Wilkins, John, A discovery of a new world : or a discourse tending to prove, that 'tis probable there may be another Habitable World in the Moon ; with a discourse concerning the Probability of a Passage thither; unto which is added, a discourse concerning a New Planet, tending to prove, that 'tis probable our earth is one of the Planets

Table of contents

< >
[41.] PROP. XII.
[42.] PROP. XIII.
[43.] PROP. XIV.
[44.] FINIS.
[45.] A DISCOURSE Concerning a Rem Planet. Tending to prove That ’tis probable our EARTH is one of the PLANETS. The Second Book. By John Wilkins, late L. Biſhop of Cheſter.
[46.] LONDON: Printed by J. D. for John Gellibrand, at the Golden Ball in St. Paul’s Church-Yard. M.DC.LXXXIV.
[47.] To the Reader.
[48.] PROP. I.
[49.] PROP. II.
[50.] PROP. III.
[51.] PROP. IV.
[52.] PROP. V.
[53.] PROP. VI.
[54.] PROP. VII. PROP. VIII. PROP. IX. PROP. X.
[55.] That the EARTH May be a PLANET. PROP. I.
[56.] PROP. II.
[57.] PROP. III.
[58.] PROP. IV.
[59.] PROP. V. That the Scripture, in its proper conſtru-ction, does not any where affirm the Immobility of the Earth.
[60.] PROP. VI. That there is not any Argument from the Words of Scripture, Principles of Na-ture, or Obſervations in Aſtronomy, which can ſuſſiciently evidence the Earth to be in the Gentre of the Uni-verſe.
[61.] PROP. VII. Tis probable that the Sun is in the Gentre of the World.
[62.] PROP. VIII. That there is not any ſufficient reaſon to prove the Earth incapable of thoſe mo-tions which Copernicus aſcribes un-to it.
[63.] Provebimur portu, terræque, verbeſq; recedunt.
[64.] PROP. IX. That it is more probable the Earth does move, than the Sun or Heavens.
[65.] PROP. X. That this Hypotheſis is exactly agreeable to common appearances.
[66.] Quicunq; ſolam mente præcipiti petit
[67.] Brevem replere non valentis ambitum, # Pudebit aucti nominis.
[68.] FINIS.
< >
page |< < (97) of 370 > >|
27797That the Eartb may be a Planet. ſtance from the Earth, and no nearer or far-
ther.
And beſides, this Argument might as
well be urged againſt the Hypotheſis of Pto-
lomy or Tycbo, ſince the Stars, for ought
we know, might have been as ſerviceable to
us, if they had been placed far nearer than
either of thoſe Authors ſuppoſe them.
A-
gain, were there any force in ſuch a Conſe-
quence, it would as well conclude a great
improvidence of Nature, in making ſuch a
multitude of thoſe leſſer Stars, which have
lately been diſcovered by the Perſpective.
For to what purpoſe ſhould ſo many Lights
be created for the uſe of Man, ſince his Eyes
were not able to diſcern them?
So that our
diſability to comprehend all thoſe ends
which might be aimed at in the Works of
Nature, can be no ſufficient Argument to
prove their ſuperfluity.
Though Scripture
tells us, that theſe things were made for
our uſe, yet it does not tell us, that this is
their only end.
’Tis not impoſſible, but that
there may be elſewhere ſome other Inhabi-
tants, by whom theſe leſſer Stars may be
more plainly diſcerned.
And (as was ſaid
before) why may not we affirm that of the
bigneſs, which our Adverſaries do concern-
ing the motion of the Heavens?
That God,
to ſhew his own immenſity, did put a kind
of infinity in the Creature.
There is yet another Argument to this
purpoſe, urged by Al.
Roſſ. which was 11Lib. I.
ſect. 2.6.I.
referred to any of the former kind, becauſe
I could ſcarcely believe I did rightly

Text layer

  • Dictionary

Text normalization

  • Original
  • Regularized
  • Normalized

Search


  • Exact
  • All forms
  • Fulltext index
  • Morphological index