"ance.

But afterwards these parts separated " from each other, the world assumed the shape "which we now behold, and the air received "it's perpetual motion. The fire ascended highest, because the lightness of it's nature impelled it upwards; and for the same reason "the sun and the stars move in an invariable "circle. But that part which was gross and muddy, as also the fluid, sank down into one place, by the force of gravity. These elements perpetually floating and rolling to

gether, from their moisture produced the sea, "while from their more solid particles sprang "the earth, as yet extremely soft and miry. "But in proportion as the light of the sun be

gan to shine upon it, it became solid; and "the surface of it, fermented by the warmth "extracting it's moisture, swelled, and exuded

putrescences, covered over with a kind of "thin skins, such as may still be observed in "marshy or boggy places, when, the earth

having been cool, the air is heated suddenly, "and not by a gradual change. These pu"trescences, formed after this manner from the "moisture of the earth extracted by the

warmth, by night were nourished from the "clouds spread all around, and in the day were consolidated by the heat. At length, "when these embryos were arrived at their

"perfect growth, and the membranes by which "they were enclosed were broken by the "warmth, all sorts of living creatures instant"ly appeared. Those that had a larger pro"portion of heat in their natures, became birds "and soared on high. Those that were of a

gross and terrestrial kind, became reptiles and "animals confined to the ground. While those "who drew the most of their qualities from "moisture, were gathered into an element cor"responding with their natures, and became "fish*."

It is scarcely possible to conceive of any thing more confused, inexplicable, and unphilosophical, than this hypothesis. Yet even in this account, deformed as it is by alterations, disguised by absurdity, and clouded with obscurity, something of the Mosaic system may be traced, which renders it probable that it might originally have sprang from his representation of chaos. There is this essential difference he makes order and beauty to arise out of confusion and deformity under the forming, superintending hand of Deity: they ascribe it all to the agency of chance. When I speak of the Mosaic hypothesis, I would be understood

* See note 2, at the end of this Lecture.

to prefix his name to the scriptural system, only because he committed to writing the tradition of the generations which preceded him up to the birth of time, and not to insinuate that he was the inventor of the account contained in the first chapter of Genesis.

On the present occasion, and in the discussion of the present subject, I trust that it will be deemed sufficient if I merely mention a more modern hypothesis. It remained for the philosophers of the eighteenth century to discover that the earth and the other planets were originally parts of the sun, struck off from that immense body by the concussion of comets, and whirld into infinite space, by the rapidity of their motion acquiring their spherical form, and assuming their present appearance. It may be thought that this account of the creation evinces the fertility of their imaginations; but it may also be questioned whether it will place the laurel upon their heads, as accurate reasoners, or as illumined and sound philosophers. Yet these are the men who arrogate to themselves the sole claim to reason, and who condemn as superstitious and irrational, all, who, rejecting their crude and extravagant systems, adhere to the plain, concise, and luminous account, transmitted to us by Moses.

But it is time that we should pass on to the consideration of the remaining hypothesis, viz.

II. THAT THE WORLD IS ETERNAL.

Many celebrated names among the ancients supported this opinion; of whom were Ocellus Lucanus, Aristotle, the later Platonists, and Xenophanes, the founder of a sect called the Eleatic. Plato himself acknowledged that the world was created by the hand of God. It was moreover supported by many modern philosophers; among whom we may number Spinoza, Amalric, and Abelard; not to name those of our own day, some of whom hold the eternity of the world in it's full sense; and others assign to it an antiquity much more remote than the scriptural account will allow. The heathen poets at large countenanced the former opinion, which proves that the popular sentiment of the Pagan world was, that what we deem creation, sprang from a chaos of which they appear to have no correct notion, under the influence of mere chance*.

Their are several modifications of the hypothesis of the world's eternity: but we feel it

* See note 3, at the end of this Lecture.

our duty to assign the reasons which appear to us to overthrow it, rather than to state the several senses in which it was held.

1. A valuable writer* has laid it down as an axiom, that if any thing be eternal, it is also self-existent and immutable. For a being is the same with all it's properties taken together. We can have "no conception of any substance dis"tinct from all the properties in which they "inhere.” On this principle, if any property be removed or destroyed, a part of that being would necessarily perish; which is inconsistent with it's being necessary, and subverts it's eternity as a whole. It cannot be said, that it is impossible for alterations to be made on the face of this globe, when it's several parts are incessantly changing; and the inference, allowing this fact, is against it's eternity.

2. The same ingenious author has collected and enumerated at length†, several philosophical and astronomical objections against this system. These have been urged by various writers; and we shall be satisfied with simply naming them. They are founded upon those immutable laws

* Doddridge's Lectures, xxiv. Part II. page 47. Demonstration ---connected with the preceding chain of propositions.

+ See Doddridge's Lectures, Part II. page 47-50. Quarto edition.