LECT. I. of the earth, which have in succession been em braced and abandoned by scientific men, that its masters are by no means agreed in first principles, that they are not yet in possession of a complete view of the natural agencies which may have been in operation at any given period, and that the comparatively limited scale of their observations and experiments must necessarily leave them in nearly total ignorance of the effects of such powers, for instance, as those of magnetism, electricity, light, heat, and, possibly, other yet undiscovered agencies, upon the materials of which the earth is composed, or was at first composed, it cannot be deemed an unreasonable demand that the new theories, upon the periods required to explain geological facts, should be viewed with some suspicion, and received with some reserve. For it can hardly be doubted, that a different combination of causes from that which falls under our observation may have produced, in a comparatively abridged period, all the results which we might conclude could only be the effect of the causes we can observe operating through a much longer period. We never can be sure, that we are in possession of all the agencies which have been antecedently employed, in states of the earth T. Gisborne's "Considerations on Modern Theories of Geology, &c." a pamphlet which undoubtedly shakes the basis on which some of the inferences of the geologists rest, and points out the invalidity and inconsistency of several of their conclusions. different from the present one, nor of the exact _LECT. I. relative proportions and amounts of their respective influences, through those vast periods which we suppose to have elapsed. Some may have exhausted themselves in their results, and disappeared, as we know takes place in some chemical agencies; others may remain, but in a lowered degree, and the relative proportions of the present known agencies may have altered greatly in the long succession of ages, as it is ascertained some of them actually have done. Moreover, the admission of a creation at all Some perfect presupposes the production of some results perfect at once; for instance, of man and woman, as mature in the first moment of their existence as we become in thirty or forty years. Any argument, therefore, from the laws of our own development, made to bear upon the first man, must prove invalid and deceptive. So some results in the condition of the globe, which, according to our observations and calculations, would require a thousand or ten thousand years, may have evolved mature at once, by the effort of creating power. We are entitled, therefore, to put in a bar against the validity of any conclusion that so long a period would, in the first instance, have been absolutely required to form a given specimen of primitive rock, because this would imply that the effect could not have been produced in any other way than the theory supposes; whereas, for aught we know, there might exist a different combination results im bed in crea tion. LECT. I. of natural causes and chemical agents, which might materially expedite the result, or it may at once have been produced by creative power, with all the appearances of a gradual and long travailing process, and with all the marks of a venerable age. The law which regulates any department or object of creation is not to be supposed in operation till its object has an existence; and that law which is now efficient to its conservation has no reference whatever to its original production. Conservation of objects already existing is one thing, creation is another. The geological theory not incompatible with the Mosaic. But, indeed, so far as philosophers have hitherto prosecuted their discoveries into the wonderful works of the Almighty, we might safely accede to the general requirements they make, since they are not absolutely inconsistent with revelation. It seems in itself not unlikely, and, judging analogically, highly probable, that there had been developments of creating power and wisdom in the formation of the material universe, and of the globe which we inhabit, with some degrees of organization, previous to that creation which Moses relates, and the origin of which it was his chief object to record; just as there had been a creation of intelligent spirits, certainly prior, perhaps long prior to the creation of the human soul. We conceive no objection to his cosmogony can arise from discoveries which are supposed to penetrate into the ages or eras preceding those events which exclusively concerned the human race. Let us bear in mind, that he was not commissioned LECT. I. to impart a system of philosophy generally, or of geology in particular, but a theory of religion and morals, with only so much of the history of the present system as concerned ourselves, and the maintenance of just views respecting the Lord and Creator of all, and we shall then find, not merely that geology has brought to light nothing which invalidates his record, as a general statement of first principles, but that much light may be thrown upon it, and some confirmation derived to it by the recent disclosures of science. For, in the first place, all these discoveries tend to show, that whatever was the fact as to previous states of this globe, the present races, both of men and animals, cannot be placed farther back than the date to which he assigns them. He affirms nothing to contradict the supposition of a previous creation. He leaves all the antecedent duration open to the discoveries of philosophers. Science, it is true, has disclosed to us numerous races of animals and vegetables supposed to be extinct, all deemed referrible, from the positions in which they are found, to what are called the geological eras, as distinguished from the Mosaic; but no human remains yet brought to light, have been referred to a date so early as that attributed to the fossil remains of the extinct animals.* Buckland's Bridg. Treatise, vol. i. p. 103. But human remains are equally absent from the highest strata, which were confessedly formed by the general deluge. LECT. I. Scripture distinct from tations. Secondly, it may be shown that the doctrine. of periods of duration, antecedent to the date of the Mosaic creation, is not only compatible with his statements, but seems to be, if not expressly alluded to, yet required by his language, and that of other inspired writers. This it shall be our object further to show. to We call upon you to make an important disour interpre- tinction here between the interpretations which have been fixed upon the Scripture, and the Scripture itself. When any fact in nature, or a theory established by philosophy, in reference any class of facts, is found to be irreconcileable with any particular interpretation of Scripture, it is our duty to re-examine the interpretation, and not hastily to infer that facts are at variance with Scripture, because they are at variance with our interpretations of it. Were we to rush upon such a conclusion, we must either shut our eyes upon facts, for the sake of abiding by Scripture, or we must give up Scripture, for the sake of the fact. The position in which we are placed by the discoveries of geology is of this very kind. It is thought that we cannot abide by the popular notion, so long maintained by many interpreters of Scripture, that Moses actually records the very Hence this fact supplies no ground for attributing a greater |