Understanding Evolution: History, Theory, Evidence, and Implications By - March 5, 2006

Updated - May 2, 2006 Index Introduction Origin Mythology Mesopotamian and Mediterranean Origin Belief Evolutionary Concepts in Ancient Greece The Early Christian Fight Against Naturalism The Reemergence of Evolutionary Concepts Scientific Attempts to Develop a Theory of Biological Evolution Darwin Current Theory of Biological Evolution Sources of Variation Sources of Constraint Evidence of Evolution Evidence that Evolution Has Historically Occurred Evidence that Evolution Is Occurring Understanding "Species" and "Speciation" Understanding Viruses and Other Subcellular Replicators The Implications of Evolution Evolution Beyond Biology Evolution of the Universe Evolution of Languages Memes and the Evolution of Morals, Culture, and Religion The Darwinism of Laissez- faire Capitalism Understanding Human Cognition and Behavior Perception and the Senses Desire and Emotions as Behavior Modifiers Intelligence, Superstition, and Religion Science vs. Religion The Christian Worldview vs. Naturalistic Worldviews Criticisms of Evolution Popular Comments on Evolution Conclusion and Summary Introduction Evolution itself is simply the process of change over time. When applied to biology, evolution generally refers to changes in life forms over time. "The Theory of Biological Evolution" is a term used to refer to the proposition that all forms of life on earth are related through common descent, that inheritable traits are passed on from parent organisms to their offspring, that some changes naturally arise when organisms have offspring, and that over time these changes have resulted in the variety of life that we see on earth today. The Theory of Biological Evolution is most often associated with Charles Darwin, because it was Charles Darwin that proposed the mechanism of natural selection and accompanied that proposition with a large volume of empirical data providing evidence for biological evolution. Darwin was not, however, the first person to propose an evolutionary explanation for the diversity of life on earth. In fact, evolutionary concepts about life date far back into history and arose in many different cultures. The Greeks developed a concept of evolution over 2,300 years ago that was basically equivalent to that of Charles Darwin's, but the early Christians opposed the idea and destroyed all of the works that promoted it or any other naturalistic explanations for earthly phenomena. Origin Mythology There are literally thousands of different mythological stories about the origin of the world and of life. There are several common themes in origin mythology, but there are many different means by which the universe, earth, life, and man have come into being throughout the various different origin myths. The importance and role of origin mythology has varied widely from culture to culture throughout history as well. In many archaic cultures origin mythology was not central to the belief system, nor were the origin myths fully thought-out to a logical conclusion. In societies that did not have writing, origin myths, like all of the other myths, were passed down orally, and often served as a form of entertainment as well as a means of passing on beliefs that were important to the society. When looking at origin myths from around the world several patterns can be observed. The origin myths of pre-agricultural societies tend to place humans and animals in close relations, while the origin myths of agricultural societies tend describe a separate creation of humans. Some of the beliefs about humans and animals that are expressed in various origin myths include beliefs that: Animals transformed into people, humans were born from animals, the gods were animals or part-man/part-animals, there was a time when animals were civilized, humans and animals share spirits, humans are reincarnated as animals or animals as humans. Among more technologically advanced societies, where separation between humans and other animals was more pronounced and where humans had domesticated animals, themes such as the domination of man over animals, the separate creation of man from animals, and the creation of animals for the use of man are common themes in origin mythology. Australian Aboriginal culture is thought to be the oldest continuous culture in the world, due to the isolation of the Australian continent. The mythology of the Aboriginal Australians is also thought to be reflective of some of man's earliest mythology. Below is one telling of Aboriginal Australian origin mythology. In the beginning the earth was a bare plain. All was dark. There was no life, no death. The sun, the moon, and the stars slept beneath the earth. All the eternal ancestors slept there, too, until at last they woke themselves out of their own eternity and broke through to the surface. When the eternal ancestors arose, in the Dreamtime, they wandered the earth, sometimes in animal form - as kangaroos, or emus, or lizards -- sometimes in human shape, sometimes part animal and human, sometimes as part human and plant. Two such beings, self-created out of nothing, were the Ungambikula. Wandering the world, they found half-made human beings. They were made of animals and plants, but were shapeless bundles, lying higgledy-piggledy, near where water holes and salt lakes could be created. The people were all doubled over into balls, vague and unfinished, without limbs or features. With their great stone knives, the Ungambikula carved heads, bodies, legs, and arms out of the bundles. They made the faces, and the hands and feet. At last the human beings were finished. Thus every man and woman was transformed from nature and owes allegiance to the totem of the animal or the plant that made the bundle they were created from -- such as the plum tree, the grass seed, the large and small lizards, the parakeet, or the rat. This work done, the ancestors went back to sleep. Some of them returned to underground homes, others became rocks and trees. The trails the ancestors walked in the Dreamtime are holy trails. Everywhere the ancestors went, they left sacred traces of their presence -- a rock, a waterhole, a tree. For the Dreamtime does not merely lie in the distant past, the Dreamtime is the eternal Now. source: http://www.crystalinks.com/australiacreation.html This origin myth, like many archaic myths, demonstrates the concept of a common ancestry between humans and other animals. In many Native American and Asian mythologies there is no specific creator god or act of creation, instead the world is said to have formed out of chaos, and the development of life is said to be a product of some spirit force. This spirit force is often said in these belief systems to be ever-present and continually acting. Native American mythology generally presents humans and animals as being related and having common ancestry. Many different Native American cultures discovered and interpreted fossils and integrated the knowledge of fossils into their origin mythology. Various origin myths can be identified as having come from Asia, but origin mythology has not held an important role in Asia for many centuries. This is largely because much of Asia came to be dominated by Buddhism, Taoism, and Confucianism, all of which are highly philosophical and say little or nothing about origins. "Animism" was common among the European and Asian cultures of pre-historic Eurasia and persisted into relatively recent times in some parts, until it ultimately came into conflict with Christianity. Many of the ancient European cultures, such as the Celts, the Huns, those of the Scandinavians, and many others, believed in a common tie between the "animal" and "human" world. Indeed for many there was no separation at all. This is one reason why the wearing of animal hides was a common ritual practice among the so-called "barbarian" tribes of Europe. It was precisely this belief in the unity of the human and animal world that that was seen as "pagan" and primitive by later Christians of the Roman Empire and post-imperial Romanized societies. The belief that humans and the animal world are united has been one of the major beliefs that Christians have worked to stamp out over the past two millennia of Christian expansionism. First throughout Europe, and then throughout North and South America, Christians have come into conflict with cultures that viewed humans as having descended, in some form, either spiritually or bodily, from animals. In every case Christians have fought intensely for the past 2,000 years to eradicate the belief that humans and animals have a close relationship. Mesopotamian and Mediterranean Origin Belief Mesopotamia is known as the "cradle of civilization", and for good reason. It is in Mesopotamia that writing, farming, and the domestication of animals is thought to have first taken place. Civilization from this region had wide ranging impacts on the surrounding area as the practices of writing, farming, domestication, law, and coinage spread east and west to influence other cultures. It is also from Mesopotamia and the Mediterranean that we find the most developed creation myths that tell of a separate creation of man and of the domination of man over the rest of the animal world. The Sumerians, because they were the first to develop writing, recorded one of the oldest known origin myths. Sumerian mythology tells that the gods lived on earth where they worked and toiled. After some time, the gods grew tired of working so they created humans to do their work for them. In Sumerian mythology a team of six gods created humans from a special mud. During the creation several different "defective" people were made, (non-sexual, sterile, diseased, and blind) explaining why it is that such afflicted people exist on the earth. Animals, in this case, already existed and were of a completely separate origin. The people were made in the image of the gods, to be like the gods, but they were mortal and imperfect. This mythology tells that people were created for the purpose of laboring and ruling over the animals and farm fields. In a major telling of Babylonian creation myth, Enuma Elish, which was based on the Sumerian story, the primary Babylonian god Marduk is credited with directing the creation of the heavens and the earth through six cycles and creating man as the final and ultimate act of his creation. The purpose of creation, again, was to remove the burden of work from the gods by creating humans in the form of gods to take on the burden of work. In the Babylonian myth the blood of Kingu, a god who led a rebellion against Marduk, was used to create mankind. His [Marduk's] heart prompts him to create ingenious things.

He conveys his idea to Ea,

Imparting the plan which he had conceived in his heart:

'Blood will I form and cause bone to be;

Then will I set up a savage, Man shall be his name!

Yes, I will create mankind!'

Upon him shall the services of the gods be imposed that they may be at rest.



...



Kingu it was who created the strife,

And caused Tiamat to rebel and prepare for battle.

They [the gods] bound him and held him before Ea;

Punishment they inflicted upon him by cutting the arteries of his blood.

With his blood they created mankind;

He [Ea] imposed the services of the gods upon them and set the gods free.

After Ea, the wise, had created mankind,

And they had imposed the services of the gods upon them-

That work was not suited to human understanding;

In accordance with the ingenious plans of Marduk did Nudimmud [Ea] create it.

