initial commit of ebook 2630HEADmain

2 files changed, 991 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/old/4saht10.txt b/old/4saht10.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..390a277
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/4saht10.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,991 @@
+PG's The Interpreters of Genesis and the Interpreters of Nature
+#7 in our series by Thomas Henry Huxley
+This is Essay #4 from "Science and Hebrew Tradition"
+
+Copyright laws are changing all over the world, be sure to check
+the copyright laws for your country before posting these files!!
+
+Please take a look at the important information in this header.
+We encourage you to keep this file on your own disk, keeping an
+electronic path open for the next readers.  Do not remove this.
+
+*It must legally be the first thing seen when opening the book.*
+In fact, our legal advisors said we can't even change margins.
+
+**Welcome To The World of Free Plain Vanilla Electronic Texts**
+
+**Etexts Readable By Both Humans and By Computers, Since 1971**
+
+*These Etexts Prepared By Hundreds of Volunteers and Donations*
+
+Information on contacting Project Gutenberg to get Etexts, and
+further information is included below.  We need your donations.
+
+
+Title:  The Interpreters of Genesis and the Interpreters of Nature
+Title:  This is Essay #4 from "Science and Hebrew Tradition"
+
+Author:  Thomas Henry Huxley
+
+May, 2001  [Etext #2630]
+
+
+PG's The Interpreters of Genesis and the Interpreters of Nature
+*****This file should be named 4saht10.txt or 4saht10.zip******
+
+Corrected EDITIONS of our etexts get a new NUMBER, 1saht11.txt
+VERSIONS based on separate sources get new LETTER, 4saht10a.txt
+
+Processed by D.R. Thompson <drthom@ihug.co.nz>
+
+Project Gutenberg Etexts are usually created from multiple editions,
+all of which are in the Public Domain in the United States, unless a
+copyright notice is included.  Therefore, we usually do NOT keep any
+of these books in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+
+We are now trying to release all our books one month in advance
+of the official release dates, leaving time for better editing.
+
+Please note:  neither this list nor its contents are final till
+midnight of the last day of the month of any such announcement.
+The official release date of all Project Gutenberg Etexts is at
+Midnight, Central Time, of the last day of the stated month.  A
+preliminary version may often be posted for suggestion, comment
+and editing by those who wish to do so.  To be sure you have an
+up to date first edition [xxxxx10x.xxx] please check file sizes
+in the first week of the next month.  Since our ftp program has
+a bug in it that scrambles the date [tried to fix and failed] a
+look at the file size will have to do, but we will try to see a
+new copy has at least one byte more or less.
+
+
+Information about Project Gutenberg (one page)
+
+We produce about two million dollars for each hour we work.  The
+time it takes us, a rather conservative estimate, is fifty hours
+to get any etext selected, entered, proofread, edited, copyright
+searched and analyzed, the copyright letters written, etc.  This
+projected audience is one hundred million readers.  If our value
+per text is nominally estimated at one dollar then we produce $2
+million dollars per hour this year as we release thirty-six text
+files per month, or 432 more Etexts in 1999 for a total of 2000+
+If these reach just 10% of the computerized population, then the
+total should reach over 200 billion Etexts given away this year.
+
+The Goal of Project Gutenberg is to Give Away One Trillion Etext
+Files by December 31, 2001.  [10,000 x 100,000,000 = 1 Trillion]
+This is ten thousand titles each to one hundred million readers,
+which is only ~5% of the present number of computer users.
+
+At our revised rates of production, we will reach only one-third
+of that goal by the end of 2001, or about 3,333 Etexts unless we
+manage to get some real funding; currently our funding is mostly
+from Michael Hart's salary at Carnegie-Mellon University, and an
+assortment of sporadic gifts; this salary is only good for a few
+more years, so we are looking for something to replace it, as we
+don't want Project Gutenberg to be so dependent on one person.
+
+We need your donations more than ever!
+
+
+All donations should be made to "Project Gutenberg/CMU": and are
+tax deductible to the extent allowable by law.  (CMU = Carnegie-
+Mellon University).
