In noticing a statement of the Christian Union that the account of the creation and the fall of man as given by Moses was a mere matter of tradition, and not a revelation from God, we saw that the truthfulness of the whole Bible depends on the truthfulness of the writings of Moses. If they are not what they purport to be, plain declarations of facts, given by inspiration of God, then the entire Bible is unreliable, and the whole fabric of the Christian religion falls to the ground. All can see, then, the danger of, in any way, diminishing the confidence of men in this portion of the Bible-the foundation of the whole structure. And yet, strangely enough, this is the very part of which religious teachers are accustomed to speak the most slightingly. And their disbelief is the more dangerous that it is veiled under a semblance of belief. Men can be on their guard against an open enemy, but the insidious foe that comes under the guise of friendship, can destroy the strongest. So the rantings of the atheist may make no impression, but the teachings of one virtually repudiating the very groundwork of the Bible while professing reverence for it, cannot fail to lead some astray.SITI August 25, 1881, page 379.1

In the article noticed, the following passage occurred:-SITI August 25, 1881, page 379.2

“The essential truths in the first chapters of Genesis are the religious truths, and these are unaffected by the question whether the story is to be regarded as purely historical, or partially allegorical and parabolic.”SITI August 25, 1881, page 379.3

As stated before, the first chapters of Genesis have not the appearance of an allegory, but are given with as much positiveness as is the account of the departure of the Israelites from Egypt, and their journeyings through the wilderness. Now the only things in the first chapters of Genesis that pertain to religion, are the creation and the fall of man, and if these be not true, what religious truth can they teach? If these are allegorical are not the gospels also allegorical? The plan of redemption can be no more extensive than the fall, and if this is allegorical, that must certainly be. Then the prophecies of David and Isaiah concerning Christ are of no account. The statement of the angel concerning Jesus, “Thou shalt call his name Jesus; for he shall save his people from their sins,” must be a myth also; for if the story of the fall of man be not true, there is no such thing as sin, and consequently no need of a Saviour.SITI August 25, 1881, page 379.4

It must not be supposed, however, that those professed religious teachers who discredit the Mosaic account of creation, intend to deny the authority of the Bible as a whole. They do not usually look so far ahead for the result of their teachings. But there is a reason for their doubts, and it seems to be made quite plain in the following paragraph from an article on the Sabbath question in quite a prominent religious paper:-SITI August 25, 1881, page 379.5

“If we believe that the days of creation were periods, as geology quite conclusively shows, then it is difficult to say which day of our week was first observed as a Sabbath.”SITI August 25, 1881, page 379.6

It is very evident that the writer of the above paragraph knows that if the days of creation were not long periods, but literal days, then we can tell which day was the Sabbath at first, and what day ought now to be kept. He recognizes the plain fact that the fourth commandment and the first and second chapters of Genesis have the most intimate connection. He might have added that if the days of creation were vast periods, it makes no earthly difference to us what day was first kept as the Sabbath; for since the fourth commandment and Genesis 1 and 2 are so interdependent, if the latter is not literally true, the former cannot be.SITI August 25, 1881, page 379.7

But is it true geology conclusively shows that the creation days were not literal days? It has been well said that “whether or not geologists contradict Moses, it is certain that they contradict each other.” Although many professed scientists claim that the creation covered a vast period of time, no two of them have ever come within a million years of agreeing as to how long that period was. If a case were in court, and of fifty witnesses each hold a different story, their testimony would not be worth much. And after all, the authors of these theories of creation claim no more for them than that they are hypotheses. If a certain stratum is so many thousand years in forming, and if another stratum was formed in the same manner and at the same rate, then the earth must have been so many millions of years forming itself into its present shape, to say nothing of the myriads of years that it took it to evolve itself from the self-evolved protoplasm. And what is the object of this theorizing. Simply to prove that the Bible is inconsistent with itself. Infidels propound these theories and call them “science”; religious teachers who know a little of science and still less of the Bible, fearful that they may be thought ignorant if they do not acquiesce in everything asserted by “science,” eagerly swallow down these theories, reckless of consequences, and with as little understanding of the real point at issue as the ancient Ephesians had are ready to exclaim, “Great is science of the nineteenth century!” Let us rather say with Paul, “Yea, let God be true, but every man a liar.”SITI August 25, 1881, page 379.8

A few words must suffice to show how these so-called scientific theories make the Bible inconsistent with itself. The day is declared to be composed of the “evening and the morning”-the darkness and the light. Genesis 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31. In verse 16 it is declared that “God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night.” The days mentioned in this chapter, then, are such as are marked by the appearance and disappearance of the sun. To say that they are long periods is to make nonsense of the chapter.SITI August 25, 1881, page 379.9

Again in Exodus 20:8-11, we are commanded to do our work in six days, and rest on the seventh, because God, after working six days in creating the heavens and the earth, rested on the seventh, as recorded in Genesis 2:1-3. To say that God labored during six long periods, and rested on the seventh period, and that he commanded men to do likewise, would be to charge God with folly.SITI August 25, 1881, page 380.1

But, says one, it does not seem reasonable that God created the world in six literal days, we cannot comprehend it. Paul says that “the world by wisdom knew not God,” and the world by wisdom cannot expect to know his works. Are we not to believe anything that we cannot comprehend? If so our creeds will be exceedingly limited. “Canst thou by searching find out God? Canst thou find out the Almighty to perfection?” If we could comprehend the works of God, he would be on a level with ourselves, and would not be a God worthy of worship. The work of creation is an infinite work, and cannot be grasped by a finite mind. It is just as much beyond the comprehension of man how God could perform the work of creation in a hundred million years, as it is that he could do it in six days. As the child has to receive his first ideas on trust and wait for maturer years to teach him the reason, so in the things pertaining to God, we must, with our limited understanding, accept them as truth, content to “know in part,” and wait till the time when we shall “know even as we are known” for their full solution. In regard to those things which relate to our duty to God, the Bible is not obscure. There is no commandment that is more explicit than the fourth. A child can understand it. Indeed, if all spent as much time and energy in trying to ascertain the will of God, as they do in conjectures over what could not benefit them, even if it were possible for them to understand it, none would go astray.SITI August 25, 1881, page 380.2

“The secret things belong unto the Lord our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law.” Deuteronomy 29:29.SITI August 25, 1881, page 380.3

July 15, 1881

September 8, 1881