This Chapter is concerning the _original Mountains_, and that they were
before the Flood, or from the Beginning; which the Exceptor endeavours
to prove from Scripture; not directly, but because Mention is made of
them in the same Places where the Beginning of the Earth is mentioned,
_p._ 291. as _Psal._ xc. 1, 2. and _Prov._ viii. 25. therefore they must
be co-eval and contemporary. We have, I think, noted before, that Things
are not always Synchronal that are mentioned together in Scripture. The
Style of Scripture is not so accurate, as not to speak of Things in the
same Place, that are to be referr’d to different Times. Otherwise we
must suppose the Destruction of _Jerusalem_, and of the _World_, to have
been intended for the same Time; seeing our Saviour joins them in the
same Discourse, (_Mat._ xxiv.) without any Distinction of Time; or with
such a Distinction, as rather signifies an immediate Succession, (_ver._
29.) than so great a Distance as we now find to be betwixt the
Destruction of _Jerusalem_ and the End of the World. Greater than that,
betwixt the Beginning and the Flood: So in the Prophets sometimes, in
the same Discourse, one Part is to be referr’d to the first Coming of
our Saviour, and another Part to the second. _Isa._ ix. 6, 7. _Isa._ ix.
1. &c. _Luke_ i. 31, 32, 33. without making any Distinction of Time, but
what is to be gather’d from the Sense. Neither is there any Incongruity
in the Sense, or in the Tenor of the Words, if those Expressions in the
Psalmist be referr’d to different Times. God existed _before the
Mountains were brought forth, and the Earth and the World were made_.
This is certainly true, whether you take it of the same or different
Times. And if you take it of different Times, ’tis a way of Speaking we
often use. As suppose a Man should say, concerning the Antiquity of
_Troy_, that it existed before _Rome_ and _Carthage_; that does not
necessarily imply, that _Rome_ and _Carthage_ were built at the same
Time; but only that _Troy_ was before them both. And so this of the
Psalmist may be very well thus exprest, by a Gradation from a lower
Epocha to an higher. Then as for that Place, _Prov._ _ch._ viii. it
would be very hard to reduce all those Things that are mentioned there,
(from _ver._ 22. to 30.) to the same Time of Existence; and there is no
Necessity from the Words that they should be so understood. The Design
and Intention of the Holy Ghost is plain in both these Places: In the
one to set out the Eternity of God, and in the other, of the _Logos_ in
particular. And this is done by shewing their Præ-existence to this
Earth, and to all its greatest and most remarkable Parts.
He mentions also, _p._ 202. _Deut._ xxxiii. 15. where the Hills are
call’d _Lasting_, and the Mountains _Antient_. And _therefore they were
before the Flood_. This is a hard Consequence. The River _Kishon_ is
call’d the _antient_ River, _Judg._ v. 21. but I do not therefore think
it necessary, that that Brook should have been before the Flood. Things
may very well deserve that Character of _lasting_ or _antient_, though
they be of less Antiquity than the Deluge. If one should say the
_lasting Pyramids_, and _antient Babylon_, none could blame the
Expression, nor yet think that they were therefore from the Beginning of
the World.
After these Allegations from Scripture, _p._ 205. he descends to a
natural Argument taken from the _Mountains in the Moon_; which, he says,
are much higher than the Mountains upon the Earth: And therefore, seeing
her Body is less, they could not be made by a Dissolution of that
Planet, as these of the Earth are said to have been. Though we are not
bound to answer for the Mountains in the Moon, yet however, ’tis easy to
see that this is no good Argument: For, besides that the Orb there might
be more thick, all Ruins do not fall alike. They may fall double, or in
Ridges and Arches, or in steep Piles, some more than others, and so
stand at a greater Height. And we have Reason to believe that those in
the Moon fell otherwise than those of the Earth; because we do not see
her turn round: Nor can we ever get a Sight of her Backside, that we
might better judge of the Shapes of her whole Body.
From this natural Argument, _p._ 206. he proceeds to an historical
Argument, taken from the _Talmudists_ and _Josephus_. The _Talmudists_
say, that _many Giants sav’d themselves from the Flood upon Mount Sion_.
But this, the Exceptor confesses, _is wholly fabulous_. What need it
then be mentioned as an Argument? Then he says, _Josephus_ reports, that
_many sav’d themselves from the Flood upon the Mountain_ Baris _in_
Armenia. But this also, _p._ 207. he says, is _false in the Gross_, and
a _formal Fiction_. Why then, say I, is it brought in as an Argument?
