ON THE FUTURE EXISTENCE OF THE LOWER ANIMALS. 43 
meet for him.” Ithink we must infer from this that animals 
were of higher intelligence and much better able to converse with 
man than they are now} for the passage appears to imply that 
although Adam gave them all names, and made companions of 
them as much as possible, yet it became evident that he needed 
a still more equal companion, and therefore Eve was created. 
The fact that Eve was not startled when addressed by the serpent 
seems also to shew that animals were originally able to converse 
with mankind. 
We will now proceed to consider the question—Shall the 
animals ever be restored to their original state of bliss, and be 
recompensed for the many sufferings and hardships which they 
now endure? S. Paul, in the 8th chapter of Romans tells us 
that ‘the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but 
by reason of Him who hath subjected the same in hope.’ ‘The 
creature’? cannot here refer to the human race, for in the 
following verses he goes on to say ‘‘The whole creation” (or 
‘every creature”) groaneth and travaileth together until now, 
and not only they, but ourselves also,’ whence it follows that ‘ the 
creature itself,’”” which, as he proceeds to say, ‘‘ shall be delivered 
- from the bondage of corruption,” does not refer to the human 
race. Again, there is a remarkably clear reference to the subject 
in the 104th Psalm, where the Psalmist, after referring to various 
species of animals, says (in the 30th verse), ‘‘ When Thou takest 
away their breath, they die, and are turned again to their dust ;” 
and in the following verse, ‘‘ When Thou lettest Thy breath to go 
forth they shail be made, and Thou shalt renew the face of the 
earth.” Here the future renovation of the earth is spoken of in 
close connection with the resurrection of the lower animals. 
In the description of the state of things during the millennium, 
given in Isaiah xi., we read of various sorts of animals dwelling 
together in peace and harmony. By many the passage is con- 
sidered to have only a figurative meaning; but is it not safer to 
interpret no Scripture in a figurative sense which is capable of 
being understood in a literal one? Others, while admitting that 
the lions, oxen, bears, etc., refer to animals, do not deem it 
