Section I, Book 3, chapters 1–2: The Mosaicall principles: darkness, light and the waters

The third Book of the first Section, touching the essentiall Principles of the Mosaicall Philosophy.

CHAP. I. Wherein is set down the uncertainty of the antient Grecian and Arabian Philosophers, in their opinions, touching the principles or beginnings of all things.

IT is an evident Argument that the Ethnick philosophers were not well setled upon the grounds of their philosophy but did waver in their imaginations touching the true principles of nature, being that among each sect of them there was maintained and upheld a variety, yea and sometimes a plaine contrariety, of opinions concerning them: as for example, Thales Milesius, who was inrowled amongst the number of the wise men of Greece, had his opinion that Water was the beginning of all things. But Anaximenes and his disciples affirmed, that an infinite aire was the first cause or originall of every existence. And for this reason also, Anaximander did esteem this catholick aire to be God. Again, on the other side, Zoroaster will have all things to take their beginning from Fire and light; as also the Pythagoreans say, that there is one universall Fire in and over all things in this world. And verily, each of these opinions, if they be duely considered, will be found to approach, and have a near relation unto the Mosaicall truth; for a divine fire or light issuing forth of darknesse, or the dark abysse, did suddainly by its bright presence reveal and make manifest, the hidden and invisible waters, the subtiler part whereof is the vast spirit of the aire; and for this reason, both Thales and Anaximenes, do seem in some sort to agree in one subject: And yet, if we penetrate more profoundly into the businesse, we shall perceive, that these two did insist but upon the materiall or passive principle, forasmuch as from it, the substance of heaven and earth, and every thing therein, hath his existence or materiall beeing. On the other side, Zoroaster did not without reason make choice of fire, for the primary beginning of all things, in that it did proceed and appear in act, before the waters or humid nature were made manifest, no otherwise then action goeth before passion, or the cause precedeth the effect. And yet neverthelesse, he erred in this his assertion, because the active principle can in no wise rightly be considered, but as it hath his relation unto a passive originall. The Stoick Zeno, therefore, being more wary than the rest, establisheth his opinion concerning the first Principle, by a firmer tye or obligation, saying, That the substance of the fire being by the aire converted into water, is the beginning of all things. But Empedoc[…]es would be sure to lay his grounds more surely (as he vainly imagined) than Zeno; and for that cause did ordain the four Elements, to be the radicall principles of all things, whereof two of them are agents, and two patients.

Now the main errour of these philosophers in their judgments concerning the principles, was, that they did not mark or consider, that the divine puissance or sacred word, was more ancient, and of a greater Antiquity, then were any of their foresaid principles; the which, if by a riper contemplation they had understood they would have confessed, being instructed and directed by reasons produced from the eternall unity, or essentiall point and beginning of all things, that the divine light, or sacred emanation (which Scriptures entitle by the name of the holy Spirit of wisdom) was the actuall beginning of all things, as neverthelesse before it, there was another property in one and the same sacred essence, which was termed the divine puissance, or potentia divina, which did precede his act or emanation, no otherwise than the Father in time, order, and being, is justly said to exist before the Son, or the Creator before the creature: And thereupon the wise man hath it, Omnium prior creata est sapientia, Wisdom was created before all things. And yet it is most apparent, that some of the Greekish and Aegyptian Philosophers, namely, Plato, Pythagoras, Socrates, Hermes, &c. did so instruct their understandings, partly by the observation of their predecessors doctrine, and partly through the experience, which in their long travails and peregrinations they had gathered, among the Aethiopians, Aegyptians, Hebrews, Armenians, Arabians, Babylonians, and Indians, (for, over all or most of these Countries did Plato, Pythagoras, Hippocrates, and others of them travell, for the augmentation and increase of their knowledge, as Historiographers, that are worthy of credit, have related) that without doubt they did discern, though afar oft, and as it were in a cloud, the true light in the humid nature. And among the rest it is reported, as also it appeareth by his works, that Plato had the knowledge of the Word, and had read the Books of Moses; and for that reason he was called, Divinus Plato, the divine Plato. In like manner, the excellent Philosopher Hermes, otherwise termed Mercurius Trismegistus, expresseth plainly, that he was not onely acquainted with Moses his books, but also was made partaker of his mysticall and secret practise, as by his Sermons, which