Lastly, he quotes a Passage out of _Plato_, who says, when the _Gods
shall drown the Earth, the Herdsmen and Shepherds shall save themselves
upon Mountains_. And this (_ibid._) the Exceptor calls a _Piece of
confus’d Forgery_. Why then, say I still, is it alledged as an Argument
against the Theory? But however, says the Exceptor, these Things argue
that many thought there were Mountains before the Flood. But did the
Theorist ever deny, that it was the vulgar and common Opinion? Therefore
such Allegations as these may be of some Use to shew Reading, but of no
Effect at all to confute the Theory.
Yet the Exceptor is not content with these Stories, but he must needs
add a Fourth; which, he says, _p._ 208. is a _plain Intimation that
there were Mountains in the Beginning of the World_. Take his own Words
for the Story, and the Application of it. _I will only add that
traditional Story which is told of_ Adam; _namely, how that after his
Fall, and when he repented of his Sin, he bewailed it for several
hundred of Years, upon the Mountains of_ India. _Another plain
Intimation that THERE WERE MOUNTAINS_ in the Beginning of the World.
This is a plain Intimation indeed, that those that made this Fable,
thought there were Mountains then: But is it a Proof that there really
was so? As you seem to infer. Does the Exceptor really believe, that
_Adam_ wander’d an hundred Years upon the Mountains of _India_? If the
Matter of Fact be false, the Supposition it proceeds upon may as well be
false. And he does not so much as cite an Author here, for the one or
the other.
We are now come to the main Point, a new Hypothesis concerning the
_Original of Mountains_, which the Exceptor, _p._ 208, 209, _&c._ hath
vouchsafed to make for us: And, in short, it is this. When the Waters
were drain’d off the Land on the third Day, while it was moist and full
of Vapours, the _Sun_, by his Heat, made the Earth heave and rise up in
many Places, which thereupon became Mountains. But lest we mistake or
misrepresent the Author’s Sense, _p._ 209. we will give it in his own
Words. _Now the Earth, by this Collection of the Waters into one Place,
being freed from the Load and Pressure of them, and laid open to the
Sun, the Moisture within, by the Heat of his Beams, might quickly be
turn’d into Vapours. And these Vapours being still increased by the
continued rarifying Warmth from above, at length they wanted Space
wherein to expand or dilate themselves. And at last, not enduring the
Confinement they felt, by Degrees heaved up the Earth above; somewhat
after the Manner that Leaven does Dough, when it is laid by a Fire; but
much more forcibly and unevenly. And lifting it up thus in numberless
Places, and in several Quantities, and in various Figures, Mountains
were made of all Shapes and Sizes_; whose Origin and Properties, he
says, upon this Hypothesis, _will be obvious, or at least intelligible,
to thinking and philosophick Minds_.
I must confess I am none of those _thinking and philosophick Minds_, to
whom this is either obvious or intelligible: For there seem to me to be
a great many palpable Defects or Oversights in this new Hypothesis:
Whereof this is one of the grossest, that he supposes the Sun, by his
Heat, the third Day to have raised these Mountains upon the Earth;
whereas the Sun was not created till the fourth Day, p. 51. _the fourth
Day was the first Day of the Sun’s Existence_: So that it had this
powerful Effect, it seems, one Day before it came into Being.
But suppose the Sun had then existed: This is a prodigious Effect for
the Sun to perform, in so short a Time, and with so little Force. The
greatest Part of that Day was spent in draining the Waters from off the
Land; which had a long Way to go, from some inland Countries, to reach
the Sea, or their common Receptacle. And he says, _p._ 209, without an
extraordinary Power, _perhaps they could not have been drained off the
Earth in one Day_. Let us then allow, at least, half a Day for clearing
the Ground; for the Sun might begin his Work about Noon; and before
Night he had rais’d all the Mountains of one Hemisphere. It will require
a strong philosophick Faith, to believe this could be all done by the
Action of the Sun, an in so short a Time. Besides, we must consider,
that the Sun, by Noon, had past all the Eastern Countries, yet covered
with Water, or not well drain’d: So that after they were dried, he could
only look back upon them with faint and declining Rays. Yet the
Mountains of the East are as great and considerable as elsewhere. But
there is still another great Difficulty in the Case, as to the Northern
and Southern Mountains of the Earth; for they lie quite out of the Road
of the Sun; being far remov’d towards either Pole; where, by reason of
his Distance and Obliquity, his Beams have little Force. How would he
heave up the _Riphæan_ Mountains, those vast Heaps of Stone and Earth,
that lie so far to the North? You see what Observations the Exceptor
hath made(_p._ 119, 120.) concerning the Cold of those Countries: And it
falls out very untowardly for this new Hypothesis, that the Northern
Parts of the Earth, as _Norway_, _Swedeland_, _Iseland_, _Scythia_,
_Sarmatia_, &c. should be such mountainous and rocky Countries; where he
had before declar’d the Sun had so little Force. And, indeed, according
to his Scheme, all the great Mountains of the Earth should have been
under the Equator, or, at least, betwixt the Tropicks.
