Archaia. 477 



Again in speaking of the literary character of the scriptural 

 cosmogony our author says : — 



" The labours of the ablest biblical critics give us every reason to con- 

 clude that the received text of Genesis preserves, almost •without an iota 

 of change, the beautiful simplicity of its first chapter; and that we now 

 have it in a more perfect state than that in which it was presented to 

 the translators of most of the early versions. It must also be admitted 

 that the object in view was best served by that direct reference to the 

 creative fiat, and ignoring of all secondary causes, which are conspicuous 

 in this narrative. This is indeed the general tone of the Bible in speak- 

 ing of natural phenomena ; and this mode of proceeding is in perfect 

 harmony with its claims to divine authority. Had not this course been 

 chosen, no other could have been adopted, in strict consistency with 

 truth, short of a full revelation of the whole system of nature, in the 

 details of all its laws and processes. Had this alternative been adopted 

 who could have read or comprehended the vast encyclopedia which 

 would have been produced. The moral ends of a revelation would have 

 been sacrificed, and we would have been excluded from the fresh and 

 exciting exploration of actual nature." (page 29.) 



On the difficult subject of the inspiration of Scripture, this book 

 gives no uncertain sound. While insisting that science should 

 enter upon its investigations with an untrammelled and fearless 

 freedom, it at the same time bows with submission to the revealed 

 word of God. It shows clearly " that there is no hypothesis short 

 of that of plenary inspiration that will allow us to attach any value 

 whatever to the biblical records," and that they could not have been 

 the result of ancient scientific enquiries or intuitive knowledge. 

 While the primitive civilization was by no means despicable it 

 yet can not be said to have attained to such a knowledge of the 

 laws and phenomena of the universe as could constitute a basis 

 for the cosmogony of Scripture. Our author justly remarks that 

 the narrative of creation " bears no internal evidence of having 

 been the result of inductive enquiry, but appeals at once to faith " 



"it refers to conditions of our planet respecting which science 



has even now attained to no conclusions supported by evidence, 

 and is not in a position to make dogmatic assertions." In regard 

 to the mythical hypothesis, the great dream of German infidelity, 

 he combats the views of Prof. Powell of England, and points out 

 the fallacy of many of that able writer's positions. The mythic 

 theory is however one that science is least competent to deal 

 with. History and Philology are the true weapons with which 

 to confront it. By these the Germans themselves have achieved 

 a signal victory. 



