I purpose,* 1.981 God willing, hereafter to make plaine) but to free them from the crime of denying all gods; which is the highest pitch, and (as it were) the ••ead of it. And yet, euen this also, not by peremptorie asser∣tion, but by probable collection, onely out of those heads of their accusati∣ons, which haue beene most inforced against them, by their enemies.

Now, though they were not guilty of this highest degree of Atheisme, in generally & obstinately denying all gods: yet might they be guilty of many other inferior degrees of Atheisme; for which God might iustly punish them: and, by their example, teach others to beware of them. For, as it followeth not, on the one side, that, because they denied their false gods, that therefore they must needs denie the true God too: so followeth it not, on the other side, that, because they denied their false gods, they must needs confesse the true.

For first, they might denie their false gods to be Gods; and yet neuer seeke further to finde out any other, vpon a meere dulnesse, & negligence of Reli∣gion. And so liue, without any opinion at all of God. At the least, for the most part, though totally they could not. As those men, of whom the Apostle spea∣keth, that they were,* 1.982 without any God in the world. Which is a priuatiue kind of Atheisme▪ ••or which, God might as iustly punish those Heathens, as he did his owne people,* 1.983 whom he suffered to perish, for their lack of knowledge.

Secondly, they might deny their false gods; & yet therewithall, deny the true God too. Which is a positiue kind of Atheisme; by hauing an opinion There is no God: as the ••ormer was a priuatiue; by hauing no opinion, That there is a God. Of which sort of Atheists, the Prophet Dauid speaketh, when he telleth vs, that, The Foole saith in his heart,* 1.984 There is no God. Which wicked opinion, though none of them all can constantly maintaine, but hold it weakly and infirmely & with many interruptions: yet might God (euen for this impiety) as iustly pu∣nish them as he did that blasphemer,* 1.985 who offended but in passion. And, thogh diuers of those Atheists, whom before I haue named, haue both repented, & re¦canted; wherby they might diuert the seuerity of Gods iudgement: yet might ether their repentance be too weake to turne away the decree of their punish∣ment; as King Ahabs was: or it might come too late; as Antiochus his did: or,* 1.986 they might, for the present submit & confesse; and yet afterward returne vnto their former wickednesse;* 1.987 as King Pharaoh did. All whom, notwithstanding their former confessions,* 1.988 yet he iusty punished, for their former blasphemies.

Thirdly, they might denie their false gods, and seeke about for another; and

yet not hit vpon the right: because they sought him no, wthere they should, that is,* 1.989 in his owne most holy and sacred word. As Athenagoras obserueth of the Poets, and Philosophers. Deum inquirere, tanqu••m inventuri, nimia de se fiducia, conati sunt: non tamen illum vel reperire, vel animi cogitatione complecti potuerunt. Et meritò quidem: Quòd Dei notitism, non ab ipso pete∣rent Deo, sed intra se quis{que} cum disquireret. The Poets and Philosophers did, ••••th of them, seeke God, praesuming that they could not misse him. But yet, indeed they could not finde him, no nor vnderstand him neither. Because they sought not the knowledge of God, by God; but onely by confidence▪ in themselues. So that (as Lactantius hath very well obserued) It was easier for them,* 1.990 to dis∣cerne their owne gods to be false, then it was, to finde out, who was the true. Tullius dissoluit publicas religiones: sed tamen veram, quam ignorabat, nec ipse, nec alius quisquam introducere potuit. Vt ipse testatus est: Falsum qui∣dem app••rere, veritatem autem latere. Tullie (saith hee) could dissolue the false religions: but yet, hee could not finde out the true; neither hee himselfe, nor yet any other of them: because it was vnto them vnknowne. Insomuch that be professeth, That falshood still appeareth, but Truth alwayes lurketh.

Fourthly, they might (in some degree) finde out the true God, and yet ascribe his works vnto other false gods: as the Heathen did, the ruling of the heauens vnto their Iupiter; of the Sunne, vnto Apollo; of the Seas vnto their Neptune; and,* 1.991 as the Israelites themselues did, their deliuerance, vnto their Golden Calfe. Which their dishonoring of him, he punished, with the death of about three thousand of them. And might therefore, as iustly, punish the same sinne, in the Heathen.

Fiftly, they might denie their owne false gods, to be gods; and yet accept of others, as false. As we may plainely see,* 1.992 in Socrates: who openly denied the A∣thenian gods; and yet beleeued his owne familiar spirit, to be a god, which was, indeed, but a Diuell. Now,* 1.993 this was not to renounce his false Religion: but to exchange one false Religion for another, wherein, his latter impietie, was greater then his former. For which exchange of superstition, euen Plu∣t••rch pronounceth of Tullus Hostilius; that he was iustly destroyed,* 1.994 by lightning.

Sixtly, they might denie their false gods, for a time; and yet relapse vn∣to them againe. As Socrates againe did. Who,* 1.995 notwithstanding his former denying of all the Athenian gods: yet at his death, commanded a Cock to be offered for him, vnto Aesculapius.

All these wayes (and many more) might those men be impious, against the true God; though they both denied, and derided their false gods. For the least of all which manifold impieties, God might, in his iustice, take vengeance vpon them, as vpon the true Enemies of his true Religion: though they were not in the highest degree of Atheisme. And therefore, there is no wrong done, neither vnto the truth, in excusing them, from some degree of Atheisme; nor yet vnto Gods Iustice, in punishing them, for other some.

CHAP. 16.

That the generall Consent of all men, in agreeing so fully, That there is a God; is an infallible Argument, That there is one, indeed. 2. That, to this end, it is alledged by those Authors, that haue obserued it. 3. In making it, The Law of

Nature. 4. In making Consent, a Symptome of Truth, in all things. 5. In making it, the chiefest Argument, that can be brought in this Cause.

THE maine purpose of this first booke, is, to proue, There is a God: yet, neither by the view of his workes; nor by the voyce of his word: but onely, by that inward praenotion, and perswa∣sion, which nature hath implanted in the minde of euery man; That a God (surely) there is. A Lesson, not taught from one man to another, but imprinted in all of them, by the same common nature. It is (as the Orator asseuereth, in another like matter) Non scripta,* 1.996 sed nata lex; quam non ••idicimus, accepimus, legimus; verùm ex ipsa Natura arripuimus, ••••usimuo, expressimus. It is not a Law, that is written in Tables; but a Law, that is originally begotten within vs. A Law, which we haue, neither learned, nor re∣ceiued, nor read; but which, by very Nature, we haue inwardly bred. A Law, as largely diffused into the hearts of all men, as the very humane nature is com∣municated vnto them.* 1.997 For (as I haue formerly declared) there is not any Na∣tion, neither Greeke, nor Barbarian, neither Christian, nor Heathen, but that they haue their God; their Priests, their Temples, their Altars, their Sacrifi∣ces, and other such like naturalls of Religion. And yet, all these, so differing one of them from another, that it euidently appeareth, that none of them haue learned their Religion, from their Neighbours; neither by institution, nor yet by imitation: but onely erected it of themselues, from these two generall grounds of Nature: That there is a God; and, That hee is to be wor∣shipped. Againe,* 1.998 that, as there is no Nation of men, in the world: so be there no men of any condition, in the world, but that they haue their God: nei∣ther superior, nor inferior; Magistrate, nor Subiect; learned, nor vnlearned: as I haue largely declared, by particular instance, both of Poets, Lawgiuers, Philosophers,* 1.999 and Artizanes. Nay, yet againe, that, there is no particular per∣son, in the world, but, in some degree or other, at some time or other, he belee∣ueth, There is a God: yea euen those men, that doe seeme the most to con∣temne him: Swearers, Blasphemers, & Idolaters. Nay,* 1.1000 euen the very Atheists themselues, who make it their profession, to professe, There is no God: yet do euidently enough confesse him, in their deedes; though they deny him, in their words. They doe really confesse him; both by that excessiue selfe-loue, whereby they idolize themselues; and by that inward feare, which they haue of another God, aboue themselues. Yea, and sometimes they are driuen to confesse him in words too: and openly, both to acknowledge and to re∣nounce their former vngodlinesse. Finally, that, though none of all the Atheists should euer haue confessed God; neither verbally, nor really; neither directly,* 1.1001 nor indirectly: yet that God, who is faithfull, and cannot deny him∣selfe, he confesseth himselfe, by those remarkeable, and exemplarie punish∣ments, which he notoriously and constantly inflicteth vpon Atheists; more euidently, then vpon any other sort of Offenders: Thereby, euen proclai∣ming himselfe, both to be, and to be vnto the Atheist, a professed enemy. So that, there is no part of all the vniuersall, from God vnto the Deuill, but that it proclameth God: no part of nature so disordered, or distorted, but that in this one point it retaineth his rectitude, to beleeue there is a God. Yea, euen

the Deuills themselues, in whom the greatest auersion is. Which admirable consent of all the parts of the world together, in this one position, more then in any other,* 1.1002 hath beene noted and obserued, almost by all the learned: as I haue formerly declared.

2 In which their allegation,* 1.1003 this may further be obserued (which I haue purposely reserued, for the close of this first Booke) that the Authors there al∣ledged, haue not onely related it historically, that such a generall consent there is, in beleeuing that there is a God: but they haue also pleaded it logi∣cally, as a good and a sound Argument, to proue, that therefore there is one indeed: inferring the truth of the thing so beleeued, from the vniuersalitie of mens consent, in beleeuing it. In which their probation, we may obserue this Gradation, consisting of three degrees. First, that they affirme this generall con∣sent, and agreement of all men, without the dissent of any man whosoeuer, to be the very voice of nature. Secondly, that they affirme, a generall consent, in any other matter whatsoeuer it be, to be a good Argument of the truth. And thirdly, that they affirm, that in this particular truth, which is questioned by the Atheist, it is the strongest Argument, that can be brought to proue it.

3 For the first steppe of which Climax, That this generall consent of all men, in beleeuing There is a God; is not, either any casuall,* 1.1004 and accidentall agreement; nor any politike composition, made by mutuall stipulation: but the simple and vncorrupted voice of nature, working alike in al men, and spea∣king vnto them, with one and the same tongue, though they be of diuers tongues, it is expressely affirmed, by diuers learned Authors; both Philoso∣phers, and Diuines; both Heathens, and Christians.

Tully saith expressely, that, Omnium consensus, est Naturae vox: That the consent of all men, is the voyce of Nature. Nay further that it is, not onely the voice of Nature, pronouncing; but also, the very Law of Nature, prescribing. Omní in re, consensio omnium Gentium,* 1.1005 Lex Naturae pu¦tanda est: The generall consent of all Nations, in all matters, is to be reputed for none other, then for the very Law of Nature. Which generall definition, hee pronounceth in that place, vpon this particular occasion, that, Omnes, esse vim, & Naturam divinam, arbitrantur; That all men generally hold, That there needs must be a God. Yea, and in another place, hee reckoning vp the parts of the Law of Nature, he instanceth Religion, to be the very first of them. Naturae ius est, quod nobis non opinio, sed quaedam innata vis asserat: vt, Religio∣nem,* 1.1006 Pietatem, Gratiam, &c. The law of nature is that, which is not implanted into vs, by other mens opinion; but begotten in vs, by an inward sense of our owne: as Religion towards God; Piety, towards our Parents; and thankfulnes, towards our Benefactors. Where he maketh religion, to be more natural vnto vs, then that naturall loue, which we owe vnto our parents. Yea,* 1.1007 and so likewise doth Xeno∣phon. Lex apud omn••s homines vnaest, & prima, vt Deos colas: &, vt Parentes item honores. This is one general Law, among al men, and the first of all, To wor∣ship the Gods; and to honour our Parents. Where he also maketh Religion to∣wards God, the very first branch of the Law of Nature; and Piety towards our Parents, but the second. Yea, and in another place, he inferreth, that, be∣cause it is of the Law of Nature, it is also a truth. An tu putas, opinionem ho∣minibus a Dijs innatam fuisse? Sufficientes eos ad benè vel malè agendumesse,* 1.1008 si

non essent sufficientes? Ac arbitraris, homines perpetuò deceptos nunqu••m sen∣sisse? Doe you thinke that the Gods would euer haue implanted this opinion into the mindes of men, that they are of power to doe both good and euill, if they 〈◊〉〈◊〉 not of such power? Or can you once imagine, that men should ser euer in this point be deceiued, and yet neuer finde their error? Conclu••ing, that because it is an inbred opinion, that therefore it is a truth. And the rather, because no man, as yet, could euer proue it false.