- Enuma Elish, ~1700 BCE In the Sumerian myth the humans have no divinity, but in the Babylonian myth people are given partial divinity by their creation from the blood of a god, but the god from which they were made was rebellious and deceitful, thus giving the explanation for the "negative" aspects of human behavior. Like the creation myths of the Sumerians and Babylonians, the creation myth of the Hebrews tells of a separate and special creation of man. In the Hebrew myth man is also given dominion over the plant and animal kingdoms. 25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

- Genesis 1, ~440 BCE It is also worthy of note that the Genesis myth, like the Sumerian and Babylonian myths (as well as other Mesopotamian myths), mentions the existence of cattle (domesticated animals) at the time of creation. All of these myths were obviously influenced by the fact that their civilizations had control over animals. Importantly as well, all of these myths reflect the fact that these were civilizations where work was portrayed as the objective of life. Moving from the mythical and religious realm to the philosophical, the Greeks made substantial philosophical arguments in favor of a universe created and designed by a creator god for the use of man. Many different schools of philosophy developed in Greece. Stoicism was a Greek school of philosophy that, while ostensibly non-religious and anti-superstitious, viewed the universe as being intelligently designed by a rational creator, who continued to govern the universe through his divine providence. In 45 BCE the Roman statesman Cicero wrote a masterful summary of the boldest elements of Greek philosophy, The Nature of the Gods. In the tradition of his time the work was written in dialog format. In The Nature Cicero put forward the positions of the major schools of Greek philosophy relating to gods, the universe, and life. The Nature was a widely read work by Roman scholars and early Roman Christians; such men as Saint Augustine were influenced by the work. The Nature also, of course, reflects the views and opinions that prevailed in Mediterranean society shortly before the birth of Christianity. In The Nature Cicero summarized the arguments for and against views, including those of Platonic Stoics, that the universe was created by an intelligent force for the use of man, and thus the book serves as a good window into that school of philosophy. [W]ho would ascribe the intelligence of a man to him who when he saw such regularity in the movements of the heavens, such stability in the order of the stars, such interconnection and mutual coherence in all things, denied the presence of any reason in these, and described as the result of chance things which are administered with a skill to which we cannot by any skill attain? Or is it that when we see anything such as a globe, or horologe, or numerous other things, moving by means of some kind of mechanism, we make no question of their being the work of intelligence, and yet are skeptical, although we see the heavens rushing on with marvelous speed, and bringing about with the utmost regularity the yearly recurring changes of the seasons by their revolution, ensuring thereby the most complete well-being and preservation of all things,—are we, I say, skeptical as to such phenomena being the result not merely of intelligence, but of an intelligence which is exalted and divine? For we may now set aside the refinements of argument, and survey, as it were, with our eyes the beauty of the things which we say were instituted by the divine providence. And in the first place let us note the earth as a whole, which is situated in the central quarter of the universe, and is solid, spherical, gathered at every point into that shape by its own gravity, and clothed with flowers, herbs, trees, and fruits, the incredible multitude of all these being set off by a variety which cannot tire. Add to them the cool perennial springs, the liquid transparency of the rivers, the green covering of the banks, the vast hollows of the caves, the rugged rocks, the lofty overhanging mountains, and the boundless plains; add, too, the hidden veins of gold and silver, and the limitless wealth of marble. And what tribes of animals, there are, both tame and wild, and how various! what flights and songs of birds, what grazing of cattle, what forms of woodland life! How shall I next speak of the race of men, the appointed cultivators, as it were, of the earth, who neither allow it to become the lair of savage beasts, nor to be turned into a waste by a rough undergrowth, and whose handiwork makes bright the fields and islands and coasts, dotting them with houses and cities? If we could see these things with our eyes, as we can with our mind, no one, when he gazed upon the earth in its completeness, would doubt as to the divine intelligence. ... The conclusion is thus reached upon every hand, and from every consideration, that everything in this universe is marvelously administered by the divine intelligence and forethought with a view to the safety and preservation of all things. But it will be asked for whose sake so vast a work was carried out. Was it for the sake of trees and herbs, which though without sensation are nevertheless sustained by Nature? No, that at any rate is absurd. Was it for the sake of animals? It is equally improbable that the gods went to such pains for beings that are dumb and without understanding. For whose sake, then, would one say that the universe was formed? For the sake, undoubtedly, of those animate beings that exercise reason. These are gods and men, whom nothing assuredly transcends in excellence, since reason is the highest of all things. It is thus credibly established that the universe and everything that is in it were made for the sake of gods and men.

- The Nature of the Gods; Cicero, 45 BCE This argument, while more sophisticated and philosophically derived, exemplifies the reasoning present in the earlier creation myths of the Sumerians, Babylonians, and certainly the Hebrews, as well as the myths of others. This reasoning, however, was not the only one present in ancient Greece or presented in The Nature. Must I not here express my wonder that anyone should exist who persuades himself that there are certain solid and indivisible particles carried along by their own impulse and weight, and that a universe so beautiful and so admirably arrayed is formed from the accidental concourse of those particles? I do not understand why the man who supposes that to have been possible should not also think that if a countless number of the forms of the one and twenty letters, whether in gold or any other material, were to be thrown somewhere, it would be possible, when they had been shaken out upon the ground, for the annals of Ennius to result from them so as to be able to be read consecutively,—a miracle of chance which I incline to think would be impossible even in the case of a single verse. Yet, as the Epicureans assure us, it was from minute particles possessing neither color, nor any kind of quality, nor sensation, but coming together by chance and accident, that the world was produced, or rather that innumerable worlds are, within each instant of time, either coming into being or departing from it. But if a concourse of atoms is able to form the universe, why cannot they form a portico, or temple, or house, or city, things which are less, far less elaborate?

- The Nature of the Gods; Cicero, 45 BCE Here we see, from over 2,000 years ago, a common argument that is still used against evolution today. We see this argument in The Nature because the ancient Greeks had already developed a "theory of evolution by natural selection" over 2,000 years ago. Evolutionary Concepts in Ancient Greece

bust of Epicurus "Ancient Greece" is a very loose term that refers to the Greek speaking cultures from the period of about 800 BCE to 200 CE, a period of about 1000 years. The exact times and cultures considered to be a part of "ancient Greece" vary from historian to historian. The cultures, philosophies, and beliefs of "ancient Greece" are, of course, extremely varied. There is no possible way to generalize "ancient Greek" culture, and the individuals within each of the different cultures were themselves highly varied. The first logically proposed evolutionary concept is agreed to have come from Anaximandros (Anaximander) of Miletos, who lived from 610 BCE to 547 BCE, about 100 years before the writing of Genesis. Very few texts from Anaximander remain today, but some information about the teachings of Anaximander have been preserved by later writers who disagreed with him. Anaximander believed that life must have started in the water, and that from this early form of life, other forms of life, including man, developed. Below are some quotes that refer to the evolutionary concepts of Anaximander: Wherefore they (the Syrians) reference the fish as of the same origin and the same family as man, holding a more reasonable philosophy than that of Anaximandros; for he declares, not that fishes and men were generated at the same time, but that at first men were generated in the form of fishes, and that growing up as sharks do till they were able to help themselves, they then came forth on the dry ground.

- Plutarch (1st century CE) Anaximandros, the companion of Thales, says that the infinite is the sole cause of all generation and destruction, and from it the heavens were separated, and similarly all the worlds, which are infinite in number. And he declared that destruction and, far earlier, generation have taken place since an indefinite time, since all things are involved in a cycle. He says that the earth is a cylinder in form, and that its depth is one-third of its breadth. And he says that at the beginning of this world something [Diels] productive of heat and cold from the eternal being was separated therefrom, and a sort of sphere of this flame surrounded the air about the earth, as bark surrounds a tree ; then this sphere was broken into parts and defined into distinct circles, and thus arose the sun and the moon and the stars. Farther he says that at the beginning man was generated from all sorts of animals, since all the rest can quickly get food for themselves, but man alone requires careful feeding for a long time; such a being at the beginning could not have preserved his existence. Such is the teaching of Anaximandros.

- Hippolytus (3rd century CE) Animals come into being through vapors raised by the sun. Man, however, came into being from another animal, namely the fish, for at first he was like a fish. Winds are due to a separation of the lightest vapors and the motion of the masses of these vapors ; and moisture comes from the vapor raised by the sun from them; and lightning occurs when a wind falls upon clouds and separates them. Anaximandros was born in the third year of the forty-second Olympiad.

- Hippolytus (3rd century CE) What distinguishes the teachings of Anaximander from other origin mythology is that his views were arrived at from a naturalistic perspective and they were not tied to any religious belief. Anaximander is credited with having invented the sun dial and other observational instruments. He produced teachings in the fields of mathematics, astronomy, geography, and biology. While his teachings were crude compared to what we know today, they represent the earliest known example of naturalistic evolutionary thought. Xenophanes of Kolopbon, who was born around 570 BCE, was both the first recorded person to have understood the implications of fossils, and also one of the first monotheists. Xenophanes was considered an "atheist" of his time because he rejected the traditional Greek pantheon of anthropomorphic gods, instead claiming that there was only one god and that god was infinite. Despite the fact that this view seems "religious" today, Xenophanes was seen as a rationalist and materialist of his time. Like other monotheistic Greeks, Xenophanes did not develop any kind of religion or base his beliefs on claims of divine revelation. Instead, his view of god was philosophically derived. In relation to fossils, Xenophanes understood that the fossils were formed by animals that had been preserved in mud. He developed an explanation for fossils which stated that earth must have gone through many life cycles, during which different forms of animals existed and were then wiped out, but their bodies were preserved in the rocks. He believed that new forms of animals developed during the new cycles. Xenophanes did not believe that his god created people, instead he stated that all living things, including people, developed from earth and water. "Shells are found inland and in the mountains, and in the quarries of Syracuse an impression of a fish and seaweed has been found, and impressions of fish were found in Paros in the depth of the rock and in Malta impressions of many marine creatures. These, he [Xenophanes] says, were produced when everything was long ago covered with mud and the impressions were dried in the mud."