+
+For these and other matters, please mail to:
+
+Project Gutenberg
+P. O. Box  2782
+Champaign, IL 61825
+
+When all other email fails. . .try our Executive Director:
+Michael S. Hart <hart@pobox.com>
+hart@pobox.com forwards to hart@prairienet.org and archive.org
+if your mail bounces from archive.org, I will still see it, if
+it bounces from prairienet.org, better resend later on. . . .
+
+We would prefer to send you this information by email.
+
+******
+
+To access Project Gutenberg etexts, use any Web browser
+to view http://promo.net/pg.  This site lists Etexts by
+author and by title, and includes information about how
+to get involved with Project Gutenberg.  You could also
+download our past Newsletters, or subscribe here.  This
+is one of our major sites, please email hart@pobox.com,
+for a more complete list of our various sites.
+
+To go directly to the etext collections, use FTP or any
+Web browser to visit a Project Gutenberg mirror (mirror
+sites are available on 7 continents; mirrors are listed
+at http://promo.net/pg).
+
+Mac users, do NOT point and click, typing works better.
+
+Example FTP session:
+
+ftp metalab.unc.edu
+login: anonymous
+password: your@login
+cd pub/docs/books/gutenberg
+cd etext90 through etext99 or etext00 through etext01, etc.
+dir [to see files]
+get or mget [to get files. . .set bin for zip files]
+GET GUTINDEX.??  [to get a year's listing of books, e.g., GUTINDEX.99]
+GET GUTINDEX.ALL [to get a listing of ALL books]
+
+***
+
+**Information prepared by the Project Gutenberg legal advisor**
+
+(Three Pages)
+
+
+***START**THE SMALL PRINT!**FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN ETEXTS**START***
+Why is this "Small Print!" statement here?  You know: lawyers.
+They tell us you might sue us if there is something wrong with
+your copy of this etext, even if you got it for free from
+someone other than us, and even if what's wrong is not our
+fault.  So, among other things, this "Small Print!" statement
+disclaims most of our liability to you.  It also tells you how
+you can distribute copies of this etext if you want to.
+
+*BEFORE!* YOU USE OR READ THIS ETEXT
+By using or reading any part of this PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm
+etext, you indicate that you understand, agree to and accept
+this "Small Print!" statement.  If you do not, you can receive
+a refund of the money (if any) you paid for this etext by
+sending a request within 30 days of receiving it to the person
+you got it from.  If you received this etext on a physical
+medium (such as a disk), you must return it with your request.
+
+ABOUT PROJECT GUTENBERG-TM ETEXTS
+This PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm etext, like most PROJECT GUTENBERG-
+tm etexts, is a "public domain" work distributed by Professor
+Michael S. Hart through the Project Gutenberg Association at
+Carnegie-Mellon University (the "Project").  Among other
+things, this means that no one owns a United States copyright
+on or for this work, so the Project (and you!) can copy and
+distribute it in the United States without permission and
+without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules, set forth
+below, apply if you wish to copy and distribute this etext
+under the Project's "PROJECT GUTENBERG" trademark.
+
+To create these etexts, the Project expends considerable
+efforts to identify, transcribe and proofread public domain
+works.  Despite these efforts, the Project's etexts and any
+medium they may be on may contain "Defects".  Among other
+things, Defects may take the form of incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
+intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged
+disk or other etext medium, a computer virus, or computer
+codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.
+
+LIMITED WARRANTY; DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES
+But for the "Right of Replacement or Refund" described below,
+[1] the Project (and any other party you may receive this
+etext from as a PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm etext) disclaims all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including
+legal fees, and [2] YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE OR
+UNDER STRICT LIABILITY, OR FOR BREACH OF WARRANTY OR CONTRACT,
+INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE
+OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE
+POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.
+
+If you discover a Defect in this etext within 90 days of
+receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any)
+you paid for it by sending an explanatory note within that
+time to the person you received it from.  If you received it
+on a physical medium, you must return it with your note, and
+such person may choose to alternatively give you a replacement
+copy.  If you received it electronically, such person may
+choose to alternatively give you a second opportunity to
+receive it electronically.
