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

Ch a p. IV. Koi Varro'j Natural. 513Vitus religJonis^ ilia qu^ uno ncmine Latvia Greece appellatur. Neither dothe Pagans fufficietitly excufe their facrilegicus rites and images from hence,becaufe they elegantly {and ingenioujly) interpret, what each of thofe thingsfjgnifieth. For this interpretation is referred to the creature, and not to theCreator, to ivhom alone belongeth religious ivorfhip, that which by the Greeksis called Ijitvh. And again in his book de Civ. D. I. 6. c. 8. Atenim habentijla phyfiologicas quafdam (ftcunt siunt) id efl, naturalium rationum interpretationes.Sluafi verb r.os in hac difputatione phyftologiam quaramus, tJ*non theologiam ; id eft, rationem nature, id non Dei, ^amvis enim quiterus Deus eft, non opinione fed natura fit Deus ; non tamen cmnis naturaDeus eft. But the Pagans p ret end, that thefe things have certain phyfiologicalinterf ret ations, or according to natural reafons ; as if in this difputaiion wefought for phyfiology, and not theology^ or the reafon of nature, and not ofGod. For although the true God be not in opinion 07ily, but in nature God, yetis not every nature God. But certainly the firft and chief ground of this .praftice of theirs, thus to theologize phyfiology, and deify (in one fenfe orother) all the things of nature, was no other than what has been already intimated,their fuppofing God to be not only diffufed thorough the wholeworld, and in all things, but alfo in a manner all things ; and that there-,fore he ought to be worfhipped in all the things of nature, and parts ofthe world.Wherefore thefe perfonated Gods of the Pagans, or thofe things of naturedeified by them, and called gods and goddefles, were for all that byno means accounted, by the intelligent amongft them, true and proper gods.Thus Cotta in Cicero; Cum fruges Cererem, vinum Liberum dicimus, ge- D^ ST. l>. /.-*;vere nos quidcm fermcnis utimur ufitato : fed ecquera tarn anientem effe putas,p. 345.qui illud, quo vefcatur, Deum efte credat ? Though it be very common andl^^V ^^^'familiar language amongft us, to call cam Ceres, and wine Bacchus, yet '^'^''xom ^IX 1can think any one to be fo mad, as to take that to be really a god, whichbe feeds upon? The Pagans reaUy accounted that only for a God, by theworfliipping and invoking whereof they might reafonably expcdt benefitto themfelves, and therefore nothing was truly and properly a God to thsm,but what was both fubftantial, and alfo animant and intellectual. For Plato i^^^jj^i^^^^writes, that the atheiftick wits of his time therefore concluded the fun, [p. 66;.]and moon, and ftars, not to be gods, becaufe they were nothing but earthand ftones (or a certain fiery matter) devoid of all underftanding and fcnfe;and for this caufe, ^oiv ruv dv^^-jiirewv wca.'yj/.oiruv (ppovVl^eiv ouvoif/.c\ix, unable totake notice of any human affairs. And Ariftotle ' affirmeth concerning thegods in general, ^w te sratTS? •li-aeiXri'Pa.aa aJTs-J"?, xxi iyi^yiiv xcx, &c. That allmen conceived them to live, and confequently to aSi, ftnce they cannot be fuppofedto fleep perpetually as Endymion did. Tne Pagans univerfally conceivedthe gods to be happy animals; and Ariftotle there concludes the happinefsof them all to confift in contemplation. Lucretius himfelf would notdebar men of that language (then vulgarly received amongft the Pagans)of calling the fea Neptune, corn Ceres, wine Bacchus, and the Earth theU u u 2 mother» MagD. Moral. Lib. V. Cap. VIII. p. 184. To.ni.III. 0;er.