of superposition I have mentioned, (as the gneiss lying above the granite, and the fossiliferous strata above it,) sometimes dip-that is to say, you find that the stratum does not lie always perfectly horizontal, but dips down, and sometimes you find an immense mass, by some great convulsion, thrown up as if it had shot up, and standing almost perpendicular. Now when you find a large mass of granite thus driven up, and when you perceive afterwards that the next stratum, evidently, was gradually deposited by the water upon it, till it has become entirely covered, you infer it must have taken an immense cycle of years to deposit so much sand, dust, or mud around it, while the whole gradually solidifies, so as ultimately to cover this mass, and become solid rock. Suppose one of the pyramids of Egypt were in this situation, and the clouds were to shower down sand, you can conceive what a long time it would take till the whole pyramid was covered by it, and how much more to enable wet and heat to harden it. We find that very process to have taken place in cases of the under strata being driven upwards, and the upper strata lying horizontally deposited on them, thus indicating the vast periods which must have elapsed till the latter strata were complete and hard. In other words, to close this part of my subject by the interesting remarks of Professor Sedgwick, "Every thing indicates a very long and a very slow progression, one creation flourishing and performing its part, and gradually dying off as it has so performed it, and another actual creation of new beings, not derived as progeny from the former, gradually taking its place — again this new creation succeeded by a third; nothing per saltum; all according to law; all bearing the impress of mind, of a great dominant will, at the bidding of which all parts have their peculiar movement, their periods of revolution, their rise and fall." On many of these strata, I may observe, are found rounded

fragments, rounded by ceaseless attrition, and fragments invariably from the rock below.

Having thus noticed these strata, from the granite up through the fossiliferous strata, to what is called the alluvium, I observe, that it is in this alluvium, or upper mud, that lies upon the surface of the earth, that we find the remains of man. But how interesting is this fact! no remains of man, or the dynasty of man, or of the tools, the possessions, or the occupations of man, are to be found in the strata to which I have turned your attention hitherto. They are confined wholly and entirely to the upper alluvial strata, only comparatively a very few feet in depth; proving, in the most incontestable manner, this one fact, as it is asserted in Genesis, that while whole races of living creatures existed and were extinguished prior to man, man is of recent origin, or just about six thousand years old — the very age assigned in Genesis, - Geology thus calling from its depths, "O God, thy word is true!"

To touch more immediately upon the statement contained in the first chapter of Genesis, we read there these remarkable words: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." Now, in looking at this, just notice the fact, that all that this first verse does, is simply to reveal the fact that God created the heavens and the earth. It does not describe any antecedent dynasty, or any past or extinguished race; because the Bible was written not to teach geology, for we can discover its phenomena by science; it was written to teach us all that relates to ourselves, all that is fitted to enlighten us in the way that leads to happiness and to heaven, leaving for us, and for after ages, to learn more than the greatest philosophers have been able to discover in the ages that are past. The first verse of Genesis, in other words, has no reference to the chronology of creation, but simply to the fact of creation. All that

the first verse asserts is, that God made the heavens and the earth. It does not say, that he made it six thousand years ago, or ten thousand, or twenty thousand. It asserts the creatorship of God, and the creatureship of what we see, and nothing before. Then it proceeds to give the history that succeeds. The word which is translated "created," is very remarkable; it is the word bara. I know it is open to controversy and discussion, but you will find this to be almost invariably the case, that bara is employed where it is implied that God created something out of nothing, and that aasah, another Hebrew word, is employed when he uses the instrumentality of others in producing any thing. For instance, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth;" that is Bereshith bara Elohim, etc.

But in that passage, "God made Joseph father,” etc., it is aasah, and in the passage, "God made Jordan a border," it is aasah. The idea of constituted belongs to one verb, the idea of original creation is implied and involved in the other. And, very remarkably, both words are used in reference to man. It is said of him, God created (bara) man, and it is said also of him, God made (aasah) man. Why is this? First, man was a new creation, and therefore bara is the proper word to describe him; and whilst he was a new creation he was created out of the dust, and therefore aasah became also an appropriate word.

But let us look at the passage itself, and it is, "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." I have said this is the fact of creation, not the era or date of creation. In the beginning, means eternity, for in the first chapter of John it is said, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." And it is said, "The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters." Now most Chris

tians have taken the poet's commentary on that passage, instead of accepting it in its plain and unequivocal sense. They have supposed that the earth was one vast, surging, heaving chaos - that God first of all created a chaos, as the initial step, and then he made that chaos assume the beautiful shape of hill and dale, and river, and sea, and stream, that we now see upon it. But really this is not the meaning of the passage, for at the second verse you will find that the earth existed, that the sea existed, and that day and night existed. The language of it is, that "the earth was without form and void, and darkness,” that is, night, or the absence of light, "was upon the face of the "deep, and the Spirit of God moved upon the waters, and he said, Let there be light, and there was light. And he called the light day, and the darkness he called night." Now how are day and night produced? Day is produced by one hemisphere being exposed to the sun, and night by the other half not being exposed to the sun; and therefore the earth must have been revolving on its axis at the very time that poets described it in a state of chaotic confusion. But you say, "The words are, 'the earth was without form and void.' Does not that prove that chaos is the proper name for it?" I answer, No; for the very same language is applied by Jeremiah in reference to circumstances which took place long after, where he says, "I beheld the earth, and lo, it was without form and void; and the heavens, and they had no light. I beheld the mountains, that they trembled, and all the hills moved lightly. I beheld, and lo, there was no man, and all the birds of the heavens were fled. I beheld, and lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness, and all the cities thereof were broken down at the presence of the Lord, and by his fierce anger." Now here the Hebrew words, Thohu and Vohu, translated by us, "without form and void," are applied to a state superinduced by man; and therefore you

may translate this second verse thus, "And the earth was emptiness and desolation." Then it is said, "The Spirit of God moved upon the face of the water;" and that expression, "moved," indicates a process, and it is very significant. It is said elsewhere, that the Spirit descended upon Jesus like a dove. This text alludes to the third person in the adorable Trinity. The phrase is that which is predicated of a dove, and might be translated fairly, without deviating from the text, "And the Spirit kept fluttering, after the manner of a dove, upon the face of the water." You have, then, in this passage, the earth revolving upon its axis; you have day and night existing in it; and then you have the sentence enunciated by God, "Let there be light." Now mark the difference. When he created, it is said, Bara Elohim; but when it speaks of light introduced, it does not say, Bara," and he created a light;" but it says, Yehi Owr, "let light be seen." This is not the creation of light. I believe that light had existed thousands of years before; but it is, "let the light, obscured by the vapors or evaporations of the moisture of the earth, or from any other explicable and reasonable cause - let that light, obscured and hidden, now emerge and appear." But for poets to sing as if God had created light at this moment, is to stretch poetic imagination till it occupies the place of an interpreter of the word of God, and so ceases to be of use.

Again, God said, "Let there be a firmament." You ask what that is. The word here employed simply means, let there be expansion; let there be a space dividing the water of the clouds (for a cloud is simply water in the shape of steam) from the water in the ocean and the river, and thus the land would instantly come under drainage, if you will allow the expression, and become fit for herb and flower and fruit, by the waters rushing from it, and forming the mighty "let it bring forth herb," that is, let it be fitted for

ocean