Considerations on a book, entituled The theory of the earth, publisht some years since by the Dr. Burnet

CHAP. IV. and V.

THE Author coming now to establish his Hypothe∣sis, undertakes to make out two things; First, how the Earth, from the beginning, rose from a Chaos, and in what form it continu'd, till the time of the De∣luge; and Secondly, how a Deluge, at length, happen'd; his Fourth and Fifth Chapters, which are now to be consider'd, are for making out the Composition of his Earth, or how it rose at first from a Chaos, and what its antediluvian State was: As for the Dissolution of it, at the time of the Deluge, he treats of that afterwards.

In the beginning therefore of his Fourth Chapter, before he lays down his Theory, he thinks fit, in the first place, to remove an Opinion concerning the Eternity of the World; which, he says, takes away a Chaos, and any beginning to the Earth, and consequently the Sub∣ject of his Discourse, whereupon he writes thus.

It has been the general Opinion and Consent of the Lear∣ned of all Nations, that the Earth arose from a Chaos. This is attested by History both sacred and profane; only Aristotle, whom so great a part of the Christian World have made their Oracle or Idol, both maintain'd the Eternity of the Earth and the Eternity of Mankind, that the Earth and the World were from everlasting, and in that very form they are in now, with Men and Women, and all living Creatures, Trees and Fruits, Metals and Minerals, and whatsoever is of natural Pro∣duction: We say all these things arose, and had their first Existence and Production not six Thousand Years ago; he says, they have subsisted thus for ever, through an infinite Series of past Generations, and shall conti∣nue as long without first or last; and if so, there was neither Chaos, nor any other beginning to the Earth, &c.

Having thus stated this Opinion, he urges first the Scriptures against it, and then many Arguments from na∣tural Reason, which would be too tedious here to set down: but however, this point of Beginnings being very nice, and variously disputed amongst the Ancients, and the foundation on which the Author proposes to build his Theory, I must say a little of what I have consider'd on it.

I find then that Aristotle was not the first Introducer of this Opinion of the worlds Eternity, as the Author inti∣mates him to have been; and that those who in their Accounts of beginnings describe a Chaos, are not thence forc'd to deny the same Eternity. Aristotle is so far from being the first that held this Opinion, that ev'n his Master Plato, according to the sense of most of his Expositors, as Crantor, Plotinus, Porphyrius, Jamblicus, Proclus, Ma∣crobius, Censorinus, that excellent Christian Philosopher Boethius, and many others, who generally maintain'd the same, is concluded to have held that the World was al∣ways, and always was from God, and flowed from him; for they say, God always is, but that the World is always a making and flows; and if it be consider'd as to a be∣ginning of time, the World may be said not to have had any birth; but if as flowing perpetually from God, its continually brought forth. Nor may the World be said less to depend of God, if it always has depended, and ever shall depend of him, than if at some instant of time it began to depend, and may cease from it: as the light would no less draw its Origine from the Sun, and depend of it, if it had always flow'd from it, and should always so do, than if it began at some instant of time to slow thence.

Those therefore, who maintain this Opinion, will say that God did not at any time bring forth the matter new, but from Eternity, and that likewise with its Orna∣ment; altho it be conceiv'd without its Ornament before than with it: for Nature wants its order, which it ex∣pects from another; and since each thing is conceiv'd first

according to what it is, than according to what it re∣ceives; it may properly be conceiv'd first without Or∣der, being void of it in itself. So that when these men talk of a Chaos and Changes it underwent before it came to be an habitable World, they understand it only as to the natural order of things, according to our way of con∣ceiving.

Amongst the Schoolmen, the Thomists, who generally take upon them to defend Aristotle, say, It cannot be convinc'd by any natural efficacious Reason, that the World was not made from Eternity, but in time, be∣cause the thing not implying Contradiction, it depended meerly on the will of God: and that when Aristotle said the World was from Eternity, he said it only, as opining, because nothing certain can be had in this matter, but by the sole light of Revelation and Faith, according to what the Apostle says, By faith we understand that the worlds were fram'd by the word of God. Tho others say, Aristotle affirm'd that God, as being a necessary Agent, made the World from Eternity. Others, that where he endeavours to prove the Eternity of the World, he keeps himself within the Principles of the Science he was treat∣ing of, viz. Physiology, and thought himself not there ac∣countable for Metaphysical Birth. However this may be, I think it manifest that the Opinion was much more An∣cient than Aristotle. Xenophanes, before him asserted the word to be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Philolaus likewise, that famous Pythagorean, whose Books Plato is said to have bought for a great price, of his Relations, and to have compos'd his Timaeus out of them, maintain'd the same. Slobaeus recording out of him, that this world was from Eternity and will remain to Eternity. And again, That the world may truly be call'd, the Eternal Energy or effect of God, and of successive generation. Epicharmus also, a Disciple of Pythagoras, held it, and O••ellus Lucanus, ac∣cording to Philo. Neither need I to mention any that have maintain'd it since Aristotle (the Author being free to own that he has had followers) as Pliny, Dicaearchus,

