251 
dry land, and not land and water in a state of chaos. I contend that the 
most obvious meaning is the most probable and accurate one. The “ heavens ” 
refers to the sky and all beyond, and “ the earth ” to the earth and waters 
together ; and darkness then 11 was on the face of the deep.” In confirmation 
of this, the context tells us of no creation of water afterwards, but only of 
“ the waters ” (assumed to exist) being gathered together in one place, so 
that the dry land, formerly covered or moist, then should appear. The world 
also was created, as a whole, in its elements and principles, but not in form 
— though of course it must have had some shape— for there could be no form 
in darkness. If you get rid of light, you get rid of “ form ” at once. I 
approach a discussion of an exegetical kind with some reluctance, both 
because I do not like much exegesis in our papers, and because I would 
fain speak with great deference in the presence of the clergy and of the 
author of the paper before us. But I am obliged to say that the very terms 
in which the Flood is first spoken of, “ And behold I do bring a flood of 
waters upon the earth,” seem to me to indicate that that was the first time 
this had been done, and that it was not a second flood. The second would 
have been as nothing to the first that took place, and still less to the series 
of floods which Mr. Moule seems to think occurred. I shall not, however, 
take up with that theory until I find that geology has given us substantial 
ground for holding it. With regard to the universality of the Noachian flood, 
there are, no doubt, great difficulties about it ; and I must even say that I 
would much rather adopt the theory of a partial flood than the theory of 
Mr. Moule. I do not understand how any one can bring himself to believe 
that since the flood of Noah there has been a creation of wild beasts and 
other creatures ; and indeed it is rather contrary to the whole theory and 
tone of Mr. Moule’s paper to suppose that wild beasts could have been 
created as such. I prefer to hold what appears to be the more Scriptural 
view, that a state of savagery or wildness was introduced among the animals 
as a consequence of the fall. That much more accords with the theory 
of the creation and the fall of man, and the renewing of the earth and the 
restoring of man though Christ. We have St. Paul’s allusion to “ the whole 
creation groaning and travailing together in pain,” evidently as a consequence 
of the fall. But we must take up that question hereafter, when we have a 
paper in reference to it, for it will not do to touch it merely incidentally. 
But there are great difficulties in dealing with a theory so perfectly novel 
as the one now before us ; for this is the first time I ever heard of the waters 
covering the face of the earth being translated into meaning that there had 
been a previous deluge in a world of total darkness. The paper must be 
further considered carefully after we have the whole of the arguments before 
us in print, which I regret was not possible to-night. 
Rev. C. A. Row. — I will not trespass long upon the meeting ; but inasmuch 
as this paper is eminently theological, I cannot help expressing an opinion 
upon it. I think that as a mode of interpreting the holy Scriptures, it will 
hardly be supported by one theologian out of a hundred. The principles of 
interpretation which it puts forward are, I think, exceedingly dangerous 
