THE FIRST CHAPTER OF GENESIS. 



131 



evolution and development of the fifth, and that of the fifth 

 day, as arising in like manner continuously from that of the 

 fourtli, and so backward from the be^uinning. The fiat of the 

 Almighty, repeated six times over, implies the introduction of a 

 new principle on each occasion, and the commencement of a new 

 continuity, which held from that time forward and raised the 

 Creature in each case to a higher plane. We often speak of 

 Creation as a single act, and there is a sense in which that holds 

 good. But this first chapter of Genesis declares the truth that 

 God accomplished Creation, not in a single act, but in several ; 

 — there were several creations. 



This was not because the first creation broke down or was a 

 failure. The creation of the first day was good and complete 

 in itself ; it has never been superseded ; light is with us to-day 

 in all its beauty and worth ; it was created good, it remains 

 good. And so with the other creations, each in their turn. 



But because these separate fiats were creations, they escape 

 the research of science. Science deals only with relations, the 

 relations between created things ; it can only consider secondary 

 causes, and it is lunited by the continuity of their operation. 

 That which precedes the continuity of nature is creation ; that 

 which follows creation is continuity. Hence the two terms are 

 mutually exclusive ; any event or phenomenon that falls within 

 the range of continuity is not creation, and the act of creation 

 is no incident of continuity. 



In considering most of the discussions that have been 

 held over this chapter, discussions which have had for their 

 purpose to ascertain the bearing of science upon it, whether to 

 confirm or to contradict its record, it will, I think, be recognized 

 that generally the real question raised has been whether the 

 order of events as given in Genesis is the same as the order of 

 development as suggested by evolution. 



Surely this is a fundamental mistake. We must believe that 

 if God had thought fit. He could have spoken the word " Let 

 the world l>e" and it would have straiglitway followed that "the 

 w^orld was " ; and it would have been potentially, if not in out- 

 ward form and appearance, all that we behold of it to-day. 

 This is, in effect, the assumption made by both the contending 

 schools, — equally by those who hold that the course of evolution 

 confirms the narrative in Genesis, as by those who claim that it 

 is contradicted thereby. It was not once only, but six times, 

 that God spake and it was done ; and that statement implies 

 not six stages in a single continuous evolution, but six distinct 

 exertions of creative power. • 



K 2 