But to examine a little the Manner and Method of this great Action, and
what kind of Bodies these new Mountains would be; either the Sun drew up
only the Surface and outward Skin of the Earth, as Cupping-Glasses raise
Blisters; or his Beams penetrated deep into the Earth, and heaved up the
Substance of it, as Moles cast up Mole-Hills. If you take the first
Method, these superficial Mountains would be nothing but so many Bags of
Wind; and not at all answerable to those huge Masses of Earth and Stone,
whereof our Mountains consist. And if you take the second Method, and
suppose them push’d out of the solid Earth, and thrown up into the Air,
imagine then how deep these Rays of the Sun must have penetrated in a
few Hours Time, and what Strength they must have had, to agitate the
Vapours to that Degree, that they should be able to do such Prodigies as
these. Several Mountains, upon a moderate Computation, are a Mile high
from the Level of the Earth. So that it was necessary that the Beams of
the Sun should penetrate at least a Mile deep, in so short a Time; and
there loosen and rarify the Vapours, and then tear up by the Roots vast
Loads and Extents of Ground, and heave them a Mile high into the open
Air: And all this in less than half a Day. Such Things surely are beyond
all imagination, and so extravagant, that one cannot, in Conscience,
offer them to the Belief of a Man. Can we think that the Sun, who is two
or three Hours in licking up the Dew from the Grass in a _May_ Morning,
should be able, in as many more Hours, to suck the _Alps_ and
_Pyreneans_ out of the Bowels of the Earth; and not to spend all his
Force upon them neither? For he would have as much Work in other
Countries. To raise up _Taurus_, for instance, and _Imaus_, and frozen
_Caucasus_ in _Asia_; and the mighty _Atlas_, and the _Mountains_ of the
_Moon_ in _Africk_; besides the _Andes_ in _America_, which, they say,
far exceed all the Mountains of our Continent. One would be apt to
think, that this Gentleman never saw the Face of a mountainous Country;
for he writes of them, as if he had taken his Idea of Mountains, and the
great Ridges of Mountains, upon the Earth, from the _Devil’s Ditch_, and
_Hogmagog Hills_: And he raises them faster than Mushrooms out of the
Ground. If the newborn Sun, at his first Appearance, could make such
great Havock, and so great Changes upon the Face of the Earth, what hath
he been doing ever since? We never heard nor read of a Mountain, since
the Memory of Man, rais’d by the Heat of the Sun. We may therefore
enquire, in the last Place,
Why have we no Mountains made now by the same Causes? We have no Reason
to believe that the Heat or Strength of the Sun is lessen’d since that
Time; why then does it not produce like Effects? But I imagine he hath
an Answer for this: Namely, that the Moisture of the first Earth, when
it was new drain’d and marshy, contributed much to this Effect; which
now its Dryness hinders. But besides, that the Dryness of the Earth
should rather give an Advantage, by the Collection of Vapours within its
Cavities: However, we might expect, according to this Reason, that all
our drain’d Fens and marshy Grounds, should presently be rais’d into
Mountains; whereas we see them all to continue arrand Plains, as they
were before. But if you think these are too little Spots of Ground to
receive a strong Influence from the Sun, take _Ægypt_ for an Instance:
That’s capacious enough, and ’tis overflow’d every Year, and by that
Means made soft and moist to your Mind, as the new Earth when it rises
from under the Abyss. Why then is not _Ægypt_ converted into Mountains,
after the Inundation and Retirement of _Nile_? I do not see any
Qualification wanting, according to the Exceptor’s Hypothesis: _Ægypt_
hath a moist Soil, and a strong Sun, much stronger than the _Alps_ or
_Pyreneans_ have; and yet it continues one of the plainest Countries
upon the Earth. But there is still a greater Instance behind against
this Hypothesis, than any of the former; and that is, of the whole Earth
after the Deluge: When it had been overflow’d a second Time by the
Abyss, upon the Retirement of those Waters it would be much what in the
same Condition, as to Moisture, that it was in the third Day, when it
first became dry Land. Why then should not the same Effect follow again,
by the Heat of the Sun; and as many new Mountains be rais’d upon this
second Draining of the Earth, as upon the first? These are plain and
obvious Instances, and as plainly unanswerable. And the whole Hypothesis
which this Virtuoso hath propos’d concerning the _Origin_ of Mountains,
is such an Heap of Incredibilities, and Things inconsistent one with
another, that I’m afraid I shall be thought to have spent too much Time
in Confutation of it.