Simplicius, Averrhoes, Salustius, Apuleius, Taurus, Alci∣nous, and indeed most of the Platonicks and Peripateticks after Christianity: I say, I may pass by these, the Opinion being much more Ancient than any of those Persons I have nam'd, and indeed so ancient, that its hard to re∣trieve the Original: for Boemus tells us, collecting I con∣ceive from Diodorus; It was a constant Tradition amongst the Chaldean Priests that the World had never any begin∣ning, nor should ••ever have an end: which Tradition pos∣sibly, with other corrupt Doctrines, might have been deriv'd to them from times before the Deluge. And how indeed could they hold any other Opinion? when, as Philo tells us, they held the World itself, or the universal Soul within it to be God, which they consecrated under the name of Fate and Necessity; persuading themselves that there was no other Cause of things, but what is seen; and that both goods and evils were dispenc'd by the Courses of the Sun, Moon, and Stars; conformably to which Lucan introduces Cato, saying,

Aestque Dei sedes nisi terra, & pontus, & aer, Et coelum, & virtus, superos quid quaerimus ultra? Jupiter est quodcunque vides, quocunque moveris.

What Seat has God, but th'Earth, the Air, the Seas, The Heavens, and Vertue? Seek no Gods but these, Its Jove whate'er you see, move where you please.

So again Psellus, in his Exposition of the Dogmata of the Assyrians and Chaldeans, says, that both of them held the World Eternal.

I may add that the Ancient Druids held this Opinion of the Worlds Eternity, their Philosophy being that of Pythagoras and Plato, which is concluded to have been ge∣nerally the same (I say not in this particular) with that of Moses; and Pythagoras himself is said to have held it by Censorinus. Natalis Comes also tells us, that all the ancient Sages were divided into two Parties, one of them

held the World Eternal, the others that it had sometime a beginning; on the one hand were the most excellent Wits of the most famous Men, on the other were divine Persons, and Men divinely instructed. And even the An∣cient Cabalists among the Jews, who think themselves the only Persons deep seen in Scripture-knowledge, and to whom Origen seem'd inclin'd, held an Eternity of Worlds, tho indeed they suppos'd renovations of them from Chaos's at certain Periods; concerning which I shall say more in the next Book.

I have deliver'd this Account of the Opinions of Men concerning the Worlds Eternity, not but I wholly ac∣quiesce in the Opinion commonly receiv'd among Chri∣stians, of the Worlds late Beginning, but only to give the Point its due Latitude, which I judg'd too much li∣mited by the Author of the Theory.

And upon the whole, when we consider what is urg'd on both sides; as the Author has brought Arguments of strength, to prove the World's late Beginning; so I conceive there are as weighty Reasons to be brought on the other part, and that many will still say with Scaliger, Solâ Religione mihi persuadetur mundum coepisse, & finem Incendio habiturum; and with Melancthon, Necessaria est diligentia in omnibus doctrinis videre, quae certò adseverari possint, quae non possint, & de quibus rebus humana ratio certam & immobilem doctrinam habeat, de quibus verò ar∣canis, positis extra conspectum hominum, erudiat nos vox coe∣lestis. Neutrum humana ratio invenire per sese potèst, vi∣delicet, fuisse mundum inde, us{que} ab Infinita Eternitate, aut conditum esse recens, ante annos 5507. And beneath. Bre∣vitas temporum mundi à Mose tradita Physicis ridicula zi∣detur. Not a Man among the Gentiles having dreamt of so late a Beginning of the World, as Moses seems to in∣timate.

