CREATION, in its primary import, signifies the bringing into being something which did not before exist. The term is therefore generally applied to the original production of the materials out of which the visible world was composed. It is also used, in a secondary or subordinate sense, to denote those subsequent operations of the Deity upon the matter so produced, by which the whole system of nature, and all the primitive orders of things, received their form, qualities, and laws.

There is no subject concerning which there have been more disputes than that of creation. It is certain that none of the ancient philosophershad the smallest idea of its being possible to produce a substance out of nothing, or that even the power of the Deity himself could operate without materials to work upon. Hence some of them, including Aristotle, asserted that the world was eternal both as to matter and form; whilst others, though they believed that the gods had given the world its form, imagined that the materials of which it is composed were eternal. Indeed the opinions of the ancients, who had not the benefit of revelation, are so confused and contradictory on this head, that nothing of any consequence can be deduced from them. The freethinkers of our own and of former ages have denied the possibility of creation, as being a contradiction of reason; and consequently they have taken occasion to discredit revelation upon this ground. On the other hand, many defenders of the sacred writings have asserted, that creation out of nothing, so far from being a contradiction of reason, is not only probable, but demonstrably certain. This, however, is a subject with which human reason can never successfully grapple; and it would, therefore, be vain to enter into arguments which prove nothing except that the question is one beyond the reach of our comprehension.

Concerning the periods of time at which the Deity executed his several works of creation, it cannot be pretended that mankind have received very particular information. From viewing the phenomena of nature, and considering the general laws by which they are regulated, we cannot draw any conclusive or even plausible inference with respect to the precise period at which the universe began to exist. We know not, nor can we ever hope to ascertain, whether the different systems of planets circulating round the sun, and the fixed stars, were all created at one period, or each at a different period. We cannot even determine, from any thing that appears on the face of nature, whether our earth was not created at a later period than any of the planets which revolve round the same sun. Astronomers are, from time to time, making new discoveries in the heavens; but it is impossible to say whether these successive discoveries may not be owing to successive creations.

Philosophers have, indeed, formed curious conjectures concerning the antiquity of the earth, from the appearances of its surface, and from the nature and disposition of its interior strata. The beds of lava in the neighbourhood of volcanoes have afforded ground for some calculations, which, though they do not fix the period of the earth’s origin, are yet considered as proving that that period was much more remote than the earliest age of sacred or profane history. In the neighbourhood of Mount Aetna, and on the sides of that remarkable mountain, there are beds of lava covered with a considerable thickness of earth; but, on the other hand, there is one which, though known from ancient monuments and historical records to have issued from the volcano at least two thousand years ago, is almost entirely destitute of soil and vegetation. In one place a pit has been cut through seven different strata of lava; and these have been found separated from each other by almost as many beds of rich earth. Now, from the fact that a stratum of lava two thousand years old is yet scantily covered with earth, it has been inferred that the lowest of these strata which have been found divided by so many beds of earth, must have been emitted from the volcanic crater at least fourteen thousand years ago; and consequently that the age of the earth, however it may exceed this term of years, cannot possibly fall short of it. Other facts of a similar nature likewise concur in giving some degree of plausibility to this conjecture.

But all these facts are as nothing in comparison of the long series which would be requisite to establish such a conjecture as an incontrovertible truth; and besides, any evidence which they can be supposed to afford may be very easily explained away. The bed of lava which in the course of two thousand years has scarcely acquired a covering of earth, confessedly stands in a situation in which it is exposed to the spray of the sea, and to all the violence of winds and rains. In such a situation, it cannot be thought that a thick bed of earth could, in any length of time, be formed upon it; and we might as well expect depth of soil, or vigorous vegetation, on the craggy cliffs of hills. In certain crevices here and there, in which the earth has been retained, there is a depth of soil which supports large trees. This fact, therefore, admits of no such inference as has been deduced from it.

But by examining the composition and arrangement of the interior strata of the globe, and by viewing the general appearance of its surface, the ingenuity of philosophers has, with better hopes, sought to divine conjecturally the length of time during which it must have existed. Observing the exuviae of marine and land animals deposited at profound depths under ground, and accompanied with vegetable bodies in a good state of preservation, as well as with oleaginous and bituminous substances which have in all probability been formed from vegetable bodies; and remarking, at the same time, with what confusion the other materials, composing the crust of this terrestrial globe, are, in various instances, not arranged,but thrown together; they have concluded that the earth must have existed for many ages before the earliest events recorded in sacred or profane history, and must have undergone numerous revolutions before it settled into its present state. Such at least are the ideas with which Buffon and De Luc, and Dr Hutton, seem desirous to impress us concerning its changes and antiquity. It is only doing justice to these philosophers to acknowledge, that they have collected, with amazing industry, almost every fact in the natural history of the earth which can serve to give plausibility to their conjectures. But still these facts, besides the inconsistency observable in many of them, are too scanty to warrant the conclusions which they have deduced from them.

