Chapter XXI Application of the Second Hypothesis to the Mosaic History of Creation — Conclusion
Summary of the argument—Striking coincidence between the order of creation as set forth in the narrative of Moses and in the records of Geology—Comparison illustrated and developed—Scheme of adjustment between the periods of Geology and the days of Genesis—Tabular view of this scheme—Objections considered—It is not to be regarded as an established theory, but as an admissible hypothesis—Either the first hypothesis or the second is sufficient to meet the demands of Geology as regards the antiquity of the earth—Not necessary to suppose that the sacred writer was made acquainted with the long ages of geological time—He simply records faithfully that which was committed to his charge—The Mosaic history of creation stands alone, without rivals or competitors.
The results at which we have arrived by the long, and we fear tedious, line of argument pursued in the last Chapter, may be briefly summed up. First, many illustrious Fathers of the Church—Saint Augustine, Origen, Clement of Alexandria, Saint Athanasius, and others—plainly declared against the opinion that the Days of Creation were days in the ordinary sense of the word; and, therefore, it is a mistake to suppose that this opinion is supported by the unanimous voice of Christian tradition. Secondly, the word Day is frequently used in Scripture for a long period of time, and sometimes for a period of indefinite duration. Thirdly, there is nothing in the language of Moses that forbids us to explain the word according to this sense, in the first chapter of Genesis. And fourthly, there is, at least, one grave consideration, derived from Holy Scripture itself, which distinctly points to such an interpretation. The Six Days of Creation are contrasted with the Seventh Day of God’s rest; and this Seventh Day of God’s rest is unquestionably a long period of undefined duration. From all this it is obvious to conclude, that we may fairly adopt this mode of interpreting the Mosaic Days, if it will assist us in reconciling the received conclusions of science with the truths of Revelation.
Now, there is a striking resemblance, in some important respects, between the order of Creation as exhibited in the successive days of the Sacred Record, and the order of Creation as manifested in the successive periods of Geological time. Three days are specially marked out by the Inspired Historian as distinguished by the creation of vegetable and animal life—the Third, the Fifth, and the Sixth. On the Third Day were created plants and trees; on the Fifth, reptiles, fish, and birds; on the Sixth, cattle, and the beasts of the earth, and, toward the end, man himself. Geologists, on the other hand, not influenced in the least degree by the Scripture narrative, but guided chiefly by the remains of animal and vegetable life which are preserved in the Crust of the Earth, have established three leading divisions of Geological time; the Palæozoic, or first age of organic life, the Mesozoic, or second great age of organic life, and the Kainozoic, or third great age of organic life. Here, no doubt, is a remarkable coincidence.
But it would be still more remarkable if we could recognize, in the three epochs of Geology, the same general characteristics of organic life as we find ascribed by Moses to the three successive days of the Bible narrative. And so we may, it is said, if we will only take the pains to examine for ourselves the organic remains of these geological epochs as they lie dispersed through the Crust of the Earth, or even as they are to be found collected and arranged for exhibition in our museums. The first great age of Geology is eminently distinguished for its plants and trees; the second, for its huge reptiles and great sea-monsters; the third, for its vast herds of noble quadrupeds. Nay, to complete the harmony between the two Records, as man is represented by the Inspired Writer to have been created toward the close of the last day, so, toward the close of the last Geological age, the remains of man and of his works are found, for the first time, laid by in the archives of the Earth.
Such is the coincidence which some ingenious writers fancy they can trace between the history that is set forth in the written Word of God, and the history that is so curiously inscribed upon His works. Our readers, perhaps, will not be unwilling to consider it a little more in detail. We read in the first chapter of Genesis, that on the Third Day God said: “Let the earth bring forth the green herb, and such as may seed, and the fruit-tree yielding fruit after its kind, which may have seed in itself upon the earth. And it was so done. And the earth brought forth the green herb, and such as yieldeth seed according to its kind, and the tree that beareth fruit, having seed each one according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.”169 Let us now turn to the Carboniferous Period of Geology, which occupies a large space in the great Palæozoic age. All writers agree that it was specially marked by a gorgeous and luxuriant vegetation: and as we contemplate the multitudinous remains of plants and trees which have been gathered so abundantly in our coal measures, and ranged with such striking effect along the walls of our museums, we can scarcely help thinking that we have before us a practical commentary on the text of Moses. The gifted Hugh Miller, who is universally allowed to have been one of the most practical and experienced Geologists of the modern school, gives a very picturesque and graphic sketch of the Carboniferous flora. “In no other age,” he says, “did the world ever witness such a flora: the youth of the earth was peculiarly a green and umbrageous youth,—a youth of dusk and tangled forests,—of huge pines and stately araucarians,—of the reed-like calamite, the tall tree-fern, the sculptured sigillaria, and the hirsute lepidodendron. Wherever dry land, or shallow lake or running stream appeared, from where Melville Island now spreads out its ice-wastes under the star of the pole, to where the arid plains of Australia lie solitary beneath the bright cross of the south, a rank and luxuriant herbage cumbered every footbreadth of the dank and steaming soil; and even to distant planets our earth must have shown, through the enveloping cloud, with a green and delicate ray.”170 Such an age as this might well be described in history as the age in which the earth brought forth the green herb, and the fruit-tree yielding seed according to its kind.
