with Scripture on this important point. But how could such a reason for the sabbath be assigned with any shadow of integrity, if the world was not thus created, and if the six days' work really means nothing more than some of the regular operations of nature, similar to those which have been occurring for twenty thousand ages? A summary and distinctive creation, performed within a week, must be admitted by every geologist who fears the Lord of the sabbath. This prepares our way for discussing the subject of a gradual process of formation, which involves several questions. Did the Almighty first make the crude materials of our globe, and after a great while mould them into their present state? Or, did He create and fashion them at once? In the first case, did a long interval elapse between his making chaos, and his putting man into a gradually-prepared habitation? In the latter event, was the whole world, as now fitted up, produced about six thousand years ago? We would refrain from hazarding a single conjecture of our own respecting the time or manner of the world's origin; but we cannot help thinking that Ovid, the Greeks, and modern geologists are all wrong in their notions of a primeval chaos. It seems contrary to the whole analogy of nature, and opposed to the usual tenor of the divine operations. Every thing appears to have been made perfect and complete at the outset, as suited to the use for which it was designed. All the items of the Mosaic creation are of this character: birds, beasts, fishes, reptiles, herbs, trees, men, with light, atmosphere, seas, dry land,all started up into mature existence at the fiat of Jehovah. On this ground, we object to the usual geological schemes of a gradually nascent world; whilst we would neither affirm nor deny a previous occupation of our own planet. -- We see a greater degree of consistency, at least, in those old writers who imagined this earth to have been created, in glorious perfection, for the abode of intelligent beings, of a different race from our own; who left their state of innocency as man has done, and fell under their Maker's displeasure; that, consequently, they were visited with a dreadful mark of the Almighty's disapprobation, (a flood, fire, earthquake, or whirlwind of darkest storms,) by which the rebels were punished, and their habitation made desolate; that when, in scriptural language, "the earth was without form and void," (troubled and waste,)" and darkness was upon the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God moved" in coming mercy "upon the face of the waters," it pleased Him to remove the cloud of his wrath, and remodel the globe for a new family of occupants; that in consonance with the future wants of these tribes, an atmosphere was ordained, a dry land and ocean made, full-grown herbs and trees, with their seeds and fruits, created, and the earth's axis so regulated as to produce the requisite seasons for vegetable and animal life. We do not bring forward these antiquated notions as affording a real interpretation of the first verses of Genesis; but we think them a more feasible mode of reconciling the doctrine of a former world (if such there was) with the truth of Scripture and the analogy of nature, than the theories propounded by modern philosophers, who have not yet disproved the opinions of their predecessors in the field of speculation. Those also who wish for a reason (if there be any) why evil spirits harass this lower world, as the Bible tells us they do,-may think to discover it in the supposition of such demons having once been the happy tenants of the globe which we now inhabit. Dr. Pye Smith affirms, that there never was a period when the earth was destitute of organic beings; and most geologists agree with him in believing that man is of more recent origin than other species of animals now his contemporaries. These views cannot be harmonized with the Mosaic narrative; in which it is asserted, that the earth was "void" when the present forms of life originated; and assigns a distinct day for the time of their creation. "And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after its kind," on the fifth day. Terrestrial animals, including mankind, were made on the sixth day. The human species, therefore, commenced at the same epoch with all others that now inhabit the earth, the air, and the sea; and nothing, the descendant of which now lives, existed prior to that era. That there was a progressive developement of animal life, is usually maintained by those who believe in a gradual improvement of the system, from an embryo state of mud or vapour, to the more perfect condition which is now exhibited. They suppose that a progressive organization was instituted, from the lowest order of testacea up to the highest mammifers, and from the poorest grass or sea-weed up to the most elaborated trees; according as the earth was progressively fitted for their reception and entertainment. Sir Humphrey Davy, amongst others, says, "It is impossible to defend the proposition, that the present order of things is the ancient and constant order of nature, only modified by existing laws; there seems, as it were, a gradual approach to the present system of things, and a succession of destructions and creations preparatory to the existence of man." Mr. Lyell, on the opposite side of the question, declares, that the laws of nature have always been uniform, and that every change has been effected by its modifying influences; and that Sir Humphrey's proposition, "though very generally received, has no foundation in fact." Such is the agreement of cosmogonists! The hypothesis of a growing world is overthrown by the appearance of sundry fossil remains, which certain geologists have thought well to overlook. For instance: the remains of fish appear "in one of the lowest members of the group;" the vertebra of a Saurian has been met with in the mountain limestone of Northumberland; teeth of carnivorous fish have been taken from a similar formation in Fife; some remains of cetacea have been met with in the oolitic series of England, together with the bones of two species of warm-blooded quadrupeds; fragments of decotyledonous wood have been obtained