The voice of profane history is far from being decisive [7:7:455]concerning the age of the world; nor is it to be expected that it should. When the earth first arose into existence, mankind were not spectators of the scene; and it may naturally enough be imagined that the first human beings who occupied it were too much busied in furnishing themselves with the immediate necessaries and conveniencies of life, to think of curious, researches into its origin, or even into their own. Profane history, however, is not without accounts of the age of the earth, and the origin of human society; but those accounts are exceedingly various and contradictory. Plato, in his dialogue entitled Critias, mentions that his Elysian Atalantis had been buried in the ocean about nine thousand years before the age in which he wrote; and he affirms that this circumstance was well known to the Egyptian priests and to the contemporary inhabitants of Attica. The learned world, indeed, generally agree in regarding his accounts of the island in question as fictitious, affirming that the author himself did not design to be understood in any other sense; and if the existence of such an island, at a period so distant, be admitted as a fact worthy of any credit, the age of the world may be reckoned as at least considerably more than twelve thousand years. The pretensions of the Chi-neserepresent the world as several hundred thousand years older; and we arc also told that the astronomical records of the ancient Chaldeans carried back the origin of society to a period inconceivably remote, or not less than four hundred and seventy-three thousand years. The Egyptian priests reckoned between Menes and Sethon three hundred and forty-one generations, which, allowing thirty years to a generation, is a period exceeding ten thousand years. But these accounts are so discordant, and so slenderly supported by evidence, that we cannot hesitate to reject them as false; indeed the fables of historians scarcely merit so much attention as the hypotheses of philosophers.

When from profane we turn to sacred history, we may reasonably expect more accurate and more credible information concerning the antiquity of the earth. As the authenticity of the Holy Scriptures is incontrovertibly established, wherever they afford evidence concerning any fact, that evidence must be regarded as decisive; and a fact so important as the present might be thought highly worthy of a place in them. But unfortunately, even the sacred writings do not fix the era of the creation with any degree of accuracy. They leave us, in some measure, at a loss whether to extend what they say concerning the era in question to the whole contents of created space, or to confine it to our earth and its inhabitants: besides, different copies give different dates; and even in the same copy, different parts relating the same events, either disagree or do not speak decisively with regard to the length of the time in which these events passed. In the beginning of the sixth chapter of the first book of Kings, the time which elapsed between the departure of the children of Israel from Egypt, and the period at which Solomon laid the foundation of his temple, is said to have been four hundred and eighty years; and in the book of Judges, again, the age of all the patriarchs amounts to five hundred and ninety-two years. The Hebrew copy of the Bible, which Christians for good reasons consider as the most authentic, dates the creation of the world three thousand nine hundred and forty-four years before the Christian era. The Samaritan Bible, again, I fixes the era of the creation four thousand three hundred I and five years before the birth of Christ. And the Greek I translation, known by the name of the Septuagint version of the Bible, gives five thousand two hundred and seventy as the number of the years which intervened between these two periods. Many other calculations of the years contained in the same intermediate space of time might be formed upon the various dates in the sacred volume, which differ in the different copies. By comparing the dates in the sacred writings, examining how these have come to disagree in different copies, endeavouring to reconcile the most authentic profane with sacred chronology, and eking out the deficiency of dates and of evidence with conjecture, some ingenious men have formed schemes of chronology, plausible indeed, but not supported by sufficient authorities, which they would gladly persuade us to receive in preference to any of those above mentioned. From the Hebrew Bible Usher deduces four thousand and four years as the term between the creation and the birth of Christ; Josephus, according to Dr Wills and Mr Whiston, makes it four thousand six hundred and fifty-eight years; and Μ. Pezron, with the help of the Septuagint, extends it to five thousand eight hundred and seventy-two years. But Usher’s system is that most generally received.

But though these different systems of chronology are inconsistent, and slenderly supported, yet the differences among them are so inconsiderable in comparison with those which arise when we contemplate the chronology of the Chinese, the Chaldeans, and the Egyptians, and they agree so well with the general information of authentic history, and with the appearances of nature and of society, that they may be considered as nearly fixing the true period of the creation of the earth.