- Hippolytus (discussing the teachings of Xenophanes) The Greeks, along with other ancient cultures, came into frequent contact with fossils. The word fossil actually comes from Greek and means "dug-up item". The Greeks did not use the term fossil the way that we do today, instead they often talked of petrified bones when discussing larger fossils. Ample evidence now suggests that the fantastic mythology of the ancient Greeks was heavily influenced by their observation of fossils. Not only were fossils commonly found out in the open throughout the lands of ancient Greece, but the Greeks quarried massive amounts of rock. In the process of quarrying rock they often came across fossils. Fossils were actually excavated and put on display in temples in some cases. The Greeks interpreted many of the large bones that they found as being humanoid. When the Greeks found large thigh bones, for example, they were commonly interpreted as the bones of giants, and it is from these giant bones that the Greeks developed the mythology that Titians once lived on earth, whom Zeus and the other gods fought and killed. Because of the tendency of the Greeks to interpret the "bodily" fossils that they found as humanoid, when they found near complete skeletons that included horned or tusked skulls they interpreted these as having a human type body with an animal head. A small sampling of ancient accounts of fossils are listed below: "I have seen shells on the hills," evidence that "Egypt was originally an arm of the sea." In Scythia, "the natives show a footprint left by Heracles on a rock by the river Tyras. It is like a man's footprint, but 3 feet long." (units of measure translated)

- The Histories; Herodotus, 430 BCE "When King Masinissa landed on the headland of Malta, his admiral stole the special tusks of astonishing size from the ancient Temple of Juno."

- Against Verres; Cicero (born 106 BCE) A "figure resembling Pan" was found inside a slab of rock split open in a Chios quarry.

- De Divinatione; Cicero "earth brought forth the giants, ... who were matchless in the bulk of their bodies and invincible in their might, with terrible aspect.... Some say they were born at Phlegra [Italy], but according to others in Phallene [Greece]." Zeuse "killed them with thunderbolts and Heracles shot them with arrows." Athena "threw Sicily on top of the giant Enceladus," while Poseidon "broke off part of Kos and heaped it on the giant Polybotes." Typhon "surpassed all the offspring of earth. As far as the thighs he was of human shape and of prodigious bulk." Zeus fought him from Syria to Thrace and finally buried Typhon under Mount Etna, Sicily.

- Apollodorus (1st century CE) "The giants [were] men of immense bodies, whose bones of enormous size are still shown in certain places for confirmation of their existence."

- Clement of Rome, 96 CE "Historians of Chios assert that near Mount Pelinaeus in a wooded glen there was a dragon of gigantic size who made the Chians shudder. No farmer or shepherd dared approach the monster's lair. But a miraculous event allowed the discovery of how large it really was. During a violent lightning storm a forest fire destroyed the entire region of the wooded slopes.... After the fire, all the Chians came to see and discovered the bones of gigantic size and a terrifying skull. From these the villagers were able to imagine how large and terrible the brute was when alive. ... Euphorion says... that in primeval times Samos was uninhabited [except for] animals of gigantic size, which were savage and dangerous, called Neades. Now these animals with there mere roaring split the ground. So there is a proverbial saying in Samos: 'So and so roars louder than the Neades.' And Euphorion asserts that their huge remains are displayed even to this day."

- On Animals; Aelian (lived 170-230 CE) Two schools of thought developed to explain these "large bones": Mythological explanations and naturalistic explanations. To some degree, however, even the mythological explanations were naturalistic, because these were not mythologies that were made up out of thin air, nor did the mythological beliefs of Greeks always include supernatural beliefs. To many Greeks the objects of their mythology were as real and natural to them as dinosaurs are to us today. Despite this, not all Greeks believed in the mythological explanations for the bones, as we shall see, but before discussing the naturalistic Greek explanations for fossils we must first discuss the Greek atomic theory and evolutionary concepts about the "origins of worlds". Between 500 and 370 BCE Anaxagoras, Leucippus, and Democritus are credited with developing the basis of materialism (the view that everything that exists is made of matter) and the concept of the atom. Democritus is specifically credited with developing the first atomic concept. Democritus identified atoms as the smallest forms of matter, of which everything else is made. The early atomic concepts were based on the observation that things could be transformed. Specifically, animals were observed to consume food in the form of grass as they grew in size. The conclusion was that the grass had to be made of invisibly small particles that were capable of being broken apart and then put back together into different forms. The early atomists had made the connection that living bodies were actually composed of the material that they ate. The Greek concepts of atoms were relatively crude compared to today, but the fundamental concept of the atom as a particle was the foundation for the materialist understanding of reality. Democritus stated: "The universe is infinite because it has not been produced by a creator. The causes of what now exists had no beginning." "There is an infinite number of worlds of different sizes: some are larger than ours, some have no sun or moon, others have suns or moons that are bigger than ours. Some have many suns and moons. Worlds are spaced at differing distances from each other; in some parts of the universe there are more worlds, in other parts fewer. In some areas they are growing, in other parts, decreasing. They are destroyed by collision with one another. There are some worlds with no living creatures, plants, or moisture." "The material cause of all things that exist is the coming together of atoms and void. Atoms are too small to be perceived by the senses. They are eternal and have many different shapes, and they can cluster together to create things that are perceivable. Differences in shape, arrangement, and position of atoms produce different things. By aggregation they provide bulky objects that we can perceive with our sight and other senses." "By convention sweet, by convention bitter, by convention hot, by convention cold, by convention colour: but in reality atoms and void."

- Democritus Atomism was never completely accepted among all the Greeks, in part because of the materialism that the concept was based on, and because the atomists proposed that the world was created from the chance collisions of atoms, contradicting the popular idea of a purposeful creation. Plato and Aristotle, in particular, argued against the atomic concepts of the materialists. Democritus' atomic concepts were integrated into the later teachings of Epicurus. The Epicurean school of thought went on to become relatively well accepted in Greece. It's estimated that about 30% of Athenians were Epicureans during the philosophy's height. Like so many of the other naturalistic works of the Greeks, almost all the texts of the atomists were lost or destroyed by the Christians. Cicero's The Nature of the Gods does, however, provide a good summary of the Epicurean concept of the "evolution" of worlds from the random collisions of atoms. [T]he world was produced by the working of nature, without there having been any need for a process of manufacture, and that what your school declares to be capable of accomplishment only by means of divine intelligence is a thing so easy that nature will produce, and is producing, and has produced worlds without end. It is because you do not see how nature can accomplish this without the help of some kind of mind that, like the tragic poets, in your inability to bring the plot to a smooth conclusion, you have recourse to a god. Yet you would certainly feel no need for his agency if you had before your eyes the expanse of region, unmeasured and on every side unbounded, upon which the mind may fasten and concentrate itself, and where it may wander far and wide without seeing any farthermost limit upon which to be able to rest. Now in this immensity of length and breadth and height there floats an infinite quantity of innumerable atoms which, in spite of the intervening void, nevertheless join together, and through one seizing upon one, and another upon another, form themselves into connected wholes, by which means are produced those forms and outlines of the material world which your school is of opinion cannot be produced without bellows and anvils. You have therefore placed our necks beneath the yoke of a perpetual tyrant, of whom we are to go in fear by day and night, for who would not fear a god who foresaw everything, considered everything, noted everything, and looked upon himself as concerned in everything,—a busy and prying god? From this has come, in the first place, your idea of preordained necessity, which you call ε μαρμένη, meaning by the term that every event that occurs had its origin in eternal truth and the chain of causation—(though what is to be thought of a philosophy that holds the ignorant old crone’s belief that everything happens by destiny?)—and secondly your art of μαντικ , or divinatio, as it is called in Latin, which, if we were willing to listen to you, would imbue us with such superstition that we should have to pay regard to soothsayers, augurs, diviners, prophets, and interpreters of dreams. From these terrors we have been released by Epicurus, and claimed for freedom; we do not fear beings of whom we understand that they neither create trouble for themselves, nor seek it for others, and we worship, in piety and holiness, a sublime and exalted nature.

- The Nature of the Gods; Cicero, 45 BCE To these concepts the Stoic of the dialog, after giving many examples of "ordered phenomena", replies: Can any sane person think that all this grouping of the stars, and this vast ordering of the heavens, could have resulted from atoms coursing to and fro fortuitously and at random? Or could, indeed, any kind of nature that was destitute of mind and intelligence have produced these results, which not only needed intelligence in order to be produced, but which cannot be understood in their nature without a very considerable amount of intelligence?

- The Nature of the Gods; Cicero, 45 BCE It was this concept of atoms and infinity that freed the Greek Epicureans and materialists to embrace evolutionary concepts of life origin. Though Cicero does not present the Epicurean teachings on biological evolution in The Nature, the Greek materialists had nevertheless developed a highly sophisticated concept of evolution with natural selection. Atomic theory was the essential first step in their development of concepts of biological evolution. Several different Greeks are known to have put forward varying evolutionary explanations for biological diversity, ranging from the mythical to the purely naturalistic. Two of the best surviving examples of Greek evolutionary concepts come from the Epicurean Lucretius and from Aristotle, who argued against the concept. In 50 BCE the Roman philosopher Lucretius wrote the epic poem On the Nature of Things, which is now one of the best surviving examples of Greek materialist thought in a materialist's own words. (Most of our knowledge of Greek materialism comes from the remaining writings that opposed the view) This work contains the best known explanation of the Greek concept of biological evolution written by a proponent of the teaching. In a section titled "Origins of Vegetable and Animal Life " Lucretius wrote: For lapsing aeons change the nature of

The whole wide world, and all things needs must take

One status after other, nor aught persists

Forever like itself. All things depart;

Nature she changeth all, compelleth all

To transformation.