Neither is this the iudgement only of Heathen Philosophers, but also of diuers of the learnedest Christian Fathers. Tertullian saith, that Ipsum Deum, secun∣dùm naturam, priùs novimus: Our first knowledge of God,* 1.1009 is by the inward tea∣ching and instruction of Nature. Which therein hath lessoned vs so perfect∣ly, that, as he there addeth, in another like matter: Quaeres igitur Dei legem ha∣bens communem istam in publico mundi, in naturalibus Tabulis? We neede not to seeke it in the law of God: we may reade it so plainely in the law of the world, in the naturall tables of our hearts. Inferring in the Chapter following, Ag∣noscant interim Naturae authoritatem, communis parentis nomine: Let them therefore acknowledge the authority of Nature, as of their common Mother. In∣sinuating, that this lesson, is of her first teaching. So likewise Gr••gorie Nazi∣anzene, Esse Deum, cùm ipse nos asp••ctus, tum Naturae lex, docet: That there is a God,* 1.1010 not onely the visible sight of our eyes;* 1.1011 but also the very law of Nature,* 1.1012 doth teach vs. So likewise, Lactantius. Naturalis legis caput primum est, ipsum Deum nósse: The very first Chapter of the law of Nature, is to know, There is a God. Yea, & this law of nature is so largely diffused, that it is infused euen into very Beasts: as God himselfe professeth. Yea, and as Xenocrates Carthaginensis also confesseth; Qui non omn•• spem abiecit, quìn et••ā in rationis expertibus animan∣tibus, sit Dei notitia: He was not without some hope, but that, euen the brute beasts had some knowledge of a God. So that he stretcheth this Law of Nature, to as large an extent,* 1.1013 as the Emperour Iustinian doth in his Institutions: who saith, that Ius naturale, non est humani generis proprium, &c. He maketh the law of Nature not to be a law peculiar vnto the nature of man; but to be a com∣mon law, vnto euery liuing thing: as the naturall coniunction of male and fe∣male, the procreation of young, and such like. Vnto which extended signifi∣cation of the law of Nature, yet this first head of it, concerning the knowledge of God, extendeth it selfe no lesse, then those his named instances. Nay, indeed much further; as Proclus affirmeth. For he saith, that not onely things indu∣ed with life, but also things without life, haue euery one, in his kinde, not one∣ly a knowledge, but also an acknowledgement of God; vnto whom they all doe sing with such a voyce,* 1.1014 as he hath giuen them. Cuncta pr••cantur, hym∣nòs{que} con••inunt, ad ordinis sui ducem; alia, intellectuali modo; alia, ration••li; a∣lia, sensiti••o; alia, naturali. All things doe both pray and sing vnto their Cap∣taine, and to the Author of their order. Some, after an intellectuall kinde and manner, as Angels; some, after a reasonable, as Men; some, after a sensible, as Beasts; and some after a naturall, as insensible Creatures. Yea,* 1.1015 and the three Children, in their Song, allude vnto the same: when they call, not onely vpon a Angels, b Men, and c Beasts; but also vpon the d Heauens, the e Stars, the •• Winds, the g Waters, the h Hils, and the Mountaines, to bl••sse the Name of the Lord, to prayse him, and to magnifie him for euer. Yea, and the Prophet Dauid

doth also the very same. Yea, and euen the very Diuells themselues (as the A∣postle Iames teacheth) doe not onely beleeue God, but also tremble at him, Yea,* 1.1016 and as S. Mathew testifieth,* 1.1017 They doe also confesse him. Which though they do not willingly or purposely to honor him,* 1.1018 yet doe they therein (though vn∣willingly) honor him. So that this law of Nature is so forcible in euery crea∣ture, that it compelleth all of them to acknowledge their Creator; yea, euen those that are the most vnwilling to doe it; the Deuill, and the Atheist. Now, how commeth this law of Nature to be so forcible in them, as to be able to in∣force them? Surely, onely by that reason which Zeno hath alledged, that The Law of Nature is the very Law of God: Naturalem legem,* 1.1019 esse Diuinam. This is that which compelleth them to confesse him: That he hath giuen it for a law vnto all his creatures,* 1.1020 which they cannot passe: euen from the very Angels vn∣to the very Dragons: yea, euen to the great red Dragon. This then is the first collection, from this so generall a consent, in beleeuing There is a God; that it is nothing else, but that Law of Nature, which God hath imposed vpon euery creature; that they shall in some degree, both know him and confesse him. And to this very purpose it is alledged, by the forenamed Authours.

4 Now, as the forenamed Authours haue esteemed of his so full a con∣sent, in beleeuing There is a God, to be a branch of the Law of Nature,* 1.1021 and consequently an infallible truth: so haue diuers others collected it to bee a truth; because there is so full a consent in it. The former sort, deducing the Consent from the Truth; and the second sort, arguing the Truth from the Con∣sent. For the same Nature which doth Nihil facere frustrà, it doth also, Nihil dicere frustra too. For, Nullius rei vel sine causa est ortus,* 1.1022 vel sine rati∣one praenotio: as Plutarch truely affirmeth, There is no generation, without a cause; nor no praenotion, without a reason. So that,* 1.1023 Nature neither saith, nor doth any thing in vaine. And therefore, if Nature say, That there is a God, it is not vainely said: but there is surely one indeed. Now, that which all men affirme, they say it not of themselues; but it is Nature that saith it in them. For, as I haue shewed out of the Romaine Orator, Consensus omnium,* 1.1024 est Naturae vox: The Consent of all men, is the voyce of Nature in them. And therefore many learned Authors, both of Heathens and Christians, doe reckon such Consent, to be alwayes a concomitant of the truth: yet not following after it, as an ordinary seruitor; but going before it, as a Gentleman Vsher. For, it followeth not, that such a thing is true, and therefore there is a generall Consent in it. But it followeth, There is in such a thing a generall Consent: and therefore it is true.

For as Aristotle obserues: Quod vniversis videtur, id, esse,* 1.1025 dicimus. That which all men affirme, is taken of all men, to be true and firme. And, in another place, he ascribeth as much certainety to Consent, as vnto any thing,* 1.1026 that hath bene found to be true, by experiment. Quod omnes aut plures autumant, adducit ho∣mines, vt existiment, hoc ipsum dici, tanquam vsu perceptem, aut experi∣mento cognitum: That which all, or the greatest part of men, doe beleeue, may iustly be beleeued, to haue beene found (vpon triall) an experimented truth. Yea, and in another place, he citeth the testimony of the ancient Poet Hesio∣dus,* 1.1027 vnto the same purpose,* 1.1028

Quam populi celebrant, omninò fama perire

Nulla potest— What all men speake, and Fame doth crowne, That cannot easily be layd downe.

And therefore is not likely, to haue beene rashly tak••n vp.

Certus abest Author;* 1.1029 sed vox hoc nuncia•• omnis. Credo tibi, verum dicere▪ Fama, soles:

saith another to like purpose.

There is a constant rumor runn's; Ye•• want's a certaine 〈◊〉〈◊〉. But, Fame, thou vsest to speake truth: I credit thee, the r••ther.

Now, if a common fame be such an Argument of the truth, which many men divulge against their inward perswasion: then, how much more is the in∣ward perswasion it selfe, when it is vniuersall, and begotten in the minde, not by any outward fame, but by a naturall inward worki••g? As it is in this perswasion; That there is a God. Here, the perswasion groweth not out of the fame; but the fame out of the perswasion. And yet, is the fame as large as the perswasion: as Aristotle, in plaine words, doubteth not to af∣firme. Vetus est fame,* 1.1030 & quidem haereditaria, mortalium omnium; Vniuersa, a Deo, & per Deum, nobis esse constitu••a. It is both an an••ient, and a natur••ll fame, vniuersally diffused into the mindes of all men; that from God, and by God, proceedeth all our good. Alledging this vniuersalitie of consent, to be a good argument, of the vndoubted truth of it. The same Philosopher defi∣neth that to be probable,* 1.1031 which seemeth to be true, either vnto all men, or to the most men, or, at the least, vnto wise men. Probabilia sunt, quae aut omnibus aut pluribus, aut sapientibus videntur. Then, must that needs be more then probable; Quod, & omnibus, & pluribus, & sapientibus videtur: as this doth, That there is a God. This can be thought no lesse then a necessarie truth. For (as Seneca obserueth) Multum dare solemus praesumptioni omnium hominum. Veritas argumentum est,* 1.1032 idem omnibus videri. Wee vse to ascribe much vnto a generall perswasion. It is an argument of a truth, to seeme a truth vnto all men. Nay, it is more then an argument of a Truth. It is (as Tullie too affir∣meth) a very necessarie truth. De quo omnes consentiunt, id verum esse ne∣cesse est: That, whereon all men are agreed,* 1.1033 that must needs be true indeed.

Neither doe these Heathen men onely, giue this great ascription, vnto the consent of all men: but diuers Christian Diuines, doe also the very same. Chrysostome* 1.1034 saith, that it is Grande indicium veritatis, cùm vnoore idem pro∣nuncient. It is a great argument of the truth, when many doe speake the same. things, with one mouth. Pleading this, for the consent, euen of the Holy Euangelists: and out of their consent, concluding their truth, as by a firme Argument. And Hierom saith likewise, that, Etiam si Scr••pturae authoritas non subest;* 1.1035 tamen orbis consensus instar praecepti obtin••••. That though there ••e no expresse warrant of Scripture, yet the consent of the world, is as good as a prae∣cept. Which, though hee there pronounce, in the person of an Heretike: yet in the person of the Orthodox, he doth not reuoke; confirming by his silence, what he reproues not by his speech. So great an estimation, ••aue all learned men ascribed, vnto the consenting of all men. Yea, and diuers of them haue beene so zelous, in defending it, that they set a stigma, and a note vpon all that impugne it. Aristotle censureth them, to be a carping and captious kinde

of men, who loue to reproue all othere mens opinions, and yet can bring ••o better themselues. Qui fidem [consensus] tollit,* 1.1036 non valde probabiliora dicet. Tullie goeth a steppe further, and passeth an harder censure; imputing v. to them not boldnesse, but malipertnesse. For, though he were one of the Academikes himselfe, who chalenged vnto themselues a Libertie of speaking, both for and against euery thing: yet de••••ieth hee, euen to Academikes the libertie of speaking against Consent: pronouncing that, to be, not libertie or and a citie,* 1.1037 but petulancie and procacie. Tum demùm mihi procax Academia vid▪ b••tur, fi omnes consenserint: Yea, and Caecilius censureth it, to be such a kinde of boldnes, as he cannot so much as thinke on, without great impati∣ence. Cùm omnium Gentium,* 1.1038 de Dijs immortalibus, quanvìs incerta sit vel ratio, vel origo; maneat tamen firma consensio; neminem fero, tanta audacia, tam{que} irreligiose, nescio qua prudentia, tumescentem, qui hanc religionem, tam vetustam, tam vtilem, tam salubrem, dissoluere, aut infirmare nitatur. Seeing there is a generally receiued opinion of God, through all the nations of the world, wherein the consent of them all is most certaine; though both the rea∣s••n, and originall thereof, be vncertaine; the boldnesse of those men is not to be indured, nor their profanesse to be suffered, who (swelling with an opinion of th••ir owne proper wisedome) dare presume, to impugne so ancient, so profita∣ble, and so wholsome a Religion.* 1.1039 Clemens Alexandrinus taxeth those men (which consent not with all other men, in this generall and naturall beleefe of a God) to be not insolent, or malipert; but to be plainely impudent: and sayth, that they doe, Omnem exuere pudorem,* 1.1040 aduerùs veritatem. And Za∣charias Mytilenensis, hee censureth them, to be no better then mad-men. Commun••m omnium sententiam destruere, est dementissimum. To impugue the common opinion of all men, is the action of a Mad-man. Thus you see, how great Authoritie, all learned antiquitie doth ascribe vnto Consent; and how tender they be ouer it, making it so certaine an Argument of truth, that they cannot brooke any man, that doth seeke to oppose it.

5 Now, as this generall Consent of all men, is an Argument of truth,* 1.1041 in euery other thing: so is it most of all, in this our present Question. To proue, There is a God. For though many other Arguments may be brought ••o confirme it; and so be, by learned Writers, both of Heathens, and Christi∣ans: yet is none of them all, of greater weight, and importance.

Tullie saith, that, Firmissimum hoc afferri videtur,* 1.1042 cur Deos esse credamus; quòd nulla gens tam fera, nemo omnium tam sit immanis, cu••us mentem non imbuerit Deorum opinio. This is the strongest reason, why all men should be∣leeue, that there is a God; because all men doe beleeue it: And, because there is not any, either Nation so fierce, or Person so sauage, but that his minde is indued, with some opinion of the Gods. And againe in another place. Intelliginecesse est, esse Deos; quoniam insitas eorum,* 1.1043 vel potiùs innatas cognitiones habemus. We must needs beleeue, that therefore there be Gods; because the opinion of them is so generally ingrafted, or rather indeed inbred in our mindes. And againe, in the same place. Esse igitur Deos,* 1.1044 consitendum est:—quoniam ferè constat in∣ter om••es, non Philosophos solùm, s••d etiam indoctos. Wee must needs confesse, that therefore there is a God: because, both Philosophers and ignorants doe so generally agree in it. Pressing still this consent, as a good Argument

to conclude it. Yea, and Velleius, obseruing, with how great an applause, this naturall anticipation, and presumption of a God, was receiued and vrged by all the Philosophers; hee seeketh cunningly to deriue the whole credit of the first inuention of this Argument, vnto his Maister, the Epicure: affirming, that though diuers other Philosophers had obserued, that a generall consent there is, in beleeuing a God: yet that onely Epicurus was hee, that collected, that this Consent had the force of an Argument,* 1.1045 to proue it. Epicurus solus vi∣dit primùm, esse Deos; quòd, in omnium animis, eorum notionem im∣pressisset ipsa Natura. Other Philosophers, do but onely report, and note this Consent; that we may know that such a thing there is. But the Epicure notes this of it, that a sound and firme conclusion may be gathered from it. Which, his so strong ambition, to make his Maister, the Epicure, to be the first Author of this subtile inuention, doth euidently shew his great conceite of it; and how strong, and inuincible an Argument hee thought it. But, Co••••••, the Academike incountereth Velleius, in that his assertion, and will not suffer him to steale away the glory of this Argument, onely vnto Epicurus, from the rest of the Philosophers: which he ascribeth vnto them, as well as vnto him. Com∣mune hoc est argumentum aliorum etiam Philosophorum,* 1.1046 This is a common Argument with other Philosophers, as well as with Epicures. And, that he spake no more then the truth in it, we may euidently see in Plato: who, among di∣uers other arguments, to proue There is a God, nominatìm instanceth, in this generalitie of Consent. O amice, facile est veritatem hanc ostendere;* 1.1047 Quòd Dij sint.—Primùm enìm, Terra, Sol, Sydera, ipsúmque Vniversum; temporum quoque ornatissima varietas annis men sibusque distincta id osten∣dunt; Graecorum praetereà Barbarorúmque omnium Consensus, Deos esse fatentium. It is easie (my good Friend) to make euident this truth, That there needes must bee a God: The Earth sheweth it, the Sunne sheweth it, the Starres sheweth it, the World sheweth it, the most beautifull varietie of times and of seasons, of yeares and of moneths sheweth it: And, the generall Consent both of Greeke; and Barbarians, confessing a God, that likewise sheweth it. Where it euidently appeareth, that he not onely reporteth, that there is a Consent, both of Greekes and Barbarians, that There is a God: but also, from thence collecteth, that therefore there is one indeede: pressing this Consent, as a principal Argument, which proueth the truth of it. And the same wee may likewise see,* 1.1048 in all those other Authors, whom before I haue alledged to be the Reporters of this general Consent; that al of them intend it, to this only end, to vrge it as an argument, to proue, There is a God. So then▪ the whole sum of this first book, may be contracted into this short Syllogisme:

That, which hath at all times, and in all places bene beleeued of all men, that cannot possibly be false, but needs must be a Truth.

