the Geology of Scripture. 257 



is a fact directly opposed to this theory. Many of the second- 

 ary strata were not deposited under the sea, but in fresh- 

 water lakes, or estuaries: this was undoubtedly the case 

 with the Wealden beds of Sussex and Kent, and with the 

 greater part of the coal formation. Some of the lower beds of 

 coal are intermixed with marine fossils ; but there are at least 

 upper and middle coal strata, 1000 ft. in thickness, and 

 several hundred square miles in extent, without a vestige of 

 marine remains. In some of the secondary strata you discover 

 where the plants have grown ; but their growth could not 

 have taken place under the ocean. We are not, however, 

 obliged to resort to geological facts to overturn Mr. Fairholme's 

 assertions ; we can demonstrate the fallacy of his principles by 

 his own words. Mr. Fairholme tells us that the continent 

 on which Noah descended from the ark was not the old con- 

 tinent on which he had before lived. The sacred historian, 

 however, expressly tells us it was the same continent, and 

 not a new one. In naming the rivers of Paradise, the sacred 

 writer enters into rather a minute geographical description of 

 the countries through which the Euphrates and the other 

 rivers run ; showing that he clearly intended to describe the 

 old continent as the same which was inhabited after the flood. 

 How does Mr. Fairholme reconcile this with his theory, and 

 with his first principle, that the sacred Scriptures are infallible 

 in evety point, and are to be literally interpreted? The reader 

 will be utterly astonished when he finds that Mr. Fairholme 

 rejects the whole passage as an interpolation, though he had 

 not the slightest evidence for this whatever, except that the 

 passage disagrees with his own theory ; he even admits that 

 he has no authority for rejecting the passage; but he says 

 there have been interpolations of the New Testament. Few 

 readers are so ignorant as not to know this ; but no sound 

 biblical critic ever thought himself justified in rejecting or 

 altering a text, unless he was supported by some ancient 

 copy. Mr. Fairholme tells us that Mr. Granville Penn dis- 

 covered an interpolation in the Gospel of St. John, about the^ 

 water of Bethsaida ; we are hence left to infer that Mr. Fair- 

 holme may safely reject a passage relating to the waters of 

 Paradise ! It is passing strange that Mr. Fairholme can allow 

 himself such liberty with sacred Scriptures, infallible in every 

 point, and that he will not allow the geologist to substitute the 

 word age, or epoch, for day, though it is by these terms that 

 the days of creation are expressly described in writings of the 

 most ancient Eastern nations. The axiom of Mr. Fairholme, 

 that the Scriptures are infallible in every point, is placed at 

 the beginning of his volume, p. 24-. ; the part in which he rudely 

 Vol. VI. — No. 33. s 