Again, the work of the Fifth Day is thus described in the Sacred Narrative:—“God also said: Let the waters bring forth the creeping creature having life, and the fowl that may fly over the earth under the firmament of Heaven. And God created the great whales, and every living and moving creature which the waters brought forth, according to their kinds, and every winged fowl according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.”171 And in this case, as in the former, we may find the counterpart of the Bible story in the records of Geology. “The secondary age of the geologist,” says the eminent writer from whom we have already quoted, “possessed, like the earlier one, its herbs and plants, but they were of a greatly less luxuriant and conspicuous character than their predecessors, and no longer formed the prominent trait or feature of the creation to which they belong. The period had also its corals, its crustaceans, its molluscs, its fishes, and, in some one or two exceptional instances, its dwarf mammals. But the grand existences of the age,—the existences in which it excelled every other creation, earlier or later,—were its huge creeping things,—its enormous monsters of the deep,—and, as shown by the impressions of their footprints stamped upon the rocks, its gigantic birds. It was peculiarly the age of egg-bearing animals, winged and wingless. Its wonderful whales, not however as now, of the mammalian, but of the reptilian class—ichthyosaurs, plesiosaurs, and cetiosaurs—must have tempested the deep; its creeping lizards and crocodiles, such as the teleosaurus megalosaurus, and iguanodon,—creatures some of which more than rival the existing elephant in height, and greatly more than rivalled him in bulk,—must have crowded the plains, or haunted by myriads the rivers of the period; and we know that the foot-prints of, at least, one of its many birds, are fully twice the size of those made by the horse or camel. We are thus prepared to demonstrate that the second period of the geologist was peculiarly and characteristically a period of whale-like reptiles of the sea, of enormous creeping reptiles of the land, and of numerous birds, some of them of gigantic size.”172
Once more, it is written that, on the Sixth Day, “God said: Let the earth bring forth the living creature in its kind, cattle and creeping things, and beasts of the earth, according to their kinds. And it was so done. And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds, and cattle and every thing that creepeth on the earth after its kind. And God saw that it was good.”173 And again Geology seems to confirm the truth of the Inspired narrative, and to fill up the details of the picture. “The Tertiary period,” continues Hugh Miller, “had also its prominent class of existences. Its flora seems to have been no more conspicuous than that of the present time; its reptiles occupy a very subordinate place; but its beasts of the field were by far the most wonderfully developed, both in size and numbers, that ever appeared upon the earth. Its mammoths and its mastodons, its rhinoceri and its hippopotami, its enormous dimotherium and colossal megatherium, greatly more than equalled in bulk the greatest mammals of the present time, and vastly exceeded them in number. The remains of one of its elephants (Elephas primigenius) are still so abundant amid the frozen wastes of Siberia, that what have been not inappropriately termed ‘ivory quarries’ have been wrought among their bones for more than a hundred years. Even in our own country, of which, as I have already shown, this elephant was for long ages a native, so abundant are the skeletons and tusks, that there is scarcely a local museum in the kingdom that has not its specimens, dug out of the Pleistocene deposits of the neighborhood. And with this ancient elephant there were meetly associated in Britain, as on the northern continents generally all around the globe, many other mammals of corresponding magnitude. ‘Grand indeed,’ says an English naturalist, ‘was the fauna of the British islands in those early days. Tigers as large again as the biggest Asiatic species lurked in the ancient thickets; elephants nearly twice the size of the largest individuals that now exist in Africa or Ceylon roamed in herds: at least two species of the rhinoceros forced their way through the primeval forests; and the lakes and rivers were tenanted by hippopotami as bulky, and with as great tusks, as those of Africa.’ The massive cave-bear and large cave-hyæna belong to the same formidable group, with at least two species of great oxen, with a horse of smaller size, and an elk that stood ten feet four inches in height. Truly this Tertiary age—this third and last of the geologic periods—was peculiarly the age of great ‘beasts of the earth after their kind, and of cattle after their kind.’”174
We shall be told, perhaps, that there are Six Days assigned to the work of creation in the Mosaic narrative, and that we have accounted but for three. Let it be remembered, however, that Geology does not profess to give a complete history of our Globe. It can set before us those events only which have left their impress indelibly stamped upon the rocks that compose the Crust of the Earth. These events Geologists have attempted to reduce to the order of a chronological system; and in prosecuting this task they have been guided almost exclusively by the evidence of Organic Remains. Hence it was not to be expected that, in Geological Chronology, we should find a Period specially set apart as the Period in which Light was made; or another as the Period in which the Firmament was spread out over the Earth; or a Third as the Period in which the sun and moon and stars shone forth in the expanse of Heaven. Such phenomena had, indeed, a very important influence on the physical condition of our globe. But they must occupy a very secondary place, if indeed they are distinctly chronicled at all in the records of Geology. It is the formation of rocks and the embedding therein of Fossil Remains that constitute the main study of the Geologist, and that guide him in the distribution of Geological time.