But, That there is a God, hath at al times, and in all places bin beleeued of al men.

Ergo, this cannot be false, but must needes be a Truth.

The Maior is proued to be true, because,* 1.1049 The Consent of all men is the Voice of Nature: which is not the voice of Error.

The Minor hath bene proued,* 1.1050 through the tract of this whole Booke.

And therefore, the Conclusion cannot be denied.

The End of the first Booke.

Notes

• * 1.1

  To beleeue there is a God the foundati∣on of all Re∣ligion.
• * 1.2

  Heb. 11. 6.
• * 1.3

  Lactant▪ lib. De vero cultu. c. 9. p 333 336
• * 1.4

  Palingen. in Sagit. p. 268.
• * 1.5

  Theoph. Alex.
• * 1.6

  Epist. 2.
• * 1.7

  Paschal. Bib▪ Pat.
• * 1.8

  Tom. 1. p. 391.
• * 1.9

  Phil. Iud. lib.
• * 1.10

  De decalogo p. 1018.
• * 1.11

  Aben Ezra apud Iosippu•• p. 297.
• * 1.12

  Senec. Epist. 96. p. 237.
• * 1.13

  Plato in Epi∣nom. p. 918.
• * 1.14

  Plut. lib. De Stoic. R•• pub. To. ••. Mor. p. 8.
• * 1.15

  Phocyl. p. 100. Pythag. p. 12••.
• * 1.16

  Where God is not beleeued all wickednes is planted.
• * 1.17

  Plut. lib. De Su∣persti••. Tom▪ 1. Mor. p. 380.
• * 1.18

  Sil. Italic. lib. 4. p. 56. ••.
• * 1.19

  Gen. 20. 11.
• * 1.20

  Senec. Epist. 96. p. 23••.
• * 1.21

  To beleeue there is a God is the summe of all Religion.
• * 1.22

  Cic. lib. 1. De Orat. p. 147.
• * 1.23

  Iupiter à maio∣••ibus nostris Optimus Maxi∣mus appellatur. Cic. lib. 2. de Nat. Deor. p. 210
• * 1.24

  Io. 5. 36.
• * 1.25

  Prayer must helpe vs vnto vnderstanding. Plato in Epin••m p. 918.
• * 1.26

  Theodoret. Serm 9. de Prouid. To▪ 2. p. 615.
• * 1.27

  Epiph. lib. 1. cont. Haeres. p. 1.
• * 1.28

  Nazian. Orat. 21 Apol. f••g. p. 398.
• * 1.29

  The very Hea∣thens v••ed Prayer in the beginning of their works. Cap. 5. Sect▪ 1. Clem. Alex. lib. 5. Strom. p. 277.
• * 1.30

  Cic. li. 2. De. leg. p. 320.
• * 1.31

  Virg. Eclog. 3. p. 8.
• * 1.32

  AElian. lib. 4. de var▪ Hist. c. 10. p. 423.
• * 1.33

  Demost▪ To. 2. p. 3.
• * 1.34

  Plin. in. Pa••egir▪ p. 360.
• * 1.35

  Laert. in vitae Protagorae. p. 321.
• * 1.36

  Plato in Tim••o p. 704. 713.
• * 1.37

  Cic. lib. 2. De Leg. p. 320.
• * 1.38

  Xenoph. in Oe. conom. p. 239.
• * 1.39

  S••obaeus lib. 1. Eclog. phys. cap. 3. p. 3.
• * 1.40

  Prayer must helpe vs to be∣leeue, That God is.
• * 1.41

  Plato. lib. 10. De leg▪ p. 873.
• * 1.42

  Phi. Iud. lib. De Monarchia. p. 1102.
• * 1.43

  Plutarch lib. de lside, Tom. 2. p, 611.
• * 1.44

  Arist. lib. 1. Ethic. c. 9. To. 2. p. 611.
• * 1.45

  Plato in Epinom p. 913.
• * 1.46

  Hieron. Epist. ad. Laetam. To. 1. p. 57.
• * 1.47

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. li. 1 De Trinit. p. 1127.
• * 1.48

  That God is, cannot be proue•• •• Priorj.
• * 1.49

  Plato. lib. 10. De Leg. p. ••70.
• * 1.50

  Senec. li••. De Prouid. c. 1. p. 1.
• * 1.51

  Epieurus, cùm Pr••uidentiam su, ••ulit▪ D••u•••• ne••av••t esse, cum autem Deum esse pro∣fessus est, et pro∣uidec••iam esse contess••t▪ Alte∣run enim c••••m sine altern necesse pro••••as, nec in∣••ellig•• potest. Lact in. lib. De ••ra D••. ••. 9. P. 455.
• * 1.52

  Tri••••eq. Sto••••. Serm. 〈…〉〈…〉 ••ohan ••u. Mi∣rand. lib De ••nte. p. 204.
• * 1.53

  Arist. lib 1. ••oster. c. 2. To. 1. p. 175.
• * 1.54

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.55

  1. Tim. 1. 15.
• * 1.56

  Clem. ••lex. lib. 5. Strom. p. 273.
• * 1.57

  Cic. lib. 3. De Offic. p. 380.
• * 1.58

  Heb. 11. 6.
• * 1.59

  Cic. lib. 1. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 leg. p. 313.
• * 1.60

  That God is, may be shewed A Posteriori.
• * 1.61

  Arist. l•• b. 1. ••oster. c. 10. To. 1. p. 188.
• * 1.62

  Aquinas 1. Quaest. 2. Art. 2. Arist. lib. 1. Poster. c. 2. To. 1. p. 175.
• * 1.63

  Scaliger. lib de Subtil. Exerci•• 218 p. 697.
• * 1.64

  Nemini comp••r∣t•• ••unt in igne caloris principia
• * 1.65

  Arist. lib. 2. Me∣taphys. c. 3. To. 2. p. 1388.
• * 1.66

  Arist. Ethic. lib. 1. c. 3. ••o. 2. p. 604.
• * 1.67

  Clem. Alex. lib. 5. Strom. p. 273.
• * 1.68

  Cic. lib. De Vni∣uersitate p. 428. Plato, in Timaeo p.
• * 1.69

  Iod. Viues. lib. 1. De Veritat. Christ. Relig. c. 4. p. 14.
• * 1.70

  The best Te∣stimonies, to proue, that There is a God, are the Testi∣monies of the Sc••••ptures.
• * 1.71

  Io: 8. 13. 14.
• * 1.72

  Iohn 14. 6.
• * 1.73

  Iohn 17. 17.
• * 1.74

  Salvian: lib 3. De Prouiden. Bib. Pat. To: 3. p. 270.
• * 1.75

  C••em. Alex. li. 5.
• * 1.76

  Strom. p. 273.
• * 1.77

  Philo Iud. lib. de leg. allegor. p. 139.
• * 1.78

  Xenoph. lib. 1. De••act. Socrat. p. 157.
• * 1.79

  Clem. Alex. vbi. supra.
• * 1.80

  Hilar. lib. 7. De Trin, p. 95.
• * 1.81

  Orosius lib. 6. Hist. c. 1. p. 213. ••
• * 1.82

  Atheists reiect the testimo∣nies of the Scriptures.
• * 1.83

  Lactant. lib. De falsa Relig. c. 4. p. 3.
• * 1.84

  Looke Sect 5. following. Macrob. lib. 1. De Som: Scip. c. 2. p. 3.
• * 1.85

  Salui••n. vbi supra.
• * 1.86

  The Testimo∣nies of the Heathens, are more regar∣ded with Atheists, then the Scriptures Sect. 4. and 5. Lactan. lib. De Iustitia. cap. 4. p. 268.
• * 1.87

  Hieron. Epist. ad Mag. Orat••∣rem. To. 2. p. 327.
• * 1.88

  Iustin. Mart. Orat. ad Gent. To. 1. p. 48.
• * 1.89

  Lactan. lib. De falsa Relig. c. 5. p. 10.
• * 1.90

  Lact. lib. De Diuino praemio. c. 13. p. 414.
• * 1.91

  1. Cor. 3. ••▪
• * 1.92

  Prosper lib. De Prouident. p. 180
• * 1.93

  The Testimo∣nies of Scrip∣ture why vsed in this worke.
• * 1.94

  A••g. lib. 22. De Ciu. Dei. c. 8. To. ••. p. 13 39.
• * 1.95

  Psal. 94. 9.
• * 1.96

  Illorum autho∣ritas est omni rationabili fa∣cultate validi∣or. Nazian. O∣rat. 47. p. 770.
• * 1.97

  Salu••a••. l. 3. De Prouid. Rib. Pat. To. 3. p. 270.
• * 1.98

  The most pro∣per authorities in respect of the Aduersa∣ries.
• * 1.99

  Sect. 2.
• * 1.100

  Claud. Vict. lib. 1. in Gen. ••ib. Pat. To. 7. p. 345.
• * 1.101

  Euseb. l. 6. De Praepar. c. 6. p. 125.
• * 1.102

  Act. 17. 28. 1. Cor. 15. 33. Tit. 1. 12.
• * 1.103

  The Testimo∣nies of the Heathens, why here so much vsed.
• * 1.104

  Qui sermonem invicem com∣municaturi sunt, oportet vt ali∣quatenus invi∣cem intellig••nt. Arist. l. 11. Me∣••aph••s. c. 4. To. 2. p. 1486.
• * 1.105

  Sect. 2. before.
• * 1.106

  Tertul. lib. De Cor••na. Cap. 7. p. 181.
• * 1.107

  Nouatian. lib. De Tri••it. cap. 18. Apud Ter∣tul. p. 631.
• * 1.108

  Lactan. l. 1. c. 6. p. 17.
• * 1.109

  Chrysost. Hom. 3. in Tit. Tom. 4. p. 1614.
• * 1.110

  ••••ctant. lib. De vera Sapientia. c. 12. p. 211.
• * 1.111

  Cic. Orat. Pro. P. Quint. p. 12.
• * 1.112

  Tertul. li. De A∣nima cap. 2. p. 262.
• * 1.113

  1. Sam. 17. 51.
• * 1.114

  Mat 7. 6.
• * 1.115

  Muscas, & Ra∣nas illis immi∣sit; vt rebus vi∣lissimis, superbia domeretur. Aug. Tract. 1. in Io∣han. Tom. 9. p. 12.
• * 1.116

  Senec. in prae••at Nat. Quaest. p. 3.
• * 1.117

  God hath plā∣ted in all men a certaine per∣swasion, That there is a God. Cognitio diuino ru•• suit semper in 〈…〉〈…〉 p. 7.
• * 1.118

  Senec. lib. 4. De Benfi••. c. 6. p. 50.
• * 1.119

  Laert. vita Ze∣nonis p. 248.
• * 1.120

  Testimonies of Heathens, that all men be∣leeue There is a God.
• * 1.121

  Cap. 6. Sect. 1. Plato lib. 10. de. leg. p. 878.
• * 1.122

  Xenophon lib. 1. De fact. Socrat. p. 166.
• * 1.123

  Thismegist. in Asclep. c. 3. p. 483.
• * 1.124

  Cic. lib. 1. De leg. p. 313.
• * 1.125

  Iu••enal. S••t. 15. p. 69. b.
• * 1.126

  Arist. lib. De Mundo. To. 2. p. 1566.
• * 1.127

  Rom. 11. 36.
• * 1.128

  Iamblic. lib. De Myster. c. 1. p. 5. Cap. 9. Sect. 2.
• * 1.129

  AElian. lib. 2. De var. Hist. c. 31. p. 395.
• * 1.130

  Arnob. lib. 8. cont. gent. p 747
• * 1.131

  Senec: Epist. 118 p. 295.
• * 1.132

  Testimonies of Christians That all men beleeue There is a God.
• * 1.133

  Clem. Alex. lib. 5. s••••om. p. 274
• * 1.134

  Arnob. lib. 1. cont. Gent. p 47••
• * 1.135

  Macarius ••om. 12. p. 153.
• * 1.136

  Beda. in cap. 17. Ioh. To. 5. p. 792.
• * 1.137

  Prosper. lib. De Prou••d. p. 180.
• * 1.138

  Theodoret. lib. de Angelis. Tom. 2. p. 498.
• * 1.139

  Testimonies of Tullie, that all men beleeue, There is a God.
• * 1.140

  Cic. li. 1. De Nat. Deor. p. 190.
• * 1.141

  Cic. lib. 1. Tusc. p. 112.
• * 1.142

  All Nations haue their Gods, by the Testimonies of Histories.
• * 1.143

  Diodor. Sicul. l. 13. p. 317.
• * 1.144

  Strabo. lib. 3. p. 328.
• * 1.145

  Cap. 8. Sect. 3.
• * 1.146

  Arnob. l. 8. cont. gent. p. 748.
• * 1.147

  C••••lius Rhodigin lib. 18. cap. 28. p. 862.
• * 1.148

  Herodot. l. 4. p. 278. 279.
• * 1.149

  Lucian. lib. De Sacrifici••s, p. 57. b.
• * 1.150

  Herod. vbi. supra.
• * 1.151

  Herodot. l. 1. p. 100.
• * 1.152

  All Nations haue there Gods, by the testimoni•• of new Histories.
• * 1.153

  Tres sunt in Mundo Religio∣nes; Iudaeorum, Paganorum, Christianorum. Athanas. in D••••put. cont. Arium p. 517. But time since his time hafh brought forth a fourth.
• * 1.154

