conceptions; and those who made the fairest conjectures, are such as were generally allowed by the learned, to have seen the system of Moses, if I may so call it, who was in great reputation at that time in the Heathen world, as we find by Diodorus, Justin, Longinus, and other authors: for the rest, the wisest among them laid aside all notions after a Deity, as a disquisition vain and fruitless, which indeed it was, upon unrevealed principles; and those who ventured to engage too far, fell into incoherence and confusion.
Fourthly, Those among them who had the justest conceptions of a Divine power, and did also admit a Providence, had no notion at all of entirely relying and depending upon either; they trusted in themselves for all things; but, as for a trust or dependance upon God, they would not have understood the phrase; it made no part of the prophane style.
Therefore it was, that in all issues and events which they could not reconcile to their own sentiments of reason and jusdce, they were quite disconcerted: they had no retreat; but, upon every blow of adverse fortune, either affected to be indifferent, or grew sullen and severe, or else yielded and sunk like other men.
Having now produced certain points, wherein the wisdom and virtue of all unrevealed philosophy fell short, and was very imperfect; I go on, in the second place, to show, in several instances, where some of the most renowned philosophers have been grossly defective in their lessons of morality.
Thales, the founder of the Ionic sect, so celebrated for morality, being asked how a man might bear illfortune with greatest ease, answered, "By seeing his enemies in a worse condition." An answer truly
