If miracles were bound up with credulous prattle, and stood alone, doubtless, faith in miracles would pass away with our childhood; but, associated with words and deeds of imperishable wisdom and sublime purity, they are regarded as sparks from the great wheel of Divine operation. They are in connection with examples of moral grandeur, nowhere matched in the history of mankind, proving that they are not inventions of the crafty and deceitful. If opponents answer "We do not deny the moral grandeur of those who asserted the miracles, but we maintain that in an unscientific age moral grandeur is compatible with an uncritical belief in the marvellous; " then we reply-The men used as agents to work them, and many of the eye-witnesses, were the most thoughtful and experienced of our race: not likely to be, and, in many cases, could not be deceived: and the Power displaying the marvels is that very Power which Science acknowledges to exist behind all phenomena. Nor is that all those physical marvels were not done in a corner and secretly, but publicly; and given in attestation of whatever knowledge is possessed concerning Forgiveness of sin, Redemption from evil, Immortality of life. The old Christmas Hymn says-"O tidings of comfort and joy, comfort and joy."

We are gravely told-"The universe of the Bible is -limited to a few thousand years in time, and to a narrowly bounded area in space."

Where is it so limited? Certainly not in the Bible, where are glowing descriptions of the grandeur and antiquity of the universe. Limitations, that do exist, must be interpreted by the larger accounts; or explained by the purpose for which limitation is made. The Inspiration of a Prophet was not universal as to knowledge; but special for his ministry. As to the Earth's antiquity, the Rev. R. Gresswell, in "The Threefold Cord," says "In the very year, which, it has often been shown, is assigned by the chronology of the Hebrew Bible as the year of the Mosaic Creation itself, B.C. 4000, we find all the measures of time, both the natural and the civil, which have entered this system from the first and are still making part of it, meeting all together." We cannot agree with the above statement. It is not in man to know, with any accuracy, when time began to be measured by day and night. Job was admonished of this—“ Where

The Mosaic Days.

399

wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth?" (Job xxxviii. 4). Moses so far from counting the world new, spoke of the mountains as very old (Ps. xc. 2). Other passages (Gen. xlix. 26; Deut. xxxiii. 15; Job xv. 7; Prov. viii. 22-31) plainly declare the antiquity; even as "The laying of foundations," "The laying of the cornerstone," "The stretching out of the line upon it," mark a slow and progressive operation. Inward growth working outward show.

The time occupied by the Mosaic Days has been a subject of controversy from the earliest times. Some great men, considering the eternity of God and the infinity of His works, maintained that everything done in connection with the earth occupied only a moment of time; but that this moment it is impossible to imagine or to explain. Biblical archæologists, of modern times, agree that the common chronology is too narrow. Ancient records, development of commerce and government, time required for production of a thousand languages from the confusion of early speech at Babel, the separation of so many human families from the early race, 66 require a cradle of larger dimensions than Archbishop Ussher's Chronology." The early Church at Antioch counted six thousand years from the Creation till the birth of Christ; the Greeks took five hundred from that number; Eusebius, taking three hundred more, was content with an antiquity of five thousand two hundred years; the Samaritans counted thirteen hundred and seven years from the Creation to the Deluge; the Hebrews, sixteen hundred and fifty-six; the Septuagint, two thousand two hundred and sixty-three. The sum of all iswe have no revelation as to the time which has elapsed since God made the world. Sir. G. B. Airy, concerning the tenth chapter of Genesis, interprets "the filial relation of persons as meaning the colonial relation of tribes." 1 The Bible gives no statement as to date of the beginning, ot'ner than that Christ was in the beginning (Gen. i. 1; John i. 1). We agree with Aristotle-Nature is not full of incoherent episodes, like a bad tragedy; yet we supplement the dictum of Leibnitz—“ La nature n'agit jamais par saut," by wider experience" Nature sometimes does make a leap." While allowing the Pythagorean doctrine of pervading order: in the "Notes on the Earlier Hebrew Scriptures," p. 45.

universal kooμós; or, as the Bechuana chief said-"One event is always the son of another, and we must not forget the parentage; we do not reduce history to nothing better than an almanac, nor allow that morals can be explained by mechanics. It is somewhat premature for a few physicists to account orthodox theology a graveyard, the Bible a coffin, and our Lord that dead one to be buried out of sight. Those who will not believe, who arrogantly refuse Scripture, and choose to be guiltily ignorant of its marvellous evidence and proof of Divinity; who want the Lord to be always walking on the sea-but, even if He did, would have less than the little faith of Peter; who profess to educe the world from no world, Nature from no Nature, life from no life; surrender their position and accept miracles-"Can there be anything more miraculous than the existence of man and the world? anything more literally supernatural than the origin of things?” 1

From many painful examples of the unbelief that clings as a parasite to certain physicists, take the following from the pen of a leader.