And hence the learned Father Simon judges it pro∣bable, that the Greek Doctors in the Septuagint Transla∣tion, believing that the World was more ancient than appears from the Hebrew Text, have took the liberty of

etching out the time; especially upon the belief they had, that when the body of the Canonick Scripture, which we have, was publisht, the people had only given them what was thought necessary for them. So those, who will not allow Plato to have held the World Eter∣nal, must at least grant, he suppos'd it to have existed for a vast and unaccountable Succession of Ages. And so we find what Simplicius reply'd to Grammaticus, who urg'd against him a first Generation and a Beginning of time according to Moses, viz. That Moses's Relation was but a fabulous Tradition, wholly drawn from Egyptian Fables.

Aquinas also seems to me to give an home hint to those who from humane Reason will pretend to assign a time for the Worlds beginning, saying, Mundum incepisse est credibile, non autem demonstrabile, aut scibile; & hoc utile est ut consideretur, ne fortè aliquis quod fieri est, demon∣strare praesumens, rationes non necessarias inducat quae praebe∣ant materiam irridendi infidelibus, existimantibus nos propter hujusmodi rationes credere quae fidei sunt. So again, Picolo∣mini. Quoniam principium originis mundi, longè abest à nobis; & ejus creatio superat naturae vires, per cujus opera elevantur Philosophi ad inventionem causarum, ideo mirum non est, si Philosophi, humanâ ducti ratione, facilè in hanc sententiam la∣buntur, quòd mundus omni ex parte sit aeternus: reverâ enim per naturam, nec principio, nec fine valet esse praeditus.

Moreover, as to all those learned amongst the Gentils, whose Opinions concerning the Worlds Beginning, the Author applauds before Aristotle's; its manifest they were more absurd than him in what they held; for generally grounding themselves on this Principle, Ex nihilo nihil fit, they either suppos'd Corpuscles from Eternity, rowling without order in an immense Space; or that the said Bodies lay lurking in a confus'd Chaos from Eternity. Now wherein do these men excel Aristotle? Is it, in that they have made a deform'd World from Eternity, which came in time to be adorn'd? Is there less absurdity and re∣pugnancy in an infinite multitude of disorderly motions,

than of such as succeed in order? and in the Eternity of a deform'd Body, than of a beautiful? Certainly it was better Aristotle's way; who not having foreseen any Im∣possibility of eternal Motions and Bodies, had rather have the Face of the World beautiful from Eternity, than at some time to have emerg'd from an eternal De∣formity.

Again, whereas the Author, in his second Book, where he treats of the Cosmogonia Mosaica, will have it, that the Creation, according to the six days Works, set forth, Gen. 1. is deliver'd only 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, ad capum usumque Populi; and judges that some of the Antients have deliver'd the Generation of the World more Philosophically. I must confess, if any Tergiversation were to be allow'd from the Text of Moses, I should be more enclin'd to think, that either the World being eternal, as the fore-men∣tion'd-Philosophers held; or, at least, that the time of its Rise or Creation, being indefinite, and wholly in∣scrutable by Man (as all the Gentiles, who held it not eternal, must have suppos'd it, not a Man of them, as far as I know, having assign'd or substituted any deter∣minate time for its beginning), Moses, as a divine Le∣gislator, substituted a time for its Creation or Rise, and the Modus of it (whereas the Gentiles substituted only the Modus according to their corrupt Divinity) there∣by to carry on a Doctrine for the Good and Salvation of Man; and that his Chronology, according to the Lives of the Patriarchs, may possibly be resolvable by Arithmantical Divinity, according to certain Symbolical Mysteries contain'd in Numbers: or I should more rea∣dily follow the Opinion of Austin, than any of those Philosophers; he holding that God created all things in an instant, without any succession of time; which Opi∣nion might as well have been consider'd by the Author, as that of the World's Eternity, this equally taking away those gradual Changes, which he represents in the Chaos; setting the World immediately in the State it is. And truly it seems much more rational to me, that all things

were set in their perfect State at first, whether it be ta∣ken as the Text of Moses literally imports, by a prope∣rated Maturation; or instantaneously, after the Opinion of Austin; than to suppose an Earth gradually qualifi'd (as those Philosophers do) for the Production of Plants, and Animals, &c. So that their Earth, as it rose from a Chaos, must have been a long time in a Quagmire con∣dition, and not affording a tolerable Habitation for an Irish Bog-trotter; till the Sun, I know not after what Revolution of Ages, had made it tenantable; which ap∣pears but a meagre and unsatisfactory Story, of which I may say more elsewhere. Of Austin's Opinion also were the most rational amongst the Jewish Doctors, Rabbi Moses Aegyptius, Philo Judaeus, Abraham Judaeus, and the Schools of Hillel, and Schammai, as Manasseh Ben Israel writes. Procopius Gazaeus also, and Cajetan held the same. I may add, that Hermodorus the Platonick, says that Linus writ the Generation of the World, the Cour∣ses of the Sun and Moon, and the Generation of Fruits and Animals; and that in the first Verse of his Work, he affirms all things to have rose together. And so much for this Point, which some, perhaps, may think more than need to have been.

