ciates against Dr, Burnet. But I was willing to produce him as an inftance, to fhew how unfit a man who understands no Geometry, is to write a book of Natural Philofophy.

But to return to the Theory', I cannot but acknowledge, that there was never any book of Philofophy written with a more lofty and plaufible ftile than it is, the noble and elegant defcriptions the Author gives the subject he treats of, fhew that he has a great command of Language. His Rhetorical expreffions may eafily captivate any incautious reader, and make him fwallow down for truth, what I am apt to think the Author himself, from the facred character he bears, defigned only for a Philofophical Romance, feeing that an ordinary Examination thereof, according to the laws of Mechanifme cannot but fhew, that he has acted the part of an Orator much better than he has done that of a Philofopher. For in reality none of thefe wonderful effects, which he endeavours to explain, could have proceeded from the caufes he affigns. And to demonftrate this is the defign of this fmall Treatife, in which I will not inquire how far the Theory is agreeable to Holy Scriptures, that being a work already done by others, who I prefume understand that Subject better than I do, neither will I confine my felf to follow the Author from Chapter to Chapter, and find Fault with every thing contain'd in the

Theory

Theory, least it should look more like fpitefulness and ill nature than a diligent fearch after Truth. My defign therefore is to choose out fome of the principal heads of the Theory, and having fhown them to be falfe and difagreeable to the laws of Mechanisme, the rest must all fall to the ground of course.

CHAP. I.

An Examination of the Theorists general Argument which he uses to prove the Truth of his Theory.

I

N the fecond and third Chapters the Theorist makes way for an Argument which he alledges in his feventh to prove the truth of his Theory, viz. that all other wayes for the explication of Noah's Flood are falfe and impoffible, and that he has given the only poffible, and confiftent Idea of an univerfal flood, and therefore it came to pass the way he has affigned and no other. This Argument we fee is founded upon two Propofitions. ft. That no other way is poffible, and 2dly. That his own Theory is an intelligible and confiftent explication of the univerfal flood. This laft Propofition I intend to examin in the following Chapter, and the first in this.

The Theorist, to prove all the common ways of explicating the univerfal deluge falfe and impoffible, Calculates the quantity of

watǝr,

water, which would be fufficient to cover the whole Earth, above the Tops of the highest Mountains, and finds that no less than eight Oceans of water could be fufficient for fuch a Work. Now it is certain (fays he) that fuch a stock of waters could neither come from the Sea, the Rain, or fubterraneous Caverns, and Channels of the Earth, there being no fuch quantity of water in Nature, as would be requifite for fuch a Purpose: and therefore the explication of the deluge from these causes is impoffible. Neither will he allow any fuperceleftial waters to make up the eight Oceans neceflary for the deluge. For if there were any fuch waters, the Heavens above where they lay must be either folid or fluid. If folid as Glafs or Chrystal, how could the waters get thro' them to defcend upon the earth? If fluid as the Air or Ether, how could the waters reft upon them, it being heavier than Air? But if you will fuppofe, that waters were brought down from this imaginary region, to drown the world, in that vaft quantity that would be neceffary, what became of them when the deluge ceafed? It would be a hard task to lift feven or eight Oceans of water up among the spheres, and there is no room for them here below. Thus the Theorist thinks, that the vulgar opinion makes the deluge impoffible and unintelligible upon a double account, both in requiring

quiring more water than can be found, and more, if found, than can be difpos'd of

This is the fum of the Theorift's Argument, why all other methods and explications of the deluge are false, and impoffible, which I have here related, because I think it an evident demonftration of the impoffibility of all Natural and Mechanical explications of the de luge whatsoever, even his own not excepted, as I fhall fhew in its due place: it being impoffible for Nature, not affifted with extraordinary divine power, to bring fo much water upon the earth; and if it were once brought, it is as impoffible to remove it.

But all this does no way prove, that the deluge might not have been brought upon the earth by the Almighty power of God. Cannot he bring out the waters from the deep or the Abyffe as from a Storehouse, and fuftain them from running down again with the fame ease he made the waters of the Red Sea ftand on a heap, while the Ifraelites paffed through? Is any thing of this nature too hard for the Almighty to perform? Might not he, if there were not enough in the abyffe, bring water on the earth from the Heavens above, which might have been there from the Creation notwithstanding the Theorist's question, How could they reft there? Since the fame power might keep them in their place, that detains the Moon or any other of the Planets in their orbits; and perhaps from fome

of