THE

¦BIBB

ic Record

X AND

¦y-X:..- :.::.:, ¦¦¦y^-^y;^'

iIENCE

m$w$i>'

88i.t

:.v/>^MHi

••;•:¦*•••¦ : ..--.--:

;-:;:V

¦SHI.

"I give theft £ooh
for the founding of a Cotlsere in this Cchny"

190f

THE

MOSAIC RECORD AND MODERN SCIENCE.

By L. T. TOWNSEND. D. D.
AUTHOR OF "CREDO," ETC.

I have noticed that when theological writers can be induced to stick to the
literal account in Genesis, and scientists to the pure facts, that the two records
have a very wonderful correspondence. Pres. McCosh.

BOSTON:
HOWARD GANNETT.
1881. '

COPYRIGHT, 1880,
Bt Howard Gannett.

Electrotyped at the Boston Stereotype Foundry,
No. 4 Pearl Street.

PREFACE.

Maxy Sabbath-school workers and Bible students have felt
and expressed surprise that during the late discussions and
explanations of the International Lesson Series, the Mosaic
account of creation received such unsatisfactory defence.
Though familiar with the current difficulties and objections,
and in some instances unable to answer them, still the teacher
and the student had not been alarmed; they presumed, that,
when this subject should be critically examined and commented
upon by the pulpit and the press, perfectly satisfactory expla
nations would be given. But as a matter of fact, we have to
confess that a large number of even the more common objec
tions either were not well met, or were passed in silence.
]STow, only a moment's reflection is needed to show how un
reasonable is the demand that all difficulties should be exhaust
ively examined and satisfactorily reviewed in the studies of a
few weeks. The space devoted to the introductory chapters of
Genesis was necessarily too limited, the. scientific researches
demanded were too extensive, and the theological and exeget-
ical questions involved were too profound to admit, within the

4 PREFACE.
limits of International Series, anything like exhaustive treat
ment. These facts, and the many new questions raised, together
with the interest developed in the minds of all the friends
of the Bible, have led the author to contribute the follow
ing brief treatise to the general literature belonging to this
somewhat difficult and perplexing subject.

CONTENTS.

PAGE
I. Conflict of Theories, . .  7
II. Cosmical Periods: the First, Second, and Third. . . . . 11

III. Cosmical Periods : the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth, .... 17
IV. The Law of Type and Antitype,  2G
V. Chaos and Mosaic Days,  29
VI. Mosaic Days: the First, Second, and Thhjd,  31
VII. Mosaic Days : the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth,  35
VIII. The Seventh Day,  38
IX. Origin of Ljght and Life, and the Creation of Man, . . . . 41
Supplemental Notes  61
5

THE

MOSAIC RECORD AND MODERN SCIENCE.

i.
COIOTJCT OF THEORIES.

The Christian student, while examining the different scientific theo
ries of the origin of the world, and while studying the various inter
pretations given to the Mosaic record, is often left to wonder if these
conflicting opinions can ever be reduced to anything like consistency.
Controversies upon these subjects have arisen, not exclusively be
tween skeptical scientists and religionists, but have also been warm
and exciting even among those who are firm believers in the truths of
Revelation. There have been those, for instance, who maintain that the Bible
teaches, beyond question, that God, in six ordinary days, begun the
world and brought it, during that brief period, to its present inhabitable
condition. The more scientific believer replies, however, that, judging'
from a candid view of facts, it cannot be possible that the various geo
logical deposits could have been arranged without consuming millions
of years. But to this it is sometimes rejoined, that God could have
created the geological deposits and fossils just as they now are as well
as to have created them in any other way. That he could have done
this, no firm believer in the supernatural doubts, but that he did this,
no intelligent believer at present will for a moment admit. 7

8 MOSAIC EECOED
On the other hand, a large number of Christian scholars evade the
scientific difficulties involved in the literal six-days' theory by asserting
that the word " day," as used in the first and second chapters of Genesis,
means a period of indefinite length. Hence, according to this interpre
tation, all that is required to establish a harmony between science and
Revelation, is to show that the general order of development is essen
tially the same in both the Mosaic and scientific records. This, it may
be remarked, is the view now maintained by perhaps the majority of
scholarly commentators and scientific believers, who during the last
fifteen or twenty years have written upon these subjects.
That this theory is entirely free from embarrassments, however, none
of its advocates venture to affirm. It may be, and certainly is, a tempo
rary relief from scientific, but it is not a relief from exegetical difficulties.
Indeed, no one, unless in support of some favorite theory, or to escape
some embarrassment, would read the Mosaic account thinking for a
moment of any period except that of a literal day. And further, this,
which seems to be the natural interpretation of common sense, is like
wise supported by some of the ablest and most critical Hebrew scholars
of both ancient and modern date. Says Baumgarten : " The word ' day,'
the Hebrew Torn, is primarily day, and not period; and here (in Genesis)
this word is used for the first time." Rosenmuller contends, also, that
this Mosaic account cannot possibly be made to mean other than days
of twenty-four hours' length. The learned and eminent Hebraist,
Kalisch, says, " It is philologically impossible to understand this word
' day ' in any other sense than as a period of twenty-four hours." Says
Professor Hedge, in his Primeval World, " There is no reason to
doubt that the text means literally days of twenty-four hours." Calwer,
Hagenbach, Keil, Davidson, and Professor Murphy maintain the same
opinion. We have to confess, therefore, that the usual method of
explaining the Mosaic account, as meaning days of indefinite length,
is not such as can easily harmonize the facts of science with a natural
and obvious interpretation of the Bible.
Aside from the length of days, there are other matters in controversy.
For instance, not a few writers, adopting the theory that the Bible was
never designed to teach science, have surrendered all claims as to the

AND MODERN SCIENCE. 9
inspiration of the Mosaic account, save some general truths as to God's
creatorship. They have styled that account, in the words of Dr. Cocker,
" poetical, symbolical, and unchronological." Others resolutely oppose
this view, and say, with the late President of Amherst College, himself
a scientific man of no mean rank, " If the supposed results of scientific
discovery should be found to be antagonistic to the Bible, I should cleave
to the Bible and suspect the results." 1 *
Such are some of the conflicting views, even among evangelical be
lievers. Aside from these controversies found within the household of faith,
there have also been at the hands of pronounced unbelievers heavy as
saults upon the Mosaic record. " A piece of stupidity and fraud," is the
charge often made. Therefore the effort to find a harmonious adjust
ment of these conflicting opinions of theologians, scientists, and skeptics,
as to the origin and formation of the world, seems well-nigh hopeless.
Still, while the Christian has faith that the Bible is a God-made and not a
man-made book, and while he believes that the same Being who inspired
the Bible also created the universe, and must therefore have known how it
was created, there is but one course to pursue — -keep attempting adjust
ments until sooner or later one that is reasonable and harmonious shall
be discovered.2 At the cost of subsequent repetition, but at the gain'of clearness, we
briefly outline a theory upon this perplexing subject, which at least
somewhat reduces the number of difficulties heretofore met with. This
theory maintains, in common with all recognized scientific opinions upon
the subject, that the evolution or creation of the physical universe, in
cluding our earth, has consumed periods of time so vast that the human
mind cannot comprehend them. With those who hold that the word
'• day " is indefinite, our theory agrees so far as to admit that apparently
there are, in geology at least, six well-marked periods " of activity,"
having immense durations, which may be properly termed cosmical, or
geological days, and that these periods are prophetic or typical of six literal
days, during which the Creator brought into being the vegetable and
* The notes in this volume are indicated by the small Arabic numerals, 1, 2, 3, &c, and
constitute the Supplement. (See p. 61.)

10 MOSAIC EECOBD
animal life now found upon the earth's surface. It will be noticed, by
adopting this theory, that we avoid a quarrel with scientists as to geo
logical durations, all the time being allowed that can reasonably be de
manded. Nor need we quarrel with those exegetes who apparently are
correct when insisting that the word " day," used in connection with
" morning " and " evening," must mean an ordinary day. Each ex
treme party in this controversy, we concede, has truth on its side, but
not the whole truth.

A*SD MODEEN SCIENCE. 11

IT.
COSMICAL PERIODS: THE FIRST, SECOND, AND
THIRD.
In unfolding the subject, we first call attention to certain ap
parently well-established facts as to the beginning of things. We say,
' apparently well established,' in order to allow the science of geology to
shift its ground in the future, as in the past, if new data should so
require. The field before us is immense. In traversing it, human history is the
first informer, carrying back the student, with reliability, however, only
a few thousand years. Nearly where human history begins, geological
history takes the student and conducts him with something of a firm
tread to a period when the lowest stratified rocks were formed. Beyond
this point, geology ventures to report but little.
Next, the united sciences of astronomy, spectrum analysis, and chem
istry, beginning where geology is compelled to stop, aided by analogical
arguments and reasonable conjectures, carry the student back to the
realms of those invisible forces which must have produced visible
phenomena. If investigation is extended further, it will be found that
history, geology, astronomy, spectrum analysis, and chemistry are com
pelled to commit all additional research to theology, which deals with
data that lie beyond the reach of all other sciences.
In view of the fact that the nebula hypothesis has such strong sup
port, being first propounded by Swedenborg, accepted by Kant, elab
orated by Laplace and Herschel, having also been held and variously
applied by such scientists as Cuvier, Humboldt, Arago, Guyot, Nichol,
Proctor, and Dana, we feel justified in adopting it, at least as a work
ing hypothesis.3
Keeping for the present within the circle of the natural sciences, the
comparatively well-supported induction quickly follows, that, first of all,

12 MOSAIC EECOED
and back of all, there was a dark and empty universe. From some
cause, by creative power, or by chance, or by the nature of things, or
otherwise, this empty space was filled, fully or partly, with highly illu
minated and highly rarefied " star-fire " or " star-stuff." And this change
from darkness to light, science likewise affirms, must have been instan
taneous. It is well to bear in mind at this point that one of the most pronounced
postulates of modern science is, that there can be no effect without an
adequate cause. This compels science to take the additional step, that an
invisible and unknown, but nevertheless a Potent Agency, evoked from
the invisible and unknown, this star-stuff, and then while the star-stuff
was enveloped in primitive darkness, and while it was itself darkness,
that same Potent Agency which evoked it into being, also set it on fire,
and thereby dissipated the darkness of a past eternity.
Let it be observed that we do not yet attribute to science the word
God. We go no further than pure science authorizes us. The terms we
use are, an invisible and unknown, but Potent Agency, and it was this
which brought into existence that which was not.4
How or why this Potent -Agency brought " star-stuff " or " light-*
stuff" into being, or definitely what this Potent Agency itself is, physi
cal science cannot from the nature of the case report ; it should there
fore properly refer for information to theology. But until new scientific
information reaches us, we shall venture to fill this practically atheistic
(not scientific) hiatus with the sublime words with which Moses
describes certain later phenomena that were tj-pified by those events
which transpired millions of ages earlier : " And God said, Let there be
light; and there was light."
There followed in order of time, according to astronomical and geo
logical history, a distinct " epoch of development." The universally
diffused " star-fire," by processes of concentration and condensation,
formed rings, which, as Sir William Thomson thinks, resembled in
form and preliminary movement those vapor-smoke rings that on a
small scale are sometimes sent out of a locomotive during its first few
exhausts. As this era wore on, the flaming rings broke asunder forming distinct

AND MODEEN SCIENCE. 13
masses of fire. At that time our earth threw off its satellite and became
a well-defined sun, rolling through the spaces a flaming torch, giving out
light and heat as does the sun which now lights and warms our planetary
system. In a word, this first cosmical day, it may reasonably be concluded,
witnessed the creation of light, the conversion of light, through pro
cesses of condensation into rings, then into globes of fire, the earth, sun,
moon, and stars being thereby shaped, and brought from confusion into
order. Or, using a phrase in which Herbert Spencer delights, " the
homogeneous became heterogeneous."5 And no scientific man, be he
skeptic or believer, can do better* than say, that that primal darkness.
which had no beginning, and that morning light which first emblazoned
the spaces, together with other astronomical phenomena, constituted the
primitive day or epoch of the physical universe, or, in the simple yet
scientifically faultless language which Moses designed for later phe
nomena : " And God saw the light, that it was good : and God divided the
light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the dark
ness he called Night : and the evening and the morning were the first
day." The length of that epoch is beyond all our powers of comprehension.
It could not have been less, as is thought, than the time which has
elapsed since the earth's crust began to form, making, therefore, this first
creative day to be, according to the earlier estimates of Sir William
Thomson, at least three hundred million years.
As this day approached its evening the earth-fires burned less in
tensely than at mid-day. The flames at length entirely ceased to leap
up from the earth's surface. They smouldered, and then a solid crust
began to form. The surrounding gases were condensed, forming water
and acids which were precipitated upon the earth, hastening its cooling,
and also corroding and dissolving much of its surface materials. And
when at length the surface fires were completely out, and when the
crust had fully formed, though still hot enough to throw the descending
waters back in the form of steam, and while these masses of steam and
clouds were creeping over the sky, a great astronomical night shut down
upon the earth, whose first day had consumed these hundreds of millions

14 MOSAIC EECOED
of years. It was a night of wildest thunder-storms. " An overwhelm
ing pall of clouds," says a popular lecturer, " covered the earth at this
period, which at length fell in raindrops, and these exploding on their
encounter in mid-air with the vapors rising from the earth, produced a
universal tempest with thunder and lightning, which tempest lasted
through a geological period. The planet Jupiter is now passing through
this stormy period."
How long this black pall hung over the earth we have no reliable
means of knowing*. We may reasonably conjecture that its duration
extended, through years numbered by millions. The close of this night
found the earth entirely deluged.
Like every other night, this one was at length greeted by a dawn-
light, at least by a season of changed geological conditions, formations,
and developments. That is, geological science positively reports that
the primitive crust or rock-bed of the earth was anon broken up, thereby
disclosing those fires which had been concealed through the previous
night. In a word, the terrestrial fires had again broken out. From one
pole to the other, and round its entire surface, the world was torn by
earthquakes, and was lighted up in every direction by volcanic fires.
Huge masses of the primitive stratified rocks were piled up in folds and
then were repeatedly sunk in these seething seas of liquid fire.
The cause assigned by science for these mighty physical changes, is,
the cooling and contracting of the surface matter of the earth. Of these
changes and revolutions there is abundant proof. For instance, the
oldest rocks of which geology has taken note, are those in the Lauren
tian system, belonging to the Archcean epoch. But these are stratified or
fragmental, and are therefore formed from the debris of other and
earlier rocks, and give evidence in many places of intense heating and
sudden cooling. These earlier rocks constituted the primitive earth-
crust of which we have just spoken.
It was during the closing hours of this second creative day that the
broken and fragmental crust of the earth formed another covering for
the suppressed fires. Mountain ranges made their appearance and a new
series of rocks was formed. The moistures of the atmosphere likewise
passed through marvellous chemical changes. Then it was, as is shown

AND MODEEN SCIENCE. 15
by Professor Hunt, that the carbon and carbonates, the sulphur and
sulphates, the chlorides and waters, representing so much carbonic,
sulphuric, and hydro-chloric acids and aqueous vapor, were extracted
from the atmosphere which in those early times enveloped the earth.
Fragmentary rocks were fused and macadamized. Then also was
formed the geological series consisting of gneiss, granite, hornblende,
and the sandstones. In Canada, the thickness of these formations or
measures is forty thousand feet. In Bohemia and Bavaria, the thick
ness is even greater, being not less than fifty thousand feet. During
these geological and chemical changes the atmosphere, though not1
perfectly clear, became an agent, through processes of evaporation, or
possibly by other means, in separating the dense aqueous vapors into two
masses, one below, the other above the atmosphere. It is estimated that
186,240 cubic miles of rain-water fall annually ; enough to submerge
Asia, Africa, Europe, North and South America with water three feet
deep. The average weight of water, or, strictly speaking, aqueous vapor,
continuously held in the air, well-nigh baffles human comprehension.
This immense weight, estimated as high as 50,000,000,000,000 tons,
did not originate in the sky, but was raised above the earth's surface and
suspended. Therefore without violence we may also, through rhetorical
accommodation, apply to this period the language of Moses :
" And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters:
and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firma
ment, #nd divided the waters which were under the firmament from the
waters which were above the firmament : and it was so. And God
called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were
the second day."
Of the length of this second day, all "our judgments must be con
jectural. Le Conte, estimating from the time needed to form a thickness
of forty or fifty thousand feet of the rocks belonging to this period,
concludes that its duration is greater than the entire subsequent history
of the earth. If this is the case, then, according to the conjecture of
Sir William Thomson, the length of this volcanic day was not less than
one hundred million years.
After another " cycle of repose," called properly a cosmical evening

16 MOSAIC EECOED
and night, a new era of activity, development, and organization dawned
upon the earth. Geologically it is easily distinguishable from both the
preceding and succeeding days. "'The rock system," says Le Conte,
speaking of this epoch, "is distinct, being everywhere unconformed
to the Laurentian below and to the Secondary above. It stands out the
most distinct era in the physical history of the earth. The former or
Archcean period must be regarded as the mythical age. But here, with
the Paleozoic, commences the dawn of established geological history."
During the morning hours of this new day the Silurian system, some
times termed the age of MollusJcs, was formed. During its noon hours
the Devonian system, sometimes termed the age of Pishes, was completed.
And during its afternoon hours the Carboniferous system, sometimes
termed the age of Amphibians, came into being and was completed. It
was also during this period that the vast deposits of coal were formed
and stored. The atmosphere was warm, humid, uniform, highly car
bonated, stagnant, and stifling. Under such conditions the growth of
vegetation was enormous and probably such as never again in this world
can be witnessed. With great propriety we might apply to this period
the words of Moses :
"And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together
unto one place, and let the dry land appear : and it was so. And God
called the dry land Earth ; and the gathering together of the waters
called he Seas : and God saw that it was good. And God said, Let the
earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit-tree yielding
fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth : and it was so.
And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind,
and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind : and
God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the
third day."
The duration of this Silurian, Devonian, and Carboniferous day can
only be relatively and approximately conjectured. The estimates of
Bischof and Le Conte call for a million years for the coal period alone.
If we allow the same time for the two remaining divisions, then this
third cosmical day lasted three million years.