I shall now proceed to state the Author's Theory, for the Composition of his Earth, or how it rose from a Chaos; which runs thus:

First, He supposes that all those that allow the Earth an Origine, agree that it rose from a Chaos (tho I have shewn before, that Austin, and those that are for instan∣taneous Creation, could not agree to it, farther than to help out our way of conceiving; because no real successive Changes could then have pass'd in the sup∣pos'd Chaos, in order to the Earth's Formation,) and then he lays down two Propositions to be made out by him.

The first is, That the Form of the Antediluvian Earth, or of the Earth that rose from a Chaos, was different from the Form of the present Earth.

The second is, That the Face of the Earth before the Deluge, was smooth, regular, and uniform, without Moun∣tains, and without a Sea.

He proves his first Proposition; first, because, he says, he has shewn in his Second Chapter, that if the Earth had been always of the present Form, it would not have been capable of a Deluge.

Secondly, he proves it from a Passage in the second Epistle of S. Peter, Chapter the Third.

Thirdly, He proves it from Reason, and the Contem∣plation of the Chaos, from whence the Earth first arose.

To the first Proof, I answer, that as I have intimated be∣fore, it does not concern me here to shew how a Deluge was possible, according to the present Form of the Earth, which may still rely on Miracle, till more valid, natural Reasons are assign'd for it, than any, perhaps, have hi∣therto been; and all I undertake, is, to shew that the Deluge could not have happen'd according to the Hypo∣thesis laid down by the Author, which I conceive I shall make out in its due place.

As to his second Proof from S. Peter, first I have in∣timated in my Advertisement to the Reader, prefixt to this Book, that a right reverend Divine has already given some Explanation of the Passages of Scripture, con∣tain'd in the Theory; and in this regard I shall not in∣termeddle with them, farther than necessity of Argument shall enforce me thereunto. Secondly, as to Scripture Passages, I have this to offer in general, that since the End of the Scriptures is of an higher Nature, than to in∣struct us in natural History, and in Sciences grounded on second Causes, to which God has left them, as useless to the Salvation of Men; I think they ought not to be ap∣ply'd but in those holy things, of Faith, and Morals, for which they were dictated: and possibly it was on these accounts, that those of the Antients, who are sup∣pos'd to have read the Books of Moses, did not quote them in their Writings. Again, since the Author is pleas'd to set by the first Chapter of Genesis, as not Philosophi∣cally

written, (tho certainly this, if any part of the Scri∣ptures is design'd for our instruction, as to the original state of the World, and the beginnings of things) I know not why he should much insist on any part else, unless it be so self-evident, that it is not liable to various Ex∣positions, as those Passages he quotes, are by him allow'd to be. Neither to me do they seem cogent; tho I may allow some of them to bear a fair Exposition enough his way, as others seem more natural in another sense: But this I observe generally of Quotations; that, farther than they carry a fair stress of Reasoning with them; what by various Explications, and comparing of Passages, they breed endless Cavillations, which rather nauseate, than satisfie a judicious Reader. And even that Passage of S. Peter, so much insisted on by the Author, tho it seems to intimate to us some other state of the Heavens and Earth before the Flood, than they have since; we find the thing is not so clearly hinted, that any Man since could thence divine what that State should have been: and I shall shew in the sequel, by Arguments drawn from the Nature of the thing, that the Attempt the Author has made for explaining it, has been unsuccessful: and so for his Tehom Rabba, or the great Abysse of Moses, which he has also much urg'd; and for any other Passa∣ges he has quoted.