  Trauellers find, that eue∣ry nation hath a God.
• * 1.155

  Eng. Voyag. vol. 3. p. 737. 738.
• * 1.156

  Ibid. p. 819.
• * 1.157

  Max. Tyr. Ser. 1. p. 6.
• * 1.158

  Cap. 6. Sect. 1.
• * 1.159

  Cic. lib. 1. De Nat. D••o. p 187.
• * 1.160

  Plut. Cont. Co∣lot. Tim. 3. Mor. p. 532.
• * 1.161

  Nisi Diuina sin••, vbi{que} tolli∣tur Sacrificij virtus, lambli. c. 6. P. 15. lib. De Mysterijs. Cic. lib. 1. Offic. p. 358.
• * 1.162

  Pet. Martyr. Decad. 1. lib. 5. p. 30. b. Aug. lib. de Haeres. To. 6. p. 18
• * 1.163

  Gen. 2. 25. Paul. Venet. lib. 3. c. 14. p. 390.
• * 1.164

  Eng. Voyages. vol. 1. p. 281.
• * 1.165

  Alex. ab. Alex. Geneth. Lib. 6. c. 26. p. 321. b.
• * 1.166

  The ridiculous Gods or diuers Nations.
• * 1.167

  Cap. 7. Sect. 1. Clem. Alex. Pro∣trept. p. 11.
• * 1.168

  Athenaeus. lib. 1. p. 21.
• * 1.169

  Lact. lib. 2. c. 16. p. 120.
• * 1.170

  Munster. lib. 5. Cosmogr. p. 1087
• * 1.171

  Masseus, lib. 6. Hist. Indic. p. 118.
• * 1.172

  Mat. 4. 9.
• * 1.173

  Deut. 32. 17.
• * 1.174

  2. King. 1. 2.
• * 1.175

  Luke 11. 15.
• * 1.176

  AElian. l. 12. De Animal. c. 5. p. 250.
• * 1.177

  Iuuenal. Satyr. 15. p. 60. a.
• * 1.178

  Aristop. ia Nub. Act. 5. sec. ••. p. 228.
• * 1.179

  Plin. l. 2. c. 7. p. ••.
• * 1.180

  Lucian. In Ioue Tragaedo, p. 210. a.
• * 1.181

  Linschot. c. 36. p. ••0.
• * 1.182

  P••t. Mar. Dec. p. 284.
• * 1.183

  Masseus l. 1. p. 24. Linschot c. 44. p. 81.
• * 1.184

  Ort••l. Chart. Cos∣mogr. 104.
• * 1.185

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.186

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.187

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.188

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.189

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.190

  Deut. 29. 17.
• * 1.191

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.192

  Aug. lib 4 de 〈◊〉〈◊〉. De••. c. 8. p. 231
• * 1.193

  The peculiar Gods of diuers Countries and Cities.
• * 1.194

  Cap. 5. Sect. 4. Cap. 7. Sect 1.
• * 1.195

  Cic. l. 3. de. Nat. Deor. p. 231.
• * 1.196

  Lucian. lib. De•• Sacri••ic. P. 57. ••.
• * 1.197

  p. 110 Tertul. in. Apo. log c. 24. p 54.
• * 1.198

  Lactant. l. 1. c. 15 p. 39.
• * 1.199

  Item Isidor. l. 8. orig. c. 11. p. 1023.
• * 1.200

  2. Kin. 18. 34.
• * 1.201

  ••er. 2. 28.
• * 1.202

  Deut. 4. 1.
• * 1.203

  Psal. 121. 4. 5
• * 1.204

  Psal. 127. 1.
• * 1.205

  Ex. 32. 1. 1. Sam. 8. 20.
• * 1.206

  1. King 11. 5. 7.
• * 1.207

  1. King. 17.
• * 1.208

  Vers. 33.
• * 1.209

  Vers. 29. 30.
• * 1.210

  The particular Gods of Fami∣lies. Cap. 5. Sect. 4.
• * 1.211

  Cic. l. 2. de. Nat. Deor. p. 210.
• * 1.212

  Plaut. Prolog. in Aulular. p. 103.
• * 1.213

  Gen. 31. 30. 33. Iud. 18. 24.
• * 1.214

  Plin. l. 2. ••. 7. p. 2.
• * 1.215

  Max. Tyr. Ser. 1. p. 6.
• * 1.216

  Seneca Epist. 116. P. 292.
• * 1.217

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.218

  Arislot. lib. 12. de Theelogia. cap. 8.
• * 1.219

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.220

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.221

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.222

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.223

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.224

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.225

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.226

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.227

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.228

  Cap. 1. Sect 3. All Poets be∣leeue, There is is a God. 〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.229

  P••ato. In Ione. p. 170. 171.
• * 1.230

  Cic. lib. 2. Epist: ad •• Fra••. Ep. 12. p. 211. Isa. 6. 6. 7.
• * 1.231

  Isidor. lib. 8. O∣rig. c. 7. p. 1018.
• * 1.232

  Theodoret. l. de Principijs. Tom. 2. p. 491.
• * 1.233

  Cic. Ora. pro. Ar∣chia Po••ta. p. 365
• * 1.234

  Plato. l. 2. De Repub. p. 548. ••it. 1. 12.
• * 1.235

  Max▪ Tyr. Serm. 22. p. 264.
• * 1.236

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 Argument. ••n plat Ion. p. 168.
• * 1.237

  Iust. Martyr. Orat. ad Gent. To. 1. p. 78.
• * 1.238

  Ouid. l. 1. Me∣t••m. p. 2.
• * 1.239

  Virgil. Eclog. 3. p. 8.
• * 1.240

  Pla••••an Io••e. p. 170.
• * 1.241

  Flori••eris vt apes in saltibus omnia limant. Omnia nos iti∣dem depas••imur aur••a dicta. Lucre. l. 3. p.
• * 1.242

  As Bees their hony seeke and sucke from euery flowery spring:
• * 1.243

  So Poets doe their golden sawes from o∣ther Authors bring.
• * 1.244

  Plat••, vbi supra. Manil. lib. 1. As••ronom. p. 4.
• * 1.245

  Martia. 2. Epigr. 89. in Gaurum. p. 68.
• * 1.246

  All Lawgiuers doe beleeue, That there is a God.
• * 1.247

  Max. Tyr. Serm. 1. p. 5.
• * 1.248

  Plut. contr. Col••t To. 3. Mor. p. 532
• * 1.249

  Ex. 20. 3. 32. 15. 16. Deut. 10. 4.
• * 1.250

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.251

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. l. 1. de Leg. p. 322.
• * 1.252

  Ros••••us l 8. De Antiquit. Rom. c. 6. p. 330.
• * 1.253

  Idem. l. 8. ••, 5. p. 323.
• * 1.254

  Siue putantes rem diuinam es∣se Leges, siue vt citius Populi Deûm timore le∣gibus obtempe∣rent. Diodor. l. 1. c. 2. p. 43.
• * 1.255

  Gen. 47. 22. Arist. l. 2. Pol. c. 6. To. 2. p. 773.
• * 1.256

  Diod. Sicul. l. 1. c. 5. p. 42.
• * 1.257

  Iust. Mart. To. 1. p. 50.
• * 1.258

  Psal. 68. 4. Ex. 20. 1.
• * 1.259

  Ficinus Argum. in Plat. Mino. p. 49.
• * 1.260

  Plut. in vita Numae, To. 1. p. 138.
• * 1.261

  Plut. l. de laude sui To. 2. p. 262.
• * 1.262

  Homer. l. 1. Ili∣ad. p. 7. a. b.
• * 1.263

  Stobaeus Serm. 41. p. 261.
• * 1.264

  Stobaeus. Serm. 39. p. 229.
• * 1.265

  Plato lib 1. De Leg. p. 746.
• * 1.266

  Pro. 8. 15.
• * 1.267

  Iob. 36. 22. in. vulgata.
• * 1.268

  Ia. 4. 12
• * 1.269

  Isa••. 33. 22.
• * 1.270

  Ioseph l. 2▪ cont. Apion. p. 914.
• * 1.271

  All Philoso∣phers beleeue that There is a God.
• * 1.272

  Plus diuersitatis inu••nias inter Philosophos, quàm societatis. Tertul. l. de A∣nima cap. 2. p. 262.
• * 1.273

  Senec. in Ludo, p. 247.
• * 1.274

  Cic. l. 1. De. Nat. Deor. p. 192▪
• * 1.275

  Arnob. l. 8. cont. Gent. p. 748. Cap. 8. in sin.
• * 1.276

  Cic. Tusc. p. 111
• * 1.277

  Plato lib. 10. De Leg. p. 870.
• * 1.278

  Euseb. l. 11. De pr••parat. c. 6. p. 229.
• * 1.279

  Ex. 33. 11. Iust. Mart. Orat. ad Gent. To. 1. p. 45.
• * 1.280

  Arist. l. de Mun∣do. To. 2. p. 1566.
• * 1.281

  Aristotles Booke De Mundo.
• * 1.282

  Lod. Viues in l. 4. Aug. De. Ciuit. Dei. c. 2. 10. 5. p. 222.
• * 1.283

  Lucius Apul. l. de Mundo. p. 2.
• * 1.284

  Aug Eugu••. l. 4. De peremi Philo¦soph. c. 4. p. 176. 177.
• * 1.285

  Arist. lib. 1. Me∣taphys. c. 2. To. 2. p. 1372.
• * 1.286

  Cic. l. 3. de Nat. D••or. p. 229.
• * 1.287

  Laert. in vita Zenonis P. 253. 256:
• * 1.288

  Mornaeus lib. De verit. Relig. c. 1. p. 15.
• * 1.289

  Cic. l. 1. de Nat. D••or. p. 190.
• * 1.290

  Iosephus l. 2. cont. Ap••on. p. 907.
• * 1.291

  Max Tyr. Orat. 29••. 358.
• * 1.292

  Tertul••. ••. 2. cont. Marc••on c. 27. p. 382.
• * 1.293

  Nonius in voce Canum p. 532.
• * 1.294

  Tertul. l. 1. cont. Marcion. ••. 21. p. 360.
• * 1.295

  Vnus est verus Deus in quem omnis set siex diuersis opinie∣nibus) secta con∣currit. Oros. 16. Iust. 1••. 213. Ouid Metam. l. 3. p. 100.
• * 1.296

  Iaert. in Pro∣••••. p. 3.
• * 1.297

  All Arts doe hold, That there is a God. Max. Tyr. Serm. 1. p. 5.
• * 1.298

  ••eren, in Pho••m Act. 2. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 4. p. 218. b.
• * 1.299

  Aug. Eugub. lib. 4 De pe••en. Phi. los. c. 4. p. 177.
• * 1.300

  Plut. lib. de vir∣tute Mora••. To. 2. p. 496.
• * 1.301

  Cap. 13.
• * 1.302

  Mat. 23. 6. 7.
• * 1.303

  The Tutela•• gods of seue∣rall Arts. Cap. 4. Sect. 5.
• * 1.304

  Chp. 4. Sect. 5.
• * 1.305

  Plut. in vit. Romuli. p. 54.
• * 1.306

  Mercurius prae∣est Sapientiae et eloquio. I••m∣blic. l. De Myster. c. 1. p. 1.
• * 1.307

  Arnob. l. 3. co••t. Gent. p. 581.
• * 1.308

  Lactant. l. 1. ••. 20 p. 51. 54.
• * 1.309

  Varro. l 6. p. 52.
• * 1.310

  Horat. l. 1. Epist. 16. p. 114. ••.
• * 1.311

  Festus in voce Ancilla. p. 251. Aug. lib. 4. c. 8. De Civit. Dei. Item c. 11. &••. Arnol. l. 3. cont. Gent▪ ••. 581. &•• Tertul▪ Apolog. c. 46. p. 76.
• * 1.312

