Schyn became known as a writer on practical themes through his Mensch in Christus (1721-25) and Beletsden d. Gcestelyken Levens (1727), and also as an advocate of union among his coreligionists through the Ontwerp toe Vereeniging der Doopsgezinden (1723). His principal fame was obtained, however, in the publication of the Ilistoria Mennonitanun (Amst. 1723, 1729,2 vols, [first in Dutch, Korte IJisl.^). See Blaupot ten Gate, Geschied. der Doops^gezinden, etc., ii, 13C, and the literature there given; Krohn, Gesch. der Wiederlui'J'er, p. 136 sq. — llerzog, Real-Encyldop. s. v.
Sciaditis, in Greek mythology, was an appellative of Diana, who possessed a temjde at Scia, in Arcadia, which had been built by Aristodemus.
Sciallius, in Greek mythology, was an appellative
oi Apollo.
Scianiancy, or Scioniancy (Gr. aKia, a shadow, and pavTtia, dicinatioii), a species of divination, by which it was pretended the dead were brought from the shades below. See Divination ; Necromancy.
Sciapodes was a name in Greek mythology. A fable of the ancient Greeks recites that a people lived in India whose feet were so large as to be capable of serv- ing as umbrellas. The Sciapodes {shadoic-footed people) were accordingly in the habit of seating themselves and interposing a foot between the sun and their persons. — Yollmer, Wdrterh. d. Mythol. s. v.
Scias, in Greek mythology, was a nymph from the forests of Tanagra, the wife of Cephissus and mother of Elinus. Eunostos, a son of the latter, became notorious through his indifference towards Ochne, the daughter of Colon lis.
Science (V'yc,maddd; Dan. i, 4, fowtt7«7f/e, as else- where rendered). In one passage only (1 Tim. vi, 20) this word has also been given bj' our translators as the equivalent of the Greek term jvUxtiq. a word which is used about thirty times in the New Test., but which in all other passages is properly rendered knowledge. It doubtless here refers to the so-called gnosis, or that af- fectation of spiritual knowledge which set itself in ar- ray against the Gospel of Christ, and which boasted of its superior insight into the nature of things. It was from this sort of pretentious knowing that the Gnostics derived their name, and they were among the earliest corrupters of the simplicitj' of the (iospel of Christ. See Gnostics. Many readers have erroneously supposed that Paul is speaking of something else than the " knowl- edge" of which both the Judaizing and the mystic sects of the apostolic age continually boasted, against which he so urgently warns men (1 Cor. viii, 1, 7), the counter- feit of the true knowledge which he prizes so highlv (xii, 8; xiii, 2; Phil, i, 9; Col. iii, 10).
It was not until after the accession of David that the Jews became remarkable for their intellectual culture ; but the patriarchs probably possessed a considerable .knowledge of practical astronomy [see Astiiono.myJ,
such as is still popular among pastoral tribes, prob- ably corrupting it by an admixture of judicial astrol- ogy. See AsTU0L0(;v. The literature of the He- brews was chiefly limited to ethics, religion, the his- tory of their nation, and to natural history, on which Solomon wrote several treatises no longer extant. If the phenomena mentioned in Scripture had been de- scribed with the accuracy of modern physical science, they would have been unintelligible to the persons for whose use the sacred writings were originally designed. The most numerous references to Oriental science occur in the book of Job ( see Schmidt, Bihlischer rinjsikits [Ziillichau, 1731, 1748]).
In modern times the appeal of rationalists and semi- infidels has especially been to the discoveries of science, especially geology (q. v.), as militating against the Bi- ble; but in every instance a careful and candid compari- son has shown their compatibility. See Inteupueta- TioN, Biblical.
SCIENCE AND Eevelation. It is an undeniable fact that there is a controversy between scientists and theologians, but we propose to answer in this article the question. Is there anj' antagonism between science and revelation '? It may be well to deline the position which some of the most distinguished scientists take, and which they claim to be alone tenable. Prof. Hux- ley says, " There is but one kind of knowledge, and but one method of acquiring it;" that that kind of knowlr edge makes "scepticism the highest of duties, blind faitli the one unpardonable sin." He describes all faith as " blind" which accepts anything on any kind of au- thority but that of scientific experience. He describes true religion as " worship, ' for the most part of the silent sort,' at the altar of the Unknown and Unknowable," and proclaims "justification, not by faith, but by verifi- cation," as the gospel of modern science {Lay Sermon, read at St. Martin's Hall, London, and published in the Fortnightly Review, Jan. 15, 186G). He further sa3'S that "the improver of natural knowledge absolutely refuses to acknowledge authority as such," and maintains that the method of the inductive sciences is the only method by which any human creature can arrive at any sort of truth. The natural consequence is that such men find themselves opposed to revelation, which assumes that man by searching cannot find all truth, and therefore teaches what is, otherwise, unknown and unknowable. Many scientists assert that their investigations prove the falsity of the statements and teachings of Scripture. That the conclusions of scientists may not harmonize with what they believe to be the teachings of Scripture we readih' admit; but that the real facts taught in the one contradict, antagonize, those revealed by the other v.e as unhesitatingly deny. In fact, revelation, as we hope to show, reall}^ has no controversy with science. Let us glance at some of the alleged contradictions.