130 Remarks on Prof. Stuart's examination of Gen. L 



" God made the firmament" that is, an expanse "solid and exten- 

 ded/' " and divided the waters which were under the firmament from 

 the waters which were above the firmament]" Do we not read, 

 " The earth brought forth grass," that God set two great lights 

 " in the firmament of the heaven," and that the waters " brought 

 forth" fish and fowl ? — Are not these " real affirmations?" — and affir- 

 mations " as to particulars ?" as much so, at least, as 6: the evening 

 and the morning were the first day," and "the evening and morning 

 were the second day ?" — Now if Prof. Stuart, claims, that any of 

 these affirmations can be philologically modified, he is bound to show 

 why, on clear, distinct, and acknowledged philological principles, 

 all cannot be ; and, his philosophy being out the question, that bis 

 .philology would still make a difference. If in his exposition of the 

 former passages, he has not passed by, winked out of sight, or turn- 

 ed awry " any of the declarations that Moses has actually made as 

 to particulars," the geologists claim, that in their exposition of the 

 latter passages, they are equally innocent of these high offences. 

 11 Where among them all," [the geologists,] asks Prof. Stuart, 

 • (p. 54.) is one profound critic and interpreter of the Scriptures ; or 

 where has there ever been one ?" We have now, respond the geolo- 

 gists, what is better; a profound critic and interpreter of the scrip- 

 tures, among our opponents, virtually making every concession we 

 ask for. 



Prof. Stuart himself says, (p. 55.) that "the common principles 

 of interpreting words must be carried through and through," and 

 the geologists agree with him in this position. Their objection is, 

 that he has gone only half through ; that he has adopted princi- 

 ples of interpretation in reference to meteorology and astronomy, 

 which he has lost sight of when he comes to geology ; and that in- 

 stead of going " through and through," he has stopt short, and been 

 guided by principles essentially different, in reference to this latter 

 science. 



These remarks have sprung from no disposition to cavil. What 

 have been pointed out as inconsistencies in Prof. Stuart's examina- 

 tion of the first Chapter of Genesis, have been honestly felt to 

 be such ; and this statement is now made public, with the hope, that 

 it will lead to a clearer elucidation of the subject, when the Professor 

 shall again write on geology. The writer of these remarks, honors 

 Prof. Stuart for his literary zeal, and would willingly sit at his feet, 

 to be instructed in the true Mosaic cosmogony, or in any other sub- 

 ject. K. 