he calleth Pymander, a man may plainly discern, where he doth mention the three Persons in Trinity, and sheweth the manner of the worlds creation, with the elements thereof, by the Word. And therefore of all other antient Philosophers, I may justly ascribe divinity unto these two: But in this I cannot much commend them, viz. in that they having had a view of Moses his labours, which were indited by the Spirit of God, did gather out, and confesse the truth of his doctrine, touching the principles of all things, and yet would not in open tearms acknowledge their Master, but altered the names of them; but as Plato served his Master Moses, even so was he dealt with by his schollar Aristotle, who knowing that his Masters three Mosaicall Principles of all things, masked under strange titles, were but truth, would neverthelesse arrogate his doctrine unto himself, and for that cause did alter the assumed names of Plato's principles, gilding them over with new denominations, and did afterward rear up upon them, a spurious philosophicall structure, carved and framed out after his own inventions, which may be therefore rightly compared unto a house of straw or stubble, which though it be erected upon a firm rock or foundation, yet because their stuff is Heterogeniall unto the truth, and evilly compacted, it will not endure a storm, no, not the least blast of truth, but will easily be destroyed and cast down. Thus may every good Christian discern, how each of the Ethnick Philosophers have stolen their principles from Moses his grounds, stolen I say, because they expresse them under covert names, without any acknowledgment of their Master, which did arrogate his doctrine and learning unto the Spirit of God which did teach him it, and did practically express the grounds thereof, in the apparition which God made upon the Mount Sina: For upon the grounds of these three Principles, the true mysticall Philosophers or Theosophers did pronounce, that as well the externall Law of Moses, as the internall of Jesus Christ was erected; which was not discovered or discerned by Aristotle, how cunning soever he maketh himself, which if it had been so, he would not (without all doubt) have founded or built, upon the true Corner-stone, I mean the eternall Wisdome, a bastard Philosophy which did differ in shape and essence from the true Foundation. And although he was taught in some sort by his diviner Master, yet was he, as it doth, appeare, all together ignorant of the centrall truth thereof: wherefore it was but a folly in him, who is so vainly magnified for the Prince of Philosophers, to make a privation where there was no precedent position, or information, being there was a Chaos before any thing else was created. But it was no marvel, being that he surmised, the world, and all things or Species thereof, to be eternall that is to say, without beginning and end; which if it had been true indeed, he then had said but rightly, that the dark Abysse or Chaos, in respect of its beeing without form, was a Privation of some Act or form in an actuall pre-existent matter. But that this is false, the whole concurrent of the Scriptures do confirm, being that it is said, that God created the world of matter without form, and that the heavens and the earth were first of waters, and by waters, and consisting by the word of God. And that the Originall or primary womb, from whence the waters were extracted (which were the materiall stuff, whereof all things were framed) was this dark and deformed Abysse or Chaos, and therefore had the beginning of their formall being, from the Father of all-informing and vivifying light and essence. But that we may directly shew unto you the egregious theft of the foresaid Philosophers from Moses his Principles; That Principle which Moses termed darknesse, the darke Abysse or potentiall Principle, Aristotle doth call his Materia prima, or first matter, which he averreth to be something in puissance or potentially only, because it is not as yet reduced into act. Again, he seemeth to term it privation, but falsly, being that no position did precede it. On the other side Plato calleth it Hyle, which is esteemed to be nothing, forasmuch as it is invisible and without form. Also he compareth it to a dark body, in respect of the soul and spirit. As for Hermes, he intitleth it by the name of umbra horrenda, or fearfull shadow. Pythagoras maketh it his Symbolicall Unity: From in this its estate, it hath relation unto nothing else but it self, which is mere Unity, and consequently it acquireth not so much as the name of a Father, because it doth not by an emanation respect or attempt the production of a Son. Hippocrates will have it named a deformed Chaos, or an universally troubled mass, without form or shape. Again, as touching the first inacted passive Principle, or the primary passive matter, out of which all things were carved. That which Moses called waters, Aristotle doth intitle by the name of Second matter; forasmuch as it was begotten and derived out of the bowels of the first-matter, or Chaos, or dark abysse: which also Plato termeth the Spirit, and Hermes the humid nature. Hippocrates with Anaximenes the vast and universall aire of this