The Cairo bulletin. [volume] (Cairo, Ill.) 1872-1878, 1874-09-06
THE BOOK OF GENESIS,
IT'S ANTIQUITY, AUTHORSHIP
AND SUBJECT MATTER OF
THE FIRST CHAPTER.
ny REV. II. Is. THAYER, ID. ID.

, For THE BULLETIN.
We promised, in the article proceed
ing this, to compare the cosmogony OF
Moses with tho cosmogonies of the
most ancient nations, in order to fur
thor our examination Of Moses sources
of information.
There is no longer any doubt that
Moses wrote the book Of Genesis.
Where did he gather his information Z
| We here present the cosmogonies, or
theories, of three separate nations
concerning the existing order oil
things
LIST. The cosmogony of the Babylo.
mans.
This represents the beginning o.
things to be darkness and water, where
nondescript animals, hideous monsters,
half men and half beasts appeared.
A flor these woman was divided into
| two parts, aud the heavens and tho
earth produced by the division. Belus,
their supreme divinity, cut of his own
head and his blood trickliug down and
mingling with the dust of the earth
produced human creatures having in
telligence and spiritual life.
.. The PhUnician cosmogony
According TO this theory, that
which first appeared was an ether or
mist dilTused through space. Then
arose wind, and from this agitation
proceeded god, and from this god
came forth an egg, the division Of
which, as in the case of the woman,
produced the heavens and the earth.
The noise of thunder awakened beings
into spiritual life.
3. The Egyptian cosmogouy;
Between this and the Phenioian the
Org there is a general harmony. The
principal Egyptian divinity was Ptah, -
the world-creating power, who shaped
the cosmic egg, which appears here, as
in the Phrenician. Then followed a
long succession Of gods with different
Offices and powers, from whom sprung
demi gods. then heroes and then our
| common humanity. This order seems
to be the exact reverse of Darwin's.
Now the bare statement of these sys-
TENS must convince one that Moses
borrowed nothing from them.
Moses Incorporates none Of these err.
rors or extravagancies, nor does he any
where fall into line Of thought that
10 any manner approximates to these
theories. But, on the contrary, he has
given, with severe simplicity,a descrip.
ton of the creation which no rhetoric
an improve and no science gansay.
At much later period we find no i'm.
provement in the prevalent conception
OF the origin of the universe.
No nation, either ante or post .deluy-
ian has any theory of the origin Of
things, from which Moses could, by
any possibility, have borrowed any
thing.
According to Grote, "the myth.
ical world Of the Greeks opens
with gods anterior and superior
to man. Then comes heroes and
then the human race. Along
with the gods are found various mon.
strous natures, ultra human aud extra
human, who somehow partake of the
properties Of both gods and men. Such
as the Harpieds, Gorgons, Sirens,
Sphinx, Cyclops and Centaurs."
With tho Greeks, first came Chaos,
then broad fiat earth, with deep, dark
Tartarus below, full Of creatures and di-
grand, terrible and menstrous.
The mystic hymn of the Veda upon
the same characterization of the
earliest relics of the llindoo taught is
likewise full of absurdities and impos.
From all these, il is evident
Moses drew nothing. His account
stands alone, simple, serene, unique,
unsurpassed, scientific and satisfactory.
" here did he get it2 To suppose that
Noses was so gifted, above all thathad
gone before him, or lived his cotempo.
aries, as to draw such description of
hlngs as we find in Genesis | from his
'wn brain, is to count Oh the miracu.
Gus.
We must keep distinctly in view
hese four things IN our efforts to an.
wer the question before us
LIST. Moses wrote tho Book of Gen.
isis.
End, 1t cannot be ans...invention of
is own.
3rd. He copies from the Cosmopo.
les of no nation or tribe.
4th. His statements are IN bar.
Iony with the deductions of science.
W. find, therefore, an answer to our
LleStiOn hildan in thaaa xyo.J. a. Al