AND MODEEN SCIENCE. 17

III.
COSMICAL PERIODS : THE FOURTH, FIFTH, AND
SIXTH.
The Paleozoic era was followed by another night, or " lost interval,"
or " collapse and subsidence," as modern geologists have variously de
nominated it. Of its duration we know not much. But we know that it
had an end, then a morning, and was followed by another era of activity
and development. It was upon this fourth cosmical day that the sun,
moon, and stars gave their light to the earth. Hitherto, the atmosphere
had been loaded with vapors and gases, especially with carbonic-acid
gas. The sky had been obscured, especially with smoke from active
volcanoes, and with vapors from " the steaming lands just arisen from
their watery sepulchre." Indeed, up to the preceding day, the earth,
being self-luminous, and therefore casting no shadow behind it, was so
conditioned as to render the succession of day and night impossible.
But upon this, which may be termed the first true solar period, the
weird light previously prevailing, often compared by scientists to the
" zodiacal gleam," the "dying photosphere," and the " shimmer of the
aurora," gave place to light under the same conditions as now greets the
world in day-time. There was a veritable dawn-light and a veritable
sunrise. With manifest propriety, therefore, the words of Moses, not
literally, but through rhetorical accommodation, may be applied to this
geological era :
"And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven, to
divide the clay from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons,
and for days, and years; and let them be for lights in the firmament of
the heaven, to give light upon the earth : and it was so. And God made
two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to
rule the night ; he made the stars also. And God set them in the firma-
2

18 MOSAIC EECOED
ment of the heaven, to give light upon the earth, and to rule over the
day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness : and
God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the
fourth day."
The duration of the cosmical epoch, now under consideration, with
its succeeding lost interval, was probably not much less than that of the
preceding day and night.
The night of the solar day was succeeded by another formative and
organizing period, called by geologists the Mesozoic era or age of Reptiles.
The earth's climate was of high temperature and quite uniform. Fos
sils of tropical and sub-tropical flora and fauna belonging to this era
are found as far north as Spitzbergen.
During its morning hours, which constitute the Triassic period (con
suming ten thousand ordinary daj*s and nights), were formed vast ac
cumulations of rock-salt. During its noon hours, which constitute
the long Jurassic period, were formed fossil and petrified forests. At
that time also were made the ponderous footprints upon the Connecticut
sandstones. During its afternoon hours, which constitute the Cretaceous
period, were formed immense deposits of carbonate of lime.
But the culmination of reptiles is the most distinguishing character
istic of the Mesozoic era. All the fauna, including birds and mammals,
were reptilian. Professors Dana, Cope, and Le Conte call attention to the
fact that there are in the world at present only six varieties of reptiles
over fifteen feet in length. But in the Cretaceous of Great Britain alone
there were not less than eighteen varieties which were from twenty to
sixty feet in length. In the United States, one hundred and forty-seven
fossil species of reptiles belonging to this period have been found, some
of them gigantic in size, being from seventy to eighty feet in length.
Hence, had the author of the Book of Genesis intended a description
of this period, he could not have done much better than to say :
" And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving
creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open
firmament of heaven. And God created great whales, and every living
creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after
their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind : and God saw that it

AND MODEEN SCIENCE. 19
was good. And God blessed them, sa}*ing, Be fruitful and multiply,
and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. And
the evening and the morning were the fifth day."
The duration of this epoch, like that of the others, baffles definite
calculation. From one to three million years are the various and ap
proximate estimates.
The close of this period was a time of continent making. The west
ern half of America underwent a " bodily upheaval." The great Cre
taceous sea which had hitherto divided North America was drawn off,
and one continent took the place of two. The Wahsatch and Uintah
mountains were formed, while the eastern range of the Rocky Moun
tains was greatly elevated. These physical changes witnessed the devas
tation of nearly all the flora, and the destruction of nearly all the fauna
which had hitherto characterized this era.
There followed, as geologists affirm, another lost interval, or night,
called the Permian Laps, from whose darkness at length dawned another,
the sixth, cosmical epoch. A new flora and fauna took the place of the
old, ushering in the era familiarly known as the Tertiary, or Cenozoic,
which includes the Eocene, Miocene, and Pliocene formations. Animals
and plants such as had flourished in no previous age were to be every
where met. It was emphatically the era of mammals. Professor Dana's
description vividly portrays the animal life of those times :
" The quadrupeds did not all come forth together. Large and powerful herbiv
orous species first take possession of the earth, with only a few small carnivora.
These pass away. Other herbivora with a larger proportion of carnivora next
appear. These also are exterminated; and so with others. Then the carnivora
appear in vast numbers and power, and the herbivora also abound. Moreover these
races attain a magnitude and number far surpassing all that now exist, as much so
indeed, on all the continents, North and South America, Europe, Asia, Africa, and Aus
tralia, as the old mastodon, twenty feet long and nine feet high, exceeds the modern
buffalo. Such, according to geology, was the age of mammals, when the brute spe
cies existed in their greatest magnificence, and brutal ferocity had free play ; when
the dens of bears and hyenas, prowling tigers and lions far larger than anj- now ex
isting, covered Britain and Europe. Mammoths and mastodons wandered over the
plains of North America, huge sloth-like Megatheria passed their sluggish lives on
the pampas of South America, and elephantine marsupials strolled about Australia.
As the mammalian age draws to a close, the ancient carnivora and herbivora of that

20 MOSAIC EECOED
era all pass away, excepting, it is believed, a few that are useful to man. New creat
ures of smaller size peopled the groves ; the vegetation received accessions to its
foliage, fruit-trees and flowers, and the seas brighter forms of water life. This we
know from comparisons with the fossils of the preceding mammalian age."
" One of the most noteworthy facts connected with the first mam
mals," says Le Conte, " is the apparent suddenness of their appearance
in great numbers. The earth seems to swarm with mammals." The
Eocene basin of Paris, studied by Cuvier ; the Siwalik Hills of India,
studied by Falconer; the Miocene and Pliocene of Europe, studied by
Flower and Lyell ; the Green-River basin of the United States, studied
by Marsh and Cope ; the Mauvaises Terres of Nebraska, examined and
described by Hayden and Leidy, — tell the same remarkable story of the
huge proportions of the mammalia of the Cenozoic era. There was the
massive Dinothere, combining in its structure the character of the modern
Elephant, the Hippopotamus, the Tapir, and Dugong. There were also
the Sivathere, a four-horned antelope of elephantine proportions ; the Di-
nocerus, likewise ponderous in size, armed with three pairs of horns and
one pair of tusks. There were the Bramathere, the different varieties of
the Rhinoceros, of the Hippopotamus, and of the Mastodon, the last variety
reaching its greatest size somewhat later. The tread of these mammals
was almost enough to make the hills and valleys tremble. Trees were
crushed in their pathway.6 Job's description of the Behemoth ma}r well
be applied to this race of giant animals :
" Behold now behemoth ; he eateth grass as an ox. He moveth his
tail like a cedar. His bones are as strong pieces of brass ; his bones are
like bars of iron. Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all
the beasts of the field play. He lieth under the shady trees, in the
covert of the reed, and fens. The shady trees cover him with their
shadow ; the willows of the *brook compass him about. Behold, he
drinketh up a river, and hasteth not : he trusteth that he can draw up
Jordan into his mouth. He taketh it with his eyes: his nose pierceth
through snares."
The suddenness of the appearance of this race of mammals both in
Europe, where the uniformity of strata is clearly indicative of " a lost
interval," and in the Rocky Mountain region of America, where the

AND MODERN SCIENCE. 21
interval between the Cretaceous and the Tertiary is far less' marked, also
the wide difference between this fauna and that found in the preceding
era — perplexingly marvellous facts in any atheistic theory of evolution
— allow us, as in the other instances, to accommodate the language of
Moses to this epoch :
"And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after
his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his
kind : and it was so. 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."
It may be remarked in this connection that up to the early part
of the period under consideration, there is no evidence that man, either
prophetic or Adamic, anywhere existed. As to the date of his origin,
three sciences, History, Archaeology, and Geology, must be allowed to
co-operate in furnishing information. Canon Rawlinson has clearly
shown the remarkable convergence of all reliable historic and archaeologic
dates, outside of the Bible, towards a time not earlier than three thou
sand, nor later than two thousand j'ears B. c. Scripture history goes
further, carrying us back to antediluvian man. Geological history has no
firmly established data, though as to certain points there is quite general
agreement. Says Le Conte : "The Miocene man is not acknowledged
by a single careful geologist." Both M. Favre, reviewing the subject
up to 1870, and Professor Evans, President of the Geological Society
of London, thoroughly examining the subject in 1875, decided that the
existence of Tertiary man was unproved. Careful examinations of later
formations have been made throughout Europe, in the United States,
and in some parts of India. As a result, we are told by an eminent
authority, that " there is no reliable evidence yet of man's existence
before or even during the true Q-lacial t)r ice-sheeted epoch." In the
later Terrace period there are human remains. It is not clear, however,
that they at all antedate the Asiatic descendants of Adam. Still, it
need not be surprising, should it hereafter be established that there are
remains of beings who in merely physical or physiological structure
resemble existing man. The great law of geological or creative proph
ecy would almost seem to demand an order of animal life a little more
clearly typical of the Adamic race than has yet been discovered.7

22 MOSAIC EECOED
It should be noted still further, that the uncertainties of geological
chronology have been of late not a little increased by certain discoveries
of Dr. Wyville Thomson, Dr. Carpenter, and others, of creatures now
living in the deep seas, which geologists, if they had found them as
fossils, would unhesitatingly have ascribed to a ver}* early epoch.
Professor Winchell, in Sketches of Creation, speaking of the antiquity
of man, is emphatic. He says :
" There is more in the history of primeval man that confirms our Scriptures than
there is of conflict with them. Man has no place till after the reign of ice. . . .
But it has been imagined that the close of the reign of ice dates back perhaps a hun
dred thousand years. There is no evidence of this. The cone of drift materials
accumulated at the mouth of the Tiniere, in which have been found human remains,
was estimated by Morlot to be from ninety-six to one hundred and forty-three thou
sand years old; but Dr. Andrews has exposed a curious arithmetical blunder, the
correction of which reduces the time to within five thousand years. "We have no rule
for the measurement of post-tertiary time which necessitates the admission of so high
antiquity to our race. If we have been accustomed to think of the extinction of the
cave-bear as dating back to high antiquity, we now discover that he lived with man,
and the reindeer, and other animals which still survive. The existence of even the
cave-bear may not have been so very remote. What are the reasons assigned for the
prevalent opinion that it was many ages ago that the glaciers began to disappear
from Europe? Simply the existence at that time of quadrupeds now extinct, together
with the presumption, unsupported, as it seems, by the facts, that no animals have
coexisted with man except those of the recent fauna. The fact is, that we come
ourselves upon the earth in time to witness the retreat of the glaciers. They still
linger in the valleys of the Alps, and along the northern shores of Europe and Asia,
while the disappearance of animals once contemporaries of man is still continuing.
Not only did contemporaries of man become extinct during the age of stone ; some
survived to the twelfth, fourteenth, and sixteenth centuries, sts already stated; tho
Moa of New Zealand, and the jEpiornis of Madagascar, have become extinct within
the epoch of tradition, as indeed has the Mammoth of North America ; the Dodo of
Mauritius disappeared in the seventeenth century; the Great Auk of the arctic
regions has not been seen for half a century ; and every one must be convinced that
the beaver, elk, panther, buffalo, and other quadrupeds of North America are ap
proaching extinction by perceptible steps. The fact is, we are not so far out of
the dust, and chaos, and barbarism of antiquity as we had supposed. The very
beginnings of our race are still almost in sight. Geological events which, from the
force of habit in considering geological events, we had imagined to be located far
back in the history of things, are found to have transpired at our very doors. Our
own race has witnessed the dissolution of those continental glaciers which we have

AND MODEEN SCIENCE. 23
so long talked of as incidents of pre-Adamic history. Our own race has witnessed
the submergence of Southern Europe ; the detachment of the British Islands and
Scandinavia from the continent; the wanderings of the great rivers of Eastern
Asia ; the submergence of thousands of square miles of the coast of China, so that
the seats of ancient capitals are now rocky islets far at sea. The emergence of the
ancient country of Lectonia ; the drainage of the vast lake which once overspread
the prairies of Illinois ; the alternations of forests, and many other events which we
once associated with high antiquity. It is the opinion of Hooker and Gray that the
Falkland Islands, and others in the vicinity, have formed a part of the continent of
South America during recent times, and that during this connection they acquired
the continental fauna and flora. The Straits of Behring may even have been cut
through since the early migrations of man and his contemporaries, the mammoth and
reindeer; as in some distant future age the Isthmus of Darien, which now connects
North and South America, may become a strait separating them. There is no more
reason in this day than fifty years ago to claim a hundred thousand years for the past
duration of our race." 8
Returning to the characteristics of the Cenozoic day, and allowing
its later periods to include the earlier part of the Quaternary era, we
find it remarkable in many respects not yet mentioned. There were
late in the day immense oscillations of the earth's surface, resulting in, or
accompanied by, conditions that were extremely destructive. Northern
Europe and Canada rose more than a thousand feet above their present
level. The temperature fell greatly below its former average. The
polar ice-sheet crept southward in North America until it covered Sierra
Nevada, reaching even to southern California. The Yosemite Valley
and the Lake Tahoe region were filled with glacial ice. Over the
Middle and Eastern States this polar ice-sheet extended to the fortieth
degree. The Archman region of Canada was covered with an ice-mantle
from three to six thousand feet thick. So likewise the British Isles, the
whole of Scandinavia, Switzerland, and all northwestern Europe and
Asia, were under fields of ice, which at the culmination of the Glacial
period extended as far south as the fiftieth degree. Animals belonging
to the northern latitudes perished or were forced to retreat southward.
They entered all available caves and caverns. It was then, as is sup
posed by some scientists, that much of the cave bone-rubbish was accu
mulated. The picture drawn by Le Conte is doubtless true of what then
took place. " Animals of all sizes and kinds," he says, " are supposed

24 MOSAIC EECOED
to have huddled together in those caves, forgetting their mutual hos
tility in the sense of a common danger and perished miserably together
there." Later in the day came the Champlain period, during which the land
surfaces sunk until the sea stood from five hundred to a thousand feet
above its present level.9 The climate moderated, the ice rapidly melted,
and the waters of lakes and seas were filled with icebergs, which dis
charged their cargoes of gravel and boulders over lands widely sep
arated. These changes, though not in every instance sudden, were neverthe
less attended with sweeping devastations and death. The world is not
improperly represented during the close of this era as a vast and almost,
though not quite, silent grave-yard. The most recent investigations
show that some varieties of life seem to have struggled on into the later
or established human period.10
The length of time thus far consumed is bewildering — in all, per
haps, a thousand million years. Such are the six work-days of the
cosmical and prophetic week of creation. That there is general agree
ment among scientists, as to these six eras, there can be no question.
Indeed, refer to any modern treatise upon geology, and the coincidence
is at once noticeable. For illustration : We have in Professor Marsh's
classification, first, the Planetic era; second, the Archceic ; third, the
Paleozoic; fourth, the Mesozoic; fifth, the Cenozoic ; and sixth, the Psy-
chozoic. In Le Conte's classification there are, first, the Eqzoic ; second,
the age of Invertebrates ; third, the age of Fishes ; fourth, the age of
Acrogens ; fifth, the age of Reptiles ; and sixth, the age of Mammals.
The classification of Professor Dana, except the terms employed, is
identical with the foregoing : First, Azoic age ; second, age of Mollushs ;
third, age of Fishes ; fourth, age of Coal ; fifth, age of Reptiles ; and
sixth, age of Mammals. These six periods and the six days of Moses,
it will be noticed, show a remarkable agreement.
Thus the case stands at the present stage of scientific investigation.
What the next ten years may bring to lignt through geological researches,
we do not know.11
Now bear in mind that it is this striking and wonderful correspond-

AND MODEEN SCIENCE. 25
ence between the Bible account and modern science, which has led such
Professors as Guyot, Hitchcock, Dana, and such men of science as Hugh
Miller, Humboldt, and Chancellor Dawson, and such Biblical students as
Professor Schaff, Lange, and President McCosh, to say that Moses either
must have known the general facts of modern geological science, or else
have been inspired to make the record in Genesis. And more than this,
they think that Moses must have meant by the term " day," one of these
six vast periods into which geological history is so manifestly divided.
Indeed, were it not for the word "day," with its "evening and morning,"
and were it not for the opinions of eminent Hebrew scholars, without
taking an additional step, we might be satisfied to rest the argument
upon this unmistakable and remarkable agreement of Bible statements
with the disclosures of modern science. But, as the case stands, we
cannot, and therefore venture to take the additional step.

26 MOSAIC EECOED

IV.
THE LAW OF TYPE AND ANTITYPE.
Accoeding to the theory as already outlined, it was after those vast
cosmical periods had passed, after the Champlain submergence and the
Drift ice-flow had wrecked the earth's surface, and just prior to the
Human period, that the Creator, in six ordinary days, accomplished the
work which is definitely recorded in the book of Genesis. The theory
also involves the claim that these ordinary days were anticipated, or
were typified by the six scientific, or cosmical days of the original
creation. There is certainly a strong antecedent probability in support of this
view, in the fact that there' is a prophetic or typical principle found
everywhere in the universe. One dispensation as a forerunner of
another, is a universal order or arrangement in the nature of things.
Childhood is a prophecy, manhood its fulfilment. The Jewish theocracy
was a type, Christianity the realization.
Or, confining attention to the field of pure physics, we shall discover
that the fins of fishes, and the wings and the feet of birds, and the fore
and hind feet of brutes, created before man, are typical or prophetic of
the arms and feet of man. George Mivart makes the following state
ment of this subject :
" Thus man, the horse, the whale, and the bat, all have the pectoral limb, — whether
it be the arm, or fore-leg, or paddle, or wing, — formed on essentially the same type,
though the number and proportion of the parts may more or less differ. Again, the
butterfly, and the shrimp, different as they are in appearance and mode of life, are
yet constructed on the same common plan, of which they constitute divergent mani
festations." Man, as Professor Owen expresses the same thought, has had all his
parts and organs " sketched out in anticipation in the inferior animals."

AND MODEEN SCIENCE. 27
Says Professor Agassiz, speaking of animal types : " They appear now
like a- prophecy in those earlier times of an order of things not possible
with the earlier combinations then prevailing in the animal kingdom,
but exhibiting in a, later period, in a striking manner, the antecedent
consideration of every stage in the gradation of animals."
The lower forms of animal life are not therefore necessarily those
from which later forms were developed, but apparent^ are those which
prophesied the coming of those forms which God was to create when
suitable conditions had been reached. Thus, likewise, prehistoric human
remains, should they be discovered, might be those of irrational creat
ures, not from which rational man has been developed, but which are
simply a type, in accordance with which God designed to make rational
and existing man when the ordained period had arrived.
Professor Agassiz carries this general thought a step further, showing
that types and prophecies are even found in minerals. He asserts that
" the crystal imbedded in the rock, by the little fibres and threads that
go out from it, anticipates the coming vegetable." "And vegetation,"
says Chancellor Haven, " when it reaches perfection pre-typifies the
coming animal, and the animal in its instincts pre-typifies the coming
reason of the man." " The swan on still Mary's lake
Floats double, swan and shadow."
It is the discovery of the presence throughout physical nature of this
typical or prophetic principle, sometimes termed the law of " springing
and germinant accomplishment," which leads to an antecedent proba
bility that there will be found for every type in the work or method of
creation an antitype. Indeed, it should occasion great surprise, if upon
thorough investigation it should be found that the Creative Power,
in fitting the universe for habitation, has departed from this law of
type and antitype, or of creative prophecy and fulfilment. Hence,
if the Mosaic account of creation describes cosmical clays, then the
scientific mind ought confidently to look for a corresponding work
embraced in six ordinary days. Or, if the Mosaic account describes

28 MOSAIC EECOED
ordinary days, then we ought, upon strictly analogical and scientific
grounds, just as confidently to expect a prophetic work embraced in
six cosmical or geological periods. Prophecy and fulfilment in creation
there ought to be, in which a thousand years are as one day, and one
day as a thousand years.12

AND MODEEN SCIENCE. 29

V. j
CHAOS AND THE MOSAIC DAYS.
Befoee advancing, it is well to observe that we do not claim that
Moses was not permitted or inspired as well to see what transpired in
the vast cosmical or primitive creative periods, as in the six solar days.
He may or he may not have seen those early parallel developments. But
if he saw both the type and the antitype, and if he wrote of both,
then his whole account of the original creative periods, or the type, is
included in the first verse of the first chapter of Genesis. For upon
exegetical grounds, as already shown, we must insist that verses two
and twenty-eight inclusive, of the first chapter, and verses one and
three, and five and seven inclusive, of the second chapter, refer to six
ordinary days, which had been typified by the earlier and undescribed
cosmical days or periods.
In a word, as Yom (day), though sometimes used to denote an
indefinite period, as in verse four, chapter second, is never so used when
limited by the words, a-rav (evening), and ba-kar (morning), it follows,
that in harmonizing the Mosaic account and modern science, we are,
after passing from the first verse of chapter first, to limit attention
primarily, and indeed exclusively, to six solar days ; and we are to
consider all the early and distinctive geological formations as merely
evidences of parallel, or typical and prophetic epochs.
Hence, under the light of a very well-established exegesis, aided by
various acknowledged data which certainly support our working hy
pothesis, we cannot fail of discerning that those remarkable words, " In
the beginning God created the heavens and the earth," cover the entire
past of the present administration of the physical universe. The start
ing-point of the period designated by Moses is not, therefore, limited, as
is sometimes talked, to six thousand, nor sixty thousand, nor six hundred
thousand years. The words employed merely tell us that the silence of

30 MOSAIC EECOED
a section of eternity was broken, and that something appeared which
at least, was not previously visible. The only restriction placed upon
science at this point by the Mosaic account, is, that the evolution and
development of the material universe, with which our world is con
nected, had a beginning under the direction of a power called God.13
In this connection, the mind of the reflective, student is at once
engaged with the thought, that the condition of darkness and emptiness
which preceded the original creation of light upon the first cosmical or
astronomical epoch, harmonizes with what must have been the condition
of the earth after the true glacial, and during the turbulent drift period.
During that epoch of melting ice and of floating icebergs, much, of the
earth now inhabited was under the sea. There were howling winds, and
among the mountains there were grinding and crushing icebergs, and
the sky was everywhere heavily* inswathed with dense banks of vapor,
fog, and clouds. Conditions similar to those which now produce the
dense fogs of London, and the well-nigh perpetual fogs along the north
eastern coast of North America, existed round the entire earth, and
nearly from one pole to the other. Thus, in this darkness, and in this
wreck of the earth's surface, was a blank, as already intimated, that
corresponded with the blank which science declares preceded the origi
nal creation of light.
Turning now to the Mosaic account, and following a strictly literal
translation, we read these words : " In the beginning created God the
heavens and the earth. Then the earth became a roaring flood and void,
and darkness was upon the face of the billows."
Read, if you please, any scientific work upon the Drift period,
whether from the pen of a believer in the Bible, or an unbeliever, it
matters not, and the agreement between it and the Bible account will
be found exact. That is, both science and the Bible affirm that after
the earth had been created, after it had existed a countless number of
ages, during which it had been governed by natural laws, much as it is
now governed, after it had met with change and vicissitude, had lai(Lifjp
in storehouses the geological deposits of granite and clay, of coal and oil,
of salt and lime, of silver and gold, then it became a waste. In the
zone where man first appeared, scarcely a living thing moved on its sur
face, or burrowed in its soil.

