The Mosaic Narrative Of The Creation Considered Grammatically And In Its Relations To Science -- By: E. P. Barrows

Journal: Bibliotheca Sacra
Volume: BSAC 013:52 (Oct 1856)
Article: The Mosaic Narrative Of The Creation Considered Grammatically And In Its Relations To Science
Author: E. P. Barrows

The Mosaic Narrative Of The Creation Considered
Grammatically And In Its Relations To Science

E. P. Barrows

By the discoveries of geology the Mosaic narrative of the creation has been invested with new and extraordinary interest. These revelations, as might have been anticipated from the history of all past discoveries in science that touch upon the sphere of revelation, have been treated in two opposite and extreme methods, both of them alike uncandid and un-philosophical. One class of men take the position of entirely neglecting the facts of geology; generally on the ground that the science is yet in its infancy, that its cultivators are at variance among themselves, and that everything which pertains to it is uncertain. But if these men would make themselves acquainted with the subject, at least in its outlines, they would learn that it is the certainty of the great facts of geology which furnishes a basis for all the controversies among its teachers and expounders; the problem being, not whether they are sustained by valid evidence, but how they are to be accounted for. They would further learn, that while they have been disregarding these facts, others

have been making themselves masters of them, and spreading, everywhere, the knowledge of them; and that they are the very facts which have the nearest relation to the Mosaic narrative.

Another class of men, receiving the facts of geology, have hastily turned them against the sacred narrative; not considering that a record, sustained by such a mighty mass of evidence, justly demands of them that they should, first of all, make a candid and earnest attempt to harmonize with its statements the discoveries of the science; not understanding that the principle of setting aside evidence of one kind, that stands firm upon its own foundation, by evidence of another kind and resting upon another foundation, is radically unsound, since it is far more probable that some mistake has been made in interpreting the relation of the two classes of evidence to each other, than that God has arrayed irrefragable proof against irrefragable proof, in a contradictory way; and forgetting, moreover, that many discoveries of science that have been claimed, at the outset, as being on the side of skepticism, have afterwards been found to be on the side of faith.

The true inquirer after truth will avoid both of these extremes. He will not shut his eyes to the revelations of science, because the work of harmonizing them with the inspired record costs him some labor, and some sacrifice, it may be, of old pre-judgments; nor will he make his faith in the Bible to rest upon the narrow foundation of his success in this work. If he cannot solve existing difficulties, he...

You must have a subscription and be logged in to read the entire article.
Click here to subscribe
visitor : : uid: ()