world. Pythagoras pointeth at it Symbolically, by the number of duality, which is the mark of imperfection; for it argueth thereby, the imperfect estate of matter being destitute of the formall character of Unity, which maketh three, and therefore the ternary number is esteemed amongst the wisest Philosophers, for the root of all perfect numbers. To conclude; that vivifying and animating Principle, which Moses called light, proceeding from the Spirit of the Lord, Aristotle maketh his formall beginning; Plato, the act or soul of the world; Pythagoras delineates it by the number of three, and Hippocrates calleth it that immortall heat, the which when all things were troubled in the beginning by contention, did sore up unto that upper region, which the Ancients do call the Aether or Heaven. Is not this therefore a notable kind of Robbery amongst the choisest Ethnick Philophers, thus fasly to ascribe and attribute the Principles and Doctrine unto themselves, which were revealed by God's Spirit, unto the wise Prophet Moses, and that of pupose to make themselves great and eminent, not only in the eies of the Gentiles, but also by subtill allurements, or false and fading suggestions, laid on those foundations, to distract Christian men from the Truth? And yet as for Plato and Hermes, I must excuse them, being that they do both of them acknowledg in express terms with Moses, that the matter or substance wherof the heavens and the earth were made, was a humid nature, and the internall form or act, which did dispose of it into diversity of figures or forms, was the divine Word, as you may find most plainly expressed in Plato's works, and in the Pimander of Hermes or Mercurius Trismegistus. But amongst all the rest, Aristotle hath sored highest upon the wings of his own conceited imaginations, and built the structure of his worldly wisdome upon the typicall form of the Mosaicall grounds, thinking thereby to assume and purchase unto himself, in the regard of this world, the name of an absolutely wiseman, though in the conclusion he appeareth far otherwise in the eyes of God, for as much as he doth assigne particular essentiall actions, which appertain really unto God, unto the creatures, with more obstinacy then the rest, affirming that they operate essentially of and by themselves, when in Verity it is only God that operateth all and in all, and that immediatly, (as the Apostle Paul doth intimate unto us) And this is the reason that they give not unto God the only Creator, the glory of every action in this world, (as they ought to do) but rather to a created nature, and unto Angels, and Stars, and Elements, and compounded creatures, which were made, and are still sustained and maintained by the all-creating Spirit or word of the Almighty. And this is the originall occasion of the multiplicity of Idolatry, which hath and doth hitherto raigne in this world, namely, of the worshipping of the Sun, Moon and starres, of sacrifices offered unto Idols or false Gods, and deceiving Devils, of the Veneration of Isis and Osiris, of the adoration of Saturne, Jupiter, Mars, Venus, and Mercury, of the immolations or offerings unto Caelum, Vesta, Ceres, Proserpina, Vulcan, Pluto, and Neptune, with many other errours and absurdities, whereby ignorant men are rather seduced from the knowledg of the true God, than any way induced unto the understanding of him rightly. And this very same Doctrine relying on the invention of man, hath been the occasion that the world hath erred concerning the divine Word, and through blindness have not perceived the operations and properties of the holy Spirit, in the creatures; yea verily, it hath been the occasion, why some of our Christian Philosophers themselves, have neglected the research of Gods Actions in his creatures, as well visible as invisible: they are (I say) so wedded unto the Aristotelian Philosophy, that they do voluntarily avert their eies from the true and certain Science of the Meteorologicall Science, revealed by the Scriptures, which are the fountains of Wisdome; to follow the uncertain, and scarce-probable doctrine of their Ethnick-Master, touching that admirable subject. And this is the reason that they will not acknowledg any true Meteorologicall Philosophy to be taught by the Spirit of Wisdome, in the said holy Book, but only matters belonging to the health and salvation of man, when indeed it is most evident, that whole pages or leaves as well of the books of Moses, Job, Psalms, and the Prophets, as many places of the New Testament, are full of that subject. All which is expressed in the book of the true Wisdome, that thereby we may admire the wonderous works which the Creator hath from the beginning effected, and daily doth produce in this lower world, to witness his eternall power in his creatures. But leaving all allaterall discourses, I will proceed now unto our main Subject, which concerneth the true Mosaicall Principles, with their effect.

CHAP. II. What were the Mosaicall Principles or beginnings in generall: How they were produced and extracted out of Nothing. Then what is meant by that word Nothing. And lastly, the first Principle, which is the dark Abysse or Chaos without form, is particulaerly described.