He states, concerning the observance of the Sabbath Rest"To give sanction to this precept, the authority of at least a myth was requisite. I believe it was simply for this reason that the myth of the six days of creation was preserved." 2 The second narrative in Genesis ii., was "to confirm the solemnity of marriage; and for this purpose only, or chiefly, the second history of creation was preserved."” 3 Such credulity is preposterous.

We are to believe that Moses, who has produced a greater effect on the history of the civilised world than any other man, One only excepted; Moses, of whom it is stated, that the mighty inspiration came upon him which convinced him that, great as were the difficulties, he could lead his people to independence and to territorial possessions; but that it must be done by the establishment among them of a new and pure religion; " became, in order to establish a new and pure religion," one of the greatest deceivers in the world. We are to believe this in order to disbelieve

1 "Lothair."

2

"Notes on the Earlier Hebrew Scriptures," p. 17: Sir G. B. Airy, K.C.B.

Ibid. p. 18.

Ibid. p. 54.

Narrowness and Ignorance of Assailants. 401

2

4

miracles! The Book itself, as a history of all human life in relation to God, is the best answer to all such depreciations. The death of Abel is stated to be "simply a myth, explaining the hostility between the feeders of sheep and the tillers of the ground." The punishment of Cain is a myth-" a holy myth would be required . . . to restrain a half-savage people." Concerning Lamech-"It appears that the history of Lamech is a mere myth, floating down. from some distant age, and preserved by Moses as a sanction for the beneficent measures which he was anxious to enforce." 8 The terrors of the Lord on Mount Sinai, are attributed to a volcanic eruption; and the glory seen in the cloud was "either the smoke of Sinai, or the reflection of its fire as seen in the clouds." 5 The unwise guessing is rebuked by the fact that there is no volcanic formation in the Triassic rock of Sinai. The water obtained at Rephidim (Exod. xvii. 1), by smiting the rock, receives this explanation "I think it will appear that this was some artificial, or (in modern terms) engineering, process by which water was procured." A larger explanation of verses 5 and 6 is given "The meaning seems to be that, instead of patiently relying on the goodness of God, under circumstances which would have justified waiting, he undertook some mechanical work for obtaining water. Or, possibly, he may have used some forced labour, carried out with cruelty, in the engineering." How the people were persuaded that God helped them, though all was done by engineering, is not explained. The punishment of Nadab and Abihu by fire from God (Lev. x. 1, 2), is thus misrepresented-"I suppose Moses put them to death immediately."8 The destruction of the two hundred princely rebels (Num. xvi. 33) was not by fire from God, but "by the act of Moses. What kind of pitfall had been prepared for the few, and what form of death for the many, we cannot precisely say." No character seems sacred; as for Elijah and Elisha, we are told-" Of those who, with great ability, displayed unlimited ferocity are Elijah, who slaughtered without mercy the party opposed to 1 "Notes on the Earlier Hebrew Scriptures," p. 26: Sir G. B. Airy,

7

9

him; Elisha, who instigated Hazael (vizier) to murder Benhadad (king) of Syria, and who set up Jehu apparently for the express purpose of committing wholesale slaughters, in which he was aided by the savage Jehonadab. The legendary history of Elijah and Elisha may be compared with that of Dunstan."

The irreverence exhibited in these unwarrantable interpolations and misinterpretations, the rash charges made against holy men, the believing anything rather than that which is in Scripture, are astounding-as coming from one whose reasoning faculties have been highly cultivated. To get rid of miracles, to tie down God to modern notions, it is thought worth while to charge holy men, the best and greatest of our race, with cruelty, lying, and grossest deception. To credit that the scheme of redemption is without Divine authority, we must account all recorded marvellous acts of God unsubstantial figments; Prophets and Apostles are to be denounced as the greatest deceivers in the world. Moses, who describes God as "The Lord, The Lord God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth that will by no means clear the guilty" (Exod. xxxiv. 6, 7), is charged with the guilt of lying and murder; yet, from this man we have "a code of social laws to which nothing then existing was comparable for purity and for clear definition of justice in the infinity of social relations. I imagine that everything good, in the legislation of modern times, has had its origin in the Sinaitic laws of Moses." 2

The weakness, irreverence, want of sanctity, assumption of authority, painfully marking these perversions of Holy Scripture, can be explained.

A high degree of complexity wearies and confuses any ordinary intellect. Few minds can apply continuous power of attention, and the mental energy of several faculties, in an involved process. The most vigorous experience a sense of fatigue, followed by lassitude, if they transgress in arduous manifold work; and the penalty has to be paid in confusion of ideas and collapse of mental energy. On this account it is necessary for spheres of intellectual action to be defined; "Notes on the Earlier Hebrew Scriptures," p. 102: Sir G. B. Airy, K.C.B. 2 Ibid. p. 93.