SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES. 
iL 
?.b 
P. 33. Since the publication of my first edition, I have been 
favoured by the Rev. G. S. Faber with a communication of 
his opinion respecting the views propounded in my second 
Chapter, on the Consistency of Geological discoveries with Sa¬ 
cred History, and am much gratified by his permission to state, 
that he is satisfied my views upon this subject are consistent 
with a critical interpretation of the Hebrew text of those verses 
in Genesis, with which they may at first sight appear to be at 
variance. 
This opinion of Mr. Faber is enhanced in value, by his adopt¬ 
ing it to the exclusion of a different opinion published in his 
Treatise on the Three Dispensations, (1824), in which it was 
attempted to reconcile Geological Phenomena with the Mosaic 
History, by supposing each of the demiurgic days to be periods 
of many thousand years. 
Respecting this subject, I have been much surprised to 
find myself misrepresented, as inclining to the opinion that 
each day of the creation, recorded in the Mosaic Narrative, 
comprehended a space of many thousand years. In my second 
Chapter (P. 17 et seq.) I have stated that this opinion has been 
entertained, both by learned Theologians and by Geologists, but 
is not entirely supported by Geological facts, and have adopted 
the hypothesis which supposes an undefined amount of time 
to have elapsed between the creation of the matter of the Uni¬ 
verse, and that of the Human race. According to this view, placing 
the Beginning at an indefinite distance before the first of the 
six days described in the Mosaic History of creation, I see no 
reason for extending the length of any of these beyond a natural 
day; and I suppose that an interval sufficient to afford all the 
time required by the Phenomena of Geology, elapsed between 
the prior creation of the Universe recorded in the first verse 
R R 
