of proof on the other. I proceed therefore to the

SECOND consideration, That the most pressing difficulties are on that side on which there is no proof.

Those who deny a God, and hold the world to have been eternal and of itself, have only two things to object against us: the difficulties that there are in the notion of a God, and in making the world of nothing. To the first I answer, that we attribute nothing to God that hath any repugnancy or contradiction in it. Power, wisdom, goodness, justice, and truth, have no repugnancy in them to our reason; because we own these perfections to be in some degree in ourselves, and therefore they may be in the highest degree that is possible in another. The eternity of God, and his immensity, and his being of himself, how difficult soever they may be to be conceived,

yet these perfections must be granted to be somewhere; and therefore they may as well, nay much better, be ascribed to God, in whom we suppose all other perfections to meet, than to any thing else. And as for God's being a spirit, whatever difficulty there may be in conceiving the notion of a spirit, yet the Atheist must grant the thing, that there is a being or principle really distinct from matter; or else shew how mere matter, which is confessed by themselves to be void of sense and understanding, and to move necessarily, can produce any thing that has sense, understanding, and liberty. As to the other difficulty, of making the world of nothing, I shall only say this: that though it signify an inconceivable excess of power, yet there can no contradiction be shewn in it. And it is every whit as easy to conceive that something should be caused to be that was not before, as that any thing should be of itself;

which yet must be granted on both sides; and therefore this difficulty ought not to be objected by either.

And

But then on the other side there are these two great and real difficulties. First, That men generally have always believed the contrary, viz. That the world had a beginning, and was made by God; which is a strong evidence that this account of the existence of the world is more natural, and of a more easy conception to human understanding. indeed it is very natural to conceive that every thing which is imperfect (as the world and all the creatures in it must be acknowledged in many respects to be) had some cause which produced it, such as it is, and determined the bounds and limits of its perfection: but that which is of itself, and without a cause, may be any thing, and have any perfection which does not imply a contradiction. Secondly, To assert mankind to have been

of itself, and without a cause, hath this invincible objection against it, that we plainly see every man to be from another. So that mankind is asserted to have no cause of its being, and yet every particular man must be acknowledged to have a father; which is every whit as absurd in an infinite succession of men, as in any finite number of generations. It is more easy indeed to conceive how a constant and permanent being (suppose matter) should always have been of itself, and then that that should be the foundation of infinite successive changes and alterations but an infinite succession of the generations of men without any permanent foundation is utterly unimaginable. If it be said that the earth was always, and in time did produce men, and that they ever since have produced one another, this is to run into one great absurdity of the Epicurean way, which shall be considered in its proper place.

And thus I have endeavoured, as plainly and briefly as the nature of the argument would admit, to prove that the account which the Scripture gives of the existence of the world is most credible, and agreeable to the reason of mankind; and that this first account which the Atheist gives of it, is altogether incredible. And now I expect after all this the Atheist will complain, that all that hath been said does not amount to a strict demonstration of the thing. It may be so and if the Atheist would undertake to demonstrate the contrary, there might be some reason for this complaint. In the mean time I desire to know, whether when both sides

agreed that the world is, and that it must either have its original from God, or have been always of itself; and if it have been made evident, that on one side there are fair proofs both from testimony and reason, and as convincing as the nature of the thing is capable of, and no