Furthermore, we would observe that the scheme of Chronology which Geologists put before us, affords abundant room for each and all of the Mosaic Days. Let it be assumed for a moment that the Carboniferous Period corresponds with the Third Day of the Sacred narrative. The earlier Periods of the Palæozoic Age will then fit in with the First and Second Days of Scripture; and the Permian, which intervenes between the Carboniferous Period and the Secondary Age, may be supposed to correspond with the Fourth Day of Scripture. This adjustment between the Mosaic Days and the Periods of Geology will probably be made more intelligible to the general reader by the Table that appears on the following page.
The reader must not think it amiss, in this distribution of the Mosaic Days, that four out of six are crowded together into one Geological Age, while each of the other two has an entire Age assigned to itself. If the Days of Creation were indefinite periods, there is no incongruity in supposing that one may have corresponded to a longer, another to a shorter interval in the history of our planet. But, in truth, our scheme of distribution does not of necessity imply that the Mosaic Days were periods of unequal length. Geologists do not pretend that there is even a remote approximation to equality between the several divisions of Geological time. The three great Epochs are distinguished from each other by reason of the very marked difference in the character of their Fossil Remains. And the multiplication of Periods in each Epoch seems to depend rather upon the degree of completeness with which the strata of that Age have been examined, than upon any conjecture as to the probable length of its duration. Thus, for example, Sir Charles Lyell thinks that, as far as the present condition of Science affords the means of forming an opinion, almost any one of the Periods in the Palæozoic Age was as long as all the Periods of the Tertiary Age taken together.175
But there is another and a more serious objection against our hypothesis. It has been observed more than once that the periods of Geology are out of harmony with the Days of Genesis, even as regards the history of Organic life. According to the Scripture narrative no Organic life appeared upon the Earth previous to the Third Day. Now the Third Day of Scripture corresponds, in our scheme, with the Carboniferous Period of Geology. And yet there is abundant evidence in the Fossil Remains of the Devonian, the Silurian, and the Cambrian Formations, that Organic life—both plants and animals—prevailed upon the Earth for many ages before the Carboniferous Period began. Nay, it is now commonly held, since the discovery of the famous Eozoon Canadense, the oldest known Fossil, that life already existed during the deposition of the Laurentian Rocks, the earliest of all the Stratified Formations. Furthermore, in the Mosaic account, Fish are represented as having been created only on the Fifth Day, which we have fitted in with the Secondary Age of Geology: whereas in the Geological Record we find Fish as early as the Silurian Period, which is far back in the Primary Age. These considerations, and divers others of a like nature, have been regarded by some eminent writers as altogether fatal to the hypothesis for which we are contending.
| DAYS. DAY OF GOD’S REST. | PERIODS. RECENT. | EPOCHS. HISTORIC AGE. |
| SIXTH MOSAIC DAY. | POST-PLIOCENE. PLIOCENE. MIOCENE. EOCENE. | TERTIARY OR KAINOZOIC AGE. |
| FIFTH MOSAIC DAY. | CRETACEOUS. JURASSIC. TRIASSIC. | SECONDARY OR MESOZOIC AGE. |
| FOURTH MOSAIC DAY. THIRD MOSAIC DAY. FIRST AND SECOND MOSAIC DAYS. | PERMIAN. CARBONIFEROUS. { DEVONIAN. { SILURIAN. { CAMBRIAN. { LAURENTIAN. | PRIMARY OR PALÆOZOIC AGE. |
To us, however, it appears that such points of discrepancy involve no contradiction between the two Records. The Sacred Writer tells us, no doubt, that on the Third Day God created plants and trees: but he does not say, either expressly or otherwise, that previous to the Third Day the Earth was devoid of vegetation. Again, we read that reptiles, fish, and birds were created on the Fifth Day. But there is nothing in the language of the Inspired narrative from which it can be inferred that these several classes of animal life may not have been represented before that time, by many and various species: though probably, it was only on the Fifth Day that they were developed in such vast numbers, and assumed such gigantic proportions, as to become the most conspicuous objects of creation.