To come to the Author's third Proof, which is from Reason and the Contemplation of the Chaos, whence the Earth rose: this Proof, in effect, is not only for making out, that the Earth, as it rose from a Chaos, in its first state, was of a different Form from the present Earth, according to the Authors first Proposition; but, withall, is partly for shewing that the Face of the first Earth was smooth, regular, and uniform, without Mountains and a Sea, as he has set forth in his second Proposition; where∣fore the scope of it being connected with the Motions, Progress, and Separations, which he supposes to have pass'd in the Chaos, for forming the first Earth, I shall briefly state them both together, as he has represented them.

He supposes then the Chaos as a fluid Masse, or a Masse of all sorts of little Parts or Particles of the Matter of which the World was made, mixt together, and floating in confusion, one with another: Hence he says, there follows an impossibility that this Masse should be of such a Form and Figure, as the Surface of our present Earth is: Or that any Concretion, or consistent State, which this Mass could flow into immediately, or first settle in, could be of the said Figure. He proves the first of these Assertions, because a fluid Mass always casts it self into a smooth and spherical Surface: He proves the second Assertion; because, when any fluid Body comes to settle in a consistent and firm State, that Concretion, in its first State of Consistence, must be of the same Form, that the Surface was when it was liquid; as when Water congeals, the Surface of the Ice is smooth, and level, as the Water was before: And hence, when he has con∣sider'd the broken condition of the present Earth, both as to its Surface and inward Parts, he concludes, that the Form of it now cannot be the same, with that it had originally; which must have been smooth, regular, and uniform, according to his Second Proposition. And to make this clear, he sets forth the Motions and Progress which he supposes must have pass'd in the Chaos, and how it settled it self in the said Form, when it became an habitable World.

1. First therefore, he presents us with a Scheme, which represents the Chaos, as is before express'd, viz. as a sphe∣rical and fluid Masse, containing the Particles of all the Matter of which the World is compos'd, mixt together, and floating in confusion in it.

2. The first Change which he conceives must happen in this Masse, must be, that the heaviest and grossest parts would subside towards the middle of it, and there harden by degrees, and constitute the interior Parts of the Earth; while the rest of the Masse, swimming above, would be also divided by the same Principles of Gravi∣ty, into two orders of Bodies, the one like Water, the

other volatile like Air; and that the watery part would settle in a Masse together under the Air, upon the Body of the Earth, composing not only a Water, strictly so call'd, but the whole Masse of Liquors, or liquid Bo∣dies, belonging to the Earth, and these Separations in the Body of the Chaos are represented to us in a second Scheme.

3. The liquid Masse, he says, incircling the Earth be∣ing not the mere Element of Water, but a Collection of all Liquors belonging to the Earth; some of them must be fat, oily, and light; others lean and more earthy, like common Water. Now these two kinds mixt toge∣ther, and left to themselves, and the general action of Nature, separate one from another, when they come to settle (which these must be concluded to have done) the more oily and thin parts of the Masse getting above the other, and swimming there, as he represents in a third Figure.

4. Next, he considers, that the Masses of the Air and Waters were both, at first, very muddy and impure, so that they must both have their Sediments; and there be∣ing abundance of little terrestrial Particles in the Air, after the grossest were sunk down; these lesser also, and lighter remaining, would sink too, tho more slowly, and in a longer time; so as in their descent, they would meet with that oily Liquor on the watery Masse, which would entangle and stop them from passing farther, whence mixing there with the unctious substance, they compos'd a certain Slime, or Fat, soft and light Earth, spread on the Face of the Waters, as he shews in a fourth Figure.

5. He says that when the Air was fully purg'd of its little earthy Particles; upon their general descent, they became wholly incorporate with the oily Liquor, ma∣king both one Substance, which was the first Concre∣tion, or firm, and consistent Substance, which rose upon the Face of the Chaos; and fit to be made, and really constituted an habitable Earth; which he sets before us in a fifth Figure, and which I have also subjoyn'd;

where A is the first Sediment of the Chaos; B the Orb of Water, or the Orb of the Abysse; C the Orb which made the first habitable Earth.

[illustration]

6. Having thus represented the Rise of the Earth from the Chaos, he adds, that whereas the Antients generally resemble the Earth to an Egg, he thinks the Analogy holds as to those inward Envolvings represented in the Figure of the Earth, and that the outward Figure of the first Earth was likewise oval, it being a little extended to∣ward the Poles, which he represents to us in a sixth Figure, and which I also here insert; where, as the two inmost Regions A B represent the Yolk, and the Membrane that lies next above it; so the exterior Region of the Earth (D) is as the Shell of the Egg, and the Abysse C under it, as the White that lies under the Shell.

