The Daily bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Hawaii]) 1882-1895, 1882-12-12

people, just emerging from slavery,
il still commands therespect of some
of the profoundest thinkers and the
best scientists of this enlightened
century.
A wide distinction should be made
between Bible truth and our inter
pretations of the Bible. The one l
believe will always stand the test of
Science; the other in the future, as
in the past, may conflict with the es-
tablished facts of Science. In such
cases Our interpretations must yield,
but Gods truth will stand.
What is the object of the Bible?
Is it intended as handbook in
Science, or of Salvation? "The
Bible was given to show man the
way to Heaven, and not his way
among the stars" 1t uses the Ian
guage of everyday life; 1t avoids
strictly scientific language; it often,
in accord with the common usage of
men, uses apparent instead of real
truth--as for example, it speaks of
the suns "rising" and setting"
God was compelled to give to that
rude people Bible written in this
way, else it would have been uncom-
prehensible, unbelievable, and use
less. Even if it could be shown that
there are scientific errors in the
Bible, that fact would not invalidate
it, for the Bible was given to teach
religious truth, not Science.
But / do not believe that any such
errors can be shown. Let us com
pare these two accounts of Creation,
the one in Genesis with that of
Science. Take the origin of the
earth. Science agrees with Genesis
that our globe was not eternal. Her
bert Spencer says it owes its, exist
ence "to the Unknown Source of
things" and Moses calls that
"God." They differ only in a name.
If Moses errs in saying that origin
ally "the earth was without form
and void," he has good company for
Science tells US that originally the
Universe was only q floating, form
less deep. They agree, too, in say
ing that darkness enshrouded it. We
have positive proof, Prof. Dana
says, of superhumen intelligence
debating this account in Genesis, in
the fact thai it puts the first appear
ance of light in the first period, or
"day," while the sun does not lieh hit
the earth till the fourth day.
Whence came this light? Moses
says, 'Thc Spirit of God moved
upon the face of the fluid, and there
was light" Science tells us that
the first shiver Of motion in that
floating mass of matter produced
light. But what did Moses know
about the undulatory theory of
light? That is a discovery of the
10Th century. = 4.
Mr.. Cruzan then compared the
two accounts in their teachings in
regard to the first division of time
ihlO Osty al't iHShV, UfC SiSallhS
away of the thick clouds enshroud-
ing the earth, and the appearance of
blue sky; and the first appearance
of dry land, and the lower orders Of
life, showing In each step exact and
wonderful! agreement. He closed by
quoting Prof. Dana's order of Crea-
ton, arranged according to Science
and Scripture, as follows:
1.-THE INORGANIC ERA.
1st Daylight, cosmical.
End Day-The earth divided from
the fluid around it, or individualized.
{ 1. Outlining of the land
3rd Day and water.
u. Creation of vegetation.
2.--THE ORGANIC ERA.
4th Daylight from the Sun. .
9th Day-Creation of the lower
order of animals.
9Th Day l. Creation Of Mammals:
(2. Creation of Man.
Dana begins his examination Of
the Mosaic account of Creation by