  2 King. 10. 25.
• * 1.313

  Act. 19. 24. 25. 26. 27.
• * 1.314

  Lactant▪ L. De Ira Dei. c. 8 p. 453.
• * 1.315

  Cic. l. 1. De Nat. Deor. p. 184.
• * 1.316

  Ficinus Argum. l. 4. Plat. de Legib. p. 782.
• * 1.317

  Cic. l. 1. de Nat. Deor. p. 190.
• * 1.318

  Aug. l. de v••ra Relig. c. 14. To. 1. p. 686.
• * 1.319

  All seuerall men do be∣leeue There is a God.
• * 1.320

  Cap. 3. Sect. 2.
• * 1.321

  Arist. l. de Mu••. do To. 2. p. 1566.
• * 1.322

  Cic. l. 1. Tus••. p. 212.
• * 1.323

  Clem. Alex. l. 5. Str••••. p. ••74.
• * 1.324

  Ar••••b. l. 1. cont. Ge••t. p. 476
• * 1.325

  Beda. In Psal. 58. To. 8. p. 741.
• * 1.326

  Prosper. l. de. Prouiden. p. 180.
• * 1.327

  Clem. Alex. l. 5. Strom. p. 280. P. 277.
• * 1.328

  Cap. 4. Sect. 3.
• * 1.329

  Cic. l. 2. de Nat. D••or. p. 201.
• * 1.330

  L••c••an. in Iou•• Trag••▪ d••. p. 210.
• * 1.331

  All Swearers doe beleeue There is a God.
• * 1.332

  Plut. cont. Colo••. To. 3. Mor. p. 532.
• * 1.333

  Arist. Rheto. ad ••lex. c. 17. To. 2. p. 1038.
• * 1.334

  Heb. 6. 16.
• * 1.335

  Rom. 1. 9. Gal. 1. 20. Plaut. Menech. Act. 5. Sce. 2. p. 446.
• * 1.336

  Plaut. in Cap••. Act. 2. Sce. 3. p. 159.
• * 1.337

  Cic. l. 3. Off 15. p. 390.
• * 1.338

  Cic. vbi supra••
• * 1.339

  Exod. 22. 11.
• * 1.340

  Gen. 31 53. 4
• * 1.341

  Cic. Orat. 〈…〉〈…〉 Flacco. p. 346.
• * 1.342

  Plaut. in Ru∣dent. Act. 5. Sec. 2. p. 692.
• * 1.343

  Mat. 23. 18. 5
• * 1.344

  ••••nophon l. 2. D•• Cyri expe∣dit. p. 293. 1. Ioh. 1. 10.
• * 1.345

  Ioseph. l. 2. cont. Apion. p. 914.
• * 1.346

  Plaut. Menech. Act. 5. Sc•• 7 p. 455.
• * 1.347

  Ibid. Act. 4. S••e. 2. p. 439.
• * 1.348

  Plato in Hippia maiore. p. 115.
• * 1.349

  Stob••us. serm. 27. p. 194.
• * 1.350

  Plaut. Men••ch. Act. 4. S••e. 2. p. 439.
• * 1.351

  Heb. 6. 16.
• * 1.352

  Stobaeus vbi s••∣pra.
• * 1.353

  Plut. Quest. Rom. 44. Tom. 1. Mor. p. 575.
• * 1.354

  1. Sa. 14. 14. 1. Sa. 25. 22.
• * 1.355

  Plaut. in Aulu∣lar. Act. 4. Sce. 10. p. 138.
• * 1.356

  Co••l. Rhodigin. l. 21. c. 15. p. 981.
• * 1.357

  1. Sā••. 25. 29.
• * 1.358

  Eurip. 〈…〉〈…〉 154.
• * 1.359

  Aristoph. in Nu∣bibus. Act. 1. S••e. 3. p. 168.
• * 1.360

  Lucian in Toxa∣ri. p. 192.
• * 1.361

  All Blasphe∣mers doe be∣leeue There is a God.
• * 1.362

  A••g. l. 2. De mo∣ribus Manichaeo rum. ••. 11. To. 1. p. 75••.
• * 1.363

  Isay: 5. 20. Ex. 22. 28.
• * 1.364

  Leuit. 24 15. 16.
• * 1.365

  Leuit. ••4▪ 10.
• * 1.366

  Iosh. 2. 10. 11.
• * 1.367

  Aquin. 2. 2. quaest. 13. Art. 1. p. 29. ••
• * 1.368

  Homer. l. 9. Odyss. p. 66.
• * 1.369

  Nazianz. Orat. 47. p. 770.
• * 1.370

  Plin. l. 2. c. 7. P. 3.
• * 1.371

  Lactant. l. 2. c. 9. p. 103.
• * 1.372

  Tertul. Apologet c. 24. p. 54.
• * 1.373

  All Idolaters doe beleeue, That there is a God.
• * 1.374

  Plato in Cratil••. p. 313.
• * 1.375

  Plato in Ciuili. p. 205.
• * 1.376

  Vniuersum hoc Deus ipse regit alque rotat. Item Aristote∣les.
• * 1.377

  Cic. l. 2. de Nat. Deor. p. 215. Haec tanta opera Deorum sun••.
• * 1.378

  Wis. 13. 2, 3, 4, 6, 7. 8, 9, 10.
• * 1.379

  Strabo. l. 15. p. 525.
• * 1.380

  Cic. ••. 1. de Nat. D••or. p. 200.
• * 1.381

  Plutarch l. de Iside, To. 2. Mor. p. 209. 210.
• * 1.382

  Plutarch l. 1. de Placitis Phi∣losoph. c. 6. To. 2. Mor. p. 13.
• * 1.383

  A. Gellius l. 5. c. 12. p. 82. ••.
• * 1.384

  I••em Plinius l. 2. c. 7. p. 2. Ita∣que nomina &c.
• * 1.385

  Wise. 13. 13.
• * 1.386

  Isay 44 19 16 10.
• * 1.387

  Aug. Serm. 2. In Psal. 113. To. 8.
• * 1.388

  p. 1305. 1307.
• * 1.389

  Luctant. lib. 1. c. 20 p. 55.
• * 1.390

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 1. de Nat. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 p. 194.
• * 1.391

  Ci••. l. 1. de Nat. Deor p. 200.
• * 1.392

  Iudith 3. 8. Sueton•••• vita Cal••g. c. 22. p. 61. Aurel. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 vita D••mi••. p. 387.
• * 1.393

  Clem. Alex. Stro. l. 5. p. 277.
• * 1.394

  Plutarch. l. De I∣side To. 2. Mor. p. 174.
• * 1.395

  Eccles. 4. 12.
• * 1.396

  Plut. l. 1. De ••la∣citis Philosoph. c. 6. To. 2. Mor. p. 13.
• * 1.397

  Iamblic. l. De Myster. c. 1. p. 5.
• * 1.398

  Cap. 5. Sect. 1.
• * 1.399

  Great disse••∣tion what God i••.
• * 1.400

  Cic. l. 1. De Nat. Deor. p. 184. 177.
• * 1.401

  Coe••iu•• Rh••di•• l. 23. c. 3. p. ••••27.
• * 1.402

  Teren. Phor. Act 2. S••c. 4 p. 218.
• * 1.403

  Te••tul. i•• Apol▪ c. 47. p. 77.
• * 1.404

  Cap. 4. Sect. 4.
• * 1.405

  Cic. l. 1. De Nat. Deor. p. 187. &c. Plu••. l. 1. de Pla∣cit. Ph••. c. 7. p. 14.
• * 1.406

  Lucian in loue Trag. p. 210.
• * 1.407

  Cap. 4. Sect. 5.
• * 1.408

  The dissension of men about God doth not conclude That there is no God.
• * 1.409

  Cic. l. 1. Tusc. p. 112.
• * 1.410

  Plutarch l•• A••at••rio T••. 3. Mor. p. 416.
• * 1.411

  Cic. l. 2. De Nat. Deor. p. 203.
• * 1.412

  Cic. l. ••. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. p. 313.
• * 1.413

  Iust. Mart. lib. Christ. Qu••est. To. 1. p. 3••▪ ••.
• * 1.414

  Non quia assir∣matio, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 est aut negatio, ideo res e••it, aut non erit. Arist. l. 1. de Interpret. c. 8. To 1. p. 63.
• * 1.415

  Pal••••gen. in Scorp. p. 211.
• * 1.416

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 l. 1. de A∣nima. c. 2. To. 1. p. 785. &c. Cic. l. 1. Tusc. p. 1••1
• * 1.417

  Plut. l. 2. de Placit. c. 13. To. 2. p. 27.
• * 1.418

  Ecclu••. 23. 19.
• * 1.419

  Cic. l. 1. De Nat. Deor. p. 201.
• * 1.420

  Plut. de ••ide To. 2. p. 189.
• * 1.421

  The dissension of men about God sheweth There is one. Chrysos••. Ho••. 1. in Mat. To. 2. p. 11.
• * 1.422

  Cic. l. 1. Tusc. p. 112.
• * 1.423

  Cic. l. 1. de Nat. Deor. p. 190.
• * 1.424

  Plut. l. de Iside. To. 2. p. 190.
• * 1.425

  Plut. ibid. p. 205.
• * 1.426

  Max. Tyr. Serm. 23. p. 285
• * 1.427

  1. Cor. 8. 5. 6.
• * 1.428

  Lactan. l. 1. c. 2. p. 5.
• * 1.429

  Senec. Epist. 81. p. 260.
• * 1.430

  Cap. 3. & 4.
• * 1.431

  Cap. 5.
• * 1.432

  Clem. Alex. ••. 5. Strom. p. 274.
• * 1.433

  Plut. l. 1. de Pl••∣cit. c. 7. To. 2. Mor. p. 14.
• * 1.434

  The Atheists Reasons that al men beleeue not There is a God.
• * 1.435

  Cic. l. 1. De Nat. Deor. p. 190.
• * 1.436

  Ibid. p. 192.
• * 1.437

  Cic. l. 1. De Nat. Deor. p. 192.
• * 1.438

  The At••eists Reasons a∣gainst the ge∣nerall consent in Religion, answered: Cic. l. 1. Tusc. p. 112.
• * 1.439

  Cic. l. 4. Acad. p. 22.
• * 1.440

  Cap. 4.
• * 1.441

  Cap. 4. Sect. 1.
• * 1.442

  Plin. l. 2. c. 7. p. 2.
• * 1.443

  Cap. 4. Sect. 1.
• * 1.444

  Cic. l. 3. De Nat. Deor. p. 227.
• * 1.445

  Arist. l. 4. Meta∣phys. c. 5. To. 2. p. 1406.
• * 1.446

  Cap. 14. Sect. 1.
• * 1.447

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.448

  Morn•••••• Cap. 1. De verit. Relig. p. 16.
• * 1.449

  Clem. Alex. in Protrept. p. 10.
• * 1.450

  Laert. in vita Aristip. p. 73. 77
• * 1.451

  Plutarch. l. De Tranquid. To. 2. p. 312.
• * 1.452

  Arnob. l. 8. cont. Gent. p. 748. Cap. 5. Sect. 3.
• * 1.453

  Malachi. 3. 8. The Iews spo••∣led then God, and yet denied him not.
• * 1.454

  The Atheist's second Ob∣iection. That Religion is but an humaine inuention.
• * 1.455

  Plut. l. 1. de. Pla∣cit. Cap. 7. To. 2. Mor. p. 14.
• * 1.456

  Plutar. lib. De Herodoto To. 3. Mor. p. 630.
• * 1.457

  Lucian In loue 〈◊〉〈◊〉 p. ••02.
• * 1.458

  Item ••n lo••e Tragoedo, p. 109.
• * 1.459

  Cic. l. 2. De Diui∣nat. p. 285.
• * 1.460

  Cic. l. 1. De Nat. Deor. p. 192.
• * 1.461

  Cic. l. 1. De Nat. D••or. p. 200.
• * 1.462

  Senec. l. 2. Nat. Quaest. c. 42 p. 35.
• * 1.463

  The Antiquity of Religion. Cap. 5. Sect. 1.
• * 1.464

  Cap. 3. Sect. 1. & 2.
• * 1.465

  Arnob. l. 1. Cont. Gent. p. 476.
• * 1.466

  Iamblic. l. de Myster. c. 1. p. 5. Cap. 3. Sect. 2.
• * 1.467

  Arist. l. 1. Ethic. c. 3. To. ••. p. 605.
• * 1.468

  Plutarch. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Stoic. To. 3. p. 564.
• * 1.469

  Gen. 4. 3. 4.
• * 1.470

  Gen. 1. 27. Eph. 4. 24. lames 1. 27. Exod. 28. 36.
• * 1.471

  Iob 38. 7.
• * 1.472

  Tert. l. de Testi∣mon. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. c. 5. p. 86.
• * 1.473

  Tertul. l. de Vir∣gin. veland. c. 1. p. 188.
• * 1.474

  Tertul. l. 2. cont. Marcion c. 2. p. 368.
• * 1.475

  Tertul. l. cont. P••axeam c. 2. p. 494.
• * 1.476

  Plutarch l. 1 de Placit. c. 7. To. 2. Mo••. p. 15.
• * 1.477

  Iust. Mart. l. Quest. & R••∣spons. Quaest. 73. 74. 70. 3. p. 104. 105.
• * 1.478

  Fet. Mart. Decad. 1. l. 5. p. 30. b.
• * 1.479

  Lactan. l. 3. c. 10. p. 143. Item l. 2. c. 3. p. 75.
• * 1.480

  Alex. ab Alex. l. 6. Genial. Dier. c. 26. p. 384. b.
• * 1.481

  Gen. 3. 3.
• * 1.482

  The Vniforme Consent in Religion.
• * 1.483

  Cap. 5.
• * 1.484

  S. 10. Mandeuile part 2. c. 24. Eng. V••yag. p. 45.
• * 1.485

  Tertul. l. de Prae∣scrip. c. 28. p. 209.
• * 1.486

  Plaut. Mil. Glor. Act. 2. Sce. 1. p. 467.
• * 1.487

  Lact. l. de Ir•• Dei, c. 10. p. 462.
• * 1.488

  Senec. l. 4. de Benefic. c. 4. p. 49.
• * 1.489

  The Perpetui∣ty of Religion.
• * 1.490

  Mat. 15. 13.
• * 1.491

  Ps. 129. 6. Cic. l. 2. Offic. p. ••69.
• * 1.492

  Cic. l. 2. De Nat. D••or. p. 201.
• * 1.493

  Senec. Epis. 121 p. 307.
• * 1.494

  Cic. l. 3. de Nat. Deor. p. 227.
• * 1.495

  Plut. l. 2. de Pla∣cit. c. 7. To. 2. Mor. p. 14.
• * 1.496

  Cic. l. 3. offic. p. 387.
• * 1.497

  Cic. l. 1. de Nat. deor. p. 200.
• * 1.498

  Cic. l. 1. de. diuin. p. 241.
• * 1.499

  2. Pet. 1. 16.
• * 1.500

  The Atheists third Obiecti∣on: oppugning the vniuersali∣tie of consent in Religion, by their owne dissenting.
• * 1.501