+
+THIS ETEXT IS OTHERWISE PROVIDED TO YOU "AS-IS".  NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ARE MADE TO YOU AS
+TO THE ETEXT OR ANY MEDIUM IT MAY BE ON, INCLUDING BUT NOT
+LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A
+PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
+
+Some states do not allow disclaimers of implied warranties or
+the exclusion or limitation of consequential damages, so the
+above disclaimers and exclusions may not apply to you, and you
+may have other legal rights.
+
+INDEMNITY
+You will indemnify and hold the Project, its directors,
+officers, members and agents harmless from all liability, cost
+and expense, including legal fees, that arise directly or
+indirectly from any of the following that you do or cause:
+[1] distribution of this etext, [2] alteration, modification,
+or addition to the etext, or [3] any Defect.
+
+DISTRIBUTION UNDER "PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm"
+You may distribute copies of this etext electronically, or by
+disk, book or any other medium if you either delete this
+"Small Print!" and all other references to Project Gutenberg,
+or:
+
+[1]  Only give exact copies of it.  Among other things, this
+     requires that you do not remove, alter or modify the
+     etext or this "small print!" statement.  You may however,
+     if you wish, distribute this etext in machine readable
+     binary, compressed, mark-up, or proprietary form,
+     including any form resulting from conversion by word pro-
+     cessing or hypertext software, but only so long as
+     *EITHER*:
+
+     [*]  The etext, when displayed, is clearly readable, and
+          does *not* contain characters other than those
+          intended by the author of the work, although tilde
+          (~), asterisk (*) and underline (_) characters may
+          be used to convey punctuation intended by the
+          author, and additional characters may be used to
+          indicate hypertext links; OR
+
+     [*]  The etext may be readily converted by the reader at
+          no expense into plain ASCII, EBCDIC or equivalent
+          form by the program that displays the etext (as is
+          the case, for instance, with most word processors);
+          OR
+
+     [*]  You provide, or agree to also provide on request at
+          no additional cost, fee or expense, a copy of the
+          etext in its original plain ASCII form (or in EBCDIC
+          or other equivalent proprietary form).
+
+[2]  Honor the etext refund and replacement provisions of this
+     "Small Print!" statement.
+
+[3]  Pay a trademark license fee to the Project of 20% of the
+     net profits you derive calculated using the method you
+     already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  If you
+     don't derive profits, no royalty is due.  Royalties are
+     payable to "Project Gutenberg Association/Carnegie-Mellon
+     University" within the 60 days following each
+     date you prepare (or were legally required to prepare)
+     your annual (or equivalent periodic) tax return.
+
+WHAT IF YOU *WANT* TO SEND MONEY EVEN IF YOU DON'T HAVE TO?
+The Project gratefully accepts contributions in money, time,
+scanning machines, OCR software, public domain etexts, royalty
+free copyright licenses, and every other sort of contribution
+you can think of.  Money should be paid to "Project Gutenberg
+Association / Carnegie-Mellon University".
+
+We are planning on making some changes in our donation structure
+in 2000, so you might want to email me, hart@pobox.com beforehand.
+
+
+
+
+*END THE SMALL PRINT! FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN ETEXTS*Ver.04.29.93*END*
+
+
+
+
+
+Processed by D.R. Thompson <drthom@ihug.co.nz>
+
+
+
+
+
+The Interpreters of Genesis and the Interpreters of Nature
+by Thomas Henry Huxley
+This is Essay #4 from "Science and Hebrew Tradition"
+
+
+
+
+Our fabulist warns "those who in quarrels interpose" of the fate
+which is probably in store for them; and, in venturing to place
+myself between so powerful a controversialist as Mr. Gladstone
+and the eminent divine whom he assaults with such vigour in the
+last number of this Review,<1> I am fully aware that I run great
+danger of verifying Gay's prediction. Moreover, it is quite
+possible that my zeal in offering aid to a combatant so
+extremely well able to take care of himself as M. Reville may be
+thought to savour of indiscretion.
