Mr. Blount's oracles of reason examined and answered in nine sections in which his many heterodox opinions are refuted, the Holy Scriptures and revealed religion are asserted against deism & atheism / by Josiah King ...

Pag. 216.

Now it is very much, that this Author, Ocellus Lucanus (who for his Anti∣quity, is held almost a Cotemporary with Moses, if not before him) should have so different a Sen∣timent of the World's Beginning, from that which Moses had; methinks if Moses's History of the Creation, and of Adam's being the first Man, had been a general received Opinion at that time, Ocellus Lucanus, who was so ancient, and so e∣minent a Philosopher, should not have been altoge∣ther ignorant thereof.

ANSWER.

What Origen observes of Celsus, lib. 4. that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c.

That he objected Ignorance and Illiterature to Christians, whereas he him∣self was a great Ignoramus in History, in mak∣ing Hesiod ancienter than Moses, who was much ancienter than the Trojan War.

The same I have observed of Mr. Blount, who in his Oracles hath objected the same to a Learned Clergy; and yet is far more absurd in his Chronology, relating to Ocellus Lucanus, than Celsus was in the case of Hesiod. Hor∣nius, in his Historia Philosophica, lib. 3. c. 11. makes Ocellus one of Pythagoras his Scholars, Ex ejus discipulis qui ante Platonem floruerunt, Architas, Philolaus, Ocellus Lucanus: A∣mong his Scholars, who were before Plato, are Architas, Philolaus, Parmenides. Mr. Sel∣den

in his Book de Jure Naturae & Gentium, lib. 5. c 11. Ex Pythagoreorum Schola vetu∣stissimus Autor Ocellus Lucanus:

In the School of the Pythagoreans was that most ancient Author Ocellus Lucanus.

And to the same purpose, our most Famous Men, Bishop Pearson, and Bishop Stillingfleet. The eldest account I can find of Him in Diogenes Laertius, is in the Life of Archytas Tarenti∣nus; who in his Epistle to Plato, says, That when he came to Lucania, he met with some of the Posterity of Ocellus; and that what Commentaries he had met with of Empire, Laws, Sanctity, and the Generation of all things, he sent to him.

This then is the greatest Antiquity that can be pretended for Ocellus, which if granted to be true, yet he comes several Centuries short of Moses.

Yet, with all due submission to so great Authority, I have some reason to think this may be a mistake; for the Writings of Ocel∣lus savour nothing of Pythagorism: He Philo∣phizes without regard of numbers, and after the manner of the Peripateticks, he useth the word Antiperistasis, which is not to be found in any of the Ancient Philosophers, no not in Plato; and some accurate Persons assure us, that Aristotle was the Inventor thereof: Neither can I think, what Scaliger (in his 28. Exercit.) affirms concerning Plato's An∣tiperistasis, can invalidate this Presumption.

As to the Dialect in which it was first written, I can affirm nothing for certain: it is extant both in the Attic and Doric; in the latter those of the Italic Family always writ, as Architas Tarentinus, Timaeus Locrus, and others: and 'tis Suspicious, that this Book was first written in the polite Attic, and afterward to conciliate some Authority, it was changed into the obsolete Doric. But I leave this to the Criticks, and make use of better Arguments: altho' I cannot deny but that this Method is frequently made use of by Gerhard Vossius; and particularly in the 12. and 13. chap. of his Book de Philosophia, in the case of that great Physician Aretaeus the Cappadocian.

Plutarch lib. 2. of the Opinion of Philoso∣phers, says, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: That the World was made by God, and if we respect its Nature, it was corru∣ptible. And if we consult Timaeus Locrus, or any other of the Pythagoric School, we shall find their Sentiments very different from those of Ocellus: And in a word, 'tis very strange he should dissent from his Master in a point of so considerable moment.

Aristotle lib. 1. de Coelo, c. 11. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: All Philoso∣phers say the World was made, and not eter∣nal: And to the same effect he speaks lib. 3. c. 2. Now altho' we may suppose that Ari∣stotle

was so disingenuous as not to own, that he had his Arguments from Ocellus ('tis certain he no where mentions him) yet it overcomes all belief, that he should be so impudent as to affirm, as he did, that all Philosophers be∣fore him held the World to have had a be∣ginning, if this Book of Ocellus Lucanus had been extant in his days, as it is now, especi∣ally had it been of that Eminence and Anti∣quity as Mr. Blount pretends, who hath dis∣coursed subtilly, but very injudiciously of so weighty a Subject.