In the Conclusion of this Chapter, _p._ 215. he hath an Attempt to prove
that there were Mountains before the Flood, _because there were Metals_;
which are commonly found about the Roots of Mountains. But the Theorist,
he says, _to shun this great Inconvenience, fairly consents to the
abolishing of Metals out of the first State of Nature_. Yet he is hard
put to it, to prove that the Theorist hath any where asserted,
whatsoever he thought, that there were no Metals then. The first
Citation he produces, only recites the Opinion of others, and says, _p._
216. he _thinks they do not want their Reasons_. Of the two other
Citations out of the Preface, the first does not reach home, making no
mention of Metals. And the second is wholly misconstrued, and perverted
to a Sense quite contrary to what the Author intended, or the Context
will bear. But however the Theorist appears doubtful, whether there were
Metals or no in in the first World: And, upon this Doubt, the Exceptor
lays this heavy Charge, _p._ 215. _li._ 24. _Thus the Fidelity of_
Moses_ is assaulted, and another intolerable Affront put upon the HOLY
GHOST: For do not both inform us, that the City_ Enoch _was built, and
the Ark prepared, before the Flood? But how could either be done without
Iron-Tools?_ But does either _Moses_, or the Holy Ghost tell us, that
there were Iron-Tools in building that City, or the Ark? If they do not,
we only affront the Consequence, which the Exceptor draws from the
Words, and not the Authors of them. By what divine Authority does the
Animadverter assert, that there was Iron, or Iron-Tools, in Building
this City, or that Ark? I’m sure Scripture does not mention either, upon
those Occasions. And seeing it mentions only _Gopher Wood_ and _Pitch_
for the Building of the Ark, _Gen._ vi. 14. ’tis a Presumption rather,
that there were no other Materials us’d. And as to the City, ’tis true,
if he fancy the City which _Enoch_ built, to have been like _Paris_, or
_London_, he has Reason to imagine, that they had Iron-Tools to make it.
But suppose it was a Number of Cottages, made of Branches of Trees, of
Osiers and Bulrushes, (and what needed they any other House, when the
Air was so temperate?) or, if you will, of Mud-Walls, and a Roof of
Straw, with a Fence about it to keep out Beasts, there would be no such
Necessity of Iron-Tools. Consider, pray, how long the World was without
knowing the Use of Iron, in several Parts of it, as in the North, and in
_America_: And yet they had Houses and Cities after their Fashion. For
the Northern Countries you may see _Olaus Magnus_, _li._ 12. _c._ 13.
For _America_, _Pet. Martyr. Dec. 1._ But the Exceptor will save you
your Pains, as to the _Indians_, for he says himself, _p._ 250. in
another Place, that they had no Instruments of Iron, when the
_Spaniards_ came amongst them. And if in those late Ages of the World,
they were still without the Use of Iron, or Iron-Tools, we have less
Reason to believe that the Children of _Cain_ had them four or five
thousand Years before.
It is also worthy our Consideration, how many Things must have been
done, before they could come at these Iron-Tools. How came the Children
of _Cain_ to dig into the Earth, I know not to what Depth, to seek for a
Thing they had never heard of before, when it was so difficult to dig
into the Earth without such Tools? More difficult, methinks, than to
build an House without them. But suppose they did this, we know not how;
and, amongst many other Stones, or Earths, found that which we call
Iron-Ore: How did they know the Nature and Use of it? Or, if they
guess’d at that, how did they know the Way and Manner of preparing it,
by Furnaces, Wind-Forges, and Smelting-mills? These would be as hard to
make or build, without Iron Tools, as dwelling Houses. And when they had
got a Lump of Iron, till they knew how to temper it, they could not make
Tools of it still. Unless _Cain_’s Children had an Inspiration from
Heaven, I do not see how they could discover all these Things, in so
short a Time. And this is only to make good what the Theorist said, that
such an Hypothesis _does not want its Reasons_. And as to _Tubal-Cain_,
let those that positively assert that there was no Iron in the first
World, tell us in what Sense that Place is to be understood. For, I
believe, Iron or Brass is not once mention’d in all the Theory.