The first chapter of Genesis is but a brief summary of an inconceivably vast series of events. It is nothing more than a rapid sketch, exhibiting, as it were, to the eye the prominent features in the history of Creation. Moreover, we should remember that it was written with a specific end in view. The purpose of the Sacred Writer was plainly to impress upon the Hebrew people, naturally prone to idolatry, the existence of One Supreme Being, who has made all things. Hence we should naturally expect that, amid the boundless variety of God’s works, he would make choice of those that were most calculated to strike the mind with wonder and awe, and to bring home to a rude and uncultivated race of men the Almighty Power and Supreme Dominion of the Great Creator. Now the Zoophytes, and Graptolites, and Trilobites, of the Devonian and Silurian Periods, however curious and interesting they may be to men of science, would have had but little significance for the Jewish people. Let us suppose that these more humble forms of animal life had, in fact, existed during the First and Second Days of the Mosaic narrative, and where is the wonder that the Inspired Historian, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, should pass them by in silence, and choose rather to commemorate the more striking and impressive facts, that, at the bidding of God, Light shone forth from the midst of darkness, and the blue firmament of Heaven was expanded above the waste of waters?
We say, then, that events which are simply left unrecorded by the Sacred Writer are not, on that account, untrue:176 that he describes to us, not all the works of Creation, which would have been an endless task, but only the more conspicuous objects in each successive stage; and that he sketches them, most probably, as they would have appeared to the eye of a human observer, if a human observer at the time had existed on the Earth. If this view be admitted, then it is not inconsistent with the Scripture narrative to suppose that plants may have existed before the Third Day, and fish before the Fifth. Each Day in its turn would have been rendered conspicuous to an observing spectator by those events which are recorded by Moses. But each Day, too, would have witnessed many other events, unnoticed by Moses, of which the memorials have been preserved, even to our time, in the Crust of the Earth.
We should observe, however, that though this scheme of adapting the Periods of Geology to the Days of Moses, may be defended as a legitimate hypothesis, it cannot be upheld as an established truth. The geological records that have hitherto been brought to light represent but the merest fragment of the Earth’s past history. Each year that passes over our heads is adding largely to the store of facts already accumulated. And it needs but little reflection to perceive that an hypothesis may be quite consistent with the knowledge we possess to-day, and yet may be found altogether inconsistent with the knowledge we shall possess to-morrow. We must be content, therefore, to suspend our judgment, and to await the progress of events. It may be that future discoveries shall bring to light new points of harmony between the Days of Genesis and the Periods of Geology; it may be they shall demonstrate that no such harmony exists. For us it is enough to have shown that this hypothesis is consistent, on the one hand, with the story of Genesis—on the other, with the actual discoveries of Geology; and, therefore, that it may be adopted, in the present condition of our knowledge, as a legitimate means of reconciling the established conclusions of that science with the truths of Revelation.
Conclusion.—We have, then, two distinct systems of interpretation, according to which the vast Antiquity of the Earth, asserted by Geology, may be fairly brought into harmony with the history of creation, recorded in Scripture. The one allows an interval of incalculable duration between the creation of the Heavens and the Earth, and the work of the Six Days: the other supposes each one of these Six Days to have been itself an indefinite period of time. We cannot, indeed, prove that either of these two systems is true in point of fact; but we have attempted to show that neither is at variance with the language of the Sacred Text. On the other hand, when we look to the evidence of geological facts, we see no decisive reason for preferring one to the other. Either mode of interpretation seems in itself quite sufficient to meet all the present requirements of Geology; for, according to either interpretation, the Bible narrative would allow time without limit for the past history of our Globe; and time without limit is just what Geology demands. We may say, then, on this point, what Saint Augustine said long ago, in speaking of the diverse interpretations which the text of Genesis admits: “Let each one choose according to the best of his power: only let him not rashly put forward as known that which is unknown; and let him not fail to remember that he is but a man searching, as far as may be, into the works of God.”177
It must not be supposed that, according to our view, the Sacred Writer, in composing his account of the Creation, had before his mind those vast Geological Periods about which we have said so much in the course of this volume. Such an opinion is no part of our system. We see no good reason for believing that the author of Genesis was specially enlightened from Heaven on the subject of Stratified Rocks and Fossil Remains, of Upheaval and Denudation, of Volcanic Action and Subterranean Heat. These are matters of Physical, not of Religious Science. And it seems to be the order of Providence to leave the discovery of such things to the industry and ingenuity of man: “Cuncta fecit bona in tempore suo, et mundum tradidit disputationi eorum.”178
What we maintain, then, is simply this: that the Sacred Writer recorded faithfully, in language fitted to the ideas of his time, that portion of Revelation which was committed to him; and, in the accomplishment of this task, made such a choice of words and phrases, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, to whom all truth is present, as to set forth plainly those facts that were unfolded to him, without introducing any error about those facts of which he was ignorant. The language is the language of men, but the voice that speaks therein is the voice of God. And thus it comes to pass that this Mosaic story, when fairly examined according to the ordinary laws of human speech, is found in every age to accommodate itself, with quite an unexpected simplicity, to those new and wonderful views of God’s manifold power which each human science in its turn brings to light.