AND MODEEN SCIENCE. 31

VI.
MOSAIC DAYS : THE FIRST, SECOND, AND
THIRD.
A moment's reflection at this point will convince any person that
all the sciences unite in a declaration, that, in order to render the earth
inhabitable, the ice-line must retreat north, and the thick mantling of
vapors and fogs — a mantling so dense as to render day impossible and
night perpetual — must lose somewhat of its density, so that the light
could at least struggle through the darkness, enabling one, if upon the
earth's surface, to distinguish day from night. This, we repeat, is what
must first take place in order to render the earth inhabitable. No scientist
would be disposed to or could dispute this statement. But how could
such changes be brought about, must have been at that time a perplex
ing question. The Bible account answers the question thus : " Then
the Spirit of God was brooding upon the face of the waters. Then said
God, Light be ; and light was. Then God saw the light that it was
good ; then God divided between the light and between the darkness.
Then God called the light day, and the darkness he called night. Then
was evening, then was morning ; day one." Thus far, Bible statement
and scientific fact perfectly harmonize.
This change to comparative daylight from a blackness denser than
that of a Newfoundland midnight, could by Creative Power have been
effected, it must be allowed, without doing any violence to modern sci
ence, in a day of twelve hours duration. Certain meteorological or elec
trical changes were all that was necessary.
The type of this day's work is found evidently in the primitive
creative period, when the flames of nebulous gases flashed out from the
original chaotic darkness.
The next change, according to science, which was necessary in order to
render the earth inhabitable, was such as to clear, up the banks of fogs

32 mosaic eecoed
that still clung to its surface. They must be lifted to the higher regions
of the sky through some agency — perhaps, by the introduction of new
elements into the atmosphere — so that between the waters of the earth
and the dense moistures which had been held in the atmosphere, there
would be a breathing-space of pure and pellucid air, for upon this
depended the possibility of thrifty and healthful vegetable and animal
life. Something like this is witnessed in the breaking up after a storm.
The fogs rise, concealing the sun, even after the atmosphere upon the
earth's surface, as far as the eye can reach, is clear. But how, it may
well be asked, could these very desirable and necessary changes be
accomplished ? The Bible account again answers : " Then said God,
Let an expanse be in the midst of the waters ; and let a dividing be
between the waters to the waters. Then God formed the expanse, and
divided between the water which was above the expanse and between
the water which was beneath the expanse : and it was so. Then God
called the expanse heaven. Then was evening, then was morning ; day
second." 14 These changes, upon strictly scientific grounds, required for
their accomplishment no more than a single day of twelve hours dura
tion. Thus again, Bible statement and scientific fact are found to be in
such exact agreement, that no man caring for his reputation would ven
ture to divorce them. Furthermore, the cosmical type, of which this sec
ond ordinary day is the antitype, is manifestly found in that early epoch
before organic life and dry land had appeared, and when by slow processes
the atmosphere was elaborated from the primeval waters and vapors.
Thus far, upon scientific grounds, we have shown, what, from the
nature of the case, must have been the process and order of the earth's
renewal. From this point onward we can follow definitely the geologic
records. That is, we know that the world was deluged during the Drift
period. North America was two or three thousand feet under water. In
a similar condition were all countries which have been geologically exam
ined. Therefore, before there can be further advance in preparing the
earth for habitation, the waters which still concealed its surface must by
some agency be removed.
There are two ways which at that time were scientifically possible :
First, a change in the atmosphere, which, without destroying its trans-

AND modeen SCIENCE. 33
parency, would render it a greater absorbent of water; and second,
some change in the ocean of waters which would enable them to under
go greater condensation. By either method, or by both combined, the
required changes could be easily, quietly, and quickly accomplished, and
the words of the Psalmist would be accurately descriptive :
"Thou coveredst it with the deep as with a garment: the waters
stood above the mountains. At thy rebuke they fled ; at the voice of
thy thunder they hasted away. They go up by the mountains ; they go
down by the valleys unto the place which thou hast founded for them.
Thou hast set a bound that they may not pass over ; that they turn not
again to cover the earth." 15
These surface changes of the earth described by Moses, it will be
noticed, find their type or prophecy in that cosmical epoch when a
world of rocky peaks, active volcanoes, lava currents, vast mud flats,
with nowhere "a blade of grass or a clinging lichen," were upheaved
from their watery sepulchre.
Upon this second solar day, after the retiring of the waters, the
earth was in readiness for an order of vegetation hitherto unknown. But
whence could it come ? Various agencies had been at work to devas
tate the flora of the old geological periods. The Glacial and Drift eras,
for instance, had made with it sad havoc. Were the conditions which
characterize the Glacial and Drift eras reproduced in our day, we do
not see how any existing flora could survive. Aside from those atmos
pheric changes there had also been geographical elevations and sub
sidences, which are thought to have been of sufficient magnitude to
wreck every remaining plant and tree which had flourished during the
geological ages. Says Dr. Lardner :
"The disruption of the earth's crust, extending W. 16° S., and E. 16° N., through
which the chain of the great Alps was forced up to its present elevation, which,
according to M. D'Orbigny, was simultaneous with that which forced up the Chilian
Andes, — a chain which extends over a length of three thousand miles of the western
continent, — terminated the Tertiary age, and preceded immediately the creation of
the human race and its concomitant tribes. The waters of the seas and oceans, lifted
up from their beds by this immense perturbation, swept over the continents with
irresistible force, destroying instantaneously the entire flora and fauna of the last
Tertiary period, and burying its ruins in the sedimentary deposits which ensued." 16
3

34 MOSAIC EECOED
Whence, therefore, could come the existing grasses, plants, and trees ?
They differ, as a matter of fact, from those that had previously existed.
Furthermore, that early vegetation, as just hinted, appears to have been
largely devastated. Since the Drift period there does not seem to
have been time sufficient, by the processes of development, to produce
the existing flora, and there is as yet no positive evidence that decidedly
distinct and established species have ever been developed from previ
ously existing species.17 Whence, then, we repeat, came the grasses,
and the herbs, and the fruit-bearing trees belonging to the present
Human period ? From some source they must have come. There could
have been no oak without an acorn ; there could have been no acorn
without an oak. Whence the first oak, or the first acorn, for the
modern oak and acorn are not found the other side of the Drift epoch ?
Whence did they come, and what power was it that fitted the deluged
earth for their reception, are legitimate questions. Again, the Bible
account answers the perplexing inquiries :
" Then said God, Gathered be the waters from under the skies into
one place, and let the ground appear : and it was so. Then God called
the ground land, and the gathered waters he called seas ; then God
saw it was good. Then said God, Grow the land grass, herb yielding-
seed, fruit tree bearing fruit after its kind in which is its seed, upon
the land : and it was so. Then brought the land forth grass, herb
yielding seed after its kind, and tree bearing fruit, in which was its
seed after its kind : then was evening, then was morning ; day third."
And a day having a morning and an evening of twelve hours duration,
was all that was needed.
The type of which this Mosaic day is the antitype is found in the
Carboniferous period, when the lower forms of vegetation flourished as
never before nor since.

AND MODEEN SCIENCE. 35

VII.
MOSAIC DAYS : THE FOURTH, FIFTH, AND
SIXTH.
Fixing attention again upon the Mosaic account of the world's
evolution and preparation, we ask, what, from the nature of the case,
must have been clone next, in order to grow this created vegetation, and fit
the earth for animal life? Upon a cloudy day the plants and trees were
created, but without the clear sunlight of after-clays thej* would sicken
and die. Hence, it was necessary that the clouds which had hitherto
concealed the sun and stars, should be removed. There had been, since
the beginning of the Drift period, daylight, but no direct sunlight. The
sun, moon, and stars must therefore next appear, and the years likewise,
and seasons as now ordained, must commence, before vegetable and
animal life, as they now exist, could thrive.
In perfect keeping with these scientific requirements, as any one can
see, is the Mosaic account:
" Then said God, Lights be in the expanse of the heavens to divide
between the day and between the night ; and let them be for signs,
and for seasons, and for days, and years. And let them be for lights
in the expanse of the heavens, to shine upon the earth : and it was so.
Then God displayed the two great lights, the greater light to rule
the day, the little light to rule the night, and the stars. Then God
displayed them in the expanse of the heavens, to shine upon the earth.
And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide between the
light and between the darkness : then God saw that it was good. Then
was evening, then was morning; clay fourth." 18
The evening came, the sun set clear for the first time since the Drift
period had clouded the earth, and an ordinary night of twelve hours,

36 MOSAIC EECOED
spangled with stars, stars which, perhaps, had been clouded for thou
sands of ages, rested upon the renewed and peaceful world.
*The type or the prophecy of this fourth Mosaic or solar day is
found in the clearing up of the dense atmosphere which succeeded
the Carboniferous period, a clearing up extending through millions of
ordinary days and nights.
Returning to the Bible record, we observe that these four Mosaic
days had witnessed wonderful changes. The darkness had given place
to light ; the atmosphere had expanded ; the waters had receded ; the
vegetable productions had appeared; the sun had shone forth, and every
thing was in readiness for further divine unfoldings. In a word, the forest
solitudes, and the grassy hillsides, and the water-brooks, and the rivers,
the lakes, and the seas, were waiting to welcome the coming of their
ordained tenants. Ah ! but how did they come, or how could they
come ? Whence these primitive immigrants ? There could have been
no hen without an egg, and there could have been no egg without a
hen ; whence the first hen, or the first egg ? The Mosaic account
responds thus :
" Then said God, Let the waters swarm with animal life, and let
birds fly above the earth, upon the face of the expanse of the skies.
Then God created the great fishes, and every living, breathing thing
that creepeth, with which the waters abounded, after their kind, and
every bird of wing after its kind ; then God saw that it was good. Then
God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters
in the seas, and let the fowl multiply in the land. Then was evening,
then was morning; day fifth."
Great is this creative might and majesty. Between sun and sun of a
single day, the waters and the atmosphere received their modern inhabi
tants, at a word of command. The creations of this fifth day are the
antitype of which the earlier reptilian monsters of the geological ages
were the type and prophecy.
From this point the Bible record moves on in sublime and triumphant
grandeur. At the dawn of the sixth Mosaic clay we read :
" Then said God, Let the land bring forth the living breather after
its kind, cattle, and creeper, and beast of the land after its kind : and it

AND MODEEN SCIENCE. 37
was so. Then God made the beast of the land after its kind, and the
cattle after their kind, and every creeper of the Soil after its kind : then
God saw it was good."
And then, last of all, and at the head of all, — after all else was fully
prepared; after the vast cosmical eras had performed their part; after the
granite had been formed and piled up in lofty mountain-ranges ; after
the flowing and returning waters had selected and borne down into
distant vales the vegetable soils; after electric shocks had interlaced the
earth with metallic veins ; after the ancient forests had hardened into
coal, and were stored up by the cubic mile, having yielded also their res
ervoirs of petroleum ; after the deposits of primeval waters had become
iron and crystal salt ; after successive races of animals had become a
multitude of useful material; after reptiles had cleared the waters of
impurities and the land of rubbish; after birds had devoured the animal
remains and enriched the soil ; and after the appearance and disappear
ance of the monster mammals of the geological epochs, which were the
type and prophecy of the animals of the sixth Mosaic clay ; after the
great floods had been rolled back, and the dome overhead had been
lighted up, and the earth's surface had been carpeted with delicate and
soft green; after the rich profusion of natural scenery had been, prepared;
the flowers filled with fragrance, the trees hung with delicious fruit ; —
then " created God the man in his own image, in the image of God
created he him ; male and female created he them. Then was evening,
then was morning ; clay sixth."
And how can unprejudiced scientists well do otherwise than bow
their heads in acknowledgment, saying, " Lastly, God, or Something
not ourselves, infinite in wisdom, power, and majesty, whose work is
miraculous, prophetic, and orderly, created man in his own image"? But
there are those, a few only, who speak otherwise. They search for a dif
ferent solution of the human problem, and hypothesize, saying, " Lastly,
man was evolved ; he was evolved male and female, and was developed
from lower orders through processes of natural selection, and under the
law of the survival of the fittest,"

MOSAIC EECOED

VIII.
THE SEVENTH DAY.
Before attempting to search for a, harmony between Revelatfpn and
Science as to the origin of life, we review certain discussions' bearing
upon the Seventh day.
Both those who advocate the long periods, and those who maintain
the solar-day theory of creation, claim that the Mosaic account of the
seventh day establishes their peculiar views. As God is now resting,
and has been doing so for the past six thousand years, and as the
seventh day was like the other six days, therefore, as is claimed, the
other six daj's were not solar,- but of indefinite duration. On the other
hand, it is argued, that the context shows that Moses, when speaking
of the Sabbath, had in mind, not an epoch of indefinite length, but an
ordinary solar day; therefore, as all the seven days are alike, the six
days must be, not of indefinite length, but ordinary solar days. Thus
one party apparently has as good ground for its argument as the other.
A careful analysis of the subject will show, however, that the Mosaic
account of the Sabbath ought not by either party to- be too much
involved nor depended upon, in connection with the question of the
length of the creative clays. That account, in fact, cannot be adduced
exclusively in support of either side of the discussion.
To make this statement clear, attention is called, first, to the exe
gesis of the passages referring to the Sabbath, and second, to certain
related scientific facts. An exact ft-anslation of the second chapter of
Genesis, first and third verses inclusive, is the following :
" Then were finished the heavens and the earth, and all the host
of them. Then finished God on the seventh day his work which he
had made ; and rested on the seventh day from all his work which
he had made. Then blessed God the seventh day, and hallowed it ;

AND MODEEN SCIENCE. 39
because in it he had rested from all his work, which created had God
to make." With this should be connected Exodus xx. 8-11.
" Remember the sabbath-day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou
labor, and do all* thy work : but the seventh day is the sabbath of the
Lord thy God : in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor
thy daughter, thy man-servant, nor thy maid-servant, nor thy cattle,
nor thy stranger that is within thy gates. For in six days the Lord
made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the
seventh day : wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath-day and hallowed
it." Compare also Exodus xvi. 22-27.
The reader will notice that in certain respects the seventh clay in the
Mosaic record is clearly distinguished from the other six days. The nar
rative, for instance, is occupied, in the case of the six days, with the work
accomplished in each, but on the other hand, the seventh day is itself
the subject of the narration. Each of the six work-days closes with a
specific formula, — " morning and evening." We therefore naturally
look for the expression, " and the evening and the morning were the
seventh day," but such is not the record. The conviction will, there
fore, fasten itself upon any one believing in the inspiration of the Bible,
that there must be some adequate reason for this remarkable omission
of what had been so regularly repeated at the close of all the preceding
days or epochs. •
Before giving an explanation of this omission, we call attention to
the words, " And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had
made," and to the fact that geology presents no evidence of the produc
tion of any new species of plant or animal since the creation of man.
" It is the report of all sciences bearing upon this subject, that thousands
of years have swept by since God ended his work of creation, without
witnessing a new order of being. Works of necessity — works of prov
idence and mercy — he still carries on. ' My Father worketh hitherto,
and I work.' " But creation is not a work of necessity. That work he
ended at the close of the far-off sixth day, and ever since has rested.
This rest is not in consequence of the fact that God is tired, but only be
cause his creative designs under the present dispensation are completed.

40 MOSAIC EECOED
In a word, the facts, according to the record, appear to be these :
After the six long geological periods had passed, and after the six solar
days of the Mosaic record were brought to a close, then the Eternal
One, first, ceased from his work, and second, he rested. That is, he
rested during the hours of the solar day following the six preceding
solar days.
Of the long period, including the time from that first solar Sabbath
to the present, Moses does not speak definitely, though the absence of
the formula, " evening and morning," may lead us to infer that each
recurring Sabbath-day is a moving type of which the last six thousand
years are the standing antitype. The solar Sabbath, the type, has its
recurring dawn and twilight ; it comes and goes. But the divine Sab
batical epoch continues without its recurring dawn and twilight. The
solar or Mosaic Sabbath is a weekly prophecy of the Sabbath epoch in
which we now live, but whose morning has hardly yet dawned. In the
words of a thoughtful writer :
"AVe are still in the Sabbath eve, unless Christ's ascension were its terminating
era. But what that Sabbath morning may be, we must learn from the Scriptures or
never know at all. The Bible speaks of ' the morning of the resurrection.' Is it a
mere figure, or something more than a figure, — a reality transcending in literal and
substantial glory any of the matutinal periods of the earth's early physical forma
tion? There is the 'morning when the upright shall have the dominion,' which
dominion may be on this very planet. Or if this is thought to have too much diffi
culty attending it, there is also that morning of the latter-day glory whose auroral
effulgence is so vividly pictured by the rapt Hebrew seers, — that glorious morning
when ' Zion shall have put on her beautiful garments,' her spotless Sabbath robes, —
when the Church for which the earth was made, ' shall rise and shine, for her Light
has come and the glory of her Lord has risen upon her,' — when nations shall go by
her light and kings by the splendor of her rising,' — when her risen 'sun shall never
more go down, for the Lord shall be her everlasting light and her God her glory.'
Instead of mediate or reflexive illumination through the heavenly bodies,
' The Light Himself shall shine
Bevealed, — and God's Eternal Day be thine.' "

AND MODEEN SCIENCE. 41

IX.
ORIGIN OF LIGHT AND LIFE, AND CREATION
OF MAN.
Though it could be proved beyond question that the order of the
creation and development of the physical universe as recorded by
Moses is identical with that discovered by modern science, still the
fundamental question as to the efficient cause of that creation and
development would remain unsettled. The theist of whatever school
would continue to affirm that God is the ultimate cause of all things,
while the atheist would just as resolutely affirm that natural forces have
created and developed all things, and that there is no God except natural
forces. Hence, the fiercest conflicts between belief and unbelief, in the
future as in the past, will be waged about questions relating to the
origin of matter and life, including the life of vegetation, that of brute
creations, and of man.
As to the origin of matter, the Mosaic account is silent. The gen
eral opinion concerning the material substances comprising the present
physical system, is, that they are destitute of the properties of neces
sary existence, and therefore are not eternal. That is, we can conceive
of ma.tter in its present forms, also in any form, as not existing; but,
on the other hand, we cannot conceive of duration of space and of
mathematical axioms as not existing. It is, therefore, generally felt that
matter is not a necessarj- existence, like duration, space, &c, and must
have had a beginning, not from chance, or by some blind law of develop
ment, but through infinite power and intelligence.
Such, we repeat, are the views generally held ; still, it must be borne
in mind that apparently the origin of matter is not discussed in the
Mosaic record, hence we do not feel called upon in this treatise to
defend or to combat any existing theory as to the beginning of matter.

