THE MUSEUM. 



177 



The Mosaic Account of Crea- 

 tion Versus Science* 



The articles in the last two numbers 

 of the Museum, on the above subject, 

 have tempted me to reply from the re- 

 verse side the writer seems to favor. 



About the year 1885, Albert Reville, 

 D D., first professor of religion at the 

 College of France, gave to the world 

 a noted book called "Protegom- 

 ines de 1' Historic des Religeous," with 

 an introduction by Prof. Max Muller. 

 The volume attracted considerable at- 

 tention in England, in fact throughout 

 the civilized world. 



The Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, 

 ex-prime minister of England, attacked 

 the book in the columns of the Quar- 

 terly Review, and if a search was made 

 throughout the whole world, it's quite 

 possible a more suitable man could not 

 be found to champion the cause of the 

 Bible against Science. His vast fund 

 of information, his great knowledge of 

 the dead languages, his strong theolog- 

 ical opinions, and his well known liter- 

 ary power, all conduced to make him 

 the most suitable champion for the 

 cause of the Bible. 



In the volume mentioned. Dr. Be- 

 ville states his unbelief in the Mosaic 

 account of the creation, and Mr. Glad- 



*The editor of the Museum wishes to say to 

 its readers that he does not consider the views 

 set forth in any article appearing in its pages 

 as necessarily representing his own views on 

 any subject, or that in the pnblication of 

 articles he is setting out to the world his own 

 personal convictions, (and especially in re- 

 gard to the article above he finds much 

 not harmonizing with his own opinions ) 



In this connection too, he wishes to say 

 that while any article will be open to criti- 

 cism in a fair and candid way and without 

 personality itis not designed. nor will be allow- 

 ed to open its pages widely to argumentation 

 and therefore all criticism must in the future 

 study brevity or be rejected; and with a re- 

 ply if deserved by the original writer of the 

 article also as concise as possible the subject 

 must rest. 



stone attempts to prove that Geneses 

 and science agree. The several arti- 

 cles bearing on the subject, in the Quar- 

 terly Review, have been published in 

 book form, -and are by the Right Hon. 

 W. E. Gladstone. Prof. T. H. Hux- 

 ley, F. R. S,, Prof. Max Muller, Dr. 

 Reville, Mr. Lynton and Mr. Glad- 

 stone is strong on the Pentateuch, and 

 Prof. Huxley is stronger on science. 

 The writer of the two articles in the Mu- 

 seum would do well to get this book, 

 also Prof. Tyndal's "Beginning of 

 Things," and Prof. Huxley's "Lectures 

 on evolution" in New York, by the same 

 publishers, and by the time he has got 

 through with these, it's quite possible 

 he may realize that he had not quite so 

 strong a case as he imagined. 



It's a well known fact that the ma- 

 jority of the great leaders of science 

 do not recognize the creation of Gene- 

 sis. It's true. Prof. Drummond, of 

 Glasgow, came over here to Lowell, 

 to lecture, and tried to make black, 

 white. An English scientific journal 

 spoke of it in this style: " If Prof. 

 Drummond did make any influence on 

 the American intellects, as Reconcilers, 

 it would not be much compliment to 

 them." 



Facts are stubborn things, and these 

 exist in the evidence of the rocks, 

 against a most perplexing assortment 

 of errors in the Genesis. A Divine 

 book should be free from either errors 

 of translation or anything else; but 

 what do ■ we find.' Authorities out of 

 number, differing on nearly all points. 

 It seems only as yesterday that Bishop 

 Colenso was cut adrift, because he 

 could not (like De Reville) swallow the 

 Pentateuch, and recently I read that 



* Order of Creation, 75 cents, cloth; Inves- 

 tigator office, Applelon street, Boston, Mass. 



