evidence to prove the comparatively recent origin of man; that M. Bunsen--perhaps the ablest of all Egyptologers who contend for a greatly enlarged chronology— has advanced arguments which we think Mr. Rawlinson and others have fully answered; and that he has been clearly convicted of dealing unfairly with the lists of Manetho, his favourite authority; (see " Aids to Faith;") that other students of Egyptian antiquities, and students of great eminence, have come to conclusions widely differing from his; and that we can hardly be expected to place implicit confidence in the inferences of learned antiquarians, who, while they agree in rejecting the received chronology, are yet, on other points, irreconcileably opposed to one another, since one of them allows only eighty or ninety years for the stay of the Israelites in Egypt, while another assigns no less a period than 1434! and since the estimates made of the Hyksos period vary from three or four centuries to fourteen or fifteen.*

* Answers to Sir Charles Lyell's work on the Antiquity of Man have appeared in the "Witness" newspaper. See also a reply to his arguments in an "Examination of Sir Charles Lyell's recent work," by S. R. Patteson, F.G.S., who, having examined all Sir Charles's witnesses, claims the verdict of not proven' on the issue joined; and "Scientific Theories on the Origin of Man reprinted from the 'Record.'" Doctor Wilson, in his work on "Prehistoric Man," thus concludes,-" Here it is obvious we are dealing with no incomprehensible cycles of time. indeed, difficult questions still requiring the illumination which further observation and discovery may be expected to supply, nor have such been evaded in these researches; but the present tendency is greatly to exaggerate such difficulties. The first steps in

There are,

Even if these and similar arguments were unanswerable, they would only demonstrate that, on a point which in no way concerns the salvation of our souls, or any of the main objects of Divine revelation, the text of Scripture has been tampered with; and so far from regretting the discovery of any such trifling errors, whatever their cause, we rejoice at any criticism that may bring them to light, and help us to eliminate from the pure Word of God these human additions. For in this way we may hope to obtain at last, in its original state, that divinely inspired record which, in its pristine purity, "has God for its Author, salvation for its end, and truth, without any mixture of error, for its subject-matter." The truest friend to light is the truest friend to Christianity; and we shall acknowledge that Scripture has been in some places misinterpreted, mistranslated, or even interpolated, whenever such passages are not to be reconciled with demonstrated facts; firmly convinced that the necessary emendations will only restore the text to the state in which it first appeared. But we deny that any such facts have as yet been established, and agree with Mr.

the process thus indicated cannot be reduced to a precise chronology. The needful compass of their duration may be subject of dispute, and the precise number of centuries that shall be allowed for their evolution may vary according to the estimated rate of progress of infantile human reason; but I venture to believe that to many reflecting minds it will appear that by such a process of inquiry we do in reality make so near an approach to a beginning in relation to man's intellectual progress, that we can form no uncertain guess at the duration of the race, and find in this respect a welcome evidence of harmony between the disclosures of Science and the dictates of Revelation."

Rawlinson in thinking that, "nothing has as yet been really discovered, either in the facts of history or those of language, that militates against the chronological scheme of Scripture, if we regard the Septuagint and Samaritan versions as the best exponents of the original text in respect of the genealogy of the Patriarchs, from Shem to Abraham. Whether the chronology of those versions admits of further expansion; whether, since the chronologies of the Hebrew Bible, the Samaritan Pentateuch, and the Septuagint, differ, we can depend upon any one of them; or whether we must not consider that this portion of revelation has been lost to us by the mistakes of copyists, or the intentional alterations of systematizers, it is not necessary at present to determine. 'Our treasure is in earthen vessels.' The revealed Word of God has been continued in the world in the same way as other written compositions, by the multiplication of copies. No miraculous aid is vouchsafed to the transcribers, who are liable to make mistakes, and may not always have been free from the design of bending Scripture to their own views. That we have a wonderfully pure and perfect text of the Pentateuch, considering its antiquity, is admitted; but doubts must ever attach to the chronology, not only because in all ancient MSS. numbers are especially liable to accidental corruption, but also, and more especially, from the fact that there is so wide a difference in this respect between the Hebrew, the Samaritan, and the Greek copies. Still, at present, we have no need to suppose that the numbers have

in every case suffered." ("Aids to Faith," pages

263-4.)

It ought never to be forgotten, that even the strictest believer in the inspiration of the Bible has never contended for the inspiration of its translators or its transcribers nothing but a continued, a stupendous, and, we argue, a useless miracle, could preserve the Sacred Volume from all possible corruption. And are we to suppose that the Deity must miraculously interfere to prevent every error that the omission or insertion of a figure, a letter, or even a dot, might occasion in a matter, not of doctrine or of practice, but of mere chronology? If the Bible be the oldest book in existence-if it be intended for translation into every language under heaven, and if, to give it the requisite currency, it must have been rendered into different tongues, dead as well as living, imperfectly known as well as wellknown, and therefore have passed through the hands of many translators and many copyists, from century to century-how endless must have been the miracles, which alone could secure it from trifling interpolation. The real wonder is, not that Divine Providence has not interposed, specially and repeatedly, to prevent every possible error that might have otherwise crept into the text, but that errors of this kind have not been far more numerous than they are; and in arguing for the uncorrupted preservation of the Scriptures, all that we contend for is, that they have come down to us without any such change as would materially affect a single precept of duty, or a single article of belief. It is right that all this should be clearly understood by Christians in general, for otherwise their faith may be disturbed by discoveries, for which well-instructed believers have all

along been prepared, and which can cause them no perplexity.

II.-Another of those disputed points, upon which the results of modern research are supposed to be at variance with the Scriptural story of man, regards his origin. The Bible informs us, that he was created by an express act of the Deity; that he was made from the dust of the earth; that God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, thus making him a living soul; and that he was made in the image and likeness of the Creator. But certain physiologists and comparative anatomists have argued, on the contrary, that he is only the latest development of some inferior animal!! Fortunately, the highest authorities in these departments of science have come to a totally different conclusion. Yet the grounds on which, independently of Scripture, we believe that the first of our race might have been made in the image of God, are worth considering, since they show that the conclusions of modern science, as explained by its ablest professors, harmonize completely with the simple and sublime account which Scripture has given us of the Genesis of man; and because they are the groundwork of a striking argument from analogy, in favour of Divine revelation.

It appears, then, from some of the latest discoveries of geology, that though our race may be older than is generally imagined, we must yet be either almost or altogether the youngest of all the teeming tenantry of the globe that we inhabit. (See Sir Henry Holland's Lectures on scientific and other subjects: Note to the last essay.) Nor can it be doubted, that if the youngest,