...

In suchwise, then, the lapsing aeons change

The nature of the whole wide world, and earth

Taketh one status after other. And what

She bore of old, she now can bear no longer,

And what she never bore, she can to-day. In those days also the telluric world

Strove to beget the monsters that upsprung

With their astounding visages and limbs-

The Man-woman- a thing betwixt the twain,

Yet neither, and from either sex remote-

Some gruesome Boggles orphaned of the feet,

Some widowed of the hands, dumb Horrors too

Without a mouth, or blind Ones of no eye,

Or Bulks all shackled by their legs and arms

Cleaving unto the body fore and aft,

Thuswise, that never could they do or go,

Nor shun disaster, nor take the good they would.

And other prodigies and monsters earth

Was then begetting of this sort- in vain,

Since Nature banned with horror their increase,

And powerless were they to reach unto

The coveted flower of fair maturity,

Or to find aliment, or to intertwine

In works of Venus. For we see there must

Concur in life conditions manifold,

If life is ever by begetting life

To forge the generations one by one:

First, foods must be; and, next, a path whereby

The seeds of impregnation in the frame

May ooze, released from the members all;

Last, the possession of those instruments

Whereby the male with female can unite,

The one with other in mutual ravishments. And in the ages after monsters died,

Perforce there perished many a stock, unable

By propagation to forge a progeny.

For whatsoever creatures thou beholdest

Breathing the breath of life, the same have been

Even from their earliest age preserved alive

By cunning, or by valour, or at least

By speed of foot or wing. And many a stock

Remaineth yet, because of use to man,

And so committed to man's guardianship.

Valour hath saved alive fierce lion-breeds

And many another terrorizing race,

Cunning the foxes, flight the antlered stags.

Light-sleeping dogs with faithful heart in breast,

However, and every kind begot from seed

Of beasts of draft, as, too, the woolly flocks

And horned cattle, all, my Memmius,

Have been committed to guardianship of men.

For anxiously they fled the savage beasts,

And peace they sought and their abundant foods,

Obtained with never labours of their own,

Which we secure to them as fit rewards

For their good service. But those beasts to whom

Nature has granted naught of these same things-

Beasts quite unfit by own free will to thrive

And vain for any service unto us

In thanks for which we should permit their kind

To feed and be in our protection safe-

Those, of a truth, were wont to be exposed,

Enshackled in the gruesome bonds of doom,

As prey and booty for the rest, until

Nature reduced that stock to utter death. But Centaurs ne'er have been, nor can there be

Creatures of twofold stock and double frame,

Compact of members alien in kind,

Yet formed with equal function, equal force

In every bodily part- a fact thou mayst,

However dull thy wits, well learn from this:

...

Such hybrid creatures could not have been begot

And limbs of all beasts heterogeneous

Have been together knit; because, indeed,

The divers kinds of grasses and the grains

And the delightsome trees- which even now

Spring up abounding from within the earth-

Can still ne'er be begotten with their stems

Begrafted into one; but each sole thing

Proceeds according to its proper wont

And all conserve their own distinctions based

In Nature's fixed decree.

- On the Nature of Things; Lucretius, 50 BCE The monsters that Lucretius mentions no doubt refer to the many forms found in fossils, but the discussion of monsters also contains the idea that many of the early forms of life were "unfit", and that through a process of "natural selection", which he discusses, the forms of life that were able to survive did survive and have passed on their traits to their present day descendants. It is also important to note that Lucretius denied the existence of "fantastical" creatures, such as centaurs, griffins, etc. As much as this sounds similar to our present day concept of evolution it must be remember that Lucretius' work is but a poem, and though poems were often used in ancient times, it was still not as rigorous a text as other scholarly works. We do know, however, that an even more sophisticated concept of evolution existed hundreds of years before Lucretius because of Aristotle's discussion of the concept in 350 BCE. Aristotle refuted the idea of evolution, however, but mentioned the concept in his work because he taught against it. He taught against it because it was a known concept that had been embraced by a significant portion of thinkers at the time. We must explain then (1) that Nature belongs to the class of causes which act for the sake of something; ... [I]f a man's crop is spoiled on the threshing-floor, the rain did not fall for the sake of this-in order that the crop might be spoiled-but that result just followed. Why then should it not be the same with the parts in nature, e.g. that our teeth should come up of necessity-the front teeth sharp, fitted for tearing, the molars broad and useful for grinding down the food-since they did not arise for this end, but it was merely a coincident result; and so with all other parts in which we suppose that there is purpose? Wherever then all the parts came about just what they would have been if they had come before an end, such things survived, being organized spontaneously in a fitting way; whereas those which grew otherwise perished and continue to perish.... Such are the arguments (and others of the kind) which may cause difficulty on this point. Yet it is impossible that this should be the true view. For teeth and all other natural things either invariably or normally come about in a given way; but of not one of the results of chance or spontaneity is this true. We do not ascribe to chance or mere coincidence the frequency of rain in winter, but frequent rain in summer we do; nor heat in the dog-days, but only if we have it in winter. If then, it is agreed that things are either the result of coincidence or for an end, and these cannot be the result of coincidence or spontaneity, it follows that they must be for an end; and that such things are all due to nature even the champions of the theory which is before us would agree. Therefore action for an end is present in things which come to be and are by nature.

- Physics; Aristotle, 350 BCE This description of the process of evolution and natural selection put forward by Aristotle is perhaps the most lucid explanation of evolution to be found in the existing literature of the ancient Greeks. Why is it that the best explanation of evolution comes to us in a book that is written by an author that is opposed to the concept of evolution? The Early Christian Fight Against Naturalism Understanding Christian belief requires understanding the historical development of those beliefs, and understanding the Christian impact on the world also requires understanding the historical rise of Christianity. "Christianity" is an amalgam of Jewish mythology and law, Zoroastrian mythology and theology, Ptolemaic Egyptian Religion, Greek philosophy, Roman civics, and Roman imperialism. The Christian religion as we know it today developed over a period of several hundred years. The concept of God in Christianity is not the Jewish concept of God. The God of the Hebrews was a God that embodied both good and bad. He was the creator of both strife and blessing. The Christian concept of God, on the other hand, is a combination of the Platonic god concept and the Zoroastrian God. Isaiah 45:

7 The One forming light and creating darkness, Causing well-being and creating calamity; I am the LORD who does all these.

- The Torah/Old Testament Furthermore, the god of the Hebrews was not well defined, he was simply YAHWEH, who gave various commands and was given credit for the fortunes or misfortunes of the Hebrew people. Likewise, the Jews did not have a concept of Satan like that which exists in Christianity. The Hebrew religion presents Satan as one of God's helpers - a being that tests the faith of individuals for God. In the Hebrew religion there is no "war in heaven" or "fall from grace". The Christian concept of Satan comes from Zoroastrianism. Early Christianity adopted Zoroastrian mythology and the concepts of Zoroastrian dualism. The word devil does not appear in the Torah or the Old Testament because the word "devil" comes from the Persian word daeva, which was used by Zoroastrians to describe evil spirits. The Zoroastrian religion believed in one god, Ahura Mazda, who was completely good. In opposition to Ahura Mazda was Angra Mainyu, the evil one.

Pre-Christian image of Angra Mainyu According to Zoroastrian mythology these two beings were almost equally powerful and they were locked in a cosmic battle of good vs. evil. Angra Mainyu, according to the mythology, rebelled against Ahura Mazda and is responsible for all of the ills of the world, while Ahura Mazda is responsible for all of the good things. On the day of final judgment Zoroastrians believe that Ahura Mazda will defeat Angra Mainyu and banish him, as well as all evil, from the universe forever. It is a matter of historical fact that this mythology of the Zoroastrians existed before the advent of the Christian religion, and the transmission of this mythology to Jews within the Babylonian empire is also a matter of recorded history. This dualism set the stage for the integration of the Platonic concept of god. Early Christianity developed among Greek speaking and Aramaic speaking Jews. The word Christ itself is Greek and means "anointed one". The first references to "Christianity" began to emerge around 120 CE in Greek speaking regions around the Mediterranean Sea. Paul, the apostle who is said to have spread the message of Christianity, spent his time promoting the religion in Greece. Acts 17:18-33 (New International Version) 18A group of Epicurean and Stoic philosophers began to dispute with him. Some of them asked, "What is this babbler trying to say?" Others remarked, "He seems to be advocating foreign gods." They said this because Paul was preaching the good news about Jesus and the resurrection. 19Then they took him and brought him to a meeting of the Areopagus, where they said to him, "May we know what this new teaching is that you are presenting? 20You are bringing some strange ideas to our ears, and we want to know what they mean." 21(All the Athenians and the foreigners who lived there spent their time doing nothing but talking about and listening to the latest ideas.) 22Paul then stood up in the meeting of the Areopagus and said: "Men of Athens! I see that in every way you are very religious. 23For as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship, I even found an altar with this inscription: TO AN UNKNOWN GOD. Now what you worship as something unknown I am going to proclaim to you. 24"The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands. 25And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else. 26From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live. 27God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us. 28'For in him we live and move and have our being.' As some of your own poets have said, 'We are his offspring.' 29"Therefore since we are God's offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone—an image made by man's design and skill. 30In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. 31For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead." 32When they heard about the resurrection of the dead, some of them sneered, but others said, "We want to hear you again on this subject." 33At that, Paul left the Council. It was the Epicureans who would have sneered no doubt. The fact of the matter is, however, that the concept of a single god, creator of the universe, had been log established in Greece on philosophical grounds. As early Christianity developed in Greece it was heavily influenced by the Greek concepts of god and providence. Clement of Alexandria, who was born in Athens around 150 CE, was a highly influential early Christian theologian. Clement was a Greek and infused Christianity with a strong element of Platonic philosophy. Clement's attacks on other Greek philosophies is indicative of the interactions between Christianity and Greek philosophy of his time. The following quotes are taken from Clement's Stromata, written in 190 CE. "Theopompus and Timaeus, who composed fables and slanders, and Epicurus the leader of atheism, and Hipponax and Archilochus, are to be allowed to write in their own shameful manner. But he who proclaims the truth is to be prevented from leaving behind him what is to benefit posterity? It is a good thing, I reckon, to leave to posterity good children. This is the case with children of our bodies. But words are the progeny of the soul."