42 MOSAIC EEOOED
In the first verse of the first chapter of Genesis, the word translated
" created " is hara, whose primary meaning is to cut, hence to shave,
shape, form, or fashion. So, also, the German word schaff en, by which
Luther translates bara, being of the same root with schahen (Belgic
schaeven), which means to shave, cut, hence to make or fabricate out of
existing materials. It is this idea of making, which consists in cuttings,
separations, and arrangements by division of what previously lexists,
instead of the production of something from nothing, which Moses seems
to have had in mind.19
Passing, therefore, from the question of the origin of matter, we
find that the Mosaic record reveals the fact that there was a time when,
within the limits of the present physical universe, light was not, and
a time when life was not. And "between the theist and the atheist, as to
this fact, there is and there can be no ground of controversy. The
primeval absence of light and life is now a universal admission. But
the cause of light and the cause of life is the ground for a conflict of
opinions. The atheist says their production was spontaneous. The
theist of christian faith, on the other hand, accepts the statements
of the Mosaic record that it was God who called light and life into
being. That this Bible record may be better compared with the developments
of modern science, we reproduce the vital points revealed, using the
language of an exact translation, selecting from both the full account in
the first, and from the abridged and corresponding account in the second
chapter of Genesis :
" And the earth had become a waste and a void, and darkness was upon the face
of the deep." Chapter I., verse 2. "Then said God, Let there be light; and there
was light." Verse 3. "And not a plant of the field was yet in the land, and not an
herb of the field yet grew." Chapter II., verse 4. "Then said God, Grow let the
land grass, herb yielding seed, fruit tree bearing fruit after its kind, in which is its
seed, upon the land : and it was so." Chapter I., verse 11. "Then said <3od, Let the
waters abound with the crawler that hath breath and life, and let the fowl fly above
the earth, upon the face of the expanse of the skies. Then created God the great
fishes, and every living breathing thing that creepeth with which the waters abound
after their kind and every bird of wing after its kind." "Then s^id God, Let tho
land bring forth the living breathing thing after its kind, cattle and creeper, and

AND MODEEN SCIENCE. 43
beast of the land after its kind: and it was so." Verses 20, 21, 24. "And there
was no man to till the ground." Chapter IL, verse §. " Then, said God, Let us
make man in our image after our likeness." Chapter I., verse 26. "And the Lord
God formed the man of the dust from the soil, and breathed into his nostrils the
breath of life; and man became a living soul." Chapter II. , verse 7. "And the
Lord God planted a garden in Eden to the East ; and put there the man whom he had
formed." Verse 8. "And the Lord God said, It is not good that man should be
alone^ I will make a helpmeet for him." Verse 18. " And the Lord God caused a
deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; and he took one of his ribs and closed
up the flesh instead thereof. And the Lord God builded the rib which he had taken
from the man into a woman and brought her unto the man." Verses 21, 22.
Such, in brief, is the Mosaic account of the shaping of matter, the
origin of light and of life, and the creation of man. Whatever may be the
future scientific grounds of objection, we hazard nothing in saying that
up to the present date there is not one established scientific fact that
discredits in the least this Bible record. That darkness was before light,
no one questions. That there must have been some agency in the pro
duction of light is admitted. There could have been no effect without
an adequate cause, and a cause adequate enough to fill with fire-light
the space now-occupied by the physical universe, must have been Infinite.
It is not the slightest relief for the atheist to say that materials were so
arranged that light was spontaneous. In spontaneous combustion, for
instance, when substances take fire of themselves by the evolution of
heat through the chemical action of their own elements, there are first
needed, both the combustible substances, and, the necessary arrangements
and conditions. Thus, also, there must have been the previous creation
of light-producing substances, and there must have been the required
arrangements and conditions before the primitive light of the universe,
through spontaneous combustion, could appear. Hence, if original light
was not the immediate product of an invisible, potent, and intelligent
agency, it must have been the spontaneous product of materials and
arrangements that had been controlled by some invisible, potent, and in
telligent agency. The fundamental scientific and philosophical postulates
that " something can never come from nothing," and that " more can
never come from less," and that " nothing can be evolved that has not
been previously involved," and that the force in " the coiled spring can-

44 MOSAIC EECOED
not more than equal the force that originally coiled it," proves the exist
ence of an original, invisible, potent, and intelligent Agent or Agency the
moment that light took the place of darkness. Therefore the words of
the Eternal, " Let light be : and light was," can never be condemned
as unscientific. From light to life is, historically and logically, a natural transition.
The simple point is this : Life now exists upon the earth ; it has not
always thus existed. Whence did it come ? The Bible has given an
account of the beginning of the life of vegetation, of brute creations,
and of man. Can modern science give a better solution of the problem
of life, or present any reason why the Biblical account should not be
accepted? That scientific men of the materialistic school have been
making the most determined efforts to account for life independent of a
Supernatural presence, is well known to all our readers. How well have
they succeeded is at the present hour an interesting inquiry.
Professor Huxley and others have often stated that if there were a
few germs to start with, then from these, by processes of development
through natural selection, a man even could be evolved. For from the
lowest germs, as is claimed, there could be developed, first, moss and
worms, and then from these could be evolved higher animals, and lastly
man. Now, admitting all the might and majesty of natural selection
that is claimed for it, we are not much better off until the moss and
worms, or germs, are furnished.
A few years ago, in the Glasgow meeting of the British Association,
Sir William Thomson presented the working hypothesis, that certain
meteoric fragments, in time past, brought to this world from other
planets the seeds and germs of all things now existing. At the outset
it should be observed, that this speculation, in the light of astronomical,
mechanical, and chemical science, can never be established, because
white-heat, resulting from the passage of any foreign body through our
atmosphere, would be destructive of all seeds and germs of life. But
suppose this theory of Sir William were true, still the perplexing ques
tion remains : How came the germs and -seeds, the moss and worms,
upon that remarkable planetary fragment? Here is at most but a tem
porary postponement of the difficulty. Back of these shattered planets

AND MODEEN SCIENCE. 45
are still other planets, as we may suppose. But after passing an indefi
nite series, we must at length come to a dead-lock, standing face to face
with — what ?
Or, without going beyond the surface of our own planet, we may
admit, for the sake of the argument, that the materialistic theories
respecting protoplasm, bioplasm, and the like, shall at length be estab
lished, and that it will some day be shown that from this " matter of
life " has sprung the lichen, the cedar, the bird, the animal, and man.
There is no likelihood that these theories will or can be established ; but
suppose they can be, does it therefore follow that protoplasm is ulti
mate ? 21 Is there no query or curiosity a step farther back ? Rather,
when protoplasm is reached, scientific inquiries have only commenced.
Tyndall, Huxley, Bain, Drysdale, and Spencer admit that the action of
bioplasts cannot be explained, as yet, by merely chemical properties or
forces. What, then, does explain their action ? Should we admit the
development and protoplastic theories of materialism, still the atheistic
difficulties are not removed. For upon scientific grounds it is discovered
that every step of this wonderful journey, from moss and worms to man,
bears the stamp, not of chance, but of design. Who, therefore, the
designer? For chance is not a designer. As Laplace says: "We have
thereby succeeded merely in throwing final causes one step further
back." How the difficulties confront us ! To repeat expressions already-
used, there can be no woman without a child ; there can be no child
without a woman; whence the first child or the first woman? There
can be no oak without an acorn ; there can be no acorn without an oak ;
whence the first oak or the first acorn ? There can be no living bio-
plasm without previously existing bioplasm ; and there can be no previ
ously existing bioplasm without — previously existing bioplasm. But
whence that previously existing bioplasm? The chemist can just as
easily make a world as he can give life to a bit of bioplasm.
Hackel says, " The history of the germ is an epitome of that of the
race." But the life and existence of the germ are as unaccountable
as those of the race. The theory of the spontaneity of life is in every
way unsatisfactory. The closing words of Professor Tyndall's recent

46 MOSAIC EECOED
lecture on the Origin of Life, before the Royal Institution at Lon
don, leave no chance for misunderstanding. He said :
" This discourse is but a summing up of eight months of incessant labor. From
the beginning to the end of the inquiry there is not, as you have seen, a shadow of
evidence in favor of spontaneous generation. There is, on the contrai-y, overwhelm
ing evidence against it; but do not carry away with you the notion sometimes
erroneously ascribed to me, that I deem spontaneous generation ' impossible,' or that
I wish to limit the power of matter in relation to life. My views on this subject
ought to be well known. But possibility is one thing and proof is another ; and when
in our day I seek for experimental evidence of the transformation of the non-living
into the living, I am led inexorably to the conclusion that no such evidence exists, and
that in the lowest as in the highest of organized creatures, the method of nature is
that life shall be the issue of antecedent life."
The materialist sometimes calls this which is anterior to his discoveries,
" a mysteryr," which we have no right to examine. We ask questions
and are peremptorily told to stop. Now we insist that we have a right
to examine and a right to question. Indeed, it is cowardly not to examine
and to question. Sir William Thomson, in his triumphant indorsement
of this protoplastic theory, exclaims : " Now that we have settled these
vexed questions about the origin of life, let us go about our business."
Settled ! Go about our business ! We cannot. These vexed questions
are not settled. We must know, first, whence came this wonderful
life-stuff, and, second, by what skill it has been arranged.
Nearly thirty years ago, Professor Taylor Lewis, discussing the
origin of life, used this language : " But how, and whence, came life
itself? Whence the primal force from which came forth all these mani
festations of outward growth or development. The untaught Esqui
maux stand on an equal footing here with La Marck, or Laplace, or
Auguste Compte. Without light coming from above the plane of physi
cal causation, one is just as ignorant as the other." Thirty years have
made but little change in scientific opinion as to this subject.
Professor Tyndall quotes with approval the following words of
Dubois Reymond : "It is absolutely and forever inconceivable that a
number of carbon, Irydrogen, nitrogen, and oxygen atoms should be
otherwise than indifferent as to their own position and motion, past,
present, or future."

AND MODERN SCIENCE. 47
It is remarkable that Professor G. F. Barker, in his address upon
Some Modern Aspects of the Life Question, delivered before the late
session of the American Association for the Advancement of Science,
held in Boston, confesses that science, after the most rigorous investi
gations of the last forty years, is as much in the dark as ever. Still, the
Professor does not despair ; he hopes that in the future the problem
may be solved upon natural grounds. He quotes the saying of Haugh-
ton : " The number of roots in our equation of life increases the diffi
culty of solving it, but by no means permits the acceptance of the lazy
assumption that it is altogether insoluble, or reduces a sagacious guess
to the level of the prophecy of a quack." " While the answer is not
yet," continues Professor Barker, " a thousand earnest seekers after
truth seem to be slowly approaching a solution. And though the ignis
fatuus of life still dances over the bogs of our misty knowledge, yet its
true character cannot finally elude our investigation. The progress
already made has hemmed it in on every side ; and the province within
which exclusively vital acts are now performed narrows with each year
of scientific research."
The Professor then shows, first, that life has a physical basis. He
shows that all muscular motion is electrical, and then proceeds in his
specification, employing this language :
" Time would fail me to discuss the many other phenomena of the living body
which have been found on investigation to be non-vital. Digestion, which Prout said
it was impossible to believe was chemical, is now known to take place as well without
the body as within it, and to result from non-vital ferments. Absorption is osmotic,
and its selective power resides in the structure of the membrane and the diffusibility
of the solution. Respiration is a purely chemical function. Oxyhemoglobin is
formed wherever hsemoglobin and oxygen come in contact, and the carbon dioxide
of the serum exchanges with the oxygen of the air according to the law of gaseous
diffusion. Circulation is the result of muscular effort both in the heart and the
capillaries, and the flow which takes place is a simple hydraulic operation. Even
coagulation, so tenaciously regarded as a vital process, has been shown to be purely
chemical, whether we adopt the lypothesis of Schmidt, that it results from the union
of two proteids, fibrinogen and fibrinoplastic substance, or the latter theory of Ham-
marsten that fibrin is produced from fibrinogen by the action of a special ferment.
"One function yet remains which cannot be altogether omitted from our consid
eration. This function is that of the nervous system. In structure, this system is

48 MOSAIC EECOED
well known to us all. In composition, it is made up essentially of a single substance,
discovered by Liebreich and called protagon, the specific characters of which have
lately been confirmed by Gamgee. In function, the nerve-cell and the nerve-fibre are
occupied solely in the reception and the transmission of energy, which is in all proba
bility electrical. There is evidently a close analogy between the nerve and the
muscle, the axis cylinder, like the fibriUa, being composed of cells, and having a
positive electric charge upon the exterior surface, which has a tension of one-tenth
of a volt. Haughton attributes tinnitus aurium to the discharge of nerve-cells.
"The higher functions of the nerve-cell, those connected with mental processes, is
a field too vast to be entered at this time. The double telegraph line of nerve, motor
and sensor, in their effect, but as Vulpian has proved, precisely alike in function,
are the avenues of ingress and egress. Every sensory impression is received by the
thalami optici ; every motor stimulus is sent out from the corpora striata. In the acts
denominated reflex, the action goes from the spinal cord, and is automatic and uncon
scious. Should the impression ascend higher to the sensory ganglia, the action is now
conscious, though none the less automatic. Finally, should deliberation be required
before acting, the message is sent to the hemispheres by the sensory ganglia, and will
operates to produce the act. Based on principles which can be established by investi
gation, a true psychology is coming into being, developed by Bain, Maudsley, Spen
cer, and others. A physiological classification of mental operations is being formed
which uses the terms of metaphysical psychology, but in a more clearly defined sense.
Emotion, in this new science, is the sensibility of the vesicular neurin to ideas ; mem
ory, the registration of stimuli by nutrition. Reflection is the reflex action of the
cells in their relation to cerebral ganglia. Attention is the arrest of the transfor
mation of energy for a moment. Ratiocination is the balancing of one energy against
another. Will is the. reaction of impressions outward. And so on through the list."
It will be noticed that Professor Barker's aim is to show that all the
manifestations of life, physical and mental, are made up of protoplasm
and electricity. The conclusion reached is the following :
"When, therefore, the chemist shall succeed in producing a mass constitutionally
identical with protoplasmic albumen, there is every reason to expect that it will
exhibit all the phenomena which characterize its life ; and this equally whether pro
toplasm be a single substance or a mixture of several closely allieij substances." S2
The identity of vegetable and animal life is next established b}- the
Professor :
" If this view be correct, it would follow that every individual substance found in
the animal — save only those which result from degradation — must be found in the
plant upon which it feeds ; and this is the fact. The evidence then would seem con-

AND MODEEN SCIENCE. 49
elusive that, since the protoplasm of the animal and vegetable kingdoms is identical,
the former in all cases being derived from the latter, the animal as such neither pro
duces nor vitalizes any protoplasm. Two inferences seem naturally to follow from this
conclusion : First, that all the properties of animal protoplasm and of the animal
organism of which it constitutes the essential part must have previous existence in
the plant ; second, that hence the solution of the life question in the myxomycetes
will solve the life problem for the highest vertebrate." 23
Thus having shown that all life, 'vegetable and animal, is a union of
protoplasmic albumen and electricity, Professor Barker might have
paused, as have many of his predecessors, and have refused to listen
to the next question, namely : Whence this protoplasmic albumen and
electricity, or rather, whence that which energizes the albumen and the
electricity ? But he is too fair and scientific to hesitate before that
question, and therefore propounds the ingenious hypothesis that the
source of all life and energy is in " the ether of space." His language
will bear careful study :
"Now, as Preston hits suggested, if we regard this ether as a gas, defined by the
kinetic theory that its molecules move in straight lines, but with an enormous length
of free path, it is obvious that this ether may be clearly conceived of as the source of
all the motions of ordinary matter.. It is an enormous storehouse of energj7, which is
continually passing to and from ordinary matter, precisely as we know it to do in the
case of radiant transmission. Before so simple a conception as this, both potential
energy and action at a distance are easily given up. All energy is kinetic energy, the
energy of motion. In a narrower sense, the energy of matter-motion is ordinary
kinetic energy; the energy of ether-motion, which ma}' become matter-moton, fills
the conception of the older potential energy. Giving now to the ether its storehouse
of tremendous power, and giving to it the ability to transfer this power to ordinary
matter upon opportunity, and we have an environment compared with which the
strongest steel is but the breath of the summer air. In presence of such an energy
it is that we live and move. In the midst of such tremendous power do we act. Is
it a wonder that out of such a reservoir the power by which we live should irresistibly
rush into the organism and appear as the transmuted energy which we recognize in
the phenomena of life? Truly, as- Spinoza has put it, 'Man thinks himself most free
when lie is most a slave.' "
We could hardly be justified in quoting so freely from Professor
Barker's address, except that from a scientific point of view it is a
remarkable production, and also that it is the latest able discussion of
4

50 MOSAIC EECOED
the problem of the origin of life. But while acknowledging the ability
displayed in the discussion, we have to express the regret that the Pro
fessor has not brought us one step nearer the solution of the problem
of life than we were before listening to him. We are no better off with
this ether-space theory than with the meteoric theory of Thomson.
For admitting that all energy and life come from the ether-space, we
are still left to inquire what or who treasured this world's energy and
life in the ether-space? We would certainly thank the British Associ
ation or the American Association to tell us. Meantime, all these other
questions are comparatively but the prattle of children.
There is a phase of the Mosaic account, however, which, in the light
of a moderate materialism, deserves a passing notice. While the Bible
clearly teaches that life ultimately came from an invisible, intelligent,
potent, infinite, and personal Intelligence, it does not teach that each
original plant, and each original animal, or each original species of plants,
and each original species of animal, were the immediate creation of that
Great Potent Agency which the Christian calls God.24 The possible
meaning of certain expressions in Genesis is, that at least some of the
animals were the product of mediate creation, as was likewise all the
world's flora. " And God said, Let the e'arth bring forth grass," &c.
"And the earth brought forth," &c. There are two matters here
involved: first, the creative word; second, a producing energy imparted,
apparently, to the earth. Whether God at the instant of his command
endowed the earth with inherent power to generate plants, or simply
bade the plants he formed to take root, and grow from the earth, cannot
be determined from the Hebrew text.25 The text allows of either
interpretation. Thus, likewise, mediate rather than immediate creation, according to
the Bible, ma}r be predicated of the inferior animal life of the seas and
of the land, as well as of the plant life of the earth. The English
translation conveys this idea: "And God said, Let the waters bring forth
(swarm or abound) abundantly the moving creature that hath life." This
refers to the fish and reptile races, and to the birds, which are con
nected in the Bible and in science with the lower forms of animal life,
in a manner that would appear to imply some community or similarity of

AND MODEEN SCIENCE. 51
origin. "The prolific waters were the natural bed in which, through the
vivifying agency of the Ruah Elohim, or Divine Spirit, originated the
first 'moving things.' "
Not all animals were thus produced. The record says, " God created
the great taninim," — rendered the "great whales," — a general name for
the leviathan class of animals. In respect to this, however, there may
be various tenable suppositions. " It may mean," as has been well said,
" that some of those huge creatures, now extinct, and whose relics so
much astonish us, were special formations, like man in a subsequent
period, — so specially formed, perhaps, because like him they were
intended, in their period, to hold an analogous though much inferior
species of dominion over the other vegetable and animal tribes. It may
denote that this production out of the earth and waters was confined to
the fish and reptiles, and lower classes of aquatic birds, whilst the higher
terrestrial animals were direct formations."
But some of the land fauna, according to the Mosaic record, belong
as much to the mediate order of creation as does the earth's flora and
the lower water animals. The text is as explicit in the one case as in
the other: "Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind."
This refers to quadrupeds and land animals generally.
Hence, if the naturalist saj*s that originally the plants sprang from the
protoplasm of the soil, and fibhes and reptiles from the protoplasm of the
waters and mud, and the smaller land animals from the protoplasm of
the land, the Bible student should not hastily raise objections. For this
idea of mediate creation through the agency of created protoplasm may
be exactly what Moses means when saying, "And God said, Let the
earth bring forth grass," &c. ; and, " Let the waters bring forth abun
dantly the moving creature," &c. ; and, " Let the earth bring forth the
living creature after its kind," &c. The Christian student should insist,
however, that there was a time when all life, vegetable and animal, was
not, and then a time when it was ; and that it never would have been,
unless an Invisible and Potent Agency had commanded it into immedi
ate existence, or had energized or protoplasized the waters and the land
so that through them and by them, as media, life could appear.
The creation of man, according to the Mosaic account, materially