+
+Two considerations, however, have led me to face the double
+risk. The one is that though, in my judgment, M. Reville is
+wholly in the right in that part of the controversy to which I
+propose to restrict my observations, nevertheless he, as a
+foreigner, has very little chance of making the truth prevail
+with Englishmen against the authority and the dialectic skill of
+the greatest master of persuasive rhetoric among English-
+speaking men of our time. As the Queen's proctor intervenes, in
+certain cases, between two litigants in the interests of
+justice, so it may be permitted me to interpose as a sort of
+uncommissioned science proctor. My second excuse for my
+meddlesomeness is, that important questions of natural science--
+respecting which neither of the combatants professes to speak as
+an expert--are involved in the controversy; and I think it is
+desirable that the public should know what it is that natural
+science really has to say on these topics, to the best belief of
+one who has been a diligent student of natural science for the
+last forty years.
+
+The original "Prolegomenes de l'Histoire des Religions" has not
+come in my way; but I have read the translation of M. Reville's
+work, published in England under the auspices of Professor Max
+Muller, with very great interest. It puts more fairly and
+clearly than any book previously known to me, the view which a
+man of strong religious feelings, but at the same time
+possessing the information and the reasoning power which enable
+him to estimate the strength of scientific methods of inquiry
+and the weight of scientific truth, may be expected to take of
+the relation between science and religion.
+
+In the chapter on "The Primitive Revelation" the scientific
+worth of the account of the Creation given in the book of
+Genesis is estimated in terms which are as unquestionably
+respectful as, in my judgment, they are just; and, at the end of
+the chapter on "Primitive Tradition," M. Reville appraises the
+value of pentateuchal anthropology in a way which I should have
+thought sure of enlisting the assent of all competent judges,
+even if it were extended to the whole of the cosmogony and
+biology of Genesis:--
+
+<quote>
+As, however, the original traditions of nations sprang up in an
+epoch less remote than our own from the primitive life, it is
+indispensable to consult them, to compare them, and to associate
+them with other sources of information which are available.
+From this point of view, the traditions recorded in Genesis
+possess, in addition to their own peculiar charm, a value of the
+highest order; but we cannot ultimately see in them more than a
+venerable fragment, well-deserving attention, of the great
+genesis of mankind.
+<end quote>
+
+Mr. Gladstone is of a different mind. He dissents from
+M. Reville's views respecting the proper estimation of the
+pentateuchal traditions, no less than he does from his
+interpretation of those Homeric myths which have been the object
+of his own special study. In the latter case, Mr. Gladstone
+tells M. Reville that he is wrong on his own authority, to
+which, in such a matter, all will pay due respect: in the
+former, he affirms himself to be "wholly destitute of that kind
+of knowledge which carries authority," and his rebuke is
+administered in the name and by the authority of
+natural science.
+
+An air of magisterial gravity hangs about the following
+passage:--
+
+<quote>
+But the question is not here of a lofty poem, or a skilfully
+constructed narrative: it is whether natural science, in the
+patient exercise of its high calling to examine facts, finds
+that the works of God cry out against what we have fondly
+believed to be His word and tell another tale; or whether, in
+this nineteenth century of Christian progress, it substantially
+echoes back the majestic sound, which, before it existed as a
+pursuit, went forth into all lands.
+
+First, looking largely at the latter portion of the narrative,
+which describes the creation of living organisms, and waiving
+details, on some of which (as in v. 24) the Septuagint seems to
+vary from the Hebrew, there is a grand fourfold division, set
+forth in an orderly succession of times as follows: on the
+fifth day
+1. The water-population;
+2. The air-population;
+and, on the sixth day,
+3. The land-population of animals;
+4. The land-population consummated in man.
+Now this same fourfold order is understood to have been so
+affirmed in our time by natural science, that it may be taken as
+a demonstrated conclusion and established fact" (p. 696).
+<end quote>
+
+"Understood?" By whom? I cannot bring myself to imagine that Mr.
+Gladstone has made so solemn and authoritative a statement on a
+matter of this importance without due inquiry--without being
+able to found himself upon recognised scientific authority. But
+I wish he had thought fit to name the source from whence he has
+derived his information, as, in that case, I could have dealt
+with [143] his authority, and I should have thereby escaped the
+appearance of making an attack on Mr. Gladstone himself, which
+is in every way distasteful to me.
