46 



CONSTANCE L. MAYNARD ON 



His first coming our Lord Jesus Christ displayed pre-eminently the 

 love of God; but *' the day of vengeance of our God " is reserved 

 for His second coming. 



"The Bible has an outer shell as well as an inner kernel." 



If science may at times appear to kill the shell, it still leaves 

 the kernel unscathed- The Bible speaks primarily to man's heart, 

 rather than to his intellect. To the Christian it is not of conse- 

 quence whether the life of the present world is thought to be the 

 result of evolution through long ages, or was brought in by the 

 Divine fiat, as an act of creation after a period of chaos- But 

 whichever view be held, there is no doubt that man is not the 

 result of evolution, for "God created man in His own Image." 

 I find it best to take Gen. I. literally, including the six days ; 

 but this does not forbid an interval between verses 1 and 2 as vast 

 as any geologist may require, and which can contain all the specu- 

 lations of science, for the Bible passes over it in silence- The 

 mere fact that science alters or amends its theories every few 

 years, and requires fresh handbooks continually, while the Bible 

 stands for all time, should be sufficient to indicate the unreliability 

 of the former when it opposes revelation. 



Dr. ScHOFiELD thanked Miss Maynard for her valuable and 

 charming paper that left such a delightful taste behind it. With 

 reference to the disputed unity of authorship of Isaiah, he remarked 

 that the first half of Isaiah has God's people for its subject, the 

 second half the coming Messiah ; and that a chief difficulty in 

 supposing dual authorship is that the man who wrote chapters 40 

 to 66 could possibly have remained unnamed and unknown- With 

 reference to Gen. I- he said: — 



Its great value is that it is absolutely unscientific. Had it been 

 otherwise and written in the science of its time, it would certainly 

 have to be amended and altered at least every 50 years. 



Dr. Schofield said : I put this years ago to Canon Driver, who 

 pointed out that the writer probably thought the firmament was an 

 inverted copper bowl over the earth with small holes for the rain, 

 and other apertures for sun, moon and stars. I asked him, "If I 

 grant that this probably represented the last word of the science of 

 his day, of which he must have been as proud as we are of ours 

 to-day, how is it he says nothing about it in the chapter ? What 

 power restrained him from writing scientifically, and what mind 

 guided him to using instead, broad words without definition that 

 stand for the science of all ages ? 



Mr. W- HosTE wrote : — 



Our thanks are due to Miss Maynard for her most 

 interesting reminiscences This is not the first time that 

 Girton, at least, has justified her existence to the Victoria Institute. 

 I was reminded in reading the paper, of Pascal's remark, " Le 