52 MOSAIC EECOED
differs in certain respects from the creation of vegetable life and the
life of brute creations. Vegetable and brute creations, for instance, are
spoken of generically as species and races, with no reference to individ- -
ual progenitors. But according to the Mosaic account, God made not a
race of men, but a man, and then a woman. And the remarkable
expression, " in his own image," which certainly has wonderful depth of
meaning, makes a clear and ineffaceable distinction between the human
race and other orders of the animal kingdom.26 As has often been
urged, the word Adam might allow that the account is generic and
not individual, but the context utterly precludes such interpretation.
In the words of an eminent writer and scholar :
"The particulars which are given respecting the female, her origin and estab
lished relation to the man, stamp upon the narrative a character of individuality
which is unmistakable. The entire departure here from the language used in respect
to other races puts the meaning beyond all doubt. If any fact in creation is clearly
revealed, if there is any one placed beyond all cavil, beyond all room for any honest
difference of interpretation, it is, that the origin of the present human race was from
one single pair  Humanity proper, or the human proprium, did not grow, was
no work of nature, but had a divine, a supernatural, an instantaneous beginning.
There was a time, a moment, when man — a man — the primus homo — began to be,
who a moment before was not. There was one in whom humanity commenced, and
from whom all subsequent humanity has been derived. There was one who first
began to be a man ; and this principium has its date from the first energizing of that
higher life which came from a direct inbreathing of the Almighty and Everlasting
Father of Spirits."
It is upon this subject that the atheistic materialist resolutely antag
onizes the Bible. Man, as it is claimed, in common with all brute
creations, is a development from lower orders.
But it must be confessed that the evidence of this assumption is
far from satisfactory. Indeed, it is so far from satisfactory, that the
majority of scientific men are inclined to reject the hypothesis of man's
evolution from the inferior species.27 For instance, the distance between
man and the rest of the animal kingdom is now generally admitted to be
nearly, if not equally, as spanless as that between the non-living and the
living. When comparisons are instituted as to the cubic capacity of
the brain, the results are scientifically startling. The size of the brain

AND MODEEN SCIENCE. 53
of the highest apes is thirty-four inches, and of the lowest man sixty-
eight inches; here hundreds of continuous links are required, but not
one, after forty years of the most diligent search, has been discovered.
Von Bischoff and Welcker have shown, furthermore, that there is a
fundamental and bridgeless distinction between the orang-outang and
the human brains, not only from the size, but from the important phyrsi-
ological fact that their evolutions take place in opposite directions. The
latest report is, therefore, that the development of man from the orang
is, from their internal structure, an utter impossibility. Mr. Minot and
others have agreed that man and related animals are more nearly con
nected with the common earth-worm than with any other animal.
In the matter of speech and as to the monitions of conscience, and
in all aesthetic tastes, the chasm deepens and widens. As Sir George
Mivart has said : " The gorilla is no less a brute and no more a man' in
all distinguishing characteristics than is the humblest member of the
monkey family to which he belongs." Darwin, too, admits that the
utter absence of links between apes and man is amazing.
Mr. Wallace, a disciple of Darwin, though differing from him in sev
eral points, ably maintains that natural selection in no possible way
could have endowed the wildest savage with a human brain, which in
size is but slightly inferior to that of the profoundest philosopher. His
exact language at this point is the following: "The brain of prehistoric
and of savage, man seems to me to prove the existence of some power,
distinct from that which has guided the development of the lower ani
mals through their ever-varying forms of being."
Mr. Wallace also confesses that natural selection could not have
given to other mammalia a hairy covering thickest upon the back, but
to man thickest, when it exists at all, in front ; or have made the hand
and the foot of the savage perfect, adding no improvement in cases of
the highest culture ; or have perfected the human larynx, or have given
power to conceive of God and immortality.27 Professor Dana adopts
a modified form of evolution, yet the following is his recent statement
of the point before us : " If the links between the lower orders and man
ever existed, their annihilation without trace is so extremely improbable
that it may be pronounced impossible." Almost the last words of

54 MOSAIC EECOED
Agassiz were these: "For the development of man, gifted with high
reason and will, and thus made a power above nature, there was required
a special act of a being above nature, whose supreme Will is not only
the source of natural law, but the working force of nature herself. This
I still hold."
Professor Schmidt, Dr. Rud. Virchow, with a few others who are of
the extreme wing of evolutionists, believing even in spontaneous gen
eration and kindred views, have likewise admitted, not only that no links
have been discovered between man and apes, but that none exist, and
that none have ever existed. They then start the ingenious supposition
that man and apes have sprung from some lower animal, and have
developed in different directions. Dr. Rud. Virchow thus states the
hypothesis :
"The natural deduction, therefore, seems to be that by progressive development
an ape can never become a man ; nay, rather, that this very development has created
the deep gulf between them. . . . All attempts to transform our problems into doc
trines, to introduce our theories as the basis of a plan of education, particularly the
attempt simply to depose the Church, and to replace its dogma by a religion of
descent — tliese attempts, I say, must fail  AVe cannot teach, we cannot desig
nate it as a revelation of science, that man descends from the ape, or from an}' other
animal — we can but designate this as a problem."
But how long must we wait for a solution of this problem?
Professor Agassiz, Jr., in a very interesting and exhaustive paper upon
Sea Urchins, before the late American Association, utterly despairs of
finding the missing links which have been so zealously searched for
during the last twenty years. He concludes his address with the follow
ing* biological inferences :
"But we can go no further with confidence, and bold indeed would he be who
would attempt, even in a single state, to trace the genealogy of the inhabitants from
those of ten years before. AVe had better acknowledge our inability to go beyond a
certain point; anything beyond the general parallelism I have attempted to trace,
which in no way invalidates the other proposition, we must recognize as hopeless.
.... Ordinarily, the twigs of any genealogical tree have only a semblance of truth ;
they lead us to branches having but a slight trace of probability — -to branches where
the imagination plays an important part, to main limbs where it is finally allowed full
play in order to solve with the trunk, 1* the satisfaction of the writer at least, the

AND MODEEN SCIENCE. 55
riddle of the origin of the group. It seems hardly credible that a school which boasts
for its very creed a belief in nothing which is not warranted by common sense,
should descend to such trifling  These stages are the true missing links, which
we can no more expect to find preserved than we can expect to find a record of the
actual embryonic development of the species of the present day without direct obser
vation at the time. The actual number of species in any one group must always fall
far short of the possible number, and for this reason it is out of the question for us
to attempt the solution of the problem of derivation, or to hope for any solution
beyond one within the most indefinite limits of correctness. If, when we take one of
the most limited of the groups of the animal kingdom, we find ourselves engaged in a
hopeless task, what must be the prospect should we attack the problem of other classes
or groups of the animal kingdom, where the species run into the thousands, while
they number only tens in the case we have attempted to carry out? Shall we say
' ignorabimus,1 or ' impavidi progrediamus,' and valiantly chase a phantom we can
never hope to seize? "
In 1857, a skull was found between Diisseldorf and Elberfeld (Ger
many), since known as the Neanderthal Skull. It has been extensively
written about by Buck, Huxley, Barnard, and others. A few weeks
since this relic, which has been claimed to be that of a being which links
the brute to the human species, was presented before the British Associ
ation at Swansea by Professor Schaafenhauseh. The conclusion of the
Professor was, that it is the skull, not of a semi-brute, but of a veri
table human being.' Professor Rolleston, commenting upon the skull,
" announced his unhesitating concurrence with the German Professor,
that the skull, exhibiting though it did such low development, was not
that of an ape, nor of an idiot, but that of a savage man about fifty years
of age, with a small brain no doubt, but evidently perfectly well able
to hold his own in the struggle for existence. He was a man, and not
.the ' missing link.' "
No scientist present at that meeting of the Association objected to
the views of these two distinguished scholars.
Thus, out of breath, with divided ranks, extreme evolutionists no
longer seek to bridge, by intermediate forms, the abyss between man
aud the gorilla, but they daringly venture to bridge the deeper and
broader gulf between man and the anthropomorphous apes on the one
side, and some unknown animal on the other. How modestly Schmidt
puts the case: "What future times may, perhaps, discover are inter-

56 MOSAIC EECOED
mediate forms which go back to the common point of derivation of the
present apes and of man." '•'•May! " " Perhaps ! "
We need not multiply references and quotations. We hazard nothing
when saying that there is not an eminent scientific man living who dares
now question the statement that not " a single plank on which one can
tread with a firm foothold has yet been laid over the chasm which sep
arates the human body, mind, and soul from the most advanced species
of the brute creation."
Several positions can now be assumed without fear of controversy.
For instance, there was a time when man was not ; he could not have
originated from nothing, or by nothing; there is no clearer evidence upon
the exactest scientific grounds that he was evolved from either moss,
worms, or orang-outangs, than that he was a direct divine creation. We
therefore challenge any scientific man of whatever school to show that
it is unscientific or unphilosophical to adopt the Bible account *as the
wisest hypothesis or solution yet offered in explanation of the perplex
ing problem of man's origin and development.28
But this account will bear a more rigid examination than we have
yet given it. Involving with that account other points of Christian
theology, we are led to recognize in the " Creator " of the Mosaic record
the "Christ" of the New Testament. The " God-said " of Genesis is the
" God-word " of John's Gospel. Moses introduces his account with the
words, " In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth."
John introduces his gospel with the words :
" In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and
the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All
things were made by him ; and without him was not anything made that
was made."
The Apostle Paul thus expands and emphasizes this thought in the
Epistle to the Hebrews, first chapter :
" God, who at sundry times, and in divers manners, spake in time
past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last clays spoken
unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom
also he made the worlds  Unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O
God, is for ever and ever; a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of

AND MODELIN SCIENCE. 57
thy kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity ;
therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of glad
ness above thy fellows. And thou, Lord, [the " God-said," the " God-
word," the "Christ,"] in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the
earth ; and the heavens are the works of thy hands."
Christian theology, furthermore, reports that this " God-word," though
invisible, is still present with his people ; that he appeared in Judea
eighteen hundred years ago, in the form of a divine man, or " God-
man " ; that before this he had frequently appeared in visible angelic
shape to the patriarchs, and that not far from six thousand years ago,
somewhere in Central Asia, in a place called the Garden of Eden, he
appeared, and, as a miracle-worker, from the dust of the earth built up
a material human body in the image of his own spiritual, eternal, and to
us at present invisible, body or organism. The Mosaic record is explicit:
" The Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed
into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."
Professor Murphy translates the passage thus: "And the Lord God
formed the man of dust from the soil." It has been well remarked that
" there is a deep significance in the phrase, 'from the dust of the earth.'
High as may be our celestial parentage, we have an earthly mother.
The most touching appellations in-all languages are expressive of the
idea. Man 'is of the earth, earthy.' He is Adam, he is homo, humus,
humilis. If he has a spiritual life which connects him with the higher
worlds, he has also an animal, and even a vegetable life, that links him
with all below."
In this connection it is worthy of note that chemical analysis, after
the most rigid examination, is able to detect the presence of no element
in the human body which is not found in the dust beneath our feet.
Thus the body was full formed by immediate creative agency, and
then the God-word breathed into the nostrils of this fresh-formed body
"the breath of life " ; and man *became a living soul.29 The meaning
is, that the God-word energized a thinking soul in the body he had
made. This miracle of man's life was wrought with mouth to mouth,
as if Christ designed to wake man to consciousness with a kiss upon his
lips. And history shows that with the tenderness of that first act the

58 MOSAIC EECOED
Creating One ever since has followed his obedient children. And more
than this, the world of philosophy and science acknowledges the presence
in man of exceptional soul-gifts and graces. M. de Chateaubriand pro
pounds a very interesting question, and furnishes a suggestive answer:
" Why does not the ox as I do ? It can lie down upon the grass, raise its
head towards heaven, and in its lowings call upon that unknown Being
who fills the immensity of space. But, no; content with the turf on which
it tramples, it interrogates not those suns in the firmament above, which
are the grand evidences of the existence of God. Animals are not troubled
with those hopes which fill the heart of man; the spot on which they
tread yields them all the happiness of which they are susceptible; a
little grass satisfies the sheep, a little blood gluts the tiger. The only
creature that looks beyond himself, and is not all in all to himself, is
man." Darwin is right in his estimate that " man is the wonder and the
glory of the universe." .
In a word, every branch of science, and every principle of philoso
phy, confirm one of the first announcements of biblical theology — this :
that the Almighty, in crowning man, has completed an exceptional piece
of work. Every creature bows, as God solemnly announces man's final
inauguration in the sublime words : " 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." Thus it remains unalterable from that day to
this ; six thousand years have made no changes. Man, in his exaltation
or humiliation, in his civilization or barbarism, is still the monarch of
every inch of this earth he inhabits.
The account of the origin of woman, the companion of the man,
through whom all other thinking souls have originated, is given in the
following words:
" And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and
to every beast of the field ; but for Adam there was not found an help
meet for him. And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon
Adam, and he slept ; and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh
instead thereof. And the rib which the Lord God had taken from
man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man."
This language necessitates the idea of a sudden and supernatural

AND MODEEN SCIENCE. 59
formation of the material organism of woman. Does some one object
because certain difficulties present themselves ? But, we may ask, are
there fewer difficulties attending any other supposition ? May we
repeat : There could have been no first child without a woman ; and
there could have been no first woman unless she had grown from a child,
or have been full formed by supernatural power. The first child or the
first full-grown woman could not have sprung from the ground without
supernatural aid. She could not have made herself. The man could not
have made her. There is no evidence that she was developed from lower
orders. She must have been some way made. No greater difficulty
attends the formation of woman in the manner recorded in Genesis than
in any other way. Indeed, upon all modern theories of bioplasm, fewer
difficulties attend this Bible method than attend airy other method that
can possibly be named.
Examine the details of this remarkable account. Heroic treatment
was the one known to the ancients ; they would have had the gods
bound Adam to a rack, and then have had them wrench a bone from his
side. But the Lord, the God-man, the Christ and Creator, caused a deep
sleep to fall upon Adam. The most approved modern medical science
could have done no better. The man, to employ a chemical term, was
" etherized." The words " deep sleep " mean entire unconsciousness.
Then the Divine One removed some part of the flesh and bone of the
man near the breast, closing up the j:>lace thereof with other flesh, (a
perfect though rapid healing process,) and out of this flesh, bone, and
blood of Adam, with the bioplasts still alive in it and upon it, he made
the woman. In the language of the original text, "And God builded
up a woman." 30
No one doubts that the Creator could have made woman in some
other way as well .as in the way recorded. He could have made her
from a cloud in the atmosphere, or from the foam of the sea, or from a
piece of mountain granite. But he could not have created her in any-
other manner that so well establishes the intended and ordained union
between husband and wife ; — a union so well established, in the nature
of things, that a departure from it is always found destructive of the
highest individual and national prosperity. " It is worthy of note," as

60 MOSAIC EECOED AND MODEEN SCIENCE.
Herder remarks, " that what Moses adds is an elegant description of
the espousal," and as there was no other to act, God himself honored
the first marriage "by appearing as bridesman," or, in the beautiful lan
guage of the original, " And he builded up the woman and brought her
to the man." Here was the birth of society. Unity of blood is literally
maintained.81 Here is the " real presence " and a Divine succession.
As the Creator looked upon that first society and the garden home,
he could well saj-, as he actually did say : " And God saw every thing
that he had made : and behold it was very good."
In view of all these considerations, is the Bible student extravagant
in saying that the Mosaic account of man's origin is the only one ever
propounded with which so many facts of science and philosophy, of provi
dence and theology, as perfectly harmonize ? But every philosopher,
if true to the fundamental principles of philosophy and science, must
accept for his working hypothesis the theory with which the larger
number of facts agree. In other words, the world, upon purely scien
tific grounds, must accept the Bible account until a better one is pro
pounded. But a better one, according to Christian belief, will never be
propounded.

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES.

Note I. {Page 9.)
It appears to a thoughtful man well-nigh fatal to the credibility of the Bible to
take the position that without detriment it may be inaccurate in its statements upon
all subjects except those that are moral or theological. Yet not a few hold such an
opinion. Dr. Frederick Stevenson, in a late address before the University of Ver
mont, employed language which represents this class of writers :
" In my view, — and I say so frankly, — it is a mistake to expect scientific accu
racy in the Scriptures. They were not meant to teach science at all, and I see no
proof that the writers spoke anything on scientific subjects but the current ideas of
their times. They knew nothing of astronomy, or chemistry, or physiology, in the
modern sense of those words ; and they did not need to know. They had to do with
God, the soul, righteousness, the evil of sin, the blessing of goodness ; not with plan
ets, or acids, or the theory of digestion  They were not bound to do for us
what we can do for ourselves, and what they could not possibly have done without
using language unintelligible or incredible to every generation before the present.
AVe talk of scientific difficulties in the Bible now ; but who in the ancient world would
or could have believed the Sacred Book if it had stated the correct theory of astron
omy? Remember, they had no telescopes, no scientific instruments or calculations,
and the theory would have contradicted the plain evidence of their senses all the time.
They could not have believed it. Difficulties! Onr difficulties are as nothing to these.
A book, to be believed, must be understood ; and accurate science prematurely written
would be unintelligible gibberish or incredible paradox. A very little thought will
show us that a book intended for all the ages cannot possibly anticipate scientific dis
covery. Had the Bible done that, it would never have been read believingly till the
history of the human race was complete and the millennium fully come."
It will be noticed that the fallac}' underlying this reasoning is, that the Bible is
purely a man-made book. The question is not, therefore, whether the writers under
stood all science, but, were they God-inspired. If so, all allusions to science should
be correct. • God must have known.
The statement of Dr. Stevenson, that a book intended for all ages cannot possibly
anticipate scientific discovery, is too sweeping.' A divinely inspired Bible must pre-
61

62

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES.

sent facts not as men may think or desire, but correctly and truly. In this connection
it is worthy of remark that men have repeatedly antagonized the Bible upon this very
ground, that it has -anticipated scientific discovery. Said the late Professor Lyell :
"In the year 1806 the French Institute enumerated not less than eighty geological
theories which were hostile to the Scriptures, but not one of these theories is held to
day." It ought not to disturb any friend of the Bible that certain false theories of
scientists are opposed to it.
In a word, the Bible nowhere asks at our hands any cowardly defence, or anything
like special pleading. AVhen, therefore, the man of partial belief in Revelation says,
"The Bible was not intended to teach science, therefore we can excuse all scientific
inaccuracies," we reply: No; for if the Bible has allowed itself to employ false state
ments as to the truths of nature or the truths of mind, then it no longer bears the im
press of a book inspired of God, but bears the marks of a purely human origin, and
belongs among those books which may shortly become obsolete and forgotten. If
allowed at any one point, there would be scarcely any limit in this process of excuse-
making. For some one else, with just as great consistency, could say that the Bible
was not intended to teach any of the departments of human philosophy, therefore we
may excuse its errors in philosophy. Another could say, The Bible is not intended to
teach history, therefore historic misstatements in the Bible may be allowed; and if
they exist they do not invalidate its credibility, for the Bible was not designed to teach
history. Mr. Murray, in one of his sermons, employs this language: "The Bible is a
book that should be read like other books, in a broad and comprehensive way 
The length of the creation period, the tonnage of the ark, Samson's strength, the
guerilla skirmishes of the Judges, the rams'-horn signals in front of the walls of
Jericho — these are questions about which no sensible Christian cares a fig." Now,
for our part, we do care whether or not the facts recorded in the Bible are true or false.
Their truthfulness or their falsity makes all the difference imaginable as to our faith
in the Book.
AVe are much better pleased with the confession of faith as stated by Sir John
Herschel : "All human discoveries seem to be made only for the purpose of confirming
more and more strongly the truths contained in the Holy Scriptures."
Note II. {Page 9.)
The theologian as well as the scientist has an unquestioned right, when seeking
the solution of a problem, to adopt what is termed " a working hypothesis." This is
a supposition which, at a given moment, harmonizes better than any other supposition
with all the known facts bearing upon the case. The true scientist will abandon a
given working hypothesis for another, the moment a better one is presented. In pre
senting his exposition of the nebular hypothesis, which has since become so celebrated,
Laplace says : " I present this hypothesis with the distrust which everything ought to
inspire that is not a result of observation or of calculation." Thus Laplace showed

