The same answer which was insisted on before, concerning the conformitie of Scripture expressions to mens capacitie and common opinion, may well enough satisfie all those other Arguments, which seeme thence to affirme the Earth’s setlednesse and Immobilitie; since this is as well agreeable to outward appearance and vulgar apprehension as the other. But now for more full satisfaction, I shall set downe the particular places that are urged for it; which being throughly examined, wee may plainly discerne, that none of them in their proper meaning, will serve to infer any such conclusion.
One of these sayings is that of the Preacher, Eccles. 1. 4. One generation commeth, and another passeth, but the Earth endureth for ever; where the originall word is, […] and the vulgar, stat; from whence our1 adversaries conclude that it is immooveable.
I answer:2 the meaning of the word as it is here applyed, is permanet; or as we translate it, endureth. For it is not the purpose of this place to deny all kinde of motion to the whole Earth: but that of generation and corruption, to which other things in it are liable. And though Pineda, and others, keep a great deale of impertinent stirre about this Scripture, yet they grant this to be the naturall meaning of it: which you may more cleerely discerne, if you consider the chiefe scope of this Booke; wherein the Preachers intent is, to shew the extraordinarie vanitie of all earthly contentments, ver. 2. the utter unprofitablenesse of all a mans labours, ver. 3. and this hee illustrates by the shortnesse and uncertaintie of his life; in which respect, he is below many of his fellow creatures, as may bee manifested from these foure comparisons.
1 From the Earth, which though it seem to be but as the sediment of the World, as the rubbish of the Creation; yet is this better than man in respect of his lastingnesse, for one generation passeth away, and another commeth; but the Earth, that abideth for ever, ver. 4.
2 From the Sunne; who, though he seeme frequently to goe downe, yet hee constantly seemes to rise againe; and shines with the same glory, ver. 5. But man dyeth and wasteth away;3 yea, man giveth up the ghost, and where is he? he lyeth down, and riseth not till the Heavens be no more.
3 From the wind, the common emblem of uncertaintie; yet it is more constant than man, for that knowes it’s circuits, and whirleth about continually, v. 6. whereas our life passeth away as doth the wind, (Psal. 78. 39) but returneth not againe.
4 From the Sea; though it bee as uncertaine as the Moone, by whom ‘tis governed, yet is it more durable than man and his happinesse. For though the Rivers runne into it, and from it, yet is it still of the same quantitie that it was at the beginning, v. 7. But man grows worser as he growes older, and still neerer to a decay. So that in this respect, hee is much inferior to many other of his fellow creatures.
From whence it is manifest; that this constancie or standing of the Earth, is not opposed to it’s locall motion, but to the changing or passing away of divers men in their severall generations. And therefore, thence to conclude the earth’s Immobilitie, were as weake and ridiculous,4 as if one should argue thus: One Miller goes, and another comes, but the Mill remaines still; ergo, the Mill hath no motion.
Or thus; one Pilate goes, and another comes, but the Ship remaines still; ergo, the Ship doth not stirre.
5 R. Moses tells us, how that many of the Iewes did from this place conclude, that Solomon thought the Earth to be Eternall, because he saith it abideth […] forever; & questionles, if we examine it impartially, we shal find that the phrase seemes more to favour this absurditie, than that which our adversaries would collect from hence; that it is without motion.
But M. Fuller urging this text against Copernicus; tells us, if any should interprete these phrases, concerning the Earth’s standing still, ve. 4. and the Suns motion, ver. 5. in reference onely to appearance and common opinion; he must necessarily also understand those two other verses, which mention the motion of the wind and rivers in the same sence. As if he should say; because some things appeare otherwise than they are, therefore every thing is otherwise than it appeares; or, because Scripture speakes of some naturall things, as they are esteemed according to mans false conceit; therefore ‘tis necessarie, that every naturall thing mentioned in Scripture, must be interpreted in the like sence: or, because in one place, wee read of the ends of a Staffe, 1 Kings, 8. 8. and in many other places of the ends of the Earth, and the ends of Heaven: Therefore the earth & heavens have as properly ends as a Staffe. ‘Tis the very same consequence of that in the objection. Because in this place of Ecclesiastes, wee read of the rest of the Earth, and the motion of the Sun; therefore, these phrases must needs bee understood in the same proper construction as those afterwards, where motion was attributed to the Wind and Rivers. Which inference you see is so weake, that the Objector need not triumph so much in it’s strength as he doth.