- The Stromata, Book I; Clement of Alexandria, 190 CE Here Clement is discussing the issue of whether or not Christians should leave behind writings or reject writings as materialistic and embrace oral tradition instead. Clement was a well educated Greek from a well off background, and thus he believed that Christians should embrace philosophy and literature, things that earlier Christians had opposed. "The Greek preparatory culture, therefore, with philosophy itself, is shown to have come down from God to men,... ... These arts, therefore, if not conjoined with philosophy, will be injurious to every one. For Plato openly called sophistry "an evil art." And Aristotle, following him, demonstrates it to be a dishonest art, which abstracts in a specious manner the whole business of wisdom, and professes a wisdom which it has not studied. ... Thus the truth-loving Plato says, as if divinely inspired, "Since I am such as to obey nothing but the word, which, after reflection, appears to me the best." Accordingly he charges those who credit opinions without intelligence and knowledge, with abandoning right and sound reason unwarrantably, and believing him who is a partner in falsehood. For to cheat one's self of the truth is bad; but to speak the truth, and to hold as our opinions positive realities, is good. ... CHAPTER XI -- WHAT IS THE PHILOSOPHY WHICH THE APOSTLE BIDS US SHUN? This, then, "the wisdom of the world is foolishness with God," and of those who are "the wise the Lord knoweth their thoughts that they are vain." Let no man therefore glory on account of pre-eminence in human thought. For it is written well in Jeremiah, "Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, and let not the mighty man glory in his might, and let not the rich man glory in his riches: but let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth that I am the Lord, that executeth mercy and judgment and righteousness upon the earth: for in these things is my delight, saith the Lord." "That we should trust not in ourselves, but in God who raiseth the dead," says the apostle, "who delivered us from so great a death, that our faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God." "For the spiritual man judgeth all things, but he himself is judged of no man." I hear also those words of his, "And these things I say, lest any man should beguile you with enticing words, or one should enter in to spoil you." And again, "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ;" branding not all philosophy, but the Epicurean, which Paul mentions in the Acts of the Apostles, which abolishes providence and deifies pleasure, and whatever other philosophy honours the elements, but places not over them the efficient cause, nor apprehends the Creator."

- The Stromata, Book I; Clement of Alexandria, 190 CE What would become known as the Christian movement began among the poor and uneducated, which is a major reason why there are no writings from the earliest "Christians". It is within the Greek culture, and through the Greek influence, that Christianity gained the intellectual fortitude, as well as the credibility, to expand beyond the simple moralistic movement of its origin. The god of Christianity was heavily influenced by the god of Plato and Aristotle. The god of Plato and Aristotle is the all knowing and all powerful creator of the universe and instrument of "final causes". The god of Plato and Aristotle was a philosophically derived concept though, and not to be worshiped - nor did their god love and care. The Zoroastrian god of love and forgiveness was merged with the Platonic god of omnipotence and infinity to create the all knowing, all powerful, and all loving god of Christianity. Plato, who lived between 427 and 327 BCE, believed in the immortality of the soul and in the existence of two forms of reality, the corrupt material world that we experience while we are alive on earth and another perfect spiritual world where the soul goes after death. Plato thought that truth came from the soul, while falsehood came from the natural world. Aristotle, while more of a naturalist than Plato, accepted Plato's view of god and added that whatever has a use must be the product of an intelligent creator, thus all things in nature that have a function must have been created by god. Aristotle extended the teleology of Socrates into a system of natural philosophy that he used to describe all of the phenomena of nature, especially the phenomena of life. Teleology is a doctrine that attempts to explain the universe in terms of ends or "final causes". Teleology is based on the proposition that the universe has design and purpose. In Aristotelian philosophy the explanation of, or justification for, a phenomenon or process is to be found not only in the immediate cause, but also in the "final cause"— the reason for which the phenomenon exists or was created. "Further, where a series has a completion, all the preceding steps are for the sake of that. Now surely as in intelligent action, so in nature; and as in nature, so it is in each action, if nothing interferes. Now intelligent action is for the sake of an end; therefore the nature of things also is so. Thus if a house, e.g. had been a thing made by nature, it would have been made in the same way as it is now by art; and if things made by nature were made also by art, they would come to be in the same way as by nature. Each step then in the series is for the sake of the next; and generally art partly completes what nature cannot bring to a finish, and partly imitates her. If, therefore, artificial products are for the sake of an end, so clearly also are natural products. The relation of the later to the earlier terms of the series is the same in both. This is most obvious in the animals other than man: they make things neither by art nor after inquiry or deliberation. Wherefore people discuss whether it is by intelligence or by some other faculty that these creatures work, spiders, ants, and the like. By gradual advance in this direction we come to see clearly that in plants too that is produced which is conducive to the end-leaves, e.g. grow to provide shade for the fruit. If then it is both by nature and for an end that the swallow makes its nest and the spider its web, and plants grow leaves for the sake of the fruit and send their roots down (not up) for the sake of nourishment, it is plain that this kind of cause is operative in things which come to be and are by nature. And since 'nature' means two things, the matter and the form, of which the latter is the end, and since all the rest is for the sake of the end, the form must be the cause in the sense of 'that for the sake of which'. ... It is plain then that nature is a cause, a cause that operates for a purpose."

- Physics; Aristotle, 350 BCE So, what does all of this have to do with evolution? Opposition to the ancient Greek concept of evolution was an integral part of the early development of Christianity. The philosophy and culture of Christianity has its roots among the anti-Epicurean philosophers of Greece. Anti-Epicurean philosophy of Greece was merged with Christianity by early Greek theologians, whose works became the basis for later Christian theology. Both directly and indirectly, Christian theology was heavily influenced by Platonic philosophy from this early point on. This is not to say that Christian theologians accepted every philosophical principle of Plato, they did not, but Platonic views had become such an integrated part of some segments of Greek and Jewish society by the time Christianity came along that many Platonic views had ceased to be strictly identified with Plato and were just popularly held concepts that evolved and integrated into various other philosophical and religious systems. Plato was embraced by early Christians, but even he was rejected as time went on and Christian ideology become increasingly anti-philosophical and opposed to all people who were associated with "the pagan times". Concepts adopted by Christians from Platonic Greek philosophers include: God is infinite and perfect

The ontological argument for the existence of god

Logos (logos has dual meanings: logic and word) is the source of existence

Logos (logic) is unique to humans

The soul contains sacred knowledge that people have from birth

The sun revolves around the earth

Nature is a product of intelligent design, and god is the designer Most important, however, was the conflict between the early Christians and the other schools of philosophy, namely the Epicureans. The early Christians saw Epicureanism and other forms of natural philosophy as the main ideologies that they were struggling against. The writings of the early Christian fathers are littered with references to Epicureanism, Anaxagoras, and Democritus. Likewise, the naturalistic philosophers saw Christianity as a growing negative influence in the civilized world as well. One of the most striking books written by the early Christians is perhaps Refutation of All Heresies by Hippolytus of Rome. It is not known when Hippolytus was born, but he is thought to have died around 235 CE. What makes Refutation of All Heresies so extraordinary is that it is a collection and explanation of all of the most well known naturalistic philosophies of the time, which the work then goes on to refute. The work stated to Christians that the ideas held by the naturalistic philosophers were heretical. Refutation of All Heresies now provides one of the fullest explanations of the Greek philosophies because it is one of the fullest accounts that remains of these teachings (the originals were destroyed by the Christians). "We propose to furnish an account of the tenets of natural philosophers, and who these are, as well as the tenets of moral philosophers, and who these are; and thirdly, the tenets of logicians, and who these logicians are. Among natural philosophers may be enumerated Thales, Pythagoras, Empedocles, Heraclitus, Anaximander, Anaximenes, Anaxagoras, Archelaus, Parmenides, Leucippus, Democritus, Xenophanes, Ecphantus, Hippo. Among moral philosophers are Socrates, pupil of Archelaus the physicist, (and) Plato the pupil of Socrates. This (speculator) combined three systems of philosophy. Among logicians is Aristotle, pupil of Plato. He systematized the art of dialectics. Among the Stoic (logicians) were Chrysippus (and) Zeno. Epicurus, however, advanced an opinion almost contrary to all philosophers. Pyrrho was an Academic; this (speculator) taught the in-comprehensibility of everything. The Brahmins among the Indians, and the Druids among the Celts, and Hesiod (devoted themselves to philosophic pursuits). ... CHAP. I.--THALES; HIS PHYSICS AND THEOLOGY; FOUNDER OF GREEK ASTRONOMY. It is said that Thales of Miletus, one of the seven, wise men, first attempted to frame a system of natural philosophy. This person said that some such thing as water is the generative principle of the universe, and its end;--for that out of this, solidified and again dissolved, all things consist, and that all things are supported on it; from which also arise both earthquakes and changes of the winds and atmospheric movements, and that all things are both produced and are in a state of flux corresponding with the nature of the primary author of generation; ... CHAP. V.--ANAXIMANDER; HIS THEORY OF THE INFINITE; HIS ASTRONOMIC OPINIONS; HIS PHYSICS. Anaximander, then, was the hearer of Thales. Anaximander was son of Praxiadas, and a native of Miletus. This man said that the originating principle of existing things is a certain constitution of the Infinite, out of which the heavens are generated, and the worlds therein; and that this principle is eternal and undecaying, and comprising all the worlds. And he speaks of time as something of limited generation, and subsistence, and destruction. This person declared the Infinite to be an originating principle and element of existing things, being the first to employ such a denomination of the originating principle. But, moreover, he asserted that there is an eternal motion, by the agency of which it happens that the heavens are generated; but that the earth is poised aloft, upheld by nothing, continuing on account of its equal distance from all (the heavenly bodies); ... And that man was, originally, similar to a different animal, that is, a fish. And that winds are caused by the separation of very rarified exhalations of the atmosphere, and by their motion after they have been condensed. And that rain arises from earth's giving back (the vapours which it receives) from the (clouds under the sun. And that there are flashes of lightning when the wind coming down severs the clouds. CHAP. VII.--ANAXAGORAS; HIS THEORY OF MIND; RECOGNISES AN EFFICIENT CAUSE; HIS COSMOGONY AND ASTRONOMY. ... And that animals originally came into existence in moisture, and after this one from another; and that males are procreated when the seed secreted from the right parts adhered to the right parts of the womb, and that females are born when the contrary took place. CHAP. VIII.--ARCHELAUS; SYSTEM AKIN TO THAT OF ANAXAGORAS; HIS ORIGIN OF THE EARTH AND OF ANIMALS; OTHER SYSTEMS. ... And with regard to animals, he affirms that the earth, being originally fire in its lower part, where the heat and cold were intermingled, both the rest of animals made their appearance, numerous and dissimilar, all having the same food, being nourished from mud; and their existence was of short duration, but afterwards also generation from one another arose unto them; and men were separated from the rest (of the animal creation), and they appointed rulers, and laws, and arts, and cities, and the rest. And he asserts that mind is innate in all animals alike; for that each, according to the difference of their physical constitution, employed (mind), at one time slower, at another faster. ... CHAP. X.--LEUCIPPUS; HIS ATOMIC THEORY. But Leucippus, an associate of Zeno, did not maintain the same opinion, but affirms things to be infinite, and always in motion, and that generation and change exist continuously. And he affirms plenitude and vacuum to be elements. And he asserts that worlds are produced when many bodies are congregated and flow together from the surrounding space to a common point, so that by mutual contact they made substances of the same figure and similar in form come into connection; and when thus intertwined, there are transmutations into other bodies, and that created things wax and wane through necessity. But what the nature of necessity is, (Parmenides) did not define. ... CHAP. XI.--DEMOCRITUS; HIS DUALITY OF PRINCIPLES; HIS COSMOGONY. And Democritus was an acquaintance of Leucippus. Democritus, son of Damasippus, a native of Abdera, conferring with many gymnosophists among the Indians, and with priests in Egypt, and with astrologers and magi in Babylon, (propounded his system). Now he makes statements similarly with Leucippus concerning elements, viz. plenitude and vacuum, denominating plenitude entity, and vacuum nonentity; and this he asserted, since existing things are continually moved in the vacuum. And he maintained worlds to be infinite, and varying in bulk; and that in some there is neither sun nor moon, while in others that they are larger than with us, and with others more numerous. And that intervals between worlds are unequal; and that in one quarter of space (worlds) are more numerous, and in another less so; and that some of them increase in bulk, but that others attain their full size, while others dwindle away and that in one quarter they are coming into existence, whilst in another they are failing; and that they are destroyed by clashing one with another. And that some worlds are destitute of animals and plants, and every species of moisture. And that the earth of our world was created before that of the stars, and that the moon is underneath; next (to it) the sun; then the fixed stars. And that (neither) the planets nor these (fixed stars) possess an equal elevation. And that the world flourishes, until no longer it can receive anything from without. This (philosopher) turned all things into ridicule, as if all the concerns of humanity were deserving of laughter. ... CHAP. XIX.--EPICURUS; ADOPT'S THE DEMOCRITIC ATOMISM; DENIAL OF DIVINE PROVIDENCE; THE PRINCIPLE OF HIS ETHICAL SYSTEM. Epicurus, however, advanced an opinion almost contrary to all. He supposed, as originating principles of all things, atoms and vacuity. He considered vacuity as the place that would contain the things that will exist, and atoms the matter out of which all things could be formed; and that from the concourse of atoms both the Deity derived existence, and all the elements, and all things inherent in them, as well as animals and other (creatures); so that nothing was generated or existed, unless it be from atoms. And he affirmed that these atoms were composed of extremely small particles, in which there could not exist either a point or a sign, or any division; wherefore also he called them atoms. ... [H]e says that God has providential care for nothing, and that there is no such thing at all as providence or fate, but that all things are made by chance. And he concluded that the souls of men are dissolved along with their bodies, just as also they were produced along with them, for that they are blood, and that when this has gone forth or been altered, the entire man perishes; and in keeping with this tenet, (Epicurus maintained) that there are neither trials in Hades, nor tribunals of justice; so that whatsoever any one may commit in this life, that, provided he may escape detection, he is altogether beyond any liability of trial (for it in a future state). ... The opinions, therefore, of those who have attempted to frame systems of philosophy among the Greeks, I consider that we have sufficiently explained; and from these the heretics, taking occasion, have endeavoured to establish the tenets that will be after a short time declared. It seems, however, expedient, that first explaining the mystical rites and whatever imaginary doctrines some have laboriously framed concerning the stars, or magnitudes, to declare these; for heretics likewise, taking occasion from them, are considered by the multitude to utter prodigies. Next in order we shall elucidate the feeble opinions advanced by these. ... The followers, however, of Anaxagoras of Clazomenae, and of Democritus, and of Epicurus, and multitudes of others, have given it as their opinion that the generation of the universe proceeds from infinite numbers of atoms; and we have previously made partial mention of these philosophers. But Anaxagoras derives the universe from things similar to those that are being produced; whereas the followers of Democritus and Epicurus derived the universe from things both dissimilar (to the entities produced), and devoid of passion, that is, from atoms. But the followers of Heraclides of Pontus, and of Asclepiades, derived the universe from things dissimilar (to the entities produced), and capable of passion, as if from incongruous corpuscles. But the disciples of Plato affirm that these entities are from three principles--God, and Matter, and Exemplar. He divides matter, however, into four principles--fire, water, earth, and air. And (he says) that God is the Creator of this (matter), and that Mind is its exemplar. ... HAP. XXVIII.--THE DOCTRINE OF THE TRUTH. The first and only (one God), both Creator and Lord of all, had nothing coeval with Himself; not infinite chaos, nor measureless water, nor solid earth, nor dense air, not warm fire, nor refined spirit, nor the azure canopy of the stupendous firmament. But He was One, alone in Himself. By an exercise of His will He created things that are, which antecedently had no existence, except that He willed to make them. For He is fully acquainted with whatever is about to take place, for foreknowledge also is present to Him. The different principles, however, of what will come into existence, He first fabricated, viz., fire and spirit, water and earth, from which diverse elements He proceeded to form His own creation. And some objects He formed of one essence, but others He compounded from two, and others from three, and others from four. And those formed of one substance were immortal, for in their case dissolution does not follow, for what is one will never be dissolved. Those, on the other hand, which are formed out of two, or three, or four substances, are dissoluble; wherefore also are they named mortal. For this has been denominated death; namely, the dissolution of substances connected. I now therefore think that I have sufficiently answered those endued with a sound mind, who, if they are desirous of additional instruction, and are disposed accurately to investigate the substances of these things, and the causes of the entire creation, will become acquainted with these points should they peruse a work of ours comprised (under the title), Concerning the Substance of the Universe. I consider, however, that at present it is enough to elucidate those causes of which the Greeks, not being aware, glorified, in pompous phraseology, the parts of creation, while they remained ignorant of the Creator. And from these the heresiarchs have taken occasion, and have transformed the statements previously made by those Greeks into similar doctrines, and thus have framed ridiculous heresies. ... Such is the true doctrine in regard of the divine nature, O ye men, Greeks and Barbarians, Chaldeans and Assyrians, Egyptians and Libyans, Indians and Ethiopians, Celts, and ye Latins, who lead armies, and all ye that inhabit Europe, and Asia, and Libya. And to you I am become an adviser, inasmuch as I am a disciple of the benevolent Logos, and hence humane, in order that you may hasten and by us may be taught who the true God is, and what is His well-ordered creation. Do not devote your attention to the fallacies of artificial discourses, nor the vain promises of plagiarizing heretics, but to the venerable simplicity of unassuming truth. And by means of this knowledge you shall escape the approaching threat of the fire of judgment, and the rayless scenery of gloomy Tartarus, where never shines a beam from the irradiating voice of the Word! You shall escape the boiling flood of hell's eternal lake of fire and the eye ever fixed in menacing glare of fallen angels chained in Tartarus as punishment for their sins; and you shall escape the worm that ceaselessly coils for food around the body whose scum has bred it. Now such (torments) as these shall thou avoid by being instructed in a knowledge of the true God. And thou shalt possess an immortal body, even one placed beyond the possibility of corruption, just like the soul. And thou shalt receive the kingdom of heaven, thou who, whilst thou didst sojourn in this life, didst know the Celestial King. And thou shalt be a companion of the Deity, and a co-heir with Christ, no longer enslaved by lusts or passions, and never again wasted by disease. For thou hast become God: for whatever sufferings thou didst undergo while being a man, these He gave to thee, because thou wast of mortal mould, but whatever it is consistent with God to impart, these God has promised to bestow upon thee, because thou hast been deified, and begotten unto immortality. This constitutes the import of the proverb, "Know thyself;" i.e., discover God within thyself, for He has formed thee after His own image. For with the knowledge of self is conjoined the being an object of God's knowledge, for thou art called by the Deity Himself. Be not therefore inflamed, O ye men, with enmity one towards another, nor hesitate to retrace with all speed your steps. For Christ is the God above all, and He has arranged to wash away sin from human beings, rendering regenerate the old man. And God called man His likeness from the beginning, and has evinced in a figure His love towards thee. And provided thou obeyest His solemn injunctions, and becomest a faithful follower of Him who is good, thou shall resemble Him, inasmuch as thou shall have honour conferred upon thee by Him."

- Refutation of All Heresies; Hippolytus (3rd century CE) This book is not only one the few remaining sources of information about the naturalistic philosophies of Greece that preceded Christianity, but it tells us the real story of the decline of Western Civilization. All of the advanced knowledge and concepts of the ancient world were condemned by the Christians, considered heresies and eliminated. The principles that we understand today as being products of "modern science" were generally understood over 2,000 years ago, but the Christians denied them and destroyed almost all evidence of these ideas, the only real evidence remaining being their own denunciations of the ideas. The work of the Greeks and Romans was not purely "philosophical" as we know the term today. The Greeks and Romans practiced science, thought they did not use the term. They postulated hypothesis, conducted experiments, collected data, and reviewed each other's work. They conducted experiments on gravity that would not be duplicated again until the time of Galileo and Newton. They built machines, calculating devices, mechanical robots, and observational instruments. All of this was destroyed by the Christians. The teachings of Epicurus were especially disdained and opposed by the Christians. It was the Epicurean school that developed the most coherent philosophical framework of materialism that integrated the concepts of many of the different naturalistic philosophers and combined the ideas of atoms and evolution as well as natural explanations for fossils and meteorological events. For the Epicureans all the world was explainable through observation and reason. Epicurus himself is known to have been a very prolific writer, and he is thought to have written over 900 books, based on titles that have been referenced in other works, but Epicurus himself was just one of many men who held naturalistic views. All of the early Christian theologians taught against Epicurus and naturalistic understandings of the world. "And as he is in error who alleges that the superintendents of the markets make provision in no greater degree for men than for dogs, because dogs also get their share of the goods; so in a far greater degree are Celsus and they who think with him guilty of impiety towards the God who makes provision for rational beings, in asserting that His arrangements are made in no greater degree for the sustenance of human beings than for that of plants, and trees, and herbs, and thorns. For, in the first place, he is of opinion that 'thunders, and lightnings, and rains are not the works of God,'--thus showing more clearly at last his Epicurean leanings; and in the second place, that 'even if one were to grant that these were the works of God, they are brought into existence not more for the support of us who are human beings, than for that of plants, and trees, and herbs, and thorns,'--maintaining, like a true Epicurean, that these things are the product of chance, and not the work of Providence. For if these things are of no more use to us than to plants, and trees, and herbs, and thorns, it is evident either that they do not proceed from Providence at all, or from a providence which does not provide for us in a greater degree than for trees, and herbs, and thorns. Now, either of these suppositions is impious in itself, and it would be foolish to refute such statements by answering any one who brought against us the charge of impiety; for it is manifest to every one, from what has been said, who is the person guilty of impiety. In the next place, he adds: 'Although you may say that these things, viz., plants, and trees, and herbs, and thorns, grow for the use of men, why will you maintain that they grow for the use of men rather than for that of the most savage of irrational animals?' Let Celsus then say distinctly that the great diversity among the products of the earth is not the work of Providence, but that a certain fortuitous concurrence of atoms gave birth to qualities so diverse, and that it was owing to chance that so many kinds of plants, and trees, and herbs resemble one another, and that no disposing reason gave existence to them, and that they do not derive their origin from an understanding that is beyond all admiration. We Christians, however, who are devoted to the worship of the only God, who created these things, feel grateful for them to Him who made them, because not only for us, but also (on our account) for the animals which are subject to us, He has prepared such a home, seeing 'He causeth the grass to grow for the cattle, and herb for the service of man, that He may bring forth food out of the earth, and wine that maketh glad the heart of man, and oil to make his face to shine, and bread which strengtheneth man's heart.' But that He should have provided food even for the most savage animals is not matter of surprise, for these very animals are said by some who have philosophized (upon the subject) to have been created for the purpose of affording exercise to the rational creature. And one of our own wise men says somewhere: 'Do not say, What is this? or Wherefore is that? for all things have been made for their uses. And do not say, What is this? or Wherefore is that? for everything shall be sought out in its season.'"

- Contra Celsus, Book IV; Origen of Alexandria (185-232 CE) "But with reference to man, whom He formed an eternal and immortal being, He did not arm him, as the others, without, but within; nor did He place his protection in the body, but in the soul: since it would have been superfluous, when He had given him that which was of the greatest value, to cover him with bodily defences, especially when they hindered the beauty of the human body. On which account I am accustomed to wonder at the senselessness of the philosophers who follow Epicurus, who blame the works of nature, that they may show that the world is prepared and governed by no providence; but they ascribe the origin of all things to indivisible and solid bodies, from the fortuitous meetings of which they say that all things are and were produced. I pass by the things relating to the work itself with which they find fault, in which matter they are ridiculously mad; I assume that which belongs to the subject of which we are now treating."

- On the Workmanship of God; Lucius Lactantius (~250-325 CE) ""These," [Lucretius] says, "flutter about with restless motions through empty space, and are carried hither and thither, just as we see little particles of dust in the sun when it has introduced its rays and light through a window. From these there arise trees and herbs, and all fruits of the earth; from these, animals, and water, and fire, and all things are produced, and are again resolved into the same elements." This can be borne as long as the inquiry is respecting small matters. Even the world itself was made up of these. He has reached to the full extent of perfect madness: it seems impossible that anything further should be said, and yet he found something to add. "Since everything," he says, "is infinite, and nothing can be empty, it follows of necessity that there are innumerable worlds." ... Why should I speak of animals, in whose bodies we see nothing formed without plan, without arrangement, without utility, without beauty, so that the most skilful and careful marking out of all the parts and members repels the idea of accident and chance? But let us suppose it possible that the limbs, and bones, and nerves, and blood should be made up of atoms. What of the senses, the reflection, the memory, the mind, the natural capacity: from what seeds can they be compacted? He says, From the most minute. There are therefore others of greater size. How, then, are they indivisible? In the next place, if the things which are not seen are formed from invisible seeds, it follows that those which are seen are from visible seeds. Why, then, does no one see them? But whether any one regards the invisible parts which are in man, or the parts which can be touched, and which are visible, who does not see that both parts exist in accordance with design? How, then, can bodies which meet together without design effect anything reasonable? For we see that there is nothing in the whole world which has not in itself very great and wonderful design. And since this is above the sense and capacity of man, to what can it be more rightly attributed than to the divine providence?"

- On the Anger of God; Lucius Lactantius (~250-325 CE) " Therefore, when Epicurus reflected on these things, induced as it were by the injustice of these matters (for thus it appeared to him in his ignorance of the cause and subject), he thought that there was no providence. And having persuaded himself of this, he undertook also to defend it, and thus he entangled himself in inextricable errors. For if there is no providence, how is it that the world was made with such order and arrangement? He says: There is no arrangement, for many things are made in a different manner from that in which they ought to have been made. And the divine man found subjects of censure. Now, if I had leisure to refute these things separately, I could easily show that this man was neither wise nor of sound mind. Also, if there is no providence, how is it that the bodies of animals are arranged with such foresight, that the various members, being disposed in a wonderful manner, discharge their own offices individually? The system of providence, he says, contrived nothing in the production of animals; for neither were the eyes made for seeing, nor the ears for hearing, nor the tongue for speaking, nor the feet for walking; inasmuch as these were produced before it was possible to speak, to hear, to see, and to walk. Therefore these were not produced for use; but use was produced from them. ... Does wisdom therefore nowhere exist? Yes, indeed, it was amongst them, but no one saw it. Some thought that all things could be known: these were manifestly not wise. Others thought that nothing could be known; nor indeed were these wise: the former, because they attributed too much to man; the latter, because they attributed too little. A limit was wanting to each on either side. Where, then, is wisdom? It consists in thinking neither that you know all things, which is the property of God; nor that you are ignorant of all things, which is the part of a beast. For it is something of a middle character which belongs to man, that is, knowledge united and combined with ignorance. Knowledge in us is from the soul, which has its origin from heaven; ignorance from the body, which is from the earth: whence we have something in common with God, and with the animal creation. ... What course of argument, therefore, led them to the idea of the antipodes? They saw the courses of the stars travelling towards the west; they saw that the sun and the moon always set towards the same quarter, and rise from the same. But since they did not perceive what contrivance regulated their courses, nor how they returned from the west to the east, but supposed that the heaven itself sloped downwards in every direction, which appearance it must present on account of its immense breadth, they thought that the world is round like a ball, and they fancied that the heaven revolves in accordance with the motion of the heavenly bodies; and thus that the stars and sun, when they have set, by the very rapidity of the motion of the world are borne back to the east. Therefore they both constructed brazen orbs, as though after the figure of the world, and engraved upon them certain monstrous images, which they said were constellations. It followed, therefore, from this rotundity of the heaven, that the earth was enclosed in the midst of its curved surface. But if this were so, the earth also itself must be like a globe; for that could not possibly be anything but round, which was held enclosed by that which was round. But if the earth also were round, it must necessarily happen that it should present the same appearance to all parts of the heaven; that is, that it should raise aloft mountains, extend plains, and have level seas. And if this were so, that last consequence also followed, that there would be no part of the earth uninhabited by men and the other animals. Thus the rotundity of the earth leads, in addition, to the invention of those suspended antipodes.



But if you inquire from those who defend these marvellous fictions, why all things do not fall into that lower part of the heaven, they reply that such is the nature of things, that heavy bodies are borne to the middle, and that they are all joined together towards the middle, as we see spokes in a wheel; but that the bodies which are light, as mist, smoke, and fire, are borne away from the middle, so as to seek the heaven. I am at a loss what to say respecting those who, when they have once erred, consistently persevere in their folly, and defend one vain thing by another; but that I sometimes imagine that they either discuss philosophy for the sake of a jest, or purposely and knowingly undertake to defend falsehoods, as if to exercise or display their talents on false subjects. But I should be able to prove by many arguments that it is impossible for the heaven to be lower than the earth, were is not that this book must now be concluded, and that some things still remain, which are more necessary for the present work. And since it is not the work of a single book to run over the errors of each individually, let it be sufficient to have enumerated a few, from which the nature of the others may be understood. ... Wherefore there is nothing else in life on which our plan and condition can depend but the knowledge of God who created us, and the religious and pious worship of Him; and since the philosophers have wandered from this, it is plain that they were not wise. They sought wis-dom, indeed; but because they did not seek it in a right manner, they sunk down to a greater distance, and fell into such great errors, that they did not even possess common wisdom. For they were not only unwilling to maintain religion, but they even took it away; while, led on by the appearance of false virtue, they endeavour to free the mind from all fear: and this overturning of religion gains the name of nature. For they, either being ignorant by whom the world was made, or wishing to persuade men that nothing was completed by divine intelligence, said that nature was the mother of all things, as though they should say that all things were produced of their own accord: by which word they altogether confess their own ignorance. For nature, apart from divine providence and power, is absolutely nothing. But if they call God nature, what perverseness is it, to use the name of nature rather than of God! But if nature is the plan, or necessity, or condition of birth, it is not by itself capable of sensation; but there must necessarily be a divine mind, which by its foresight furnishes the beginning of their existence to all things. Or if nature is heaven and earth. and everything which is created. nature is not God, but the work of God."

- Divine Institutes, Book III; Lucius Lactantius (~250-325 CE) "I will therefore set forth the system of the world, that it may easily be understood both when and how it was made by God; which Plato, who discoursed about the making of the world, could neither know nor explain, inasmuch as he was ignorant of the heavenly mystery, which is not learned except by the teaching of prophets and God;... But since God has revealed this to us, and we do not arrive at it by conjectures, but by instruction from heaven, we will carefully teach it, that it may at length be evident to those who are desirous of the truth, that the philosophers did not see nor comprehend the truth; but that they had so slight a knowledge of it, that they by no means perceived from what source that fragrance of wisdom, which was so pleasant and agreeable, breathed upon them. ... Therefore that is more correct which they derived from Plato, that the world was made by God, and is also governed by His providence. It was therefore befitting that Plato, and those who held the same opinion, should teach and explain what was the cause, what the reason, for the contriving of so great a work; why or for the sake of whom He made it. But the Stoics also say the world was made for the sake of men I hear, but Epicurus is ignorant on what account or who made men themselves. For Lucretius, when he said that the world was not made by the gods, thus spoke: 'To say, again, that for the sake of men they have willed to set in order the glorious nature of the world' then he introduced: 'Is sheer folly. For what advantage can our gratitude bestow on immortal and blessed beings, that for our sake they should take in hand to administer aught?' And with good reason. For they brought forward no reason why the human race was created or established by God. It is our business to set forth the mystery of the world and man, of which they, being destitute, were able neither to reach nor see the shrine of truth. Therefore, as I said a little before, when they had assumed that which was true, that is, that the world was made by God, and was made for the sake of men, yet, since their argument failed them in the consequences, they were unable to defend that which they had assumed.

... Let us now assign the reason why He made man himself. For if the philosophers had known this, they would either have maintained those things which they had found to be true, or would not have fallen into the greatest errors. For this is the chief thing; this is the point on which everything turns. And if any one does not possess this, the truth altogether glides away from him. It is this, in short, which causes them to be inconsistent with reason; for if this had shone upon them, if they had known all the mystery of man, the Academy would never have been in entire opposition to their disputations, and to all philosophy. As, therefore, God did not make the world for His own sake, because He does not stand in need of its advantages, but for the sake of man, who has the use of it, so also He made man himself for His own sake. ... Therefore the opinion entertained by Democritus, and Epicurus, and Dicaearchus concerning the dissolution of the soul is false; and they would not venture to speak concerning the destruction of souls, in the presence of any magician, who knew that souls are called forth from the lower regions by certain incantations, and that they are at hand, and afford themselves to be seen by human eyes, and speak, and foretell future events; and if they should thus venture, they would be overpowered by the fact itself, and by proofs presented to them. But because they did not comprehend the nature of the soul, which is so subtle that it escapes the eyes of the human mind, they said that it perishes."

- Divine Institutes, Book VII; Lucius Lactantius (~250-325 CE) Divine Institutes, by early Christian apologist Lucius Lactantius, is a somewhat confused work which demonstrates that the author did not fully understand the philosophies that he was addressing, but nevertheless, the work was addressed to the Greeks and Romans of his time. In the work Lactantius explains that while all of the Greek philosophies contain some elements of truth, none of them can fully explain the nature of existence. Lactantius explains that Christians alone have the answers that the philosophers cannot explain because they have been given the answers by God. Lactantius explains in his works that all true knowledge comes directly from God, and that wisdom comes from religion, and that knowledge is born into the soul. Lactantius also explained that it was foolish for the Greeks to believe that the earth was round and that the idea of "antipodes" was inherently against the divine teachings of the scriptures. Antipodes ("opposing feet") is a term that was used to describe people living on the other side of the earth, whose feet would have to be facing the feet on the opposite side of the earth. The rejection of the Greek understanding that the earth is round was later upheld by Saint Augustine and became official Christian doctrine based on the teachings of the Bible. "CHAPTER 24 -- OF THE ANTIPODES, THE HEAVEN, AND THE STARS. How is it with those who imagine that there are antipodes opposite to our footsteps? Do they say anything to the purpose? Or is there any one so senseless as to believe that there are men whose footsteps are higher than their heads? or that the things which with us are in a recumbent position, with them hang in an inverted direction? that the crops and trees grow downwards? that the rains, and snow, and hail fall upwards to the earth? And does any one wonder that hanging gardens are mentioned among the seven wonders of the world, when philosophers make hanging fields, and seas, and cities, and mountains? The origin of this error must also be set forth by us. For they are always deceived in the same manner. For when they have assumed anything false in the commencement of their investigations, led by the resemblance of the truth, they necessarily fall into those things which are its consequences. Thus they fall into many ridiculous things; because those things which are in agreement with false things, must themselves be false. But since they placed confidence in the first, they do not consider the character of those things which follow, but defend them in every way; whereas they ought to judge from those which follow, whether the first are true or false. What course of argument, therefore, led them to the idea of the antipodes? They saw the courses of the stars travelling towards the west; they saw that the sun and the moon always set towards the same quarter, and rise from the same. But since they did not perceive what contrivance regulated their courses, nor how they returned from the west to the east, but supposed that the heaven itself sloped downwards in every direction, which appearance it must present on account of its immense breadth, they thought that the world is round like a ball, and they fancied that the heaven revolves in accordance with the motion of the heavenly bodies; and thus that the stars and sun, when they have set, by the very rapidity of the motion of the world are borne back to the east. Therefore they both constructed brazen orbs, as though after the figure of the world, and engraved upon them certain monstrous images, which they said were constellations. It followed, therefore, from this rotundity of the heaven, that the earth was enclosed in the midst of its curved surface. But if this were so, the earth also itself must be like a globe; for that could not possibly be anything but round, which was held enclosed by that which was round. But if the earth also were round, it must necessarily happen that it should present the same appearance to all parts of the heaven; that is. that it should raise aloft mountains, extend plains, and have level seas. And if this were so, that last consequence also followed, that there would be no part of the earth uninhabited by men and the other animals. Thus the rotundity of the earth leads, in addition, to the invention of those suspended antipodes. But if you inquire from those who defend these marvellous fictions, why all things do not fall into that lower part of the heaven, they reply that such is the nature of things, that heavy bodies are borne to the middle, and that they are all joined together towards the middle, as we see spokes in a wheel; but that the bodies which are light, as mist, smoke, and fire, are borne away fro