149 
much overwhelming evidence. It will be glad to compare its 
teaching with the discoveries and progressive theories of modern 
research. It will be willing to suspend its judgment rather 
than, lightly, repudiate the conclusions of so venerable, and so 
sacred, a record. 
The students of Science and the students of Scripture will 
thus have common ground. They will be glad to meet and to 
discuss their apparent differences. They will be anxious to hear 
what can be advanced in the way of defence of what is old or of 
accommodation of what is new. But there is one condition 
which, it is obvious, must be observed by both parties. There 
must be a fair statement of facts on both sides. There must 
be no partiality, there must be no concealment, there must be 
no distortion, out of deference to already-received opinion. 
The student of Science has a right to demand that the 
biblical student shall present to him the simple and true 
meaning of the original records. And it is only on this under- 
standing that healthy intercourse between them can continue. 
If there is any suspicion that the translation is tampered with 
in order to favour any special theory, all confidence is at an 
end. The duty of the biblical student, as such, is to give the 
meaning of the original narrative in its plainest terms, quite 
irrespective of what scientific consequences may ensue. Let 
him do this earnestly and diligently, and men of science will 
not be indifferent to his labours, however unpretentious they 
may be. But, if they cannot read the Scriptures for themselves, 
in the original languages, and have no guarantee that others, 
whose business it is to understand them, are dealing fairly with 
them ; then it is, surely, no wonder if they altogether abandon 
the Scriptures .as worthless for scientific purposes, or at any 
rate, as unintelligible. 
Let us take for example the Mosaic record of Creation in 
the first chapter of Genesis. It is not for the biblical student 
to commence by asking whether modern science will allow of 
the first verse being introductory to the rest. It is immaterial 
to him, in his capacity of biblical interpreter, whether modern 
science allows of it or not. The question for him is, how far 
the Hebrew original necessitates it. If the matter is decided 
by the original, then let him honestly say so, and let him leave 
the scientific consequences to take care of themselves. There 
will be no lack of scientific men to discuss those consequences. 
And, in this case, it appears to me that there can be no reason- 
able doubt on the subject. It appears to me that the language 
of the second vei’se necessitates an interval of delay between 
the action of the first verse and that of the verses which 
follow. The earth had become without form and void (sy evsto) 
