The Middlebury register. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1850-1882, 1871-11-28

not cause, whatever that may be, not
only distiuguishable, but different from
them allP "The laws Of nature" says
DR.. Reid, care the rules according to
which the effects are produced, but there
must be a cause which operates according
to these rules. The rules Of navigation
never navigate ship, the rules OF archi-
lecture never built house, "a law"
Jays SIR John Her.hell, may be a rule Of
action, but it is not action. The first
agent may lay down rule Of action for
himself,and that rule may become to man
known by observation Of its uniformity;
but, constituted as our minds are, and
having that conscious knowledge of can
sation, which is forced upou US by the re-
ality Of the distinction between intending
thing, and doing it, we can never sub
stitute the rule for the act"
So much then for the attempt i'll the
exuviation under review to press the
.ws of the universe, into to the place of
tho efficient causes of its natural phenom-
ena. To say that it is dishonest, would
appear uncharitable and perhaps unjust,
but to say that it is unphilosophical and
absurd, is what all sound reasoning and
all true induction must pronounce it. But,
our limited space iorbids further obscrva-
ton.
1t may be proper just here, ere re-
sumo my structures upon the objections
these iufdel scientists urge against Moses
aud the Bible, to remind my readers, aud
themselves among them, so far as they are
such, that their boosted natural scielce
rests on natural history; that is on, human
testimony, GU the same testimony Oh which
we rely for the facts of mans history
Aud, as late writer has pertlnently re-
marked, II know no law OF evidence by
which the marvellous stories Of biologists
and zoologlst should be admitted, and the
no more marvellous, and at least, equally
well authenticated stories Of the Hebrew
historians and the evangelists should be
rejected" If you say that the facts OF
natural history, though belonging to re-
mote past, admit OF proof in current time,
while l admit it, l claim that this is
equally true of the facts Of sacred history.
Give US then but the evidence for science
as it is adduced for christianity and we
bow with profound reverence to their de-
mands as to the demands of their Divine
Author. But let not the advocates Of
science assume the historic basis upon
which they stand is susceptible OF a
more complete vertication, THAI that up
on which reposes the sublime structure Of
Christian revelation.
But NV to resume our review, "Let
the ,caterS bring forth aJundanIy The
moring creatures that hare life, and fow1
that may fly ADORE the earth, m the open
armament Of hearen." So says the 10Th
verse. Now what is the objection urgec
against this representation? This, that il
is "inde6nite," an "indeGnitcness Of ig
norancc, which, for want Of knowledge
cannot make itself understood even by q
multiplicity of words" Such is thu
modest and reverential spirit Of this OBJ
lection. Such rather is the brazen trucu
enco with which it assumes the mastery
Of knowledge, respecting matter on al
hands acknowledged to be difficult, and thu
path Of which is strewu with the broker
fragments Of the theories Of just sucl
theorst as we arc noticing. "Inde6nite" i
this statement Of Moses respecting tn
origin, and the order Of the origin Of tn,
fauna of creation. But what is the rea
weight of such an objection? What
Moses object in these chapters and book
Of his? TO give us scientific treaiise
II it were, we should have II RICH
to demand definiteness aud fullncis c
statement and exactuess Of definition
But We again protest against any objeC
ton which is founded, as this is,upon sue
au assumption. No one claims that
has given all the details OF creation, c
even complete outline of it. His objeC
was merely to state so much as stand
connected with Human history. Nor doc
his statement initiate with any facts g
ologlsts give OF "a seperate creation {
birds, beasts and men, 10 looking owe
the teaching of these exuviae, one woul
suppose that there had been regular an
inform progress, ike that in the orderl
construction of an edi6ce, by which ii
earth has been brought into its preseI
form. But as have shown in previol
papers from geological writers, that the
has been series, and as facts seem
R indicate, an innumerable series of cat
o Gyms, ola universal character, which ha'
carried destruction to animals and plan
aud which have required the interpositic
l. of new formative energy 1t is admittc
IT that there was one of comparatively r.
D. cent date, that of tho period OF the drift
If to which my quotation from Prof, Wi
i chell referred. Moses there states fac
IN namely, that God caused the waters
in bring forth living creatures. That SUI
at we're brought forth none deny; while Il
* revelation between the various states
10 the earth's crust, points cut new and d
p fering commandments of life.
Or In the passage under review, Moses d
Mt not mention all that occurred in come
es ton with the generation OF "the movi
e. creature" any more than in mentloni
Ii the evocation of light and the creation
in either, in which the heavenly bodies mo
On as effected in the first two days, he nett
& er affirmed or denied whether anythi
all else was created in those days" So
Ill therefore Us the Mosaic record is &C
ut served, these two days may include t
IS. whole Of the primary, secondary, a
to tertiary formations, with all their pl
se ducts, their fora and their fauna.
Iss gives such an outline Of creati
's' which while its c0ntradiots no fact