7. Finally, this theory is reckless of the authority of revelation. It makes no effort to reconcile its doctrines with the testimony of the Scriptures. Especially on the great points of the creation of man—as to his body, independent of all other animals; as to his spirit, made in the very image of God; and as to woman, formed from man—this system stands in absolute antagonism with God’s word.——It should not surprise us, therefore, that the common sense of mankind (with rare exceptions) revolts from its absurdities. It should not surprise us that Science—the true Science which builds, not on unsupported assumptions but on ascertained and incontestable facts—should disown these theories and speculations. True Science, here as elsewhere, now and forever, is at one with Revelation; and these pillars of the great temple of Truth are in not the least danger of being shaken.
CHAPTER II.
THE ANTIQUITY OF MAN.
UNDER this head several questions arise:
1. Is the human family older than the Adam of Scripture history?
2. How far back really is the date of Adam? i. e. How many years intervened from Adam to the flood and how many to the Christian era?
Subsidiary questions are—
(a.) Were there one or more races of primeval men pre-Adamic but now extinct?
(b.) Have there been various “head-centers” of the existing human family; or only one and that Adam? Or (the same question in another form) are all the living varieties of race lineally descended from Adam and all from Noah?
The special interest of these questions will hinge upon their relation to the Scriptures—i. e. their supposed or real bearing upon the truth of the Scripture history—the friends of the Bible desiring to know whether any well sustained facts exist to affect its credit, or to modify its currently received interpretation: and on the other hand, men whose sympathies are not with the Bible, being inquisitive to see if by any means its authority can be impugned or impaired.——It is obvious that this sort of special interest, for or against the Bible, is liable to affect the candor and fairness of the investigation on either side. The friends of the Bible, however, have really not the least occasion to fear for its stability. It is indeed possible that our interpretation of its chronology may require modification—but always and only toward truth. Also we may have erred in supposing the Bible to have taught what it never intended to teach. But the real word of God can have nothing to fear from the advance of human science—that is to say, from the real knowledge of actual facts.——With the utmost composure, therefore, we welcome all candid investigation, subjecting every new theory to appropriate scrutiny, siftingthe evidence on which it rests with no prejudice for or against the conclusions to which it may compel us.