+
+For I can meet the statement in the last paragraph of the above
+citation with nothing but a direct negative. If I know anything
+at all about the results attained by the natural science of our
+time, it is "a demonstrated conclusion and established fact"
+that the "fourfold order" given by Mr. Gladstone is not that in
+which the evidence at our disposal tends to show that the water,
+air, and land-populations of the globe have made
+their appearance.
+
+Perhaps I may be told that Mr. Gladstone does give his
+authority--that he cites Cuvier, Sir John Herschel, and Dr.
+Whewell in support of his case. If that has been Mr. Gladstone's
+intention in mentioning these eminent names, I may remark that,
+on this particular question, the only relevant authority is that
+of Cuvier. But great as Cuvier was, it is to be remembered that,
+as Mr. Gladstone incidentally remarks, he cannot now be called a
+recent authority. In fact, he has been dead more than half a
+century; and the palaeontology of our day is related to that of
+his, very much as the geography of the sixteenth century is
+related to that of the fourteenth. Since 1832, when Cuvier died,
+not only a new world, but new worlds, of ancient life have been
+discovered; and those who have most faithfully carried on the
+work of the chief founder of palaeontology have done most to
+invalidate the essentially negative grounds of his speculative
+adherence to tradition.
+
+If Mr. Gladstone's latest information on these matters is
+derived from the famous discourse prefixed to the "Ossemens
+Fossiles," I can understand the position he has taken up; if he
+has ever opened a respectable modern manual of palaeontology, or
+geology, I cannot. For the facts which demolish his whole
+argument are of the commonest notoriety. But before proceeding
+to consider the evidence for this assertion we must be clear
+about the meaning of the phraseology employed.
+
+I apprehend that when Mr. Gladstone uses the term "water-
+population" he means those animals which in Genesis i. 21
+(Revised Version) are spoken of as "the great sea monsters and
+every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought
+forth abundantly, after their kind." And I presume that it will
+be agreed that whales and porpoises, sea fishes, and the
+innumerable hosts of marine invertebrated animals, are meant
+thereby. So "air-population" must be the equivalent of "fowl" in
+verse 20, and "every winged fowl after its kind," verse 21.
+I suppose I may take it for granted that by "fowl" we have here
+to understand birds--at any rate primarily. Secondarily, it may
+be that the bats and the extinct pterodactyles, which were
+flying reptiles, come under the same head. But whether all
+insects are "creeping things" of the land-population, or whether
+flying insects are to be included under the denomination of
+"winged fowl," is a point for the decision of Hebrew exegetes.
+Lastly, I suppose I may assume that "land-population" signifies
+"the cattle" and "the beasts of the earth," and "every creeping
+thing that creepeth upon the earth," in verses 25 and 26;
+presumably it comprehends all kinds of terrestrial animals,
+vertebrate and invertebrate, except such as may be comprised
+under the head of the "air-population."
+
+Now what I want to make clear is this: that if the terms "water-
+population," "air-population," and "land-population" are
+understood in the senses here defined, natural science has
+nothing to say in favour of the proposition that they succeeded
+one another in the order given by Mr. Gladstone; but that, on
+the contrary, all the evidence we possess goes to prove that
+they did not. Whence it will follow that, if Mr. Gladstone has
+interpreted Genesis rightly (on which point I am most anxious to
+be understood to offer no opinion), that interpretation is
+wholly irreconcilable with the conclusions at present accepted
+by the interpreters of nature--with everything that can be
+called "a demonstrated conclusion and established fact" of
+natural science. And be it observed that I am not here dealing
+with a question of speculation, but with a question of fact.
+
+Either the geological record is sufficiently complete to afford
+us a means of determining the order in which animals have made
+their appearance on the globe or it is not. If it is, the
+determination of that order is little more than a mere matter of
+observation; if it is not, then natural science neither affirms
+nor refutes the "fourfold order," but is simply silent.
+
+The series of the fossiliferous deposits, which contain the
+remains of the animals which have lived on the earth in past
+ages of its history, and which can alone afford the evidence
+required by natural science of the order of appearance of their
+different species, may be grouped in the manner shown in the
+left-hand column of the following table, the oldest being at
+the bottom:--
+
+Formations          First known appearance of
+Quaternary.
