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

I Proved clearly that Em^edoc\es Book I.XIII. B.il: to pifs from Pythagoras himfelf ithat Empedochs, who was aPythagorean alio, did phyfiologize atomically, is a thing that couid hardlybe doubted of, though there were no more proof for it than that one palfa^eof his in his philofophick poems •,'-p-:cNature is noth'.ng but the mixtwe and feparation of things mingled ; or thus,There is no produ^icii of any thing anen; hit only mixture and feparation ofthings mingled. Which is not only to be underftood of animals, accordingto the Pythago.'ick doilrinc of the tranfmigration of fouls, but alfo, ashimfelf expounds it, univerfally of all bodies, that their generation and corruptionis nothing but mixture and feparation ; or, as Ariflotle " exprefTes it,(r-7x.Jicri? Hzl oiiKri-^ii, concretion and fecretion of parts, together with changeof rigure and order. It may perhaps be objeAcd, that Empedocles held fourelements, out of which he would have all other bodies to be compounded ;and tliat as Arifiotle affirms % he made thofe elements not to be tranfmutableinto one another neicher. To which we reply, that he did indeed makefour elements, as the firfl: general concretions of atoms, and therein he didno moie than Dcnocritus hmifelf, who, as Laertiv.s writes '^ , did from atomsmoving round in a vortex, isx-rcx a-jkfiiiJ.y.Tx'yi-jvxj zj'p,-j^j}f,xiox, yrij, tnxi ydpy^ Tx^,x i- «To'^/,Kv Tiuwi/ ovrriuxTx, generate all concretions, fre, water, air andearth, thefe being fyjl ems mad; out of certain atoms. And Plato further confirmsthe fame; for in his book de Legibus ' he defcribcs (as I fuppofc) thatvery atheiflical hypothefis of Democritus, though without mentioning hisname, rcprefenting it in this manner ; that by the fortuitous motion of fen fe-Jefs matter were lirll: made thofe four elements, and then out of them afterwardfun, moon, ftars and earth. Now both P/«/^rf/& ' and Stob^us '' teftify,that Empedocles compounded the four elements themfelves out of atoms.'Ey.7rcijx'A)i^ Si i-A ixiy.poiipuv ofxjcv rx roiyjix (Tjfy.frjit aVfp tfiu iXx^ii-x, xxi oiovfiroix^Tx roiyji'M- Empedocles 'makes the elements to be compounded of other fmallcorpufcula, ivhich are the leafl, and as it were the elements of the elements.And the fame Stob^iis again obferves *, 'EtxTrEtToy.A^f tt^o tuv Ttcra-dpuv Toiyjl'^u^fx-Jo-tJ-xTx i>,zy^irx- Empedocles makes the fnallefl particles and fragments ofbody (that is, atoms) to be before the four elements. But whereas Ariflotleaflirms, that Empedocles denied the tranfmutation of thofe elements into oneanother, that muft needs be either a flip in him, or elfe a fault in ourcopies ; not only b;caufe Lucretius, who was better verfed in that p'lilofophy,and gives a particular account of Empedocles his doftrine (befides manyothers of the ancients) affirms the quite contrary ; but alfo becaufe himfelf,in thofe fragments of his ftill preferved, exprefly acknowledges thistranfmutation :JVide Plutarch. dePiacitisPhilor. Lib. I. » Lib.X. p. 6(>6. f)pcr.C.XXX. p.SSj. Tom. H. Oper. « D.- Placids Philof. Lib. I. c. XVII. p.* Dc Gcnerat. & Corrupt. Lib. II. c. VI. SS5. Tom. II. 0,xi-. Vide etiam c. XIII. p.p 7;9. Toin. I. Opcr. bS:.» I'lii.l p. 734. & Lib. I. c. III. p.i69y.I-.dog. Pliyfi:. Lib. I. c. XX. p. 56.4 Lib.IX. Scgm.44. p 5:5. lb;d. Lib. I. c. XVII. p.I 55.Kal