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES. 63
the true spirit in not claiming for his hypothesis infallibility. "In astronomy there is
no final human authority, no synod or council," says a distinguished astronomer, "but
simply an appeal to reason and observation. If a theory or a discovery be true, it
will stand the test of observation and of calculation ; if false, it must pass away to that
Miltonian limbo where so many things have gone and are going."
Note III. {Page 11.)
The nebular hypothesis as framed by Laplace, supposes that the matter of the
solar system existed originally in the condition of a vast, revolving, and fiery mass,
which gradually cooling and contracting, threw off, in obedience to physical laws,
successive rings from which subsequently, by the same laws, were produced the sev
eral planets, satellites, and other bodies of the stellar universe.
Note IV. {Page 12.)
Scientific men have made use of various suggestive terms to express their view
of the creative and sustaining power of the universe. Herbert Spencer employs the
words "Unthinkable" and "Unknowable." Professor Bain speaks of matter as "a
double-faced Somewhat, having a spiritual and » physical side." Professor Clifford
employs the word " Cosmos," holding up the thing represented by that word as an
object deserving worship. Strauss tried to rid his mind of the idea of God, but the
universal beauty and fitness of things compelled him to see a something which he
called "The All, existing in and for itself eternally." In his work entitled " Old Faith
and New," he goes still further, and says, " AVe demand the same piety for our
Cosmos that the devout of old demanded for his God." Dr. Lycock, followed by Mr.
Murphy the scientist, designates the marvellous skill displayed in the universe as the
product of "unconscious intelligence.'' "In the present state of our knowledge,"
says John Stuart Mill, "the adaptations of nature afford a large balance of probability
in favor of creation by intelligence." Professor Tyndall often employs the words
"inscrutable power." Mr. Mivart uses the words an "internal force," "a single
form of force." Note V. {Page 13.)
"The instability of the homogeneous," and its "tendency to the heterogeneous,"
appear to be a law applicable not only to the original formation of the physical uni
verse, but also to its present order, both as to physical existence and social life. But
law is not agency ; it is method, the method of a lawgiver.
Note VI. {Page 21.)
The era following the Reptilian age, also the one following tho age of monster
Mammals, are very troublesome to materialistic evolutionists. Indeed, the hypothesis
of pure evolution seemingly breaks down in the presence of this class of facts, in
which the weaker supersedes the stronger.

64 SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES.

Note VII. {Page 22.)
Since writing the foregoing quotation, we find that Professor Winchell has modi-
fled his views in a late work entitled Preadamites. The conclusions he reaches are the
following : — First, The biblical Adam was a representative1 of the Mediterranean race,
and was the remotest ancestor to whom the Jews could trace their descent. Second,
The Bible itself clearly implies the existence of non-Adamites. Third, Races remote
from Palestine in the times of Genesis, could not have descended from the stock of
Noah. Fourth, The lower races could not have descended from the Mediterranean
stock, because: (1) a vast diversification of races now exists; (2) some of these races
are greatly inferior to the Mediterranean ; (3) a complete differentiation of races
existed in the early dynastic periods of Egypt ; (4) and the chronological position of
Noah, or even of Adam, is far too recent to suppose the differentiation began at the
Noachic or even the Adamic era ; (5) even the theory of the Hamitic origin of the
Negroes is opposed by the Bible itself. (6) A chain of profound relationship runs
through the constitution of all the races, and they may be regarded as genealogically
connected together. (7) The initial point of the genealogical line may be located in
"Lemuria," a hypothetical continent, now submerged by the waters of the Indian
Ocean. (8) An early and profound split in the primitive stock is represented by the
woolly-haired or African types, and the straight and curly-haired or austro-oriental
types. (9) The African stock entered the continent somewhat north of the Equator,
and dispersed thence southward and westward. (10) The smooth-haired stock sent
one branch toward Australia, and another toward Central Asia. From the latter have
proceeded all the Mongoloids, and from the former the Dravidians. (11) The Adam
ites are an offshoot from the Dravidians, and showed at first a closer approximation to
the older type than is preserved in the Mediterranean race at present. (12) An early
branch of the Mongoloid stock turned westward, and occupied Northern Africa,
Atlantis, and the greater part of Europe, in times anterior to the Kelts or the Pelas-
gians. (13) The first men were geologically pre-glacial, and their antiquity is com
paratively great. It may reach a hundred thousand years. Prehistoric Europeans
were jjost-glacial, and their antiquity cannot be carried on archaBological and ethno
logical grounds beyond five or six thousand years B. C. As to the creation of Adam,
our author says : " Preadamitism does not exclude the current conception of Adamic
creation. It admits that Adam was ' created,' but substitutes for manual modelling of
the plastic clay the worthier conception of origination, according to a genetic method,
and thus embraces the Adamic origin under an intelligible method of production, so
sublime and significant as to include the whole world of organic beings. That higher
perception, which is a function of reason, clearly discerns in derivative origins the
perpetual presence and potency of a power which is in matter, but does not belong to
matter. The derivation of Adam from an older human stock is essentially and
literally the creation of Adam."
In reading this volume of Professor Winchell, every scholar will come to at least

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES. 65
three conclusions: First, The Professor is guilty of several self-contradictipns. Second,
So far as he attempts to build upon the Bible, he is guilty of pure arrogance in arbitra
rily setting aside the verdicts of Semitic lexicographers and interpreters. Though an
expert in science, Professor Winchell is not such in biblical exegesis. Third, So far as
he attempts to advance beyond his earlier conclusions, he is exceedingly suppositional.
An illustration is found in his discussion of The Epoch of the First Man. He says : " To
the determination of this very little can be contributed. The earliest men left no records
of themselves. The very country in which they lived has been swallowed up by the
sea. Their monuments, if they created any, lie in the bottom qf the Indian Ocean:
Their bones, if undissolved, are mingled with the fossil remains which must await
another geological convulsion for their discovery and investigation. But the indig
enous races of Africa and Australia may have left some record which will shed light on
the date of the occupation of those continents. I imagine that in some of the caverns
of Abyssinia or central Australia may yet be discovered relics of man which may fix his
epoch relatively to some geological event. The research is not a hopeless one.
Science stands ready to undertake it ; and I doubt not, the records of some geological
or anthropological society will one day tell whether man lived in Australia or central
Africa, as far back as the Miocene age of the world." The above italics are ours, and
suggest that the Professor has advanced not into the realm of exact science, but into
the shadowy domains of hypothetical poetry.
Note VIII. (Page 23.)
The importance of this subject may justify noting the liability of falling into
mistakes as to the antiquity of human remains. It is a well-known fact that many
discoveries, which for a time were thought to establish the great antiquity of man,
though appearing in reputable scientific publications, are now distrusted or discredited.
The connection of human and mastodon relics near Charleston, S. C, is a well-known
instance. "The deposits here," says a writer who has made a careful study of this
subject, "are so thin and superficial that it is very difficult to be sure that there is no
mixture of different ages, the more so as the bones of the ordinary ox and the domestic
hog are found also, neither of which were ever indigenous to this continent, and must,
therefore, be specimens introduced by the modern settlers." Prestwick, a celebrated
English authority, though still desirous of keeping up a high antiquity for man, says :
"I do not, for my part, see any geological reasons why the extinct mammalia should
not have lived down to comparatively recent times, possibly not farther back than
eight or ten thousand years." And in another place he remarks, that "the evidence
seemed to me as much to necessitate the bringing forward of the great extinct
animals toward our time, as the carrying back of man in geological time."
Again, those who support the hypothesis of the great antiquity bf man constantly
assume that all geological changes have required vast periods of time for their accom
plishment. But as a matter of fact, there have been great changes in brief periods.
5

66 SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES.
For the follpwing facts we are indebted to Mr. J. C. Southall, Georg Adolf Ermann,
and Sir Charles Lyell : ¦ —
In 1819 the British part of Sindree, in India, to the extent of two thousand square
miles of territory, was, in the space of a few hours, permanently submerged. Later,
another portion of Sindree was elevated, converting Sindree Lake into a salt marsh,
and forming the elevation of Ullah Bund (Mound of God).
In the Santosin group of the .ZEgean Sea ne\v islands have suddenly appeared, the
latest within comparatively a few years. Between 1795 and 1812 a lake near Ural,
Siberia, sunk two hundred and ninety-one feet.
Ermann, in his "Travels in Siberia," says:
" The ground in Yakutsk, the internal condition of which was found in sinking
M. Shergin's well, consists, to the depth of at least one hundred feet, of strata of loam,
fine sand, and magnetic sand. They have been deposited from waters which at one
time, and it may be presumed suddenly, overflowed the whole country as far as the
Polar Sea. In these deepest strata are found twigs, rocks, and leaves of trees of the
birch and willow kinds. Everywhere throughout these immense alluvial deposits are
now lying the bones of antediluvian quadrupeds along with vegetable remains."
In the years 1826 and 1827 a succession of earthquakes so changed the level of
the land along a coast in New Zealand that the sealers could no longer recognize the
locality; and a hull of a vessel, supposed to be the "Active," lost some thirty years
previously, was found two hundred yards inland, with a tree growing through its
bottom. At another earthquake in the same group, in 1855, a tract of land equal to
four thousand square miles is believed to have been raised from one to nine feet.
In 1772 the volcano Papandayang, in the island of Java, had a great eruption, by
which its summit sunk, or lost in some way, four thousand feet of its height.
The famous earthquake in Lisbon is well known, by which prodigious physical
effects were suddenly produced. Sixty thousand persons were destroyed in six min
utes, the quay of the city sunk into an almost fathomless abyss, and the shock was
felt from North America to Sweden.
The beach on the Frith of Forth, in Scotland, has risen not less than twenty-six
feet since the time the Romans ruled the country.
In Peru, in 1746, an earthquake destroyed Lima, and sunk a part of the coast of
Callas, so as to convert it into a bay.
In 1812 a series of earthquakes occurred in the region around New Madrid, on
the Mississippi. A change of level was effected so suddenly that at one place the
river for a while reversed its course. Lakes twenty miles long were formed in an
hour, and a region seventy-five miles long and thirty miles wide is now known as the
Sunk Country.
The disposition that could be made of human remains by some of these convul
sions will suggest the unreliability of this class of evidence so freely quoted by advo
cates of the great antiquity of the human race.

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES. 67
There is equal uncertainty as to the age of human remains found in various
geological deposits which have not suffered from these sudden convulsions. Notoriety
was given, a few years since, to a human pelvis, found, along wijh bones of the mas
todon and megalonyx, lying loose in a ravine near Natchez. " The trouble about this
specimen," says a reviewer, " is- that the Indian graves at the tops of these bluffs are
continually caving down, and mingling their relics with objects at the bottom. This
class of specimens is notoriously uncertain, and no experienced scientist attaches any
significance to them."
Some years ago two men took a finely-developed Indian skull from a cave in the
side of the valley, and placed it in a mining-shaft, intending to have it fall into the
hands of Professor AVhitney as a practical joke. It was successful. A workman took
out the skull, and afterward gave it to the Professor, who was so satisfied with the
evidence of its authenticity that he neglected to have the shaft pumped out (it was
full of water at the time of his visit), to examine the ground, and see- whether the
cave-stalagmite adhering to the skull could be accounted for on the supposition of its
original lodgment in the gravel of the pit. He was effectually deceived, and believed
the skull to be of Pliocene age. A well-known and thoroughly reliable clergyman
in California is brother to one of the men who placed the skull in the shaft, and testi
fies to the fact of the whole thing being a joke.
There has also been much written upon the antiquity of man based upon the
relation of the stone, bronze, and iron age to one another. The following facts are
taken, nearly in full, from a careful reviewer of this subject. AVhile, according to this
authority, it is generally true that stone is earlier than bronze, and bronze than iron,
still, as a matter of fact, they are veiy much mixed, and sometimes inverted, as in the
ruins of Troy, where Schliemann found a Stone Age later than bronze and iron both.
A "similar mixture is found in Mexico and Pern, whose inhabitants used both bronze
and stone habitually. A bronze cell was found in one of the oldest Egyptian pyra
mids; while flint implements are found in European dolmens and tumuli, dating as
late as the fourth and fifth centuries. The Chinese annals show that stone weapons
were used in that country at least as late as between A. D. 904 and 1279. Stone axes
(chi-fon), stone knives (chi-t'ao), a stone sword (chi-kien), and a stone agricultural
implement (chi-jin), are also mentioned.
In tlie ancient monarchies of the valley of the Euphrates metals were well known.
Rawlinson says {Five Great Monarchies) that " in the very first age of Babylonia a
civilized people used stone and metallic implements together." " In the Chaldean
plain the tombs and ruins have yielded," says Smith (Ancient History of the Fast),
" knives, hatchets, arrowheads, and other implements both of flint and bronze, . . .
chains, nails, fish-hooks, etc., of tho same metal, . . . leaden pipes and jars, . . . arm
lets, bracelets, and finger-rings of iron." Under the great stone bulls of Nineveh,
which had never before been disturbed, Mr. Place found knives of black flint along
with " bracelets and necklaces of carnelian, emerald, amethyst, and other hard stones
polished and fashioned in the shape of beads and the heads of animals."

68 SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES.
The Ethiopians of the Upper Nile, in the time of Xerxes, had attained a high
civilization, yet their contingent to Xerxes' army used stone arrow-points and horn
javelin-heads, — a striking case of flint implements being used while bronze and iron
were well known.
Rosallini, the companion of Champollion and other explorers, stated long ago
that knives and other articles of flint have repeatedly been found in the tombs by the
side of the Egyptian mummies. At the meeting of the Institut Egyptian, M. Mariette
Bey used this language: "The fact that there are found (in Egypt) flints worked hy
the hand ofman cannot be contested. . . . The flints in question do not go back to
the age of stone. They belong to the historic age of Egypt. ... In all historic
antiquity, even to the time of the Ptolemies, flints were worked on this plateau. . . .
AVith the flints they made knife-blades, which they fixed in handles of wood. One
finds them even among the Greeks. These knives are sometimes toothed in the form
of a saw. In the third place they made lance-heads."
In Abyssinia the Bogos still use both flint and iron for implements. M. Leemans
says that an ancient Buddhist temple in Java, which was erected about A. D. 700, has
its walls covered with bas-reliefs. These beautiful sculptures show perforated flint
implements with wooden handles, and pile dwellings. Herodotus says that the
Scythians east of the Caspian, at the time they defeated Cyrus, used gold and brass
freely about their weapons and armor; but "they use neither iron nor silver, which
indeed their country does not produce." According to this the eastern Scythians
were in the Bronze Age when Cyrus was in the Iron Epoch.
Facts show conclusively the extensive use of stone with both bronze and iron, not
only down to the Middle Ages, but even to our day.
" Possibly some future archaeologist will puzzle himself over the millions of gun-
flints used and lost by all armies fifty years ago."
Remains found in peat bogs have been supposed to prove man's great antiquity.
But there are no accurate data. Take, for instance, the peat beds of Denmark.
Mr. Hudson Tuttle thinks this peat is twenty-two thousand years of age ; Sir Charles
Lyell thinks that it may have been sixteen thousand years in forming; Steenstrup
puts its formation at a minimum, of four thousand; and Professor AA'orsade at not less
than three thousand. These different estimates forbid anything like accurate scien
tific conclusions.
There is, on the Earl of Arran's estate in Scotland, a primeval bog and forest,
which make it apparent that the pine, oak, and beech were not successive, but con
temporaneous at different levels ; the bog growing as well as the trees, (thus overtaking
the upper species last.) Holes cut in the peat of this estate filled up at the rate of
three inches a year.
Professor AA'orsade makes the statement that woollen cloth was found with the
aboriginal relics of the Danish peat.
Where the Roman general Ostorius cut the forests of Scotch firs in Yorkshire, the

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES. 69
Hatfield Moss has since grown over an area of ninety thousand acres. At the bottom
of the peat, many feet down, Roman axes and knives, with the stumps of Scotch fir,
oak, &c, were found. Many of the trunks were hewn, bored, chopped, and split;
and rails, wedges, bars, pieces of chain, horses' skulls, axes, and coins of the Roman
emperors were found.
In Kincardine Moss, Scotland, Roman coins were found; also a Roman military
road-bed of timber, over which eight feet of peat had accumulated. At Groningen a
coin of the Emperor Gordian, A. D. 237, was found under thirty feet of peat. In the
Jura Mountains old iron furnaces are found, with Roman and Gallic coins of two
thousand years or less of age. Over one of these furnaces twenty feet of peat had
accumulated. In Derbyshire a grazier perished on a bog in a snow-storm. Twenty-
eight years after, his body was found three feet deep in the peat. In the Natural
History of Stafford, it is stated that coins of Edward IAT. have been found eighteen feet
down in the peat. Sir Charles Lyell states that at Lagore, in Ireland, relics of stone,
bronze, and iron are found under fifteen feet of peat.
In the seventeenth century the Earl of Cromarty described to the Royal Society
the origination of a new peat bog, which in less than fifty years covered up the trunks
of trees fallen on it, and was thick enough to be cut for fuel. It is, therefore, hazard
ous to argue that human remains found in peat bogs carry back the origin of man to
anything like great antiquity.
Geologists have also reasoned that human remains found in the mud deposits of
the Mississippi prove the antiquity of the human race.
General Humphrey, while making a survey of the river, took elaborate observa
tions during twelve months, at different points, to determine the amount of sedimen
tary deposit. He made it equal to a stratum one foot in depth by about two hundred
and seventy square miles in area every year.
This action of the river produces many interesting phenomena, and has led to
various efforts to determine the antiquity of the deposits. In digging for the gas
works in New Orleans, the skeleton of a " Red Indian " was found, according to Dr.
Dowler, at the depth of sixteen feet, and beneath four successive layers of cypress
forest. Dr. Dowler endeavored to get an estimate of the general rate of mud accre
tion on the delta where New Orleans stands, and then, assuming it to be both correct
and uniform, estimated that it would require fifty-seven thousand years to deposit the
sixteen feet of material above the skeleton. Lyell was inclined to approve the calcu
lation; but General Humphrey, in his elaborate survey, came to the conclusion that
the whole ground of New Orleans and the surrounding country, down to the depth of
about forty feet, was only four thousand four hundred years old.
Mr. Fontaine, Mr. Hurlbut, and others, state that, owing to the enormous rapidity
with which the river changes its course, articles lost in the lifetime of men now
living are in many places buried one hundred feet deep. Dr. Andrews saw cotton-
wood saplings on the banks, with only seven rings of annual growth, over whose