  Lactan. l. 2. c. 19. p. 124.
• * 1.502

  Cic. l. 1. D•• Di∣uinat. p. 274.
• * 1.503

  Cic. l. 8. ad A••••ic. •• p. 3. p. 309.
• * 1.504

  The number of Atheists very small.
• * 1.505

  Cic. l. 3. De fin. p. 73.
• * 1.506

  Cic. l. 1. de fin. p. 58.
• * 1.507

  Aug. in Ps. 52. To. 8. p. 509.
• * 1.508

  Bedai•• Cap. 17. Iob. To. 5. p. 792.
• * 1.509

  Lact. l. de Ira. c. 10. p. 461.
• * 1.510

  Max. Tyr. Serm. 1. p. 6.
• * 1.511

  Cic. l. 1. Tusc. p. 112.
• * 1.512

  This Chap. Sect 4. in fin.
• * 1.513

  Aelian. l. 2. var. Hist. c. 31. p. 395.
• * 1.514

  The learning of Atheists not very great.
• * 1.515

  Psal. 14. 1.
• * 1.516

  L••ert. in ••roem. p. 2.
• * 1.517

  Virg. Eclog. 1. p. ••.
• * 1.518

  Lact. l. De Ira Dei. c. 10. p. 461.
• * 1.519

  Lactan. l. De Ira c. 9. p. 455.
• * 1.520

  Cic. l. 2. De Nat. Deor. p. 211.
• * 1.521

  Lactan. l. 3. c. 17. p. 164.
• * 1.522

  The noted A∣theists were no true Atheists. Cap. 8. Sect. 3.
• * 1.523

  Psal. 14. 1. Ille propri•• est Atheos qui nul∣lum Diuinitatis sensum habet, & omne 〈◊〉〈◊〉 qualecun{que} 〈◊〉〈◊〉, ridet. Calu. in E∣phes. 2. 12.
• * 1.524

  Theod••ret, l. 2. De Prouid. To. 2. p. 523.
• * 1.525

  Suidas in voce Diagoras. p. 231.
• * 1.526

  Theodorusdixit, eos impi••tatis teneri; qui My∣steria nondū in∣itiatis aperirent. La••rt. in Aristip. p 78.
• * 1.527

  Ioseph. l. 2. cont. Apion. p. 914.
• * 1.528

  1. Kin. 18. 27. 28.
• * 1.529

  Arnob. con. Gent l. 8. p. 749.
• * 1.530

  Lact. l. 1. c. 20 p. 51.
• * 1.531

  Plut. l. De Su∣perstit. Tom. 1. Mor. p. 391.
• * 1.532

  Lact. l. 2. c. 3. p. 75.
• * 1.533

  Mornae. l. de Verit Relig. c. 1. p. 16.
• * 1.534

  Laert. in vita Protagorae p. 320.
• * 1.535

  Cic. l. 1. de Nat. Deor. p. 192.
• * 1.536

  Laert. vbi supra p. 321.
• * 1.537

  Cap. 1. Sect. 3.
• * 1.538

  Ibid. page 322.
• * 1.539

  Plato in Apolo∣gia. p. ••13.
• * 1.540

  〈…〉〈…〉 verit. c. 1. p. 18.
• * 1.541

  Iob 24. 1.
• * 1.542

  Psal. 73. 13.
• * 1.543

  Theod. l. de Principijs, To. 2. p. 498.
• * 1.544

  Aug. Epist. 44. To••. 2. p. 154.
• * 1.545

  Plut. l. de Iside To. 2. p. 174.
• * 1.546

  Str••. l. 7. p. ••68.
• * 1.547

  Lactan. lib. de falsa relig cap. 11. p.
• * 1.548

  Aug l. 8. de Ciuit. D••i. c. 5. To. 5. p. 442.
• * 1.549

  Athenag. legat. pro Christ. To. 8. Bib. Pat. p. 21.
• * 1.550

  Herod. l. 2. p. 165.
• * 1.551

  Cic. l. 1. Tus. p. 112.
• * 1.552

  Xenoph. l. de Ae∣quivocis in An∣tiquit. Author. p. 64.
• * 1.553

  Theophil. Anti∣och. l. 3. ad Auto∣lic. Bib. Pat. To. 5. p. 156.
• * 1.554

  Theop. Antioch. l. 3. ad Autolic. Bib. Pat. To. 5. p. 156.
• * 1.555

  Laert. in vil. A∣risstip. p. 77.
• * 1.556

  Laert. in vita Bion••s. p. 144.
• * 1.557

  Clem. Alex. in Protr••pt. p. 10.
• * 1.558

  Cic. l. 1. De Nat. Deor. p. 191.
• * 1.559

  Cic. l. 2. De Nat. Deor. p. 207.
• * 1.560

  Cic. l. 1. de Nat. D••or▪ p. 199.
• * 1.561

  Aelian. l. 4. de var. Hist. c. 28. p. 428.
• * 1.562

  Hist. of Bel. v. 4. 5. D••n. 3. 18.
• * 1.563

  Laert. in vit. Pherecidis p.
• * 1.564

  Act•• 17. 29.
• * 1.565

  Senec. Epist. 31. p. 50.
• * 1.566

  Laert. ibid. p. 43. Ficin. Argumen. in l. ••. Platon. de Repub. p. 616.
• * 1.567

  Cic. l. 3. de Nat. Deor. p. 238. 1. Kin. 18. 27.
• * 1.568

  Tertul. Apog. c. 13. p. 36.
• * 1.569

  Act 17. 23▪
• * 1.570

  ••lato in Apog. p. 472.
• * 1.571

  Laert. i•• vit. ••∣picuri. p. 370.
• * 1.572

  Lucian in Ioue Trag••••••lo. p. 210. a.
• * 1.573

  Tertul. Apolo. get. c. 15. p. 39.
• * 1.574

  Cle••. Alex. in Pro••rept. p. 10.
• * 1.575

  Cap. 13. Why they were condemned 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Atheists.
• * 1.576

  Xenophen l. 1. de factis Socrat. p. 157.
• * 1.577

  Item Plato in A∣pologia p. 471. Idem in Euthyphrone p. 54. P••ato ibid. p. 473
• * 1.578

  Act. 17. 18.
• * 1.579

  Athenag. Orat. pro. Christian. a∣pud Iust. Mart. To. 1. p. 234.
• * 1.580

  Ouid l. ••. Amor. Eleg. 8. p. 209.
• * 1.581

  Claudia•• l. 1. in Ruffin. p. 51.
• * 1.582

  Aug. in Psal. 52. To. 8. p. 509.
• * 1.583

  Note.
• * 1.584

  Cap. 10. Sect. 2. Cap. 15. Sect. 5.
• * 1.585

  Nec assiduè re∣petendum est quod superiùs iam dixi: sed hoc recolendum, vbicunquè isla locutio in meis literis inuenitur Aug. l. 1. Retract. c. 4. To. 1. p. N••uatian l. de Trim. c. 8. Apud Tertul. p. 626.
• * 1.586

  Psal. 14. 1.
• * 1.587

  Atheists hold but weakely their opinion of Atheisme.
• * 1.588

  Laert. in vit. Bionis p. 145.
• * 1.589

  Ar••st. l. 3. de Anima c. 3. To. 1. P. 828.
• * 1.590

  Plato l. 10. de Legibus p. 871.
• * 1.591

  Plut. in vita Numae. p. 156.
• * 1.592

  Arist. l. de Mun∣do. To. 2. p. 1569.
• * 1.593

  Cic. l. 2. de Nat. Deor. p. 203.
• * 1.594

  Ier. 17. 1.
• * 1.595

  〈…〉〈…〉 To. 1. p. 195.
• * 1.596

  Ibid. p. 204.
• * 1.597

  Cic. l. 4. de 〈◊〉〈◊〉. p. 83.
• * 1.598

  Philo. Iud. l. ••e Giga••••ibus p. 401.
• * 1.599

  Max. Tyr. Serm. 1. p. 7.
• * 1.600

  Clem. Alex. l. 5. Strom. p. 274. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 in voc•• Poesis p. 725.
• * 1.601

  Tertuli de carne Christi. c. 23. p. 311.
• * 1.602

  Cic. l. 4. Acad. p. 19.
• * 1.603

  Tertul. Apol••••. ••. 17. p. 42.
• * 1.604

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 ••. 6. Hist. c. 1. P. 212. ••.
• * 1.605

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 1. de. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. D••or. p. 186.
• * 1.606

  Ps. 14. 1.
• * 1.607

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. l. 3. de Nat. Deor. P 238.
• * 1.608

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. l. 1. de Nat. Deor. p 186. &c. Ibid. p. 199.
• * 1.609

  Suidas in voce Diagoras. p. 231.
• * 1.610

  ••ic. l. 2. de Fin. p. 61.
• * 1.611

  Cap. 10. Sect. 4. &c.
• * 1.612

  lam. ••. 19.
• * 1.613

  Ci••. l. 5. Tus••. p. 170.
• * 1.614

  Aug. Epist. 20. To. 2. p. 588.
• * 1.615

  Aug. in Psal. 52. To. 8. p. 509.
• * 1.616

  Anselm. in Pro∣solog. c. 2. 3. To. 3. p. 29.
• * 1.617

  Cic. l. 2. De sin. p. 60.
• * 1.618

  Anselm. in Pro∣sologi••. c. 3. ••om. 3. p. 29.
• * 1.619

  2. Cor. 5. 12.
• * 1.620

  Tertul l. 2. cont. Marcion c▪ 2. p. 368.
• * 1.621

  Oros. l. 6. Hist. c. 1. p. 212. B.
• * 1.622

  Euripid. In Ione p. 819.
• * 1.623

  1. Tim. 6. 4.
• * 1.624

  Persius Satyr. 5. p. 11.
• * 1.625

  The two Ends of Atheisme.
• * 1.626

  Aug. de v••ra 〈◊〉〈◊〉. c. 36. To. 1. p. 702.
• * 1.627

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 l. de 〈◊〉〈◊〉. To. 1. Mor. p. 381.
• * 1.628

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. l. 4. Acad. Quaest. p. 13.
• * 1.629

  Ioh. 3. 25. The Atheist serueth many maisters.
• * 1.630

  Aelian. l. 4. var. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. c. 28. p. 428.
• * 1.631

  D••o parere li∣bertas est. Sen••••. l. De vita beat. c. 15. p. 115.
• * 1.632

  Hoc ipsum, Phi∣losophiae serulre, libertas est. Se∣nec. Epist. 8. p. 10▪ 2. Cor. 3. 17. 2. Pet. 2. 19.
• * 1.633

  Cic. Paradox. 5.
• * 1.634

  E••od. 5. 10. 11. &c.
• * 1.635

  Aug. l. de V••••a 〈◊〉〈◊〉. c. 38. To. 1. p. 702.
• * 1.636

  Rom. 1▪ 24 25. 26. 27. 2••. 29.
• * 1.637

  The Atheists base seruing of his owne Ambition. Cic. l. 1. Tus••. p. 113.
• * 1.638

  〈…〉〈…〉. 1. p. 26••.
• * 1.639

  In 〈◊〉〈◊〉. c. 4••. p. 72.
• * 1.640

  Hier. Epis••. ad Iulianum To. 1. p. 2••7.
• * 1.641

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. in vita ••ionis. p. 142.
• * 1.642

  Lact. l. de Ira Dei. c. 9. p. 455.
• * 1.643

  Lae••t, in vita Ari••tip. p. 77.
• * 1.644

  Laert. in vita Aristippi. p. 73.
• * 1.645

  Bernard in Psal. 90. Serm. 6. p. 291.
• * 1.646

  The Atheists base seruice of his Belly.
• * 1.647

  〈…〉〈…〉. To. 2. P. 106.
• * 1.648

  〈…〉〈…〉. To. 1. p 103.
• * 1.649

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. Epist. 111 p. 2••0
• * 1.650

  〈…〉〈…〉 A••t. 1. Sec. 1. P. 4••9.
• * 1.651

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.652

  Sen••c. •• 3 nat. Qu••est. c. 18. P. 51.
• * 1.653

  Pro. 23. 31. Sen••••. ••p••st. 93. p. 217.
• * 1.654

  Epist. 14 p 21. Aug. l. de vera 〈◊〉〈◊〉. c. 38. To. 1. c. 38 To. 1. p. 702.
• * 1.655

  Hugo. de. Scto. Vict. l. 2. •• Clau∣stro Anim••. c. 19. To. 2. p. 37.
• * 1.656

  Tertul. l. cont. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 c. 16. p. 598.
• * 1.657

  Cap 17.
• * 1.658

  Nonius in voce Culina, p. 514.
• * 1.659

  Phil. 3. 19. Greg. l. 31. Mor. c. 26. T••. 1. p. 195. 4. King•• 25. 10.
• * 1.660

  Non potest D••∣minum Deum suum dice••e is, cui ve••ter est Deus. Orig. in c. 1. Rom. To. 2. p. 463. Pl••. de ora. de∣fect. To. 1. p. 674. Cic. l. 2. de Diui∣nat. p. 268. C c. l. 5. Tu••c. p. 171.
• * 1.661

  Aristoph. in R••nis. Act. 1. Sce. 7. p. 250.
• * 1.662

  Terent. E••nuch. Act. 4. Sce. 5. p. 82. ••.
• * 1.663

  Hieron. Epist. Am••ndo. To. 3. p. 135.
• * 1.664

  Tertul. l. cont. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. c. 1. p. 590.
• * 1.665

  The Atheist is a base slaue vnto himselfe. Cic. Paradox. 5. p. 424.
• * 1.666

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. Sa••yr. 5. p. 10. b.
• * 1.667

  Pro. 16. 32.
• * 1.668

  Arist. l. 3. de A∣••ma. c. 9. 10. 1. p. 839.
• * 1.669

  Est voluntas in∣tellectus exte••∣sus. Scaliger. Ex. 307. 3. p. 923.
• * 1.670

  Aris••. 1. R••eto∣ric. ad Theodec. c. 10. To. 2. p. 1210.
• * 1.671

  Cic. vbi. supra. Rom▪ 7. 19. 20.
• * 1.672

  Se••ec. in Hippol. Act. 1. Sec. 2. p. 176.
• * 1.673

  Ouid. l. 7. Me∣tam. p. 249.
• * 1.674

  Plaut. in 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Act. 3. S••e. 2. p. 736.
• * 1.675

