4. That these interferences thus recorded occur at the exact points at which natural laws, so far as science has yet been able to ascertain them, are inadequate to produce the phenomena which then took place, and that the developments are proved by geology to have taken place at the points indicated.
5. That the six days into which the work is divided by Moses do correspond to the probable order of development—that in three of them, the third, fifth, and sixth, this correspondence is marked by facts ascertained by Geology—that the fourth, in which no terrestrial phenomenon is recorded, corresponds to a very long period in the Geological record in which no indications of any new development are found—while the first and second indicate a state of things which the nebular hypothesis renders highly probable, but of which no positive information is within the reach of science.
Admitting then that there is something in the way in which the days are spoken of which we are at present unable to understand, we may yet confidently assert that such a record could not have been the product of man's thought at the period at which it was written. It is utterly impossible that it should have been the result of a series of fortunate conjectures without any foundation to rest upon, and scientific foundation there was none, for there is every reason to believe that the sciences which might perchance now supply some foundation are entirely the growth of the last three centuries. There is then only one conclusion that we can draw, that it is a revelation from the Creator Himself, and that if there is anything in it which seems inexplicable or erroneous, that appearance arises from our own ignorance of facts, and not from any error on the part of the Author.