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

464 ^^ World not cut off Book I.But neither they, who held the fupreme Deity to be an immoveable mindor intelleft, fuperior to the mundane foul, (as Arijlotk and Xenocrates) didfuppofe that mundane foul and the whole world to have depended uponmany fuch immoveable intellefls felf-exiftent, as their firft caufe, but onlyupon one : nor they, who admitting a trinity of divine hypoftafcs, madethe fupreme Deity properly to be a Monad above Mind or Intelleft, didconceive that intelled: to have depended upon many fuch monads, as firftprinciples co-ordinate, but upon one only. From whence it plainly appears,that the Pagan theologers did always reduce things under a monarchy,and acknowledge not many independent deities, but one univerfal Numtn(whether called foul, or mind, or monad) as the head of all. Though ithath been already declared, that thofe Pagans, who were Trinitarians,efpecially the Platonills, do often take thole their three hypoftafes fubordinate(a monad, mind, and foul) all together, for the to hCm^ or onefupreme Numen ; as fuppofing an extraordinary kind of unity in thattrinity of hypoftafes, and fo as it were a certain latitude and gradationin the Deity."Where by the way two things may be obferved concerning the Pagantheologers ; firft, that according to them generally the whole corporealfyftem was not a dead thing, like a machine or automaton artificially made bymen, but that life and foul was mingled with and diftufed thorough it all:infomuch \\\-!X Arifiotk himfelf taxes thofe, who m.ade the world to confiftof nothing but monads or atoms altogether dead and inanimate, as beingtherefore a kind of Atheifts. Secondly, that how much foever fome ofthem fuppofed the fupreme Deity and firft Caufe to be elevated above theheaven and corporeal world, yet did they not therefore conceive, either theworld to be quite cut off from that, or that from the world, f > as to haveno commerce with it, nor influence upon it; but as all proceeded from thisfirft caufe, fo did they fuppofe that to be clofely and intimately united withall thofe emanations from itfelf, (though without mixture and confufion)p. too. tar. and all to fubfift in it, and be pervaded by it. Plutarch, in his Platonick^ejlions^ propounds this amongft the reft, T/Jn' -rron rov aiwTarw ^eoj Trari^xTTxvTuv >^ TTOinrriv v^crcTTnv; Why Plato called the highejl God the father and makerof all? To which he anfwers in the firft place thus, tHj fj.n 3-=^^ ymmui-ijt2 TU'j avflfluirwv ttutyio in, TroinT*}? ii twu iXuym >c, tmv a.'\i\>^ijiv' That perhapshe was called the father of all the generated gods, and of men, but themaker of the irrational and inanimate things of tin world. But afterwardhe adds, that this higheft God might therefore be ftyled the fatherof the whole corporeal world alfo, as well as the maker, becaufe it isno dead and inanimate thing, but endued with life.: f|«*4'"X:'' !>"*? J''"'"^'?7) VEvnffiV 'O' >^ TTOiTiTB f*iv, eiof oixoiofxo; V i/(p*i/1»)f, v Xupag ^nuitsoyo; ridvStixvloq, a,Tri]XXixyilat ro •ytvof/.aov t^yor «Vo Si t» j/svpri^anloj '^^X" ^ S{ivxfn