IN GENESIS.

21. Creation of reptiles. Every living thing that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly.

24, 25. Creation of mammalia; the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind.

26, 27. Creation of the human race.

No.

6

DISCOVERED BY GEOLOGY.

Bones of crocodiles at Monheim. - Von Bush.

Bones of saurian animals at Stonesfield. Mr. Mantell.

Remains of sea turtles and lizard like animals, at St. Pierre.-Dr. Ure.

It will be impossible not to acknowledge, as a certain truth, the number, the largeness, and the variety of the reptiles which inhabited the seas, and the land, at the epoch at which the strata of the Jura were deposited. Cuvier.

There was a period when the earth was peopled by oviparous quadrupeds, of the most appalling magnitude. Reptiles were the lords of the creation.-Mantell.

Animals analogous to the frog, toad, and salamander, existed when the strata were disordered by the revolutions of the globe.Dr. Ure.

Bones of mammiferous quadrupeds, are found only when we come to the formations above the coarse limestone, which is above the chalk.-Cuvier,

The remains of quadrupeds of extinct species, occur next above those of birds and oviparous reptiles.-Sir H. Davy.

It is only in the loose and slightly con7 solidated strata of gravel and sand, and which are usually called diluvial formations, that the remains of animals, such as now people the globe, are found.-Sir H. Davy, Consolations of Travel.

It is a fact, that as yet, no human bones have been discovered among fossil remains.-Cuvier's Rev. of the Globe. p. 81.

But found covered with mud, in the caves of Bize.-Journal.

The great question concerning human reImains in a fossil state, stands now before the world, in an entirely different aspect, 8 from what it did when Cuvier published his work. Granville Penn.

Human bones, supposed to be fossil, have been found in the caves of Durfort and Kosritz.-Outlines of Geology.

In some few instances human bones occur, but the era to which their possessors ought to be referred, has not been satisfactorily ascertained. Though some are more modern, others seem to claim an ante-diluvian antiquity.-Sharon Turner.

DISCOVERED BY GEOLOGY.

In the delta of the Ganges, human bones have been found ninety feet deep.-Von Hoff.

If there be any thing determined in geology, it is, that the surface of our globe has been subjected to a vast and sudden revolution, not longer ago than five or six thousand years.-Cuvier's Rev. Globe, p. 180.

A universal deluge, seems clearly proved by the utter extinction of the primeval race of animals.-Dr. Ure.

The Alps and Carpathians, as well as every other mountainous region which I have visited, bear the same evidence of having been modified by the force of water, as do the hills of the lower regions.-Dr. Buckland.

Geology fully confirms the scriptural history of the Deluge.-Prof. Silliman.

The numbers 4, 5, and 6, we will not conceal, are liable to be interchanged among themselves, in respect to place, and we shall derive no argument from them, farther than what arises from the circumstance, that they are all placed in one group. Still the number of coincidences here shown, between the order of the epochs of creation, assigned in Genesis, and that discovered by geology, are calculated, not only to excite the attention of scientific men, but also that of theologians, as forming an additional argument to the truth of inspiration.

Human science, in the probability of chances, as illusstrated by La Place, has put us in possession of an instrument for estimating the value of these coincidences; and we* feel amply entitled to take advantage of it, for that purpose, for no case could well be pointed out, where it would be more correctly applicable than in this, where the coincidences assume a definitely successive numerical form. We are entitled to adopt, even the language of La Place, and to say, "by subjecting the probability of these coincidences to computation, it is found, that there is more than sixty thousand to one, against the hypothesis, that they are the effects of chance."+

"It is thus, then, that the discoveries of geology, when more matured, instead of throwing suspicion on the truths

* Jameson's Journal.

+ System du Monde, Book V.

of revelation, as the first steps in them led some to maintain, have furnished the most overpowering evidence in behalf of one branch of these truths.*

DAYS OF CREATION.

At the commencement of this article, we noticed that hypothetical geologists required more time than was allowed by Moses, to account for various phenomena which the earth presents; and that so early as the time of Whiston, it was proposed so to interpret Genesis, as to leave geologists full scope for their speculations.