[illustration]

This is the Author's Theory of the Earth, in refe∣rence to the Composition of it, as it settled from the Chaos, in its first State; which he says he has all along set forth according to the Laws of Gravity: And this must now be consider'd by me.

First then, If I should allow that the first Earth was form'd from a Chaos, according to those Separations the Author has represented, it would no way answer his chief End, for which he gave it this Construction, viz. The Capacity of causing a Deluge, as I shall make appear in my Considerations on the next Chapter. But tho I might be free to allow it, as for any Deluge to be thence caus'd; yet in other respects, I must not do it, because I take upon me to maintain, that the World, from its first Existence, had Mountains, a Sea, and the like, as it has now. And both in reference to the Author's Argu∣ment from Reason, viz. That all fluid Bodies, and any first Concretion on them, must keep to a sperical Figure; whence he concludes, the Earth, on its first Concretion from the Chaos, to have taken it; and so as to the Sepa∣rations he supposes to have pass'd in the Chaos, I have many things to say.

Not to stand therefore with the Author for allowing a Chaos, and that it was a fluid Masse, and of a circular Fi∣gure (tho I know no reason why a Man should admit a Postulatum, which if the Authority of Moses may be set by, as the Author does, I see no ground for, unless it be to serve a turn, for trying whether a natural Explication may be given of a Deluge, which I judg miraculous) and to reason with those, who seem to have held gradual suc∣cessive Changes to have pass'd in the Chaos, in order to the forming of the World; The main Error, as I con∣ceive, on which the Author has grounded his whole Theory for the Composition of his Earth, as it rose from a Chaos, is, that he has here consider'd the Chaos, not as a strongly fermented Masse, which it must necessarily have been from the infinite variety of seminal Principles of a contrary Nature therein contained (as all Antiquity has

represented it) and from this fundamental Error has concluded, that in the Separations and Settlements of the Chaos, all things pass'd according to the common Laws of Gravity, observ'd in the subsiding of unfermented Bo∣dies; no respect being had to those Effects, which must necessarily have been produc'd by the said Ferments. Can any Man cast his Eye on the Contrariety of Na∣tures which appears betwixt Superiors and Inferiors, and what we find in the Animal, Vegitable, and Mineral Kingdoms, which every where occur to us, and not pre∣sently thence conclude from the consideration of a Chaos, where all these are suppos'd to have been confusedly mixt, that the same Contrariety must have been there, and that turbulent and violent Commotions were thence rais'd in it? To go no further than Ovid, who has re∣presented the Nature of a Chaos, as well as any of the An∣tients: where he speaks of it, he says,

—Congestáque eodem Non bene junctarum discordia semina rerum. —And mingled there The jarring Seeds of ill-joyn'd beings were.

And beneath,

—quia corpore in uno Frigida pugnabant calidis, humentia siccis Mollia cum duris, sine pondere habentia pondus. —'cause in one Masse The cold things fought with hot, the moist with dry, The soft with hard, the light with contrary.

Indeed as he affirms, the World to have risen from the Chaos, he immediately subjoyns,

Hane Deus, & melior litem natura diremit. God and prevailing Good broke off this Strife.

But how far this jarring Discord was taken away, according to what we may reason from second Causes,

and what Effects must have been produc'd by them upon the framing of a World, must be consider'd by us.

It must not then be thought, that when the Chaos came to be separated in order to the framing of a World, all the homogenious Bodies, or pure Elements, were rang'd by themselves; a pure Element being a pure Chimaera, no such thing in Nature. Indeed if such a Separation had been made; whereas there was a Mu∣tiny before in the Chaos, this would have establish'd a Peace, but such a Peace, that no habitable World, nor any Animal, Vegitable, or Mineral Productions could then have been. The Elements then, upon the separa∣tion of the Chaos, must have been mixt and blended to∣gether, according to such Proportions as to be able to produce such Effects, as the prime Author design'd them for; therefore when we consider his design was a World should be produc'd, qualifi'd for the Production, Sup∣port, and Propagation of those varieties of Species we find in Nature, and withal reflect what the Quantities and Qualities of those Elements were, and are, which chiefly concern us in this Discourse, viz. The Earth and Waters, we shall soon find how this habitable Earth and the Sea thence arose.