THe Mosaicall Principles are very plain and evident, unto all such as do wisely contemplate, and observe the words of the most excellent Philosopher Moses, in his first Chapter of Genesis: For before there is made any mention of that Spagiricall separation, which by the Word of God, or divine Spirit Elohim was effected in the six daies work of the Creation, mentioned and expressed there, It is said that darknesse was upon the face of the Abysse; and that Terra erat inanis & vacua: the Earth was without shape and form. Where it appeares, that the Heavens and the Earth, were not as yet inacted or informed, but were one deformed, rude, and indigested masse, and consequently all were complicitly comprehended in one dark Abysse, but explicitly they were as yet nothing: as for example, we see that a great tree, with his body, branches, bark, leaves, and fruit, is complicitly comprehended, in a grain or kernell; but explicitly it is no such thing, but only somewhat in imaginatione. St. Augustin compareth this Nothing unto Speech, which whilst it is in the mind of the speaker, is as nothing unto him that it is spoken unto, that is to say, somewhat in puissance, and nothing in essence; but when it is uttered or spoken, then is that which was before complicitly, in animo loquentis, now explicitly apprehended by the hearer. Plato compareth it in this estate of its Nullity, unto a vision in a dreame, which when a man awaketh. proveth nothing saving a mere imagination: But because this speech, to wit (God created all things of nothing) hath pusled the minds of many understanding persons, being it could not be perceived really, what should be intended, by this word Nihil, I purpose in few words to discourse upon it, and to expresse mine opinion, what is meant thereby.

Saith the Prince of Peripateticks, Ex Nihilo nihil fit: A learned Sentence, and infallible axiom, of so learned a Personage, if the sense of the word were alwaies to be construed one and the same way: But I say, being founded on good grounds, that if there be any, who either upon presumption, or through ignorance, are of an opinion, that in these words (God created all things Ex nihilo, Of nothing,) this word Nihilum or nothing, ought not to be taken or interpreted for Nihilum negativum, or such a negative nothing, which falleth not under the capacity or understanding of mans reason or intellect: Such a kind of Nihilum or Nothing was never meant or taken for the first-matter of the Creation: For it appeareth as well by the infallible sense of holy Scriptures, as the sacred Light in nature: that the first essence and matter of all things was from all eternity in God, and with God, one and the same thing; and this we prove out of Scriptures, after this manner. Saith Moses: In Principio creavit Deus coelum & terram: In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. In which speech, this word Principium is not to be taken for a negative nothing: For the Scripture telleth us, in plain terms, that ex ipso, & per ipsum, & in ipso sunt omnia: Of him, by him, and in him are all things. And therefore if all things proceed from God the Creatour, who is the highest of Entities, it followeth, that it proceedeth not from a negative nothing. And again, Scriptures say, Omnipotens Dom[…]ne, manus tua creavit orbem te[…]rarum saith, St. Jerom: or mundum, according unto Tremellius, ex mateteria invisa, as St. Jerom interpreteth it, but Tremellius hath it, Ex materia informi, Almighty Lord, thine hand hath created the earth or world, of an invisible or informed matter. And therefore, if of an invisible matter or substance, without shape; it followeth, that it is not of a negative or absolute Nothing. Also the Scriptures say in another place, Fide intelligimus aptata esse secula verbo Dei, ut ex invisibilibus visibilia fierent; We understand by faith, that the world was so made or adapted by the word of God, that of invisible things, such things as are visible were made; and consequently not of an absolute or negative Nothing. Moreover, if God had not produced and created all things essentially out of himself, but of a vain negative nothing, then creation would not appertain unto God, neither could it rightly be referred unto him, that is to say, if all things were not essentially of him, nor did take their beginning from him; then verily it must needs follow, that all were not made by him, but would have their existence from Nothing; neither would they consist in him, but in Nothing. But it is evident, that the case is otherwise; for the Creation is the work of God, and not the work and subject of Nothing; he is the entity of all entities, the life of all the living, the beginning of all beginnings, and the fountain of all waters, of which heaven and earth were framed. To conclude, nothing ever came into being, or had its existence from any other, but onely from him, and by him, neither can any thing exist but onely in him. And therefore we may conclude, that God did beget, produce, make, and create nothing, but that which was eternally in himself; which also the Apostle seemeth to verifie in these words, In Christo sunt omnia condita sive visibilia sive invisibilia, ipse ante omnes & omnia in ipso constant, angeli, throni, potestates, dominationes, per eum & in eo sunt creata qui est principium. In Christ are all things made and created. He is before all, and all, as well visible as invisible, consist in him. The angels, thrones, potestates, dominations, were by him and in him created, who is the beginning. But because this is more fully discussed in the first Book of my sympatheticall and antipatheticall History, I will say no more of it in this place, but proceed directly unto my purpose. As therefore darknesse is rightly termed potentia divina, so also is light called actus divinus, which the Cabalists express by Alephtenebrosum, and lucidum, as else-where it is declared. And therefore the Scriptures aver in another place, that God is omnia in omnibus, God is all in all. And again, Christus est omnia in omnibus, Christ is all in all, &c.