from the coal-fields of Fife and Northumberland, and from the grey-wacke of Cork, &c. Hence it would appear, that every new system of cosmogony continues in vogue but for a short time: for so soon as some practical geologist happens to oppose it, they easily find fossils in particular situations, where their appearance is incompatible with the truth of the recent hypothesis. There is no theory extant, amongst the multitudes which have started up during the last three centuries, that has not been pronounced irrelevant by other great names. Mr. Lyell maintains that "all former changes of the organic and inorganic creation are referable to one uninterrupted succession of physical events, governed by the laws now in operation." It is scarcely needful to remark, that this assertion is quite opposed to the Mosaic narrative. Mr. Lyell, indeed, affirms that "Geology has nothing to do with religion;" and this is evidently his practical view of the case. But we cannot assent to such a doctrine; for, although the Bible was not given to teach us Geology, yet if the dogmas of science contradict any items of sacred history, they certainly oppose the truths of revelation. If Moses, the Psalmist, St. Peter, and St. Paul, teach us that all existing forms, animal and material, were framed by the simple fiat of Deity; then either they are found to be false witnesses for God, or Mr. Lyell's speculations are untenable. There is no midway between these two positions. The language of these inspired writers is not figurative, but plain words of an intelligible character. The Mosaic creation was, at least, a new system of physical and animal organization; so much so, that it did not even rain until the flood; for "there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground:" (Gen. ii. 5, 6:) but after the deluge, when the Lord was pleased to visit the earth with showers, He so ordered the refraction of light upon the new clouds, as that a rainbow should appear as a token of the covenant between him and the earth." The Bible fully declares that our present system was completed in six days, by successive acts of creative power, not by a continued exercise of Nature's laws. Dr. Pye Smith's theory virtually denies this revelation: for although he admits a renewal of organic life to have then taken place, yet, inclining to the Nebular hypothesis, he denies any entire modelling to have occurred, limiting it to a particular part of the Asiatic continent. He also assents to the scheme of those physiologists who hold that there were several creations of existing species, in different parts of the world, at times remote from each other. Though here again a vast disagreement is found in the number of regions assigned for the distribution of animals; some theorists estimating them at seven, others at five, eleven, twentyseven, or forty-five! How is this speculation compatible with the scriptural declaration, that all other animals were made subject to Adam, and that the beasts and birds were brought before him to receive their names? Mr. Lyell very carefully omits any reference to the origin of things, by merely going back to indefinite ages, and there leaving the world in something like its present circumstances. Does he believe in the eternity of Nature? "O," say Before man existed, who peopled the globe? modern geologists, "plants, and fishes, and other brute animals." Upon this general proposition they are all agreed, though they greatly differ in the particular details. Cuvier's disciples evidently suppose the world to have been made for the use of man, after undergoing a laborious preparation during many thousands of years, and sustaining some grand revolutions, by which it was finally fitted to be the comfortable abode of human beings. Mr. Lyell, again, regards its occupation by our species as a mere contingency, of little consequence to its history, and as scarcely deserving of notice in its endless annals. The more Christian Nebularists think that the earth was peopled, in its different stages of growth, by plants and animals of a corresponding grade; and that having lately reached that state of perfection which was suited for man, he was forthwith created and ordained to be its tenant. Most of the French school suppose every thing to have happened by chance; so that it was quite an accidental circumstance for our race to have appeared, either at this or any other epoch of eternity. It is evident that these opinions cannot be reconciled with each other; and we believe them all to be erroneous, and contrary to the plain analogy of nature. The present world was evidently arranged with reference to its existing inhabitants. When we perceive an adaptation of parts in any piece of mechanism, we at once conclude that they were all made by a master's hand, at the same period, and for a particular end. Therefore, when we find all the component parts of our system, and all the laws or courses of Nature, to be modelled after such a fashion as evidently to suit the vegetable, animal, and intellectual families dwelling upon its surface; we reasonably infer that the whole was devised by an Infinite Mind for the very design which we perceive to be accomplished. Nor is there any valid objection to this argument, from our not yet being able to comprehend the final purposes of an almighty agent, or from the imperfect occupancy of the habitable part of our globe. There is a great difference between making a thing for future use, and making it with an intent of destroying it before it should be used. Upon visiting a mansion, elegantly constructed and beautifully garnished, we should immediately judge it to have been modelled for the convenience of some intended inhabitants: and, although certain parts might not be instantly occupied, we should never dream of their having been laboriously wrought for the purpose of being pulled down and built up again before they should be tenanted. This would be a sign of defective knowledge or foresight on the part of the proprietor. Who makes a candle to burn it away in an empty house? Who prepares a sumptuous banquet without an intention of its being enjoyed by suitable guests? Upon looking into the component parts of our mundane |