70 SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES.
original roots the inundations had deposited three feet of clay. There are streets in
New Orleans where the water flowed a hundred feet deep sixty years ago. Mr. Fon
taine gives an amusing statement that information reached the New Orleans Academy
of Sciences that a piece of wood had been found at Port Jackson deeper down than
Dr. Dowler's " Red Indian," and at a considerable distance from the river, and, more
over, showing workmanship by a high order of tools. Some members of the Academy
investigated the relic, and found it to be the gunwale of a Kentucky flat-boat.
Says Fontaine: "The Mississippi, by undermining and ingulfing its banks with
everything upon them, logs tangled in vines and bedded in mud, cypress stumps,
Indian graves, and modern works of art, are suddenly swallowed up and buried at all
depths by its waters, from ten to one hundred feet in depth." No scientist, unless he
has a pet theory to maintain, would think of estimating lapse of time from this class
of data. Mr. H. C. Lewis, volunteer assistant upon the Pennsylvania Geological Survey,
at the recent meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science,
discussed the question of the age of the deposit at Trenton, N. J., containing articles
of human workmanship. Dr. Abbott and other archaeologists have claimed for these
remains an antiquity coeval with the Glacial period. Mr. Lewis commenced by care
fully defining the absolute and relative ages of all the clays and surface deposits of
the Lower Delaware Valley. Three clays were pronounced to be of Mesozoic and
Tertiary age. Next came the Philadelphia brick clay, stated to have been derived
from the melting of the ice in the glacial period. No true glacial deposits exist
south of the terminal moraine, near Easton, as first pointed out by Professor G. H.
Cook. After the clay, three gravel deposits were laid down : first one, found on the
tops of the hills, largely composed of pebbles of Potsdam sandstone ; second, a red
gravel, referred to the Cham plain period; lastly, the Trenton gravel or sand, holding
the human implements. These beds are therefore, geologically speaking, extremely
modern. They follow the Champlain age, in which it is supposed human relics have
been found elsewhere. Perhaps these Trenton beds correspond closely in age to the
lower-level gravels of the River Somme, in France. Hence, they cease to be of
importance in fixing a great antiquity for man in New Jersey. As the implements
clearly belong to the Palaeolithic age, they may cause archaeologists to bring this
ruder human period nearer to our own times. Mr. Lewis suggested that the name
of Esquimaux period might be used to designate the period of the formation of the
Trenton gravels.
In addition to the foregoing instances, we may add that the bones found at Saint
Prest, in France, the shell marls of Leognan, near Bordeaux, the Halitherium bones at
Puance, and the flints of Thenay, which have been supposed to prove Pliocene or
Miocene men, are now generally rejected by all careful scientists as evidence of the
early antiquity of humanity.
The same may be said of the human skeleton found in volcanic breccia, near Le
Puy-en-Velay, central France, the flints of the Somme Valley, the skeleton of Colle

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES. I 1
del Vento, in Liguria, and the remains dug from the lava beds of California, which
were for a time thought to be Preglacial. There is no cautious geologist who does
not now hesitate to employ these cases in support of the great antiquity of the human
race. Scientific men are less bold than formerly. As Mr. Southall states the case,
"there has been in the past altogether too much assumption. It is assumed that it is
unphilosophical to admit any more violent energies than those which existing opera
tions present ; it is assumed that the Glacial epoch is separated from our clays by a
vast cycle of time; it is assumed that the physical geography of the earth has not
been substantially modified for tens, or hundreds, or thousands of years ; it is assumed
that it requires long ages to effect the extinction of a fauna; it is assumed that eleva
tions and subsidences of land have occurred at the rate of two and a half feet in. a
century ; it is assnmed that the rivers of to-day are the same streams with the same
volume of water which existed at the close of the Glacial period ; it is assumed that it
requires the sequence of innumerable centuries to effect a transition from a harsh to a
temperate climate ; it is assumed that because no great river-horses, or huge probos-
cisticus, or powerful carnivores roam in our age through civilized Europe, a long and
protracted period must have intervened since the hippopotamus wallowed in the
marshes of the Thames, and the cave-lion roared on the Mendip Hills." The address
of Professor Ramsay, President of the British Association, at its meeting in August
last, was an attempt to show, that, whatever may have been the state of the earth
long before geological history began, all known formations are of a more recent date
than geologists have generally supposed.
Says Chancellor Dawson :
"As a geologist, and as one who has been in the main of the school of Lyell, and
after having observed with much care the deposits of the more modern periods on
both sides of the Atlantic, I have from the first dissented from those of my scientific
brethren who have unhesitatingly given their adhesion to the long periods claimed for
human history, and have maintained that their hasty conclusions on this subject must
bring geological reasoning into disrepute, and react injuriously on our noble science.
" AVe require to make great demands on time for the pre-human periods of the
earth's history, but not more than sacred history is willing to allow for the modern or
human age."
While thinking of this subject of the antiquity of man, we wonder, first, what
skeptical scientists would say had the Bible announced that man has been upon this
earth for one hundred thousand years, and that he originated from germs that came
from " meteoric fragments," or from the " ether of space; " second, we wonder why
the Bible did not make some of these statements.
These matters were certainly under quite general consideration at the time the
Bible was written.
Ancient Persians taught that a tempest was the universal author of all existences.
The Buddhist tracts say: "The world appears to have been self-created, as it was
natural at all times that the world should be self-created, and also perish of itself."

72 SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES.
Thales, the Milesian, whom Plutarch regards as the first of philosophers, affirmed
that water is the principle whence came all things in the universe, including the earth,
the stars, and the gods, and into water all these things shall be resolved.
Anaximenes, also of Miletus, assigned the principle of all being to air, as Profes
sor Barker lately assigned it to the ether of space. Anaximenes carried his views con
siderably further than does Professor Barker, claiming that as all things came from
air, so all things in the end will return to air; also that air is God. Thus also Dio
genes, of Apollonia, taught that the air has supreme intelligence and is a creator.
" It knows much," he said; " for it has arranged things in the best and most beautiful
manner." Anaxagoras held that homogeneousness is the cause of all things.
Pythagoras, the first who gave to philosophy its name, deduced the origin of all
things from arithmetical numbers, which in certain combinations result, he says, in a
producing force.
Heraclitus and Hippasus held that fire gives being to all things, and is that by
which all things reach their end.
AVe repeat the question, AVhy did the Babylonians, the Egyptians, the As
syrians, tlie peoples of India, the masses of China, — why did Herodotus, Thales,
Pythagoras, Aristotle, Plato, Zeno, Epicurus, and other Greeks and many Romans,
differ from the Book of Genesis? These men looked upon the same skies, walked the
same earth, had before them the same sources of information as did Moses. AVhy did
they not reach the same conclusions? Or how may we explain whence the great
Jewish lawgiver obtained information that enabled him, without making n mistake,
to employ words that so exactly answer all the demands of modern scholastic criticism
and scientific investigation? It must be allowed by every thoughtful person that
this question cannot be set aside with a sneer, but that it ought to arrest attention,
and receive from us sober and candid thought and reply.
Note IX. {Page 24.)
It has generally been held that two hundred feet of the summit of Mount AVash-
ington remained above the waters of the Drift. But Professor Young reported, before
the late meeting of scientists in Boston, that he had found unmistakable evidences of
drift-action quite near the summit. Later, after the adjournment of the Association,
many of the members went on an excursion to the top of Mount AArashington, where
they inspected the evidences of glaciation of the summit. The largest transported
bowlder found by them weighed nearly one hundred pounds, and corresponds per
fectly with the rock occurring upon Cherry Mountain, ten miles distant and three
thousand feet lower down. Hence, these figures express the distance travelled by
this bowlder, both horizontally and vertically, in the Glacial age. The rock is entirely
unlike that of Mount Washington itself; and as the bowlder was covered by the pecu
liar lichens growing naturally upon the summit, it could never have been brought
there by human agency. The specimen has been taken to the rooms of the Boston

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES. 73
Society of Natural History. Near the Signal Service station may be seen a surface
twenty or thirty feet long that has been evidently planed down by the ice ; some of
the surface recently uncovered still retaining its smoothness, and displaying obscure
striae pointing in a southeasterly direction. It has been recently stated by Professor
Hitchcock that numerous moraines cover the sides of Mount AVashington, such as
were made in the decline of the ice period, when the glacier gradually retreated to
the very summit, leaving blocks of stone arranged in curved lines or loops, with the
convex side lowest. Inside of the loops the ground is smooth, comparatively level,
and grassed over, representing the area occupied by the ice before it melted; while
the stones occupy the steep escarpment of the terrace, and also show some parallelism
with the general course of the moraine. Note X. {Page 24.)
Says Le Conte : " The mammalian fauna of the Quaternary era was almost wholly
peculiar, differing both from the Tertiary which preceded, and from the Present which
followed it."
• It is certainly and clearly evident that the few species of animals which may
have survived the Glacial and Drift epochs had a difficult struggle for existence.
They must have gone without much delay from their northern retreats to the distant
uplands of the Tropics, and then, upon the change of that intense cold to the milder
temperature, they must have very soon passed back over the desolations from which
they had been compelled to escape. From the nature of the ease, laut very few. com
paratively, could have survived.
Cautious geologists are ready to confess that the number of survivors is by no
means firmly established. Note XI. {Page 24.)
This qualification is allowed, because, as a matter of fact, few sciences have had
to change their hypothesis more frequently than geology. As to the point now under
consideration, it may turn out that what geologists have denominated the Lost Inter-
rals, which we have called " nights," may be the great working periods, and that the
so-termed periods of activity may really be the eras of repose. Still, whichever way
viewed, the six great geological divisions remain perfectly distinct. The following
additional grouping of the creative periods is given by Dr. Phin in his work entitled,
The Chemical History of the Six Days of Creation :

71

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES.

THE SIX DAYS OF CREATION.

PERIOD.
First Day.

Evening

Morning

['

csults from the primeval darkness existing
from the beginning.

'esults

from the chemical union and com
bustion of the elements.

WORK DONE.
The creation of
light, or the calling
into activity of the
physical forces.

Second Day.

Evening

Morning

esults from the cooling of the ashes of the
great combustion.
esults from the light of the great Central
Sun.

The creation of
the firmament, or the
arrangement of tlie
heavenly bodies and
interstellar spaces.

Third Day.

Evening

Morning

results from the cooling of the earth and the
deposition of dense clouds.
results from the clearing away of the clouds
and the shining of the Sun, day being ren
dered continuous by the enormous refractive
power of the primeval atmosphere.

Elevation of the
land, that is, the di-
¦ vision of the land
and water, and the
creation of plants.-

Fourth Day.

Evening

Morning

results from the obscuration of the Sun by
vapor.
results from the precipitation of this vapor

The ordaining of
the sun and moon as
and the clearing of tbe atmosphere, the j- governors of day and

refractive power of the latter being still
sufficiently powerful to produce continuous
day.

night.

Fifth Day.

Evening '
Morning

results from the separation of Venus from )
the >Sun.
results from the restoration of the brilliancy
of the Sun, which still shines continuously, j

Creation of fishes,
reptiles, and birds.

Sixth Day.

-p ¦ J results from the separation of Mercury from ~|
£,venm<, j tl s
1 I Creation of mam-
,,r - f results from the restoration of the Sun's | mals and man*
MornmS i brilliancy. j

Note XII. {Page 28.)
Says Mivart in concluding an article entitled, Likenesses, or Philosophical Anatomy :
" The teaching of what we believe to be true philosophy is that the types shadowed
forth to our intellects by material existences are copies of divine originals, and cor
respond to prototypal ideas in God."
Dr. McCosh, in a treatise entitled, The Development Hypothesis, illustrates the
thought before us thus : " AA'e see branchings in the old club-mosses and the sea
weeds in anticipation of the more perfect ramification in the tree. We notice flowers

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES. 75
radiating like the shell-fish which come at a later date. Insects have wings, propheti
cal of the better wings of birds. In the reptilian ages, we have monsters standing-
upright, and foretelling the erect form of man. There are thus in nature not only
material causes, but final; not only efficient, but formal. AVe cannot allow this
evolution doctrine to shear nature of its grandeurs, nor, we may add, morality of its
binding obligations, or the universe of its God."
Note XIII. (Page 30.)
At this point we call attention to the fact that in addition to the Biblical scholars
already referred to who favor the solar-day theory is Dr. Turner. In his Commentary
on Genesis he says: "It is evident that all subsequent sacred writers who take notice
of tho creation as a work of six days do invariably assume a literal sense of the word
' day.' "
Writers, on the other hand, who have clung quite tenaciously to the so-termed
"scientific periods," are Dr. Kurtz, Cuvier, De Luc, Jameson, Hugh Miller, Donald
McDonald, Taylor Lewis, Chancellor Dawson, and Professor Dana.
Note XIV. (Page 32.)
The darkness of this day is well stated in Dr. Phin's Chemical History of the
Creation :
"AVe have all seen the sun's face darkened by thunder-clouds when their black
masses were driven by fierce tempests across his disc. From the cheerful light of day
the change to intense gloom was rapid. The birds sought the densest shade, the wild
beasts fled to their lairs, and men's faces grew pale as they gazed upon nature and
upon each other. And yet all this was produced by clouds representing at most but a
few inches. of water.
" Again, we have seen a light, fleecy cloud of vapor floating away on a still day
from a passing locomotive,* ami throwing down its shadow upon the green fields — a
shadow black as ink. And yet, if all the water in this tiny cloud had been precipi
tated on the meadow over which it passed, it would not have deposited on the dark
ened area a depth of water equal to the tenth of an inch.
" What, then, must have been the darkness of that night when the clouds, which
wrapped the earth as with a swaddling-band, contained water sufficient to have cov
ered the whole surface of the earth to the depth of from four to five miles ? "
AVe may as well here, as elsewhere, speak of the word translated in the author
ized version "firmament," which we have translated " expanse."
The word in the original is " Rakia," whose verb meaning is to stretch or spread
out; hence, literally, the substantive form means an expansion or extension.
That a "solid vault" need not be meant is evident from other passages, as "the
fowl of the solid vault" is not sense. Thus also, "The way of the eagle is in the
solid vault," and "He causeth his Wind to blow in the solid vault," make no sense.

76 SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES.
The early Jewish lexicographers translated this word by " extension."
David Kimchi, born 1160, one of the most distinguished Hebrews of the Middle
Ages, gives the meaning " expanse."
All the early Spanish translators use the word Espandidura, meaning " expanse."
The early German versions — those by Zunz, Arnheim, and Sachs — assign no
other meaning than that of " expanse." Luther uses the word f este.
The next group of authorities is found among the French-Hebrew scholars who
flourished at the revival of learning.
Vatablus, Peter Martyr, and John Calvin use expansio in medio.
So, likewise, Munster in 1588, Mercerus of the same date, Osiander in 1597,
Valera in 1602, use estendimiento en medio.
Another group of authorities is found among German scholars of early date.
Mariana, 1624; Hottenger, 1659; Schmidt, 1697; Baumgarten, 1749; Zeller, same
date ; Schults, 1783 ; Dathius, 1791 ; Ilgen, 1798 ; and Gesenius in his lexicons of
1810-13. And we may add that nearly all the eminent lexicographers and commentators
of the present century, except, of course, skeptical writers who are desirous of support
ing some pet theory, or who are determined to make Moses say what he did not say,
favor the foregoing translation of rakia.
Note XV. (Page 33.)
A third way of bringing about the above geological results would be by the
elevation of the earth's crust. But as science now generally insists that the great
upheavals of the earth have been, not rapid, but gradual and uniform, we do not
include this method in our enumeration. Still, doubtless, we should have a perfect
right to do so. (See Note VIII.)
AAre may at this point comment upon the words translated "without form and
void." The words are tohu and bohu, confusion and emptiness ; or, as Luther admira
bly renders them, wiiste und leer. The Vulgate translates them, inanis et vacua.
It may be remarked that these terms do not often occur in Hebrew Scriptures,
and yet the places in which thej? are found are such as unquestionably give their true
meaning. In Deuteronomy xxxii. 10, tohu is used of the waste, wilderness, or desert
in which the children of Israel were so long wandering. In Job vi. 18. it denotes the
condition of the streams that disappear during the summer's drought. "They go up
(evaporate) into tohu; they perish." So also, in Job xii. 24, we read : "They wander
in tohu, where there is no path." In Isaiah xxiv. 10, tohu is applied to a ruined city.
In Isaiah xl. 17, 23, xii. 29, xlix. 4, lix. 4; 1 Samuel xii. 21, it is used to denote what
is utterly formless and worthless. Besides Genesis i. 2, there are two other places in
which both words occur together. In Jeremiah iv. 24, we read: "I looked upon the
earth, and it was tohu and bohu ; I looked to the heavens, and they no more gave their
light." " In this strange diorama the world would appear to be going back again

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES. 77
into the void and formless period. The mountains are unsettling; the hills move to
and fro ; man is gone ; bird and beast have fled, and are to be seen no more. The
representation strongly suggests Campbell's and Byron's vision of the Last Man, some
features of which might seem to have been drawn from this very passage." The
other passage is Isaiah xxx. 11. Speaking of the desolation of Idumea, the prophet
says: "From generation to generation shall it be waste; forever and ever shall no
one pass through it ; for He will stretch upon it the line of confusion and the stones of
emptiness," — the line tohu and the stones of bohu.
Note XVI. (Page 38.)
AVhile many elevations and subsidences are gradual, as lately in Chili" where
there were a series of small paroxysms, and in Sweden where the movements were
almost imperceptible, yet these facts in no way preclude the mighty, sudden, and
destructive changes which elsewhere and at other times have convulsed the earth.
Note XVII. {Page 34.)
In a recent address before the Torrey Botanical Club of New York, Dr. Newberry
argued that no new species of flora — to any extent at least — has appeared on the
surface of the earth since about the time of the great ice period. He shows that the
number of species before the Arctic irruption was much greater than now. As the ice
flowed south, plants were driven from temperate atmospheres to warmer ones, which
did not agree with them, and in some cases (like the Mediterranean Sea) met barriers
they could not pass, and consequently were destroyed. A few on the American Con
tinent could go further south than the same kinds in Europe ; hence there was a possi
ble chance of returning when the ice receded. Fossil remains show that the same
species existed at one and the same time in Japan and China, in Europe and in
America. None of tliese exist at present, except as fossils, in Europe, only a very
few in America, but most of them in Japan. The ice not having passed much below
where now is the Potomac, gave a chance for some of the magnolias, oaks, cypresses,
planes, &c, to get back gradually over the area left by the receding ice-fields. In
regard to the introduction of new classes of plants, Dr. Newberry finds no evidence of
any gradual development of one from another. He finds no link that unites the naked-
seed class, gymnosperms, with those enclosed in seed-vessels, angiosperms.
Note XVIII. (Page 35.)
It has been well said that next to the Bible, in its importance to man, stands the
almanac. " The first nations had no other almanac than the rolling heavens. Spring
and summer, ploughing, sowing and reaping time, were regulated by the rising and
setting of certain constellations." Their usefulness is referred to by the Greek and
Latin poets as well as by Bible writers. The thought is happily expressed by tho
old poet Aratus in the beginning of his Phenomena :

78 SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES.
" The stars' propitious power he shows to men,
And high in heaven firm binds their ruling signs."
This is almost a free translation of the language of Moses: "He set them in the
firmament for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and for years." Thus, also, Cicero
speaks of the stars as "the moderators or riders of those temporal vicissitudes by the
accurate knowledge of which man is distinguished from the brute." — Tusc. Quces.
I., 28. Note XIX. (Page 42.)
The following critical discussion of the word bara is substantially that given
some years since by Taylor Lewis : — Ihe word »ia seems to borrow some shades of its
meaning from the kindred root "na, which has the sense of cleansing, or purification,
from the primary ideas of separating, dividing, purifying, &c. So creation is a clear
ing up, a cleansing, or a bringing into order. It is an established principle of inter
pretation that the best understanding of the radical nature of any word is where both
the larger and the more specific applications seem to unite in the same image. For such
a passage see Joshua xvii. 18, where, in dividing the promised land among the tribes,
it is said to the sons of Joseph: "The mountain shall be thine; for it is a forest,
¦*£it***!aT, and thou shalt clear it," — literally, cut it, hew it, separate it, clear it up. The
reference is to the operation of bringing into order waste forest land, or turning the
chaos, the tohu and bohu of the wilderness, into a well-arranged and cultivated terri
tory. The primary sense of the Latin creare, whence our word "create," is somewhat
different, though still presenting the same general idea of gradual process, or the
production of one thing from another. This primary sense of creare is growth, as is
more clearly seen in the derivative cresco, and as it manifests itself in our words
"increase," "increment," &c. The generative sense is still more plainly exhibited
in the compounds, whence our words procreate, recreate, concreate, &c. To go
still farther back into the very elements of the primitive language, there cannot be
a doubt that the Latin and the Anglo-Saxon words have each the same cognate
radicals, CR and GR, and that therefore CReo and GRow present originally the same
conception. The Greek tpvatg has the same significance.
Note XX. {Page 43.)
Haeckel, in his History of Creation, thus states the case :
"At one part of the history of development (i. e., at the beginning) we must have
recourse to the miracle of a supernatural creation if we do not accept the hypothesis
of spontaneous generation. The Creator must in that case have created the first
organism, or a, few organisms, and have given them the capability of developing
further in a mechanical way. I leave my readers to choose between this idea and the
hypothesis of spontaneous generation."
We are perfectly willing to leave our readers to decide between these two

