wherein all the reason and philosophy of atheism is confuted, and

152 'A Plaftick Nature agreeable to the Book I.Moreover, before Plato, Empedodes philofophized alio in the fjme manner,when fuppofing two worlds, the one archetypal, the other ectypal, hemade (poJa, and xiiy.o-, friend/hip and difcord, to be the af?c») opaj-'i^t^, thea£iive principle and immediate operator in this lower world : he not underftandingthereby, as Plutarch ' and fome others have conceited, two lubflantialprinciples in the world, the one of good, the other of evil, but onlya plaftick nature, as Arijiotle in fundry places intimates : which he calledby that name, partly becaufe he apprehended, that the refuk and uplhot ofnature in all generations and corruptions amounted to nothing more thanmixtures and reparations, or concretion and fccretion of pre-exiilent things;and partly becaufe this plaftick nature is that, which doth reconcile the contrarietiesand enmities of particular things, and bring them into one generalharmony in the whole. Which latter is a notion, that Plotinus, dcicribingthis very femlnary reafon or plaftick nature of the world, (though taking itin fomething a larger fenfe than we do in this place) doth ingeniouAy purfueEn. 3. /. 2. after this manner*, 'A.tjSeV Je kAAjiAoi? t« n^sfl, x? Tronicraf hoiS,, TroXefAV x, i^-xy^i^g§• I0« (rU~«0"tV X, 5^£l.£(7»V ilpya.aa.TO' xj KTi.-? £5~IU flj 7r«f, l\ fJ-fl £V HYi' ytVO^AWi yocf iXhroi TOIfL ^ 7' jxecSTl TToXtlXiOV, 8TWf IV Ij-J xj (pl\QV, WCTTTfO £v ll SsdfAlx'i^ AtJ'Of fi'f, TK J'^a|lA«j©^,pafs for a commentary upon Empedodes, accordingly as 5?>«/i/;«'«j briefly rerEj^uu £1/ «Jtu TToAAa? (Axyjn,^' to [Jiv ?v Sca,fJ.a. toi fj.ifj.a.'X/i^ivoi.^ cm I'l; [xta.v a^/xovixVyelyii cruij^tpuvov. w? re p.aAAoa au t(? tvI dpfj-avioc tyi Ik fj.a.'xo^.i-.uv elyidanf. 'The fe~piinary reafon or plajlick nature of the univerfe, oppcfing the parts to one another,and making them feverally indigent, produces by that means war andcontention. And therefore though it he one, yet notwitbftanJing it conjifts ofdifferent and contrary things. For there being hofiility in its parts, it is neverihelefsfriendly and agreeable in the whole ; after the fame manner as in a dratnatickpoem, clafhings and contentions are reconciled into one harmony. Andtherefore the feminary and plaftick nature of the world may fitly be refembledto the harmony of difagreeing things. Which Plotinick doctrine may wellprefents his fenfe, ^Efj.-mSoy.y^ri'; Sioy.iiTy.vi; (rjvlrri^i, tou fj-h' t^vx/j-i-jov >C, voy.to'j, to-ji"ifp. -1. Edir. ^'^ Sixaexpifj.i'jov x^ alSrirov^ >^ iv ts'tu xo't^uu tw 'ijuai-j oaoi >^ trfJ Sixxcitdi- EmpcdocleSGrec. Venet. makes two worlds, the one united and intelligible, the other divided andfenfibki1526 fi) 1.] and in this lower fenfible worlds he takes notice both of unity and difcord.It was before obferved, that Heraclitus likewife did affert a regular andartificial nature, as the fate of things in this lower world ; for his reafonpaffing thorough the fuhftancc of all things, or ethereal body, which was thefeedcf the generation of the univerfe, was nothing but that fpermatick or plafticknature which we now (peak of. And whereas there is an odd palfage ofthis philofbpher's recorded *, v.o'jyoi rovfs kte rig Stw? oiV d-.^ctfnrji-j ETToi'ro-f, thatneither any God nor man made this world, which as it is juftly derided byPlutarch for its fimplicity, lb it looks very atheiflically at firft fight ; yet.becaufe Heraclitus hath not been accounted an Atheift, we thereforeconceive the meaning of it to have be-rn this, that the world was not madehy any whatfoever, after fuch a manner as an artificer makes an houfe».by» De Ifide i Ofiride, p. 370. Tom. II. Timxo, Tom. 11. Opcr. p. 1014. & apudOper, Clemen;. Alexandrin. Stromat. Lib. V. tap.P Apud Plutarch, de .-^nimj: Procreat. ex XIV. p. 711.