  Rom. 7. 23.
• * 1.676

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 Parado••. 5. p. 425.
• * 1.677

  Senec. Epist. 47 p. 73.
• * 1.678

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.679

  Ex. 21. 5. 6.
• * 1.680

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. in Persa. Act. 3. s••e. 3. 4. 640. 640.
• * 1.681

  Rom. 6. 16.
• * 1.682

  Orig. Hom 2. in Iud. To, 1. p. 341
• * 1.683

  Ma••••••. H••m. ••3 p. 474.
• * 1.684

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 in cap. 1. Rom p. 3. a. Item Origen▪ in c. 1. Rom. To. 2. p. 463.
• * 1.685

  Leo Serm in fest. St•• Laurent p. 176.
• * 1.686

  Cic. l. 3. Tusc p. 147.
• * 1.687

  The Atheist de•••• 〈…〉〈…〉 feare Plut. l. De super∣s••it. To. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 p. 281.
• * 1.688

  Cic. Pa••••d. 5. p. 425.
• * 1.689

  L••e••t. in vita 〈◊〉〈◊〉. p 201. Cic. l 3. Tus. p. 143.
• * 1.690

  Cic. l. 5. de. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. p. 106.
• * 1.691

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.692

  Cic. l. 2. 〈…〉〈…〉. p. 98. & 84.
• * 1.693

  l▪ ••••ret. l. 1. p. 3.
• * 1.694

  〈…〉〈…〉 Deo••. p. 195.
• * 1.695

  Ibid. p. 191.
• * 1.696

  Cic. l. 2. de Di∣uinat. p. 278. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 p. 36.
• * 1.697

  God hath planted a feare of him∣selfe in all men.
• * 1.698

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. l. 5. p. 226.
• * 1.699

  Aug. l. de vera Relig. c. 17. To. 1. p. 688.
• * 1.700

  Psal. 111. 10. ••actan. l. de Ira Dei, ••. 11. p. 465.
• * 1.701

  Isidor. l. 7. Orig. c. 1. p. 977.
• * 1.702

  Fes••us, in voce, Deus. p. 279.
• * 1.703

  Gen. 31. 42, 53.
• * 1.704

  Ter. l. de Testim. Ani. c. 2. p. 85.
• * 1.705

  ler. 32. 40.
• * 1.706

  S••atius l. 3. Thebaid. p. 243.
• * 1.707

  Dares Phrygius l. 1. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Bello Ir••∣iano. p. 6.
• * 1.708

  The Atheist feareth God more then a∣ny other man.
• * 1.709

  Iob. 15▪ 20. 21. 22.
• * 1.710

  Cic. l. 5. Tusc. p. 175.
• * 1.711

  Ps. 53. 5. Pro. 28. 1.
• * 1.712

  I wil also laugh at your cala∣mity: I will mocke when your fear com∣meth. Pro. 1. 26. Lucret. l. 5. p. 228.
• * 1.713

  Ps. 2. 2. 4.
• * 1.714

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 Sat. 1••. p. 68. ••.
• * 1.715

  Arnob. l. 8. Cont. Gen••. p 752.
• * 1.716

  The feare of Atheists in thei•• dreames.
• * 1.717

  Plut. l. de Super∣s••it. To. 1. Mor. p. 382.
• * 1.718

  Iob. 7. 13. 14 15
• * 1.719

  Aug. l. 22 De••i∣u••t. D••••. ••. 22. To. 5. p. 1374.
• * 1.720

  Plut. l. de. virtut. & vit. Tom. 1. Mor. p. 226.
• * 1.721

  Wis. 17. 13 &c.
• * 1.722

  Plut. l. de his qui ••erò 〈◊〉〈◊〉. To. 2. p. 229.
• * 1.723

  Plato. l. 1. De Repub. p. 532.
• * 1.724

  Cic. 1. De Leg. p. 317.
• * 1.725

  Iob. 33. 14 15.
• * 1.726

  Gen. 20. 3.
• * 1.727

  Cic. l. 1. De Diui∣nat. p. 251.
• * 1.728

  Iob. 4. 12. 13. &c
• * 1.729

  Iamblic. l. De Mysteriis. c. 22. p. 52.
• * 1.730

  Lucret. l. 5. p. 226.
• * 1.731

  Cic. l. ••. de Diui∣nat. p. 281.
• * 1.732

  Dan. 4 10. 11. 14 ••.
• * 1.733

  ••••••enal. Satyr. 13. p. 60. B.
• * 1.734

  Deorum appa∣rentium magni∣tudo totum ••••••∣lum occupare v••detur.
• * 1.735

  Iamblic. l. De Myster. c. 19. p. 36.
• * 1.736

  Plut. l. de Super∣sti••. To. 1. p. 382.
• * 1.737

  Plut. ibid. p. 381.
• * 1.738

  The feare of Atheists, in •• lightning and thunder.
• * 1.739

  Iuuenal. Satyr. l 13. p. 60. b.
• * 1.740

  Lucret. lib. 5. p. 228.
• * 1.741

  The Atheists Creed.
• * 1.742

  Heb. 11. 6.
• * 1.743

  Iam. 2. 19.
• * 1.744

  Exod. 9. 27.
• * 1.745

  Su••ton. in vit. ••ib••r••. c. 69. ••. 55.
• * 1.746

  Su••eon. in vit. Caligu••ae, c. 22. p. 161.
• * 1.747

  Senec. l. 1. de Ira. c. 16 p. 34.
• * 1.748

  Hom••r. ••. 3. Il••∣ad. p. 122. Gra∣colat.
• * 1.749

  Sueton. vbi. su∣p••. •• c. 51. p. 68.
• * 1.750

  The ••••are of A••heists in their sicknesse, & after death. L. 2. c. 5. Sect. 4.
• * 1.751

  Iuvenal. Saty••. 13. p. 60. b.
• * 1.752

  Iob. 6. ••.
• * 1.753

  Psal. ••8. 2. 3.
• * 1.754

  Psal. 73. 9. 11.
• * 1.755

  Lucr••t. l. 3. p. 92.
• * 1.756

  Solen in Ele••••s p. 232.
• * 1.757

  S••obaeus Serm. 42. p. 279.
• * 1.758

  Plato l. 1. de Re∣pub. p. 532.
• * 1.759

  C••c. l. 1. de diuin. p. 251.
• * 1.760

  Laërt. in Vita Bion. p. 145.
• * 1.761

  Arist. l. 3. Eth. c. 6. To. 2. p. 634.
• * 1.762

  Ecclus. 41. 1.
• * 1.763

  〈…〉〈…〉.
• * 1.764

  〈…〉〈…〉.
• * 1.765

  ••he fea••e of the Atheist, she••••••h, that he thinkes, Th••re is a God.
• * 1.766

  〈…〉〈…〉 118. p. 295.
• * 1.767

  〈…〉〈…〉.
• * 1.768

  Max. Tyr. Se••. 1. p. 7.
• * 1.769

  Nazian. Tract. 51. de Fide. p. 832.
• * 1.770

  Palinge•• in Sagit. p. 262.
• * 1.771

  Three sorts of confessions of God from the Atheist.
• * 1.772

  Vnwitting confessions of Atheists.
• * 1.773

  Psal. 139. 4.
• * 1.774

  P••o. 16. 1.
• * 1.775

  Psal. 12. 4.
• * 1.776

  Num. 24. 17. 5.
• * 1.777

  Ve••s. 13.
• * 1.778

  I••b. 21. 15.
• * 1.779

  22. 17.
• * 1.780

  Psa. 73. 11. Iob. 22. 13. 14.
• * 1.781

  Psal. 113. ••. 6.
• * 1.782

  Ecclus. 24. 3.
• * 1.783

  Lucian. Dial. Vulcani & ••o∣uis. p. 22.
• * 1.784

  Plaut. Menech. Act. 5. Sec. 2. p. 446.
• * 1.785

  Wisd. 2. 2. 6.
• * 1.786

  Cic. l. 1. de Nat. Deor. p. 196.
• * 1.787

  Cic. l. 5. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. p. 170.
• * 1.788

  Laert. in vit. A∣ristip. p. 78.
• * 1.789

  Lact. l. 6. c. 8. p. 333.
• * 1.790

  Io. 11. 50. 51.
• * 1.791

  Vnwillingcon∣fes••••io••s of A∣thei••s.
• * 1.792

  Ex. 5. 2.
• * 1.793

  Ex. 9. 27. 8. 28.
• * 1.794

  Iosep. l 19. Anti∣quit. p. 565. Act: 12. 21. 22. 23.
• * 1.795

  Act. 12. 21. &c.
• * 1.796

  Ioseph: vbi supra.
• * 1.797

  1. Mac. 1. 46.
• * 1.798

  1. Mac. 9. 10. 11. 12. &c.
• * 1.799

  1. Mac. 1. 50.
• * 1.800

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 8 Eccl••. Hist. c. 16 p. 108
• * 1.801

  1. Mac. 1 13. ••1. Euseb. l. 9. Hist. c. 2. p 110.
• * 1.802

  1. Ma. •• 45.
• * 1.803

  Euseb. l 8. Hist. c. 18. p. 109.
• * 1.804

  1. Mac. 1. 63. ••4.
• * 1.805

  Euseb l. 8. Hist. c. 16. p. 108.
• * 1.806

  Euseb. l. 1. De vit. Constantini c. 51. p. 139.
• * 1.807

  Gen. 49. 5.
• * 1.808

  Cic Philip. 2. p. 553.
• * 1.809

  Eurip. in Oresic. p. 53.
• * 1.810

  Tertu••. l. 2. cont. Marcion. c. 14. p. 375. 2. Mac. 9 5. Euseb. l 8. Hist. c. 17 p. 1 8. 2. Mac. 9. 5.
• * 1.811

  1. Mac. 9. 5. Euseb. ibid.
• * 1.812

  Ibid.
• * 1.813

  2. Mac. 9 9.
• * 1.814

  Euseb▪ ibid.
• * 1.815

  2. Mac. 9. 9.
• * 1.816

  Euseb. ibid. p. 109.
• * 1.817

  2. Mac 9. 28.
• * 1.818

  Ecclus. 5. 4. Heb. 11. 6.
• * 1.819

  Pro. 27. 19.
• * 1.820

  2. Mac. 9. 11. E••seb. l 8. Hist. c. 18. p. 109.
• * 1.821

  1. Mac. 6. 12. 13.
• * 1.822

  Euseb. l. 9 Hist. c. 10. p. 116.
• * 1.823

  2. Mac. 9. 14. 15. Iuseb. l. 8. Hist. c. 18. p. 109.
• * 1.824

  2. Mac. 9. 13. Euseb. ibid.
• * 1.825

  E••s••b. ibid.
• * 1.826

  2. Mac. 9. 17.
• * 1.827

  I••useb. l. 1. d 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Consta•• fini c. 5••. p. 140. Ibid.
• * 1.828

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 l. 6. c 2 p 511.
• * 1.829

  Theod. l. 3 hist. Eccl••s. c. 20. Ta. ••. p. 256.
• * 1.830

  H••er. l. b. •• ia Habae. c. 3. ••06 p. 243.
• * 1.831

  Ho••a••. Serm. 1. p. 129. a.
• * 1.832

  Plut. in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Numae. p. 156.
• * 1.833

  Liuie l. 1. p. 12.
• * 1.834

  Eutrop. l. 1. p. 401.
• * 1.835

  Laert. in vita Bion. p. 144. &c.
• * 1.836

  Lucret. l. 3. p. 92.
• * 1.837

  Mat. 8. 29.
• * 1.838

  Pindarus in Py∣thijs Ode 2. p. 181.
• * 1.839

  Virgil 6. Aene∣id. p. 264.
• * 1.840

  Luk. 16. 27. 28.
• * 1.841

  Willing con∣fessions of the Atheists.
• * 1.842

  Ex. 18. 1. 11.
• * 1.843

  Act. 9. 1. 3 4.
• * 1.844

  Gal. 1. 22. Theod. l. 3. Eccle. Hist. c. 2 p. 247.
• * 1.845

  Sect. 3. hu••us Cap.
• * 1.846

  Morn••us. l. De verit. Relig. c. 1. p. 16.
• * 1.847

  La••rt. in vita 〈◊〉〈◊〉. p. 77.
• * 1.848

  Plut. l. 1. de Pla∣cit. c. 7. To. 2. p. 14
• * 1.849

  Cap. 10. Sect. 4. The••phil. A••••••∣och. l. 3. ad ••uto∣lic. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Pat. To 5 p. 156.
• * 1.850

  Plato in Ph••∣do•• c. p. 520. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. ••polo. c. 46. p. 75.
• * 1.851

  Coel. Rhodigin. l. 17. c. 34. p. 814.
• * 1.852

  Plinius, l. 13. •• 13. p. 195.
• * 1.853

  Ilem Plut in vit. Numae. p. 155.
• * 1.854

  Lact. l. 1. c. 2••. p. 62.
• * 1.855

  Iohan. Francis••. Pic. 4. Epist. Scto. Lu••ensi. To. 2. p. 882.
• * 1.856

  Clem. Alex. in Prot••••pt. p. 26. Iust. Mart. O at. a•• Ge••t. To. 1. p. 55.
• * 1.857

