128 RemarJcs on Prof. Stuarfi examination of Gen. I. 



which could not have been completed in the time stated by Moses 

 interpreted to the letter. Here Prof. Stuart directly meets them. 

 " Our inquiry is," he says, (p. 54.) " What does the language of 

 Moses mean ? We propose to solve this question simply by philo- 

 logy : they [the geologists] tell us we must not so construe Moses 

 as to contradict their geology, and that geology must be called in as 

 the final umpire, where doubt and dispute may arise. We make the 

 appeal from such a court." And again. " They are sure that their 

 decision of a scientific nature about the earth must be well ground- 

 ed. As pliilologists we say : Be that so or not, it is nothing to the 

 question, what the record of Moses means. If they please, let it be 

 a question whether Moses has taught wrongly or rightly ; but it 

 never can be a question with philologists, whether modern science is 

 to be the final judge of what an ancient writing means. This is as 

 settled as the first principles of interpretation, and as the first laws 

 of reason and the human mind in relation to this subject." And 

 again, (p. 55.) " One simple thing is his [the philologist's] business ; 

 and that is merely to seek, by the aid of usual, well known, and es- 

 tablished principles of interpretation, after what his author has said 

 or declared. This done, his work is at an end." The geologists 

 respond, that they wish to apply no rules of interpretation, which are 

 not sanctioned by high authority ; and that as to the exact limit of 

 twenty four hours to a day — " As a geologist Moses did not surely 

 write," substituting the word geologist for the word astronomer, in 

 Prof. Stuart's short method of freeing himself from all the difficulties 

 of the Copernican system. They say likewise with Prof Stuart, 

 (p. 50.) " there are many things adverted to and spoken of in the 

 scriptures, which by no means constitute of themselves a revelation," 

 that " the sacred waiters were not commissioned to teach geology or 

 any of the natural sciences," and that " so often as any of these sub- 

 jects are adverted to in the Bible, it is altogether in a popular way 

 of speaking;" and they ask, if Prof. Stuart himself will urge such 

 considerations as these in support of meteorologists, why he is not 

 equally liberal to geologists. 



But says Prof. Stuart, (p. 74.) " Moses tells us expressly in Ex. 

 20: 11. that in six days God made heaven and earth, and all that 

 is in them ; and then he rested on the seventh day ;" and (p. 76.) 

 " To the law and to the testimony, then, I answer, for we are not 

 discussing novi^ what geology has found out to be true, or guesses to 

 be true, but simply what Moses has written and what he meant. 