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES. ' 79
hypotheses, especially since there is not the slightest evidence of the origin of life
through spontaneous generation. (See pp. 43, 45, 46.)
Note XXI. (Page 45.)
AVe briefly note the meaning of some of the terms here employed. A protoplast
is a thing first formed; protoplasm is the substance out of which this first thing is
formed. It is chemically the viscid, nitrogenous material in all vegetable and animal
life-cells. Thus also of the terms "bioplast" and "bioplasm." A bioplast is a life-germ.
Mechanically, bioplasts build every part of animals and plants. Bioplasm is the
chemical composition of bioplasts. The dynamical aggregates, or highly differentiated
life-stuff, of materialistic physicists, the proligerous pellicles of M. Pouchet, the plas-
tide particles of Bastian, the monas of O. F. Muller, are, except in name, one and the
same things with these biojdasts treated of so extensively by Professor Beal.
But not one of these men can give us any light as to the origin of the life of the
bioplasts. Note XXII. {Page 49.)
The argument of Professor Barker, showing that the protoplasm of plants and of
animals is identical, is supported by the following facts :
Though the protoplasm of vegetables is enclosed within a cellulose bag, it is
onlv a closely-imprisoned rhizopod. A still more striking evidence of this intimate
relationship has been developed by Darwin in his researches upon insectivorous
plants. Not only do these plants possess a mechanism for capturing insects, but they
secrete a gastric juice which digests them. Another most curious proof of the iden
tity of animal and vegetable protoplasm has been given by Claude Bernard, who has
shown that both are alike sensitive to the influence of anaesthetics. A sensitive-plant
exposed to ether no longer closed its leaflets when touched. Assimilation and growth,
as well as germination, are arrested by chloroform. Schiitzenberger has proved that
the fresh cells of the yeast plant breathe like an aquatic animal. It would seem, then,
that the protoplasmic life of animals is identical with that of plants; a certain measure
of destructive metamorphosis taking place in each, evolving energy and producing
carbon-dioxide and water.
But it may be remarked that upon the closest examination the Professor is unable
to find that either the plant or the animal can vitalize protoplasm. The origin of life
in both the plant and animal is shrouded in mystery.
Note XXIII. (Page 50.)
Some of our readers may desire to know the distinction made between mediate
and immediate creation. It is this : When the Creator produces something by means
of an intervening object or agent, the action is termed "mediate"; that is, if the

80 SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES.
creative act enabled the soil to originate plants or animals, it was a case of mediate
creation. On the other hand, if the creative act originated plants and animals without any
intervening object or agent, it was a case of immediate creation.
Note XXIV. {Page 50.)
There are those who think they find a somewhat stronger wan-ant for the
mediate creation of vegetation than we have claimed. The following is from Profes
sor Taylor Lewis while commenting upon the passage before us :
"Here are two distinct things, — the going forth of the Omnific Word, as in the
other creative periods, and the productive power, energy, or energizing of the earth.
This latter is expressed by two different yet kindred Hebrew verbs. One of them,
vc£~, means properly to germinate (Greek @hxovipjat,; Vulgate, germinare), to bud, or
to sprout, as in Joel ii. 22: 'For the pastures of the wilderness do spring, the tree
beareth fruit; the fig-tree and the vine do yield their strength,' — ^eB^uoryxet, iu nedtu —
Quia germinaverunt speciosa deserti. There it is applied in Kal to the plant. Here in
Hiphil it has for its subject the earth, — 'Let the earth germinate, or cause to germi
nate.' It is the casual or causative conjugation; and although we would not attach
much importance to this standing alone and unsupported by the context, yet, in the
connection in which we here find it, it is certainly worthy of note. The other Hebrew
word means precisely what the English does, — to come forth; and, in the Hiphil con
jugation which is here used, to cause to come forth, or out, to bring forth, — to give
birth to, nasci facere, or cause to be born, which is the special sense it has in Job x. 18,
Isaiah Ixv. 9, and other places. The earth, then, was not a mere passive recipient,
nor was production by it a mere outward, unessential mode, having no other than
an arbitrary connection with the divine working, or employed merely as an accom
panying sign; but the earth exerts a real causative power, and this becomes an essen
tial and important part in the chain of causation which God saw fit to originate and
establish. The divine power was exerted ; but it was upon the earth and through the
earth. . . . The command is to the earth; but the earth is not passive. She exerts an
active obedience in the exercise of the old nature, modified by the new force which
comes from the supernatural Omnific Word going forth, as it previously did for the
separation of the light from the chaos, and the waters from the waters. Before it
was said, ' Let there be light ; ' and now again, Let there be life, — and life began to be.
As in all the other periods, so here there was doubtless the instantaneous beginning
of a new, and at first supernatural, force put into nature. Vegetable life had a
moment when it began to be, — a new thing upon the earth, unborn and undeveloped
out of anything previously existing. Tho earth, by any natural power previously
imparted or previously exercised, would never have produced it ; but then, when the
new energy is imparted, the mode, or law of production, is through the earth. . . .
The first plants grew ; they were made to grow in the earth, and by the earth, and

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES. 81
out of the earth. They were born of the earth; they were carried in her womb
during their respective periods of gestation ; their embryo, or foetal, life was fed from
her warmth and moisture ; and they afterwards were nurtured and grew up, each to
its perfection, on her maternal bosom. They grew; and growth is the cardinal idea
of the word ' nature.' "
It may also be noted in this connection that it is claimed as established by nearty
all scientists, that during geological periods the species arose in groups of like forms
in many parts of the world at once.
Note XXV. {Page 52.)
It should be observed, however, that the difference between man and the lower
orders, Biblically considered, is not made out from single words and phrases. The
difference is deducible, rather, from the combined force of the entire context, supported
by numerous facts. " Man," says the Scripture, "became a living soul " fn"**** 1BQ"*") .
But the animals also are spoken of as having nephesh hayya, breath of life, or soul
of life, or living soul. It is the general term for animation, like the Greek ipvyf,
eui/jv/og, including all that is not matter, whether we call it life, sense, feeling, or
intellect, from the lowest sentient to the highest rational being.
Note X-XATI. (Page 52.)
It is remarkable that scientific men are quite generally inclined to make a dis
tinction between man and the rest of creation. The author of Life : its True Genesis,
is in general representative. He says :
" The primordial germs of all living things, man alone excepted, are in them
selves upon the earth, and they severally make their appearance, each after its kind.
whenever and wherever the necessary environing conditions exist."
Virchow and Agassiz hold substantially the same view; also Professor Dana,
who says :
" For the development ofman, gifted with high reason and will, and thus made a
power above nature, there was required, as AArallace has urged, a special act of a
Being above nature, whose supreme will is not only the source of natural law, but the
working force of nature herself."
Says Le Conte :
" From the purely structural and animal point of view, man is very closely
united with the animal kingdom. He has no department of his own, but belongs
to the vertebrate department, along with quadrupeds, birds, reptiles, and fishes. He
has no class of his own, but belongs to the class Mammalia, along with quadrupeds.
Neither has he an order of his own, but belongs to the order of Primates, along with
monkeys, lemurs, &c. Even a family of his own, the hominidse, is grudgingly admit
ted by some. But from the psychical point of view, it is simply impossible to over
estimate the space which separates man from all lower things. Man must be set off,
6

82 SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES.
not only against the animal kingdom, but against the whole of nature besides as an
equivalent. Nature the book, the revelation, and man the interpreter.
" So in the history of the earth. From one point of view the era of man is not
equivalent to an era, nor to an age, nor to a period, nor even to an epoch. But from
another point of view it is the equivalent of the whole geological history of the earth
besides. For the history of the earth finds its consummation, and its interpreter, and its
significance in man." Note XXVII. (Page 52.)
While holding to the view that there has been a kind of evolution in the creation
and fitting up of the physical universe, we still insist that there is no evidence that
the evolution discovered is anything except a divine execution, according to a pre
viously existing plan. Evolution has no power; it is simply a method. This kind of
evolution is strictly Scriptural. (See Ps. cxxxix. 15, 16 )
Matter, likewise, has no intrinsic power ; at least, none has yet been discovered.
It can evolve or produce only as acted upon by some power outside itself.
Darwin was not atheistic in his conclusions; but certain materialists have since
carried his views so far as to deny all supernatural agency. But these extreme views
can be condemned upon strictly scientific grounds. They are self-condemned. There
are, for instance, fatal breaks in the line of succession. There are new species repeat
edly appearing for which no vestiges of ancestors can be found. To the claim that
we may yet discover the intermediate links and the producing ancestors, it has been
well replied that "for the present we must suit our hypothesis to the facts; and the
facts show wide gaps in the succession." .Haeckel has tried to derive the higher .
plants from algas, or sea- weeds. "Nothing," says Dr. Dawson, "could more curiously
contradict actual facts. Algae were apparently in the Silurian neither more nor less
elevated than in the modern seas; and those forms of vegetable life which may seem
to bridge over the space between them and the land jilants in the modern period are
wanting in the older geological periods, while land plants seem to start at once into
being in the guise of club-mosses, a group by no means of low standing. Our oldest
land plants thus represent one of the highest types of that cryptogamous series to
which they belong, and, moreover, are better developed examples of that type than
those now existing. AVe may say, if we please, that all the connecting links have
been lost ; but this is begging the whole question, since nothing but the existence of
such links could render the hypothesis of derivation possible." The same eminent
authority assures us that " there are forms of life in the Silurian which cannot be
traced to the Cambrian, and which relate to new and even prospective conditions
which the unaided powers of the animals of the earlier period could not have provided
for." Some well-known American geologists, in order to escape the involved difficul
ties, have favored the theory that instead of an unbroken series there has been once
and again the sudden and abrupt introduction of new species; they cannot tell how.
But this is begging the entire question when one attempts thus to do away with the
supernatural.

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES. Oo
The two classes of facts, however, whioh have figured most largely in support of
pure naturalistic evolution are those connected with embryonic phenomena and rudi
mentary organs. Haeckel argues that embiyonie phenomena prove the descent of
the various species of animals from a common parentage by the operation of the law
of "natural selection" and the "survival of the fittest." He shows that the human
fcetus in the womb passes successively through the forms of fish, reptile, and quadru
ped before developing into man. AVe each in our unborn state have gone through
these metamorphoses. And this, with all Darwinists, Haeckel claims is proof that
the human race has been " generatively descended and derived through these suc
cessive gradational races." Now, while this is a wonderful parallelism, it is no
proof. "There is no logical or causative relation discernible," says a careful scholar,
"between the two lines of succession. The embryo, in its successive transformation,
is an image or picture of the evolutional transformation through which the external
animal world passes. One shows no causation of the other, and the embiyonie series
only illustrates the fact that there is an order of creation. But be it specially here
noted, it does not illustrate a generative order. The succeeding stage of the fcetus is
not born of the preceding stage. It fails, therefore, in the very vital point of illus
trating the generative descent of later animal species from earlier. The embryonic
stages are produced simply by changes of the relative positions of the molecules ; but
these changes do not embrace the process of sexual concurrence, parturition, and
birth. If I take a mass of putty and manipulate it through* exactly the same changes
of form, I have precisely imaged the embryonic image of external evolutionary ani
mal developments, and the successive stages are most surely not genetically con
nected. The successive changes of shape — that is, the successive changes of
molecular position — are produced by the interposition of the formative forces pro
ceeding from the hands. The process is an admirable image of, and comment on, the
Mosaic text of the creative order of succession. It illustrates the divine fact that man
is a microcosm, a miniature of the. macrocosm, summing up all his created predeces
sors in himself, and rising in himself above them all. If there had been so many
successive births in the womb of successive foetuses, it would have been an illustration
of Darwinism. But being only a formal succession, so far as it is proof it establishes
' a formative, but not a generative succession. But whatever the external form of a
human fcetus, it never was at any stage a real fish, or tortoise, or dog. From the first
seminal element to the birth it was a man and nothing else ; that is, there resided in
the human seminal essence at the first the formative power, superior to and overmas
tering all its forms, which did not reside in that of the lower animals."
Rudimentary organs, likewise, are claimed to establish the doctrine of materialistic
evolution. Mr. Darwin tells us that the boa-constrictor has in the hinder part of the
body some useless little bones, which, as he supposes, are the remains of lost hind
legs. The mammals of the whale tribe, which have only fully developed fore legs
(breast fins), have, further back in the body, another pair of utterly superfluous bones,
which are claimed to be the remnants of undeveloped hind legs. Now these, and a

84 SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES.
great variety of other rudimentary organs, Darwin, Tyndall, Huxley, and others
declare are utterly inexplicable on any theory except that of evolution.
In brief, it will be noticed, that, according to the theory of evolution, the animal
must always be developed upwards, for deterioration inevitably tends to ultimate
destruction. But what are the facts in the case? If the useless bones in the hinder
part of the boa-constrictor are rudiments of lost hind legs, then it has been developed
to its present condition from an animal that had legs and could walk; that ancestor
was developed from a former ancestor that had no legs, as the common ancestor had
none. But it must be admitted that the possession of legs is an advantage over the
non-possession of them. Hence, the logical conclusion is that natural selection, which,
according to Darwin, "works on for ages unerringly, preserving every improvement
and destroying that which has deteriorated," did develop, by almost countless slight
successive modifications from some legless fish or mollusk, the boa-constrictor with
legs, thereby improving its condition; but afterwards, through other almost countless
generations, finally "aborted and took from it its legs, leaving in their place these
little bones, for no other apparent reason than to aid evolutionists in proving descent
by transmutation." The evolutionist also says that the hump on the camel's back strengthens the
back and aids in carrying heavy loads. He therefore claims that the hump was
developed by the necessity for its existence. This argument is, however, anything
but convincing to a thoughtful mind^ since tho hump is not of "an osseous nature,"
does not strengthen the back, and existed long before the camel ever carried a load.
Professor Haeckel still further theorizes that the whole family of whales and fish
mammals (cetacea) were developed out of hoofed animals. But if this is the case,
then, as has well been asked, "AVhy is the whale the only one which has the rudi
mentary hind legs? And if the theory is correct, evolution spent a hundred million
years in evolving a fish into a bull, horse, elk, or some other hoofed animal, and then
spent another hundred million years in degrading it back into a fish again, thus pro
ducing an effect the exact opposite of evolution ; a transformation from the complex
and heterogeneous back into the simple and homogeneous.
Many genuine fishes, we are told by Professor Haeckel, have lost their hind legs.
But if this is the case, then "they have been developed downward toward the mollusk,
and evolution works both ways, which is absurd, for then below the lowest Silurian
strata may be found deposits containing the remains of fishes, reptiles, birds, mam
mals, monkeys, and men. Once admit that matter is eternal, and it would be easy to
imagine this see-saw operation going on from eternity — natural selection putting
legs upon a fish and making it a cow, and again taking them off and making it a fish! "
Mr. Darwin is sorely puzzled over the fact that the dugong and lamantin, which
must have been developed into their present condition much more recently than the
whale, have no rudiments of legs at all ; but it seems never to have occurred to him
that possibly neither they nor the whale ever had any legs, and that the boa may
never have been anything but a snake. The simple fact is that this theory of rudi-

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES. 85
mentary organs is simply a muddle in the brains of its expounders, which not even
Darwin pretends to understand. The theory of type and antitype, rather than evolu
tion, is the natural, easy, and scientific solution of this class of phenomena.
Note XXVIII. (Page 56.)
The history of evolution theories is interesting. Since the time of Augustine,
who thought that animals, by the power of God, might have come from the slime of
the earth, scientific men have generally held that all plants came from seed, and all
animals from animal parentage. But there have arisen, from time to time, those who
denied the commonly accepted doctrine. De Maillet, at the beginning of the last cen
tury, argued that animals were originally formed in the waters which covered the earth,
and were transferred to the land when it emerged, and then suited themselves to their
new external circumstances. Lamarck, in 1801, started the theory that there is " an
inherent principle of improvement in plants and animals, and that external conditions
working on this produced gradually variations of species, which gave rise to new
species, genera, and orders." Tlie Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation, issued
in 1844, produced a profound impression. It was ingeniously argued by the author
that "creation took place according to law; and in particular, that simply a prolonga
tion of the time of the development in the womb may give rise to a higher type."
Universal attention was called to the subject of development when, in 1858, Charles
Darwin, a very careful observer, published his work, Origin of Species by Means of
Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Paces in ihe Struggle for Life.
Note XXIX. (Page 57.)
See Note XXV., p. 81.
Note XXX. (Page 59.)
The similarity of method adopted by the "God-said" in the creation of the first
human pair, and by the " God-word " in working miracles in Judea, is striking. (See
Luke xxii. 49-51; John xi. 1-54; Luke vii. 11-16; John ix. 1-38; Mark viii. 22-26;
John ii. 1-11.) Note XXXI. (Page 60.)
We may note the following opinions of distinguished men as to the unity of the
human race :
Adelung, in his great work upon Language, says: "Asia has been in all times
regarded as the country where the human race had its beginning, received its first
education, and from which its increase was spread over the rest of the globe. Tracing
the people up to tribes, and the tribes up to families, we are conducted at last, if not
by history, at least by the tradition of all old people, to a single pair, from which
families, tribes, and nations have been successively produced."

86 SUPPLEMENTAL NOTES.
Says Dr. John Charles Hall, in his Introduction to Pickering's Paces of Men :
" We are fully satisfied that all the races of man are, as the Gospel clearly expresses
it, ' of one blood,' — the black man, red man, and the white man are links in one
great chain of relationship, and alike children which have descended from one com
mon parent."
Buffon, in his Natural History, says : " Every circumstance concurs in proving
that mankind are not composed of species essentially different from each other ; on
the contrary, there was originally but one species, which, after multiplying and
spreading on the whole surface of the earth, has undergone various changes by the
influences of climate, food, mode of living, epidemic diseases, and the mixture of dis
similar individuals."
Dr. Prichard, in his Physical History of Mankind, after speaking of -the higher
endowments of mankind, concludes thus : " When we compare this fact with the
observations which have been heretofore fully established as to the specific instincts
and separate physical endowments of all the distinct tribes of sentient beings in the
universe, we are entitled to draw confidently the conclusion that all human races are
of one species and one family.'1''
AV. Lawrence, F.R.S., in his Lectures on the Natural History of Man, says: "The
human species has numerous distinctive marks by which, under every circumstance
of deficient or imperfect civilization and every variety of climate and race, it is sepa
rated by a broad and clearly-defined interval from all other animals."
Chancellor Dawson, in Nature and the Bible, after surveying the early history of
man, says : " AVe may so surely conclude that all the above coincidences cannot be
accidental, and that what we know of primitive man from geological investigation
presents no contradiction to the history of his origin in the Bible, but rather gives
such corroboration as warrants the expectation, that, as our knowledge of prehistoric
men increases, it will more and more fully bring out the force of those few and bold
touches with which it has pleased God to enable his ancient prophets to sketch the
early history of our species."

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 01444 0235

VALE