  Idem▪ lib. de Monarchia p. 106.
• * 1.858

  Plat••. l. 10. de Legibus. p. 871.
• * 1.859

  Psal. 39. 1. 2. 3. Ier. 20. 9.
• * 1.860

  2. Cor. 4. 13.
• * 1.861

  ••il. in ps. 52. p. 368. Cap. 10. Sect. 5.
• * 1.862

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.863

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.864

  Psal. 14. 1. 74. 18.
• * 1.865

  Ps. 53. 1. An••el. in Proso∣log. c. 3. Tom 3. p. 24.
• * 1.866

  Hilar. in Ps. 52 p. 368.
• * 1.867

  Basil. in Ps l. 2•• To. 1. p. 239.
• * 1.868

  Arist. l. 1. E••••. c. 4. ••o. ••. p. 606. He••iod. opera & D••es p. 16.
• * 1.869

  Cic. l. 4 Tus••. p. 164.
• * 1.870

  Clem. Alex. in Protrept. p. 11.
• * 1.871

  Plut. l. de Super∣stit. To. 1. p. 325.
• * 1.872

  Plut. in Gryllo. p. 102.
• * 1.873

  Max. Ty••. Serm. •• p. 6.
• * 1.874

  Arnob. l. 8 Con••. Gent. p. 757.
• * 1.875

  Hilar. in Ps. 52. p. 368.
• * 1.876

  Mornaeu••. l. De verit. relig. c. 1. p. 3.
• * 1.877

  Plut. in Gryllo. To. 2. p. 102.
• * 1.878

  Pro. 26. 12.
• * 1.879

  Cic. l. 4. Acad. p. 11.
• * 1.880

  Laer••. in vita Xenoph. p. 310.
• * 1.881

  Pro. 10. 23.
• * 1.882

  Isai. 57. 4.
• * 1.883

  Plut. l. De 〈…〉〈…〉 To 2. p. 2 •• 5.
• * 1.884

  Gal. 6. 7.
• * 1.885

  Psal. ••. 4.
• * 1.886

  Cap 12. sect. 2.
• * 1.887

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. Satyr. 15. p 68.
• * 1.888

  C••c. l. 2. Epist. ••am. Ep. 15 p. 20
• * 1.889

  Prou. 26. 3. Atheists be mad-men.
• * 1.890

  Tere••t. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. Act. 2. S••••. 2. p. 61.
• * 1.891

  C••c. l arad. 4. p. 423.
• * 1.892

  I••b. 12. 2.
• * 1.893

  Act. 26. 11.
• * 1.894

  Iohn. 16. 2.
• * 1.895

  Plnt. l. de Hols. ••o. To. ••. p. 106.
• * 1.896

  Cic. l. 2. de Nat. D••or. p. 207.
• * 1.897

  Cic. l. 2. De Nat. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 p. 207.
• * 1.898

  Cic. Orat. 3. in 〈◊〉〈◊〉. p. 3••9.
• * 1.899

  Xenoph. l. 1. De ••at. Soerat. p. 157
• * 1.900

  Eur••p. in Hera∣cl••d••s. p. 729.
• * 1.901

  〈…〉〈…〉 To. 3. p. 50.
• * 1.902

  Philo. Iudaeus. l. Quòd mundus incorrupt. p. 1274.
• * 1.903

  1. Sam. 21. 14. 15.
• * 1.904

  Atheists ••e Monsters of men.
• * 1.905

  Lactant. l 7. c. 9. p. 404.
• * 1.906

  Cic. l. 2. De Nat. Deor. p. 215.
• * 1.907

  Cic. l. de som. Scip p. 307.
• * 1.908

  Scalig. Exercit. 9. p. 49.
• * 1.909

  Te tul. l. de coro∣na. c. 5. p. 181.
• * 1.910

  Paling. in Pisc. p. 358.
• * 1.911

  Cic. l. 1. Tusc. p. 113.
• * 1.912

  Theodoret Ser. 1. de Prouid. To. 2. p. 577.
• * 1.913

  Aug. l. 2. de C••u••t. Dei. c. 8. To. 5. p. 1339.
• * 1.914

  A. Gel. l. 17. c. 1. p. 236.
• * 1.915

  Cic. l. 2. de Leg. p. 322.
• * 1.916

  Ps. 58. 10. 11.
• * 1.917

  Iob. 5. 6.
• * 1.918

  Ex. 9. 16.
• * 1.919

  Pro. 16. 4.
• * 1.920

  Atheists pu∣nishments re∣corded in Scriptures.
• * 1.921

  2. Pet. 2. 3.
• * 1.922

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 9. 16.
• * 1.923

  Ex. 7. 20. 21.
• * 1.924

  Ex. 7, 20, 21 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 28.
• * 1.925

  Ex. 15. 5.
• * 1.926

  Ex. 8. 19.
• * 1.927

  Deut. 28. 15.
• * 1.928

  2. Mac. 1. 2. &c. 1. Mac. 1. 22. S••••das in voc•• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, p. 18. Cic. Orat. 6. in Ver. p. 166.
• * 1.929

  2. Mac. 9 3, 4. 7, 5, 9, 10. 8, 28.
• * 1.930

  Ez. 26. 2. 6.
• * 1.931

  V. 8.
• * 1.932

  Ez. 28 9.
• * 1.933

  Er••s. C••••l. p. 966.
• * 1.934

  Ezech. 27. 32.
• * 1.935

  Mat. ••. 13.
• * 1.936

  Macrob. l. 2. Sa∣tur. c. 4. p. 237.
• * 1.937

  Iosep. l. 17. An∣tiquit. p. 503.
• * 1.938

  Act. 12. 21. 22. 23.
• * 1.939

  Cic. l. 3. Offic. p. 386.
• * 1.940

  Iosep. l. 19. Anti∣quit, c. 7. p. 566.
• * 1.941

  Isai. 42. 8.
• * 1.942

  Atheists pn∣nishments re∣corded in Ec∣clesiasticall Histories.
• * 1.943

  Ioseph. l. 18. An∣tiquit. c. 9. p. 535.
• * 1.944

  Sueton. in vit. Caligula c. 22. p. 61.
• * 1.945

  1. Kin. 11. 14. 23. 26.
• * 1.946

  Sueton. in vit. Calig. c. 58. p. 69. Ioseph. l. 19. An••tiquit. c. 1. p. 551.
• * 1.947

  Euseb. l. 3. Hist. Eccles. c. 15 p. 34 Aurel. Vict. in Domitian. p. 387
• * 1.948

  Suet••n. in vita D••••••tian c. 17. p. 120.
• * 1.949

  Cap. 13. Sect. 3.
• * 1.950

  Euseb. l. 1. de vit. Constant. c. 51. 52. p. 1. 40.
• * 1.951

  S••zomen. l. 6. Hist Eccles. c. 2. p. 511.
• * 1.952

  1. King 22. 34.
• * 1.953

  1. Sam. 26. 8.
• * 1.954

  Cap. 13. Sect. 3. Atheists punishment recorded in secular writers.
• * 1.955

  Cic. l. 1. de Nat. Deor. p. 190.
• * 1.956

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 in vit. Protag. p. 322.
• * 1.957

  Suidas in voce Diagor. p. 231.
• * 1.958

  Athenaeus l. 13. p. 455.
• * 1.959

  Cic. l. 3. de Nat. Deor. p. 239.
• * 1.960

  Ionah 1. 6. 7.
• * 1.961

  Xenop. l. 8. de Pedia Cyri. p. 110.
• * 1.962

  Act. ••7. 24. 43. 44.
• * 1.963

  Athenaeus vb•• supra. Item Laert. in vit. Aristip. p. 77. Psal. 60. 3.
• * 1.964

  Cic. l. 5. Tusc. p. 168.
• * 1.965

  Deut. 1. 17. Psal. 82. 1.
• * 1.966

  Leuit. 24. 14.
• * 1.967

  Laert. in vit. E∣picuri. p. 346.
• * 1.968

  ••aert. in vit. Bi∣on p. 144.
• * 1.969

  Aelian. l. 4. var. Hist. c. 28. p. 428▪
• * 1.970

  Cic. l. 3. de Nat. Deor. p. 238.
• * 1.971

  Valer. Max. l. 1. c. 2. p. 19.
• * 1.972

  Aelian. l. 9. var. H••st. c. 8. p. 453.
• * 1.973

  Arist. l. 1. Eth. c. 10. 11. To. 2. p. 612. 613.
• * 1.974

  Psal. 55. 23.
• * 1.975

  Numb. 16. 29. 30.
• * 1.976

  Plut. in vi••. Num. p. 156.
• * 1.977

  An Obiection answered con∣cerning those Atheists.
• * 1.978

  Cap. 10. Sect 4
• * 1.979

  Cap. 10. Sect. 2. Item Cap. 10. Sect. 4.
• * 1.980

  Plat. l. 10. De Leg. p. 871.
• * 1.981

  Lib. 8.
• * 1.982

  Eph. 2. 12.
• * 1.983

  Hos. 4. 6.
• * 1.984

  Psal. 14. 1.
• * 1.985

  Leuit. 24. 14.
• * 1.986

  1. Kin. 21. 29. 22. 38.
• * 1.987

  ••. Mac 9. 13.
• * 1.988

  Ex. 9. 27. 34.
• * 1.989

  Athen ••g. Legat. pro. c••r bib. Pat. ••o. 8. p. 6.
• * 1.990

  Lactant. l. De ••ra c. 11. p. 464.
• * 1.991

  Ex. 32. 4 28.
• * 1.992

  Plato. in Theag. p. 12.
• * 1.993

  X••noph. l. 1. de fact. Socrat. p. 157.
• * 1.994

  Plut. in vit. Num▪ ••. p. 156.
• * 1.995

  Plato. in Phae. done. p. 520.
• * 1.996

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.997

  Cap▪ 4.
• * 1.998

  Cap▪ 5.
• * 1.999

  Cap▪ 6.
• * 1.1000

  Cap. 11. 12. 13▪
• * 1.1001

  2. Tim. 2. 13.
• * 1.1002

  Cap. 3.
• * 1.1003

  The Consent of all men in beleeuing a God is alled∣ged by Au∣thors as an Argument of the truth of it.
• * 1.1004

  To beleeue a God is of the Law of Na∣ture. Cap. 3.
• * 1.1005

  Cic. 1. Tusc. p. 113. 11••.
• * 1.1006

  Cic. l. 2. de In∣uent. p. 84.
• * 1.1007

  Xenoph. l. 4. de 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Socrat. p. 207.
• * 1.1008

  Xe••oph.
• * 1.1009

  Tertul. l. De co∣rona. c. 6. p. 181.
• * 1.1010

  Nazian. Orat. 2. De Theolog. p. 24
• * 1.1011

  Lactan. l. 6. c. 9. p. 333.
• * 1.1012

  Iob 12. 7. 8. Isal. 43. 20. Cem. Alex. l. 5. Strom. p. 274.
• * 1.1013

  Iustin. l. Institut. Tit. 2. p. 16.
• * 1.1014

  Proclus l. de. Sa∣crisicio. p. 275.
• * 1.1015

  a 59, b 82▪ c 81, 79, ••58, •• 6••, f 6•• •• 78, h 7••. S••ng of the 3. 〈…〉〈…〉. 148. 1. 2. 3. &c.
• * 1.1016

  Iam 2. 19.
• * 1.1017

  Mat. 8. ••9.
• * 1.1018

  Ma••. 1. 24.
• * 1.1019

  Cic. l. 1. de Nat. Deor. p. 189.
• * 1.1020

  Ps. 148. v. 6. 2. 7. Apoc. 12. 3.
• * 1.1021

  A generall Consent is an Argument of truth in all things.
• * 1.1022

  Arist. l. 1. De Coelo. c. 4. To. 1. p. 556.
• * 1.1023

  Plut. lib. de EI. 1. To. 1. Mor. p. 685.
• * 1.1024

  Cic. l. 1. Tusc. p. 113.
• * 1.1025

  Arist. l. 10. Eth. c. 2. To. 2. p. 730.
• * 1.1026

  Arist. To. 1. p. 907 Lib. de pr••••sen••••∣one per somnum.
• * 1.1027

  Arist. l. 7. Etbic. c. 13. p. 699.
• * 1.1028

  Hesiod. Opera▪ & dies p. 42.
• * 1.1029

  Martial. l. 7. Epigr. 5. p. 1••2.
• * 1.1030

  Arist. l. de. Mun∣do. To. 2. p. 1566.
• * 1.1031

  Arist. l. 1. Topic. c. 1. To. 1. p. 235.
• * 1.1032

  Senec. ••pist. 118. p. 295.
• * 1.1033

  Cic. l. De. Nat. D••o••. p. 190.
• * 1.1034

  Chrys••st. Hom. 1. in Mat. To. 2. p. 11.
• * 1.1035

  Hieron. Dial. cont Lucifer. To. 2. p. 139.
• * 1.1036

  Ari••t. l. 10. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 c 2. To▪ 2. p. 730
• * 1.1037

  Cic. l. 1. De Nat. Deor. p. 185.
• * 1.1038

  Arnob. l. 8. cont. Ge••t. p. 747.
• * 1.1039

  Clem. Alex. l. 5. Strom. p. 274.
• * 1.1040

  Zach. Mytile••. l. De Mundi creat. Bib. Pat. To. 5. p. 751.
• * 1.1041

  Consent in the strongest Ar∣gument to proue, There is a God.
• * 1.1042

  Cic. l. 1. Tusc. p. 112.
• * 1.1043

  Cic. l. 1. de Nat. Deor. p. 190.
• * 1.1044

  Cic. ibid.
• * 1.1045

  Cic. l. 1. de Nat. Deor. p. 190.
• * 1.1046

  Cic. l. 1. de Nat. Deor. p. 192.
• * 1.1047

  Plato. l. 10. de Leg. p. 870.
• * 1.1048

  Cap. 3. Sect ••3.
• * 1.1049

  Consensus omni∣um, est v••x Na∣tura••.
• * 1.1050

  Cic. l. 1. Tusc. p. 113.