rally true. On the contrary, we acknowledge their truth con amore; and for one, I am ready to confess that there is no part of the Bible more plainly stamped with the seal of divine inspiration.

CHAL. "It is bad policy in those who contend for the truth of revealed religion to extend their lines of defense to a greater length than necessity demands. By such conduct, we may give countenance to the notion that we are weak, when, in point of fact, we dwell in an impregnable fortress. I am of opinion, that in the first two verses of the book of Genesis there is ample room for all the discoveries, and even for the speculations of geology:-'In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.' Such was the state of things when 'the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters,'-and then began the first day's work. '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.' There appears to me to be nothing in these verses which necessarily indicates that the original creation of the heaven and the earth formed a part of the first day's work. The first day's work was the creation or revelation of light. If we ascribe to that day this single operation, it maintains its balance with the

days which follow, on each of which there was a proportionate exertion of the divine Power. On the second day, the firmament was created. On the third, the dry land was separated from the sea, and clothed with the vegetable tribes. I conclude, therefore, that the original fiat of the Almighty, which called into being the heaven and the earth, was anterior to the first day-at what distance of time, it were idle to conjecture."

Bishop Patrick gave a similar explanation of this passage, long before geology had revealed her fossil dragons; and I remember hearing the same sentiments uttered by that sober Christian philosopher, Professor Farish.

CHAL. "There is a collateral argument, which confirms my conclusions on this subject. We have reason to believe, as Granville Penn has taught us, that in original creation, all things came forth from the hand of God in a condition of maturity and perfection. Now it appears to be at variance with this analogy, to suppose that when God created the heaven and the earth, the earth was without form and void-a dark, confused, chaotic mass! May we not rather infer, that our planet was created perfect, and that before she became 'without form and void,' she had undergone some signal catastrophe or possibly a series of revolutions. Here the geologist may apply his systems, and expatiate as he pleases. He shall inflict no injury on the Christian's faith." I observed, that the only difficulty which appeared to arise in the way of this conclusion was, the

account given by Moses of the creation of the sun, moon, and stars, on the fourth day.

CHAL. "I also have felt this difficulty-but taking it for granted, that the sun and moon were actually made on the fourth day, the earth in her original condition might have been provided with heat and light, (if heat and light were required,) through some different, yet equally adapted instrumentality. With God all things are possible. However, we may meet the difficulty in another way. Are you not aware that Rosenmuller interprets ver. 14, which commences the history of the fourth day, not of the original formation of the sun and moon, but of their application,-the ordination of their purpose in relation to this earth?”

A few days after this conversation, Dr. Chalmers brought me his notes on Granville Penn, and some extracts from Rosenmuller-it being his uniform practice to make notes on all books of importance which he happens to read. The received version of ver. 14 begins, “And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven, to divide the day from the night, &c." Rosenmuller clearly shows, from the comparison of other passages in the Hebrew Bible, that the original may rather be rendered, "Let the lights in the firmament of heaven be for (the purpose of) dividing the day from the night, &c." If this version is correct, it follows, that in the fourth day's command there is a reference made to the heavenly bodies, as already existing-and therefore,

when we afterwards read, in ver. 16, that "God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night," and "made the stars also," we may not unfairly infer, that this verse declares a previous act of the hand of omnipotence. To my apprehension, these views are confirmed by the words of the first verse, considered as descriptive of an original creation of the universe. I believe the Hebrew word, rendered "heaven," properly includes the sun and moon and all the starry host.

There is one fact which tends to strengthen the idea that the fossil remains, discovered in the Secondary rocks, belong to the history of a creation anterior to the present order. It is this-that amongst the two thousand species, belonging to the animal kingdom, (including shells,) of which the remains have already been found in these rocks, there is not a single species which is now ex tant. The megatherions of that ancient day, and even the lesser animals, have utterly disappeared in the present order of nature.

DR. GREVILLE. "The same observation applies to the plants. We are daily discovering new fossil plants in the Secondary strata, and the number of those which we have ascertained is now very large. But we have not met with a single specimen known to the botany of the present day."

CHAL. "Whatever we may make of the question of the age of our globe, geology furnishes us with a noble

evidence of the creative power of God. When we inspect the machinery of nature, and argue with Paley from the contrivance to a Contriver, the atheist sometimes tells us, that the order of nature, for any thing we know, may have been eternal. But geology has supplied us with ample proofs, that the present order of nature has not been eternal-that at no immeasurable distance of time it had an actual beginning. The animals and plants

with which the world once teemed are known no more. The earth is covered and adorned with an almost endless variety of new species. Can any thing possibly account for this fact, short of the fiat of Omnipotence? If we conclude that the fossil remains in the Secondary rocks belong to a date anterior to the present order of nature, it appears that those which are found in the Tertiary deposits, many of which are those of animals and plants still extant, may be well accounted for by the Deluge, and serve to establish the reality of that event. Thus, on the whole, the Scripture history and the science of geology are so far from being irremediably at variance, that they contain the elements of mutual harmony and accordance."

My lame leg being somewhat improved, we ventured one day to go and dine with Dr. Chalmers, who had kindly invited several interesting persons to meet us. Our party consisted of Dr. McGill, Professor of Divinity at Glasgow, Geo. Ross, an advocate well known for his philanthropic and religious character, as well as his