Another proofe like unto this, is taken from S. Peter, epist. 2. cap. 3. ver. 5. where hee speakes of the Earth standing out of the water, and in the water, […]; and therefore, the Earth is immooveable.

I answer: ‘tis evident that the word here is equivolent with fuit: and the scope of the Apostle is, to shew that God made all the Earth: both that which was above the water, and that which was under it. So that from this expression, to collect the rest and immobilitie of the Earth, would be such an argument as this other. Such a man made that part of a Mill-wheele, or a Ship, which stands below the water, and that part which stands above the water: therefore those things are immoovable.

To such vain and idle consequences do’s the heate of opposition drive our adversaries.

A third Argument stronger than either of the former, they conceive may may be collected from those⁶ scriptures: where ‘tis said,⁷ The World is established, that it cannot be mooved.

To which, I answer: These places speake of the World in generall, and not particularly of our Earth; and therefore may as well proove the immobility of the Heavens, they being the greatest pert of the World; in comparison to which, our Earth is but as an insensible point.

If you reply, that the word in these places is to be understood by a Synechdoche, as being meant only of this habitable World, the Earth.

I answer: First, this is onely said, not prooved: secondly, David but a little before seems to make a difference between the World and the Earth, Psal. 90. 2. where he sayes, Before thou hadst formed the Earth and the World. But thir[…], in another place, there is the same original word applyed expresly to the Heavens; and which is yet more, the same place do’s likewise mention this supposed setlednesse of the Earth, Prov. 3. 19. The Lord by wisdome hath founded the Earth: and by understanding hath he established the Heavens. So that these places can no more proove an immobilitie in the Earth than in the Heavens.

If you yet reply, That by the Heavens there is meant the seat of the Blessed, which do’s not moove with the rest.

I answer: though by such an evasion a man might possibly avoid the force of this place: yet, first, ‘tis but a groundlesse shift, because then, that verse will not containe a full enumeration of the parts in the World, as may seeme more agreeable to the intention of it: but onely shew, that God created this Earth where we live, and the Heaven of Heavens. So that the Heaven of the Starres and Planets, shall be shifted out from the number of the other creature: secondly, there is another place which cannot bee so avoided,⁸ Psal. 89. 37. where the Psalmist uses this expression, […] It shall bee established as the Moone. So Psal. 8. 3. The Moone and the Starres, […] which thou hast established. Thus likewise, Prov. 8. 27. when he established the Heavens: and in the next verse, our English translation reads it, when he established the clouds. And yet our adversaries will affirme the Moone, and Starres, and Clouds, to bee subject unto naturall motions: why then should the very same expressions be counted as sufficient Arguments to take it away from the Earth.

If it be replyed, That by establishing the Heavens, is meant only the holding of them up, that they doe not fall downe to us (as Lorinus explaines that in the eighth Psalme:⁹ and quotes Euthymius for the same interpretation,) fundandi verbum significat decidere non posse, aut dimoteri a loco vbi collecti sunt: I answer, why may not we as well interpret the words thus of the Earth: so that by establishing of it, is meant only the keeping of it up in the vast places of the open aire, without falling to any other place.

From hence it is plaine, That these Scriptures are to be understood of such an immobilitie in the Earth, as may likewise agree with the Heavens: the same originall word being so promiscuously applyed to both.

I but (you wil say) there are some other places which do more peculiarly apply this setlednesse and establishment to the Earth. So Psal. 119. 9. Thy faithfulnes is unto all generations: thou hast established the Earth, and it abideth. Thus likewise, Psal. 104. 5. Who laid the foundations of the Earth, that it should not bee removed for ever. The later of which, being well weighed in it’s original (saith M. Fuller) do’s in three emphaticall words strongly conclude the Earth’s immobility.¹⁰

As first, when he sayes, […] fundavit, he hath founded it: wherein it is implyed, that it do’s not change his place. To which may bee added all those Texts, which so frequently speake of the foundations of the Earth; as also that expression of the Psalmist, where hee mentions the Pillars of the Earth, Psal. 75. 3.

The second word is […] translated Basis; and by the Septuagint, […]; that is, he hath founded it upon it’s owne firmenesse: and therefore it is altogether without motion.

The third expression is […] from the root, […] which signifies, declinare; implying, that it could not wagge with the least kind of declination.

To these I answer severally:

First, for the word, […] fundavit, It cannot be understood properly, as if the naturall Frame of the Earth, like other artificiall buildings, did need any bottome to uphold it; for he hangeth the Earth upon nothing, Iob. 26. 7. But it is a Metaphor, and signifies Gods placing or scituating this Globe of Land and Water. As David tells us of the Pillars of the Earth: so Iob mentions Pillars of the Heavens, Iob, 26. 11. And yet that will not proove them to be immoveable.