All the Water which the Author does account for in Nature (as I shall have occasion to set forth in the se∣quel) does not amount to enough to make an Orb of Water, to cover the Earth, as it lies in an even Conve∣xity with the Sea, a quarter of a Mile deep; and what is this to the vast Body of the other Element the Earth? Not comparably so much as a Sheet of the thinnest Pa∣per laid on a Globe of three foot diameter, adds in thickness to that Globe. Indeed, notwithstanding this disproportion, if the Earth, when it first settled from the Chaos, had been an homogenious Body, without any Principle of Motion in it, arising from Ferments, through the Contrariety of Natures therein contein'd, the Wa∣ters must have cover'd it, as Moses seems to intimate it did; Gen. 1. but when those Ferments, quickned by the

ordinary concourse of the first Cause (not to insist here on a miraculous fiat) came to exert their Force, can we think that less Effects could be wrought, than the pro∣duction of Mountains, and a Sea Channel, such inconsi∣derable Nothings to the Body which produces them? the greatest Mountains on the Earth being no more in proportion to the Earth, than the slightest Dust on a Globe of three foot diameter, is in proportion to that Globe; as the ingenious French Author of a late Book entituled, De L'Origine des Fountaines, has well made ap∣pear; where he has likewise shewn, that the little Pro∣tuberances on an Orange, which are usually compar'd to the Mountains of the Earth, are each of them a thou∣sand times greater in proportion to that Fruit, than any Mountain on the Earth is in proportion to that Globe. We find that many very small vegetable Seeds contain a protrusive Principle in them, able to raise Bodies by degrees, containing many Tuns weight, and can we doubt but the primigenial Earth, fermented with the Seeds of all things in it, had a force able to produce the Effects mention'd? And tho the Author seems to smile at those, who have held that Mountains have been cast up as Mole-hills, or produc'd as Wens on the Bo∣dy of Man; I know not whether it may be so easie to shew a Disparity, and why the one is not as possible, and as probable as the other; for if the vastness of the Body will afford it, and there be a proportional mover, neither of which, I think, any Man has reason to que∣stion in the Earth, I know not why the Earth may not be judg'd better able to produce the one, than the Mole, or Man's Body the others.

I well know, that all Antiquity (I mean it of those who held the World had a gradual beginning from a Chaos) abets this Theory, as I have stated it; and the feign'd Story of the Gyant Typhoëus (if it contains any natural deduction) relates here: Typhoëus being that Enormontick Spirit (if I may so call it) or that protru∣sive Impetus, still reigning in the Chaos, through Fer∣ments,

Winds and Inflamations, and causing the present Unevenesses in the Earth, and the retiring of the Wa∣ters into a Sea-Channel, till at length all things being set in their apt State; Jupiter, or a meet temperies of the World, compos'd these turbulent Commotions, and put a stop to their exorbitant Efforts. And this seems to me a more apt Explication of the original Formation of the World, than that the Author would introduce.

I may farther here note, that tho I think the origi∣nal Formation of the World may be accounted for this way; yet I am of opinion there is no Mountain on the Earth now, that is an original Mountain, or that exi∣sted when the World first rose, and conclude with Ari∣stotle, that the Sea and Land have chang'd places, and continue so to do; and I think it not possible for any Man fairly to solve the Phaenomenon of marine Bodies, found in Mountains, by any other Principle; especially by a Deluge caus'd as the Author has propos'd. But it being not my business here to set fort a Theory of the Earth, but only to shew the Inconsistency of the Author's Hypothesis, I shall not enlarge at present in making out these things; but refer them to a particular Tract, I de∣sign to publish with what convenient speed I may; the Demonstrations whereof will refer to certain Cuts, ta∣ken from a Collection of Fossil's, I have by me; where I hope to satisfie the Author in some tolerable way con∣cerning the Rise of Mountains, Islands, &c. and to solve all the Objections he has made against their Rise any other way, but what he has propos'd.

Notes

• Heb. 11.3.
• Ecl. Phys. 7.44.
• De Omn. Gent. Rit. l. 2. c. 3.
• L. de Mi∣grat. A∣brahami.
• Myth. l. 2. c. 2.
• Exerc. ad Card. 61. § 6.

  L. de mundo.
• Hist. Crit. c. 4.
• Simpl. in Arist. Phys. l. 8.
• P. 1. Art. 2. Q. 46.
• L. de mundo. c. 25.
• De Crea∣tione. Probl. 1: