Het regt gebruik der werelt beschouwingen, ter overtuiginge van ongodisten en ongelovigen

Archbishop of Cambrai original: "Aartsbisschop van Kameryk"; refers to François Fénelon came to my hand; and while composing this Preface, the work of Mr. Ray John Ray, an English naturalist, having been translated into French (since I do not understand that language); also that Mr. Derham William Derham, an English clergyman and scientist has broadly demonstrated the existence of a God on similar grounds in English. It was pleasing to me to see and learn that this way of proof, which I had always held to be the most powerful, was also approved by such great men. After everything that has been written about it, this method will still leave an abundance of material for the latest posterity to see the perfections of the great Creator of all things, even for unfortunate Philosophers.

The manner of demonstrating the Divinity of the Holy Word from natural phenomena, which we present to you here, I do not know has ever been employed in this way for that purpose. I hope, however, that it will be fruitful among Atheists and Unbelievers; because they are usually accustomed to practicing Physics original: "Natuur-kunde".

The general method of proof for both of these is shown more broadly in the preface sections 29, 30, and 31.

I have written in Dutch original: "Nederduits" in order to be of service to my countrymen: especially since their language is also misused for the writing of many Atheistic books.

The order that has been kept can be somewhat gathered from the summaries: although I have not bound myself very strictly to the order followed by many in Physics.

Those who wish to read this work for the modern experiences cited therein as an experimental Physics original: "Physica", should please not be offended by the convictions: since there was no intention to describe a simple Physics, but to set the wandering on the right path; and to lead one's thoughts in this way into Physics can be useful to everyone.

Experienced Mathematicians original: "Mathematici" will perhaps judge that I should have presented the experimental proofs (such as those of the strength of the muscles and the law of height in fluids, etc.) more mathematically, or brought those matters forward without proofs; so as to reach the same conclusion with less fuss and without so many figures. But let these please know that I have derived the proofs as much as possible from experiences, and not (as Mathematicians do) solely by consequences from a stated Law of Nature, in order to be understandable also to those who have little or no experience in Mathematics original: "Mathesis". Regarding the latter, I was initially of the same mind as them, and had already prepared the entire work without proofs (the grounds of which can be found among Mathematicians) and without figures. However, as a certain learned gentleman and later others were pleased to suggest to me, in this way I would seem to many to be describing what was incredible rather than true in some cases; and that in such great matters, at least as much proof was needed as for the confirmation of the truth of the...

** 2