the above method of reconciliation with the hypothesis that the term earth in Genesis did not signify the whole globe, but " the part of our globe which God was adapting for the dwelling-place of man and animals connected with him/' that is, "a large part of Asia, lying between the Caucasian Ridge, the Caspian Sea, and Tartary on the north, the Persian and Indian Seas on the south, and the high mountain ridges which run at a considerable dis- tance on their eastern and western flanks/ '
3d. Many have argued that the days spoken of in this pas- sage in Genesis were not natural days of twenty-four hours, " but periods of great, though indefinite length, during which all the changes exhibited by the strata of rocks took place," and in which the several orders of organized vegetable and animal beings were successively created, man being brought into existence at the end of the closing day of creation, and the Sabbath day of God's rest from his creation work continuing ever since. This view has been eloquently argued and illustrated in a comparison of the Mosaic text with the facts developed by geology, by the late Hugh Miller, in his last work, " The testimony of the Rocks." After all, however, theologians and geologists agree in regarding this method of reconciliation as doing equal violence to the lan- guage of the record and to the facts of the science. — President Hitchcock's " Religion of Geology."
9. What principles ought to be borne in mind by Christians in view of apparent discrepancies between the interpretation of nature by science, and the interpretation of the Scriptures by theologians ?
1st. All truth must be consistent. God's works and God's word are alike absolute truth ; whatever discrepancies appear, the difficulty must wholly exist in man's imperfect interpretation, either of the works upon the one hand, or of the word upon the other.
%&. Revelation was not designed to anticipate the natural progress of science, consequently the Scriptures teach us nothing concerning the interpretation of the phenomenal world of nature, but uniformly speak of phenomena as they ajjpear, and in the common language of the age and people among whom they were written^ and viewer of physical causes or laws as they are in fact.
REVELATION AND SCIENCE, 195
Thus they speak of the sun "rising/' "setting," "going back/' " standing still," etc., etc.
3d. From the commencement of modern science apparent in- consistencies between nature and revelation have been constantly emerging, which, for the time, have occasioned great offense to zealous believers, but in every instance, without exception, the error has been found to exist either in the too hasty generalizations of science from imperfect knowledge of the facts, or from a pre- judiced interpretation of the Scriptures, and invariably matured science has been found not only to harmonize perfectly with the letter of the word naturally interpreted, but, moreover, gloriously to illustrate the grand moral principles and doctrines therein revealed.
4th. There is no difficulty experienced in the attempt to re- concile Moses' account of the "genesis of the heavens and earth" with the science of geology, which is different either in kind or degree from those experienced in every attempt to reconcile pro- phecy with the facts of history. History and geological science are both in transitu ; when they are finished the perfect har- mony of both with revelation will be apparent to all.
5th. Christians should always rejoice in every advance of science, being assured that thereby the truth of their religion and the glory of their Grocl must be confirmed and manifested. They should equally avoid all premature adjustments of the interpreta- tion of Scripture to imperfect science in process of development, and all injurious and impotent jealousies of scientific discoveries or speculations, when apparently hostile to their traditional in- terpretation of Scripture. Perfect faith casteth out all
FEAR.
C HAP TEE, XII.
ANGELS.
1. What are the different senses in ivhich the word dyyeXog, angel, or messenger, is used in Scripture ?
"Ordinary messengers, Job i., 14 ; Luke vii., 24 ; ix., 52 ; prophets, Isa. xlii., 19; Mai. iii., 1; priests, Mai. ii., 7; ministers of the New Testament, Rev. i., 20 ; also impersonal agents, as pillar of cloud, Ex. xiv., 19 ; pestilence, 2 Sam. xxiv., 16, 17 ; winds, Ps. civ., 4 ; plagues, called ' evil angels/ lxxviii., 49 ; Paul's thorn in the flesh, e angel of Satan/ 2 Cor. xii., 7/' Also the second person of the Trinity, " Angel of his presence ;" " Angel of the Covenant/' Isa. lxiii., 9 ; Mai. iii., 1. But the term is chiefly applied to the heavenly intelligences, Matt, xxv., 31.— See Kitto's Bib. Ency.
2. What are the scriptural designations of angels, and how far are those designations expressive of their nature and offices ?