I say therefore, that the very same which is meant by Moses his dark abysse, and terra inanis, Job tearmeth umbra lethalis, because it is void of form and life; and for that cause he saith also, Aquilonem extendit Deus supra inane & vacuum. & suspendit terram supra nihilum: God spread or extended the north upon the void or inanity, and did hang the earth upon nothing. Whereby also it appeareth, that it was not the negative Nihil, but a matter that was in potentia ad actum, in the way to be inactuated, being destitute neverthelesse as yet, both of any form or act. But, Forma dat nomen & esse, Form doth give unto each thing its name and being. And therefore it consequently followeth, that because this first matter was without form, it was justly tearmed Nothing, as having neither name or essentiall being, seeing it was onely something in puissance, and nothing in act. Therefore Hermes tearmeth it, potentia divina, the divine puissance. And again he saith, that in the instance of the apparition of light, it seemed unto him to be a fearfull shaddow, saying, Umbra horrenda obliqua revolutione subterlabebatur; A horrible or fearfull shaddow did glide downwards, by an oblique revolution, &c. Again, in another place, as Moses said, Darkn[…]sse was upon the face of the abysse, Hermes hath it, Infinita in abysso, aqua in super & spiritus tenuis intellectualis per divinam potentiam in chaos inerant; There was (saith he) an infinite shaddow upon the abysse, also water, and a thin intellectuall spirit were in the chaos by the divine puissance. In which words he exactly agreeth with Moses, who said, that darknesse was upon the face of the abysse. Now that there was contained water and a fiery spirit complicitely, within the dark chaos or abysse, it appeareth by the revolution of the waters, upon the which Elohim, or the Spirit of the Lord was carried, as shall be shewed you hereafter. So that by these authorities you may discern, what the first principle, or potentiall being or beginning was, namely, the dark abysse, or terra vacua, & inanis of Moses; the nihilum, inane, vacuum, & umbra lethalis, of Job; the materia informis, or invisa, of Solomon; the potentia divina (of Esdras) ante omnia creata quae erat fons & initium omnium, the divine puissance which was created before all things; for such was the eternall wisdom, before it did act in this world. The umbra horrenda, & infinita in abysso, & potentia divina, in the chaos of He[…]mes. And to conclude, it was the mysticall and complicite number, which is said to be principale in animo conditoris condendorum exemplar, the principall pattern in the minde of the builder or creator of things, which were to be created. So that all things were complicitely in the divine puissance, before that by the emission of his inacting Spirit, they were reduced into an explicite Being. And for this reason, Hermes most properly saith in another place, Cantabóne laudes tuas in iis quae in lucem è tenebris eru isti; an in iis quae latent adhuc arcano sinu recondita? Shall I sing thy praises in those things which thou hast made to appear out of darknesse; or in those things which do lie hid as yet in thy secret bosome? Whereby he argueth, that as well the things that are hid in darkness, and appear not, as those which are made manifest, are all one, in the sight of the abstruse unity, who is the God as well of those things which are not, in respect of our capacity, as of those which are or appear unto our sense: And therefore the kingly Prophet saith, Tenebrae sunt ei sicut ipsa lux, Darknesse is to God as light; as if he had said, All things are but one thing before God, who is one and the same, in whom are all things, arcano quasi sinu recondita, as Hermes saith in the Text before mentioned, which is also most excellently described thus by him in another place, Ex uno princip[…]o cuncta dependent, principium ex uno solo. Et principium movetur ut rursus extet principium, ipsum tamen unum praestat, nec recedit ab imitate. Of one beginning all things do depend, this principle or beginning is from onely one. And again, this principle is moved, that it may again become a principle; and notwithstanding onely one doth perform this, and yet it recedeth not from the nature of an unity. I will say no more touching this principle, because I have uttered my minde more fully concerning it, in the first Book of my sympatheticall Treatise or History: I will now therefore proceed unto the description of the second, namely, unto the revealed matter which is mentioned and expressed by the Prophet Moses, and the Apostle Peter, to be the subject or materiall mass, out of which the heavens and the earth, and consequently the whole world, was framed or made.