From that time to the present, there have not been wanting authors, who either through motives of self-convenience, or a desire to reconcile science with revelation, have ventured to call the days of creation, periods of great, or indefinite length.

To believers in revelation, this cannot be an unimportant subject. If the very commencement of the book of inspiration, can be interpreted in a sense so entirely different from its plain and obvious meaning, what portion of scripture conveys truth to the understanding? And if the translation does not convey the intended meaning of the author in this case, where are common readers to look for such meaning?

We propose, therefore, to examine the question, whether the terms, in which the Mosaic history of the creation is written, will by any fair interpretation, allow the belief that the periods therein called days, were intended to mean indefinite time, or whether they were periods of more than twenty four hours.

If the scriptures are true, they must be so in their most plain and obvious sense, and if any scientific fact contradicts this sense, then, to a common understanding, they do not convey the truth.

If an author uses the same terms in different places,. and apparently in the same sense, we are bound to believe that he means the same in every case. If he intends to convey different ideas, by the same terms, standing in similar connections, and this without warning his readers,.

* Jameson's Journal..

he cannot be a correct writer, because he is not only inconsistent with himself, but cannot be understood; and therefore he is not to be credited.

It is believed that no one will deny, that whatever may be said of the prophecies, the narratives of the Old Testament were intended, by their authors, to be understood by ordinary capacities, nor will it be claimed that the author of Genesis has been so inconsistent with himself, as on that account, to raise a suspicion of his veracity.

This author has not only given us the history of the creation of all things, but also of the destruction of the ancient world by a flood of water.

Whoever reads the account of the latter, will there find, that "the flood was forty days upon the earth," or that it rained forty days; and that "the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days." And, whoever reads the account of the creation, will there find that the whole work was performed in six days; each day's work being described by itself, and the day carefully numbered, that in so important a work, there should be no doubt either with respect to the succession of the several creations, or to the time occupied in finishing the whole.

Now these narrations being from the same pen,-being also continuations of the same general history; and the word day being employed in the same unqualified manner in both cases, no reader can doubt, if the translation conveys the meaning of the historian, that he intended they should be understood to signify the same periods of time in both narratives.

From the statements of Moses, therefore, we are as fully entitled to the belief, that the waters of the deluge prevailed upon the earth for an indefinite period, or that a day of the deluge was a thousand years, and thus that its waters covered the earth for the term of 150,000 years, as we are to believe that a day of creation was an indefinite period, or a term of a thousand years, and thus that 6000 years were occupied in the work of creation.

If the terms of the history allow any difference with respect to the lengths of the days, this would certainly be in favor of those of the deluge, since the plural is there employed, while the singular only is used in the description of the creation, and each day is expressly confined within the "evening and morning." But no one, we

believe, has proposed to consider the days of the deluge of greater length than twenty-four hours, though from the words of the record, we cannot perceive, why they should not, equally with those of the creation, claim to be periods of a thousand years.

But it is needless to extend these considerations. If the words of Moses were intended to mean that a day of creation was a period of a thousand years, or any other period, more than a natural day, why have not the translators so rendered it? No man in his senses will pretend that Christianity required one translation, and geology another; or that the Hebrew is better understood at the present day, than at the time when the Bible was translated.

Finally, with a few exceptions, it is the universal belief of the Christian world, and ever has been, that the work of creation occupied only six natural days, and this alone is a sufficient proof that the common translations convey no other meaning. The exceptions, therefore, could not have been derived from the translations, and we shall show directly, that they could not have been derived from any fair construction of the original.

Does the word DAY, in Gen. i. admit of any other interpretation than the common one? We think it has been shewn above, that if the history of the creation has been fairly translated, it is impossible its author should have intended to convey by the word day, any other meaning in that history, than a period of twenty-four hours; and that this is proved by the universal understanding of the Christian church, and of the Christian world. But since some declare that this universal understanding is owing to a misinterpretation, or at least, that the terms of the original will admit of a construction different from the common one, we will here enquire of commentators, how far this is true.

Mr. Faber's Theory making the Mosaic days 6000 Years. The most conspicuous theologian who interprets Moses, so as to extend the days of creation to periods of great length, is Mr. Faber, an English writer well known as the author of the "Three Dispensations," and other works, some of which are in common use, and in high estimation in this country.