Moses relates (Gen. i. 1) that, “in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. And the earth,” continues he, “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. And God said, Let there be light, and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light day, and the darkness he called night; and the evening and the morning were the first day.” During five succeeding days the work of creation was carried on. On the second day, a firmament was made to separate the waters, and that firmament was called heaven. On the third day the waters were collected into seas, and the land from which the waters had retired was caused to produce grass, and trees, and other plants. On the fourth day, lights were made to appear in the firmament, in order to enlighten the earth, to divide the day from the night, and to distinguish time into seasons and years. On the fifth day the seas were peopled with whales and other fishes, and the air with fowls. On the sixth day, the earth was furnished with reptiles and quadrupeds of all kinds; and on the same day, the first human pair, the progenitors of the human race, were created in God’s own image.

Some difficulties occur in comparing this account of the creation with the laws which appear at present to regulate the system of nature. We find it hard to conceive how the earth, whilst yet a stranger to the influence of the sun, could experience the vicissitudes of day and night, and are astonished at the rapidity with which trees and herbage first overspread its surface. The condition of matter when the earth was without form and void, and the operation of the Spirit of God on the face of the waters, are equally mysterious.

'Some ingenious men have eagerly laboured to remove the difficulties here indicated. Among these is Dr Burnet, whose theory of the earth has long been considered as fanciful and ill founded. He supposes that the celestial bodies, even the sun and all the other planets of the solar system,, existed long before the earth. The chaos on which the Spirit of God moved, consisted, according to him, of the first principles from which terrestrial bodies were formed. When those laws by which the material world is regulated first began to operate on the mass, he supposes that its [7:7:456]grosser and heavier parts sank towards the centre, and there formed a solid ball; and that around this solid ball two species of particles still floated together in confusion. Of these, one being more volatile, would by degrees make its escape from the other, leave it still recumbent on the solid centre, and spread around it in an atmosphere. The middle stratum he composes of aqueous and oleaginous fluids; and he has no doubt, that after the air had made its escape, the levity of the oleaginous fluids would enable them to rise above the aqueous, and dispose themselves next the surface of the liquid mass. On this he supposes the impure atmosphere to have then deposited a quantity of terrene particles, sufficient to form, by intermixture with the oils, a thick crust of rich earth for the production of plants and herbage, and for affording a habitation to animals. This delicate shell he was careful not to furrow with seas or load with mountains, either of which would have reduced all to confusion. Such is his earth; but after moulding it with so much ingenuity, he refrains from using the same freedom with the remainder of Moses’s account of the creation.

Moses, however, affords nothing which can with any propriety be used in the foundation of such a theory. He tells not whether the chaos consisted of those terrene, aqueous, oleaginous, and aerial particles which Dr Burnet finds in it; he confines not the seas within a crust of earth; nor does he inform us that the scenery of nature was not diversified by hills and valleys. Besides, the author of this theory has, without any evidence, supposed matter to have been originally under the influence of laws very different from those by which it is at present regulated. Oil, indeed, whilst in a fluid state, floats on water; but in a concrete state it sinks like other solid bodies. If reduced into that state by combination with terrene matters, sufficient to render the mixture proper for the nourishment and production of vegetables, its specific gravity would be still greater, and it would consequently sink so much the sooner. How a concrete substance consisting of earth and oil could float on water appears an inexplicable enigma. But we need not take any pains in combating a theory which has long since sunk into neglect and oblivion.

Mr Whiston treats both the scriptures and the laws of nature with greater reverence; yet he certainly involves himself in no trifling difficulties in attempting to solve those which the account of Moses presents. He supposes that the sun, moon, and stars, are all more ancient than the earth. The chaos from which the earth was formed he represents as having been originally the atmosphere of a comet. The six days of the creation he considers as equal to six of our years; and he is of opinion that the earth did not revolve daily round its axis, but only annually round its orbit, till after the fall of man.