True indeed, wee reade often concerning the foundations of the Earth: but so we do likewise of the ends, sides, and corners of the Earth; and yet these Scriptures will not proove it to bee of a long or square forme. Besides, we reade also of the Foundations of Heaven, […] 2. Sam. 22. 8. And yet wee must not hence inferre, that they are without all motion; As also of the planting of the Heavens, Isai. 51. 6. which may as well proove them to be immoovable, as that which followes in the same verse concerning the foundations of the Earth.

Which phrase (as I have observed right) in severall places of Scripture, is to be understood according to these three interpretations.

1 It is taken somtimes for the lower parts of the Earth, as appeares by that place,¹¹ 2. Sam. 22. 16. The channels of the Sea appeared, the foundations of the World were discovered.

2 Somtimes for the beginning and first creation of it, Isa. 40. 2. Hath it not been told you from the beginning, have ye not understood from the foundations of the Earth. And in many other places,¹² Before the Foundations of the World was laid; that is, before the first creation.

Sometimes it signifies the Magistrates and chiefe Governours of the Earth. So many interpret that place in Micah, 6. 2. where ‘tis said, Heare O yee mountaines the Lords controversie, and yee strong foundations of the Earth. So Psal. 82. 5. The foundations of the Earth are out of course; and in Sam. 2. 8. they are called pillars. For the Pillars of the Earth are the Lords, and he hath set the World upon them. Hence it is, that the Hebrewes derive their word for Master, or Lord: from a root which signifies a Basis or bottome, […].¹³ And the Greeke word for King, do’s in it’s Primitives import as much as the Foundation of the people, […]. But now, none of all the severall interpretation of this phrase, will in the least manner conduce to the confirmation of the present Argument.

As for the second word, […] Basis ejus: I answer, the proper signification of it, is locus dispositus, sedes, or statio, an appointed seat or station; and according to this sence, is it most frequently used in Scripture. And therefore, the Heavens are sometimes called, […] the seat of Gods habitation. And for this reason likewise, doe Aquila and Symmachus translate it by the word […], a seat or appointed scituation, which may as well be attributed to the Heavens.

The third expression is […] that it should not be moved from the Primitive […] which do’s not signifie barely to move; but declinare, or vacillare, to decline or slip aside from it’s usual course. Thus is it used by David, Ps. 17. 5. where he prayes, Hold up my goings in thy paths, […] That my footsteps slide not· He do’s not meane that his feet should not move. So Psal. 121. 3. He will not suffer thy foot to bee mooved. Thus likewise, Psal. 16. 8. Because the Lord is at my right hand, I shall not be moved: which last place is translated in the new Testament by the Greeke word […], (Acts 2. 25) which signifies fluctuare, or vacillare, to be shaken by such an uncertaine motion as the waves of the Sea. Now as Davids feet may have their usuall motion, and yet in this sence be said not to move, that is, not to decline or slip aside: so neither can the same phrase applyed to the Earth, prove it to be immovable.

Nor doe I see any reason, why that of Didacus Astunica may not be truly affirmed, (Comment. in Iob) That wee may prove the naturall motion of the Earth, from that place in Iob, 9. 6. Qui commovet terram è loco suo, as well as it’s rest and immobilitie from these.

From all which, it is very evident, that each of these expressions, concerning the founding or establishing both of Heaven or Earth, were not intended to shew the unmovablenesse of either, but rather, to manifest the power and wisedome of Providence, who had so setled these parts of the World in their proper scituations, that no naturall cause could displace them, or make them decline from their appointed course. As for such who doe utterly dislike all new interpretation of Scripture, even in such matters as do meerely concern opinion, and are not fundamentall: I would only propose unto them a speech of S. Hierome, concerning some that were of the same mind in his time. Cur novas semper expetant voluptates, & vulgae eorum vicina Maria non sufficiant, cur in solo studio Scripturarum, veteri sapore contenti sunt.

Thus have I in some measure cleered the chiefe Arguments from Scripture, against this opinion. For which notwithstanding, I have not thence cited any: because I conceive the Holy Writ, being chiefly intended to informe us of such things as concerne our faith and obedience: wee cannot thence take any proper proofe for the confirmation of Naturall Secrets.

---

← Book 2, Proposition 4. That divers learned men have fallen into great · Contents · Book 2, Proposition 6. That there is not any Argument from the words of →

Footnotes

1. Vallesius Sacra Phil. cap. 62. ↩

2. Fuller, Miscell. l. 1. c. 15. Pineda Comment. in locum. ↩

3. Iob, 14. 10. 12. ↩

4. M. Carpenters Geog. lib. 1. cap. 4. ↩

5. Perplex. li. 2. cap. 29. ↩

6. 1. Chron. 16. 30.
   ↩

7. Psal. 93. 1. Item 96. 10. ↩

8. LIB. 2. Cap. 5. ↩

9. Lorinus Comment. in Psal. 8. ↩

10. Miscel. lib. 1. cap. 15. ↩

11. So Ps. 18. 15. ↩

12. Iohn 17. 24. Ephes. 1. 4. ↩

13. Etimol. mag ↩