Before taking leave of the subject, we would venture to bring under the notice of our readers one very obvious reflection, which is sometimes lost sight of in the heat of controversy. The Mosaic history of the Creation absolutely stands alone. It has no rivals, no competitors. Every other attempt that has been made to explain the origin of the world, and of the human race, is refuted by its own intrinsic extravagance and absurdity. The wisest nations of antiquity failed to discover that great fundamental truth, which stands out so boldly on the first page of Genesis, that there is One God who hath made all things. The philosophers of Chaldæa were familiar with the course of the Heavens, and could predict the eclipses of the sun and moon. But the philosophers of Chaldæa could not rise from the contemplation of creatures to the knowledge of the Creator: the creatures themselves were the gods that Chaldæa worshipped. Egypt had greatness of mind to conceive the idea of the Pyramids, and skill to devise the plan of their construction, and strength of arms to lift up the huge stones on these stupendous piles. But Egypt raised up temples to the river that waters its plain, and offered sacrifice to the reptile that crawls upon the earth, and the beast that grazes in the field. In Greece the human mind soared to its highest flight, and ranged over the widest and most beautiful fields of thought. Peerless is she among the nations, the mistress of the arts, the fountain source of refined taste, the storehouse of intellectual power, the great nurse of human genius. Her schools of philosophy have influenced and guided to a marvellous extent the thoughts and speculations of all subsequent times. The song of her immortal bard has kindled the imagination of the poet in every generation, and enriched his mind with glowing images. Orators and statesmen still love to copy the lofty sentiments, the graceful diction, the flowing periods, of her golden eloquence. And students from every clime stand enraptured before the beauty and the majesty of her sculptured marble. But Greece, Imperial Greece, knew not the One God, the giver of all good gifts, by whom she was so highly endowed. She fashioned for herself gods and goddesses after her own fancy, and portioned out the universe between them. Jupiter hurled his thunderbolts from the clouds: Neptune ruled the sea: Pluto swayed the sceptre of the infernal regions: Minerva was the goddess of wisdom: Vulcan the god of fire: Apollo the god of music. Nay, the very infirmities and vices of human nature were personified under the names of divinities, and worshipped in the Pantheon of the gods. Rome, too, the conqueror of the world, had its philosophers and its orators, its poets and its sculptors, whose productions still charm and instruct mankind. Yet was Rome no exception to the common lot of the gentile world. For Rome, like Greece, had its long array of gods and goddesses, with their petty jealousies, their vindictive malice, their shameless passions. Alone, amidst all the Mythologies and Cosmogonies of ancient nations, the story of the Hebrew Legislator rises superior to the gross and silly speculations of mortal men. It alone proclaims to mankind what Philosophy and Science, when left to themselves, have never been able to teach, that, In the beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth; that the plants and the animals, the ocean and the elements, the sun and moon and stars, man himself, and all that delights the eye and charms the ear and fills the mind, are His creatures; and that besides Him there is no other God. Away, then, with the idea that this Sacred Narrative, stamped as it plainly is with the imprint of its Divine Author, should ever be found at variance with the truths of science,—or rather, we should say, with those scanty fragments of truth, those crumbs of knowledge, falling from the table of our Heavenly Father, which it is given to man here below to gather up with laborious care, and which, however they may excite his longings, cannot satisfy his hunger.
Here, for the present, we must stop. At some future time, perhaps, if our opportunities permit, we shall return to this subject, and, taking up the second branch of the controversy, investigate the recent discoveries of Geology in reference to the teaching of the Bible as regards the Antiquity of the Human Race.