On the first day or year, therefore, the more ponderous parts of the chaos were, according to this theory, conglomerated into an orb of earth; the chinks and interstices in that orb were filled up with water; and the exterior part or atmosphere was rarefied, so as to admit some faint glimmering of the rays of the sun. On the second day, the atmosphere was diffused to its due extent around the earth, and reduced to a degree of rarity and purity which rendered it still more suitable for the transmission of light; the earth was still more consolidated; and the waters being almost entirely excluded from the interstices which they before occupied, were partly spread over the surface of the earth, and partly raised in vapour into the atmosphere or firmament. On the third day, the earth’s surface became so irregular, in one place rising into hills, in another sinking into valleys, as to cause the waters, which before were equally diffused, to collect into seas and lakes, leaving large tracts of ground unoccupied. And no sooner had part of the earth’s surface been left bare by the waters than the genial influence of the sun produced on it a rich covering of herbage, and all the different species of vegetables. On the fourth day, the earth was rendered subject to the regular influence of the sun, moon, and stars. On the fifth day or year, things were so far advanced that fishes and fowls were produced from the waters. On the sixth day the earth was furnished with animals; and the lord of all the other animals, man, was also created.

Such is Mr Whiston’s account of the phenomena of the Mosaic creation. But he likewise assumes much more than can reasonably be granted. The atmosphere of a comet could not well be the primitive chaos. It is not an obscure, but a pellucid fluid; and its exterior strata, if of the same nature with the matter of our earth, must be rarefied by its near approaches to the sun. Had the earth not begun to revolve round its axis until after the work of creation was completed, the immoderate degrees of heat and cold which its different parts would have alternately felt would in all probability have proved fatal to both plants and animals. Even the most distorted interpretation of Moses’s words cannot represent him as meaning to inform us that the sun and moon were created at different periods. But philosophy will scarcely permit us to imagine that the moon was formed before the earth, of which she is the satellite; and therefore we cannot agree with Mr Whiston that the creation of the earth was later than that of the remaining bodies of the solar system.

Among those who have endeavoured to explain the original formation of the earth, and the changes which it has undergone, is Μ. de Luc. This cosmogonist, like Mr Whiston, conceives that the days of the creation were much longer periods of time than our present days. He seems to think that the earth had existed long before the Mosaic creation, but that it began at that era to experience new changes, and to be regulated by new laws; that all the different events described by Moses in his history of the creation actually took place in the order in which he relates them; and that the days of Moses are indefinite spaces of time, which must have been very long, but of which we cannot hope to ascertain the precise length. These are ingenious conjectures; but they do not appear necessary, nor are they justified by facts.

It has been conjectured (^Universal History, vol. i. p. 85), with some probability, that the creation of which Moses is the historian was neither confined to the earth alone, nor extended to the whole universe. The relation which all the planets of the solar system bear to the same illuminating body countenances the conjecture that they, together with the luminary by which they are enlightened, were all created at one period; but it would perhaps be conceiving too meanly of the benevolence, wisdom, and active power of the Deity to suppose that, before that period, these had never been exerted in any work of creation. Yet even here we have not demonstrative evidence.

On the supposition that the whole solar system was created at once—a supposition which has at least the merit of doing no violence to the narrative of Moses—the creation of the sun and the other planets may be understood as having been carried on at the same time with the creation of the earth. In that case, even in the course of the first day, though not longer than our present days, these bodies might be reduced to such order, and their relative motions so far established, as to begin the distinction between light and darkness, or day and night.

On the second day, we may collect from Moses’s narrative, that the atmosphere was purified, and the specific gravities of aqueous vapour and atmospherical air so adjusted as to render the latter capable of supporting the former.
[7:7:457]

On the third day the waters were first collected into lakes and seas, but in what manner it is of course impossible to determine. Some call in the operation of earthquakes; whilst others tell us that, when the earth was first formed, the exterior strata were, at different parts of its surface, of different specific gravities, and that the more ponderous parts now sank nearer the common centre, whilst the lighter, still remaining equally remote from it as before, formed islands, continents, hills, and mountains. But these are mere fancies; and we have no facts to offer in their stead. On the latter part of this day vegetables were caused to spring up on the earth; and their growth must have been much more rapid than we ever behold it now; but by what particular act of supernatural power this was effected it would be vain to inquire.

• On the fourth day the sun, moon, and stars appeared in the heavens. But according to the conjecture which we have mentioned as plausible, though without ascribing to it the evidence of certain truth, those heavenly bodies are to be considered as having been created before this day. They might now begin to exert their full influence on the earth, in the same manner as they have ever since continued to do.

The creation of the inanimate world was thus finished, and the earth prepared for the reception of animals. On the fifth day, therefore, were the living inhabitants of the air and the waters created.

On the sixth day the inferior animals inhabiting the earth were first created; and after that the whole work was crowned by the creation of a male and female of the human species. To the account of the creation of the animals, nothing certain can be added in explanation of Moses’s narrative. As no more than one pair of the human species were at first created, the same economy might possibly be observed in the creation of the inferior animals.