+Pliocene.
+Miocene.
+Eocene.             Vertebrate <i>air</i>-population (Bats).
+Cretaceous.
+Jurassic.           Vertebrate <i>air</i>-population (Birds and
+                    Pterodactyles).
+Triassic.
+Upper Palaeozoic.
+Middle Palaeozoic.  Vertebrate <i>land</i>-population (Amphibia,
+                    Reptilia [?]).
+Lower Palaeozoic.
+  Silurian.         Vertebrate <i>water</i>-population (Fishes).
+                    Invertebrate <i>air</i> and <i>land</i>-
+                    population (Flying Insects and Scorpions).
+  Cambrian.         Invertebrate <i>water</i>-population (much
+                    earlier, if <i>Eozoon</i> is animal).
+
+In the right-hand column I have noted the group of strata in
+which, according to our present information, the <i>land,
+air,</i> and <i>water</i> populations respectively appear for
+the first time; and in consequence of the ambiguity about the
+meaning of "fowl," I have separately indicated the first
+appearance of bats, birds, flying reptiles, and flying insects.
+It will be observed that, if "fowl" means only "bird," or at
+most flying vertebrate, then the first certain evidence of the
+latter, in the Jurassic epoch, is posterior to the first
+appearance of truly terrestrial <i>Amphibia,</i> and possibly of
+true reptiles, in the Carboniferous epoch (Middle Palaeozoic) by
+a prodigious interval of time.
+
+The water-population of vertebrated animals first appears in the
+Upper Silurian.<2> Therefore, if we found ourselves on
+vertebrated animals and take "fowl" to mean birds only, or, at
+most, flying vertebrates, natural science says that the order of
+succession was water, land, and air-population, and not--as Mr.
+Gladstone, founding himself on Genesis, says--water, air, land-
+population. If a chronicler of Greece affirmed that the age of
+Alexander preceded that of Pericles and immediately succeeded
+that of the Trojan war, Mr. Gladstone would hardly say that this
+order is "understood to have been so affirmed by historical
+science that it may be taken as a demonstrated conclusion and
+established fact." Yet natural science "affirms" his "fourfold
+order" to exactly the same extent--neither more nor less.
+
+Suppose, however, that "fowl" is to be taken to include flying
+insects. In that case, the first appearance of an air-population
+must be shifted back for long ages, recent discovery having
+shown that they occur in rocks of Silurian age. Hence there
+might still have been hope for the fourfold order, were it not
+that the fates unkindly determined that scorpions--"creeping
+things that creep on the earth" <i>par excellence--</i>turned up
+in Silurian strata nearly at the same time. So that, if the word
+in the original Hebrew translated "fowl" should really after all
+mean "cockroach"--and I have great faith in the elasticity of
+that tongue in the hands of Biblical exegetes--the order
+primarily suggested by the existing evidence--
+
+2. Land and air-population;
+1. Water-population;
+
+and Mr. Gladstone's order--
+
+3. Land-population;
+2. Air-population;
+1. Water-population;
+
+can by no means be made to coincide. As a matter of fact, then,
+the statement so confidently put forward turns out to be devoid
+of foundation and in direct contradiction of the evidence at
+present at our disposal.<3>
+
+If, stepping beyond that which may be learned from the facts of
+the successive appearance of the forms of animal life upon the
+surface of the globe, in so far as they are yet made known to us
+by natural science, we apply our reasoning faculties to the task
+of finding out what those observed facts mean, the present
+conclusions of the interpreters of nature appear to be no less
+directly in conflict with those of the latest interpreter
+of Genesis.
+
+Mr. Gladstone appears to admit that there is some truth in the
+doctrine of evolution, and indeed places it under very
+high patronage.
+
+<quote>
+I contend that evolution in its highest form has not been a
+thing heretofore unknown to history, to philosophy, or to
+theology. I contend that it was before the mind of Saint Paul
+when he taught that in the fulness of time God sent forth His
+Son, and of Eusebius when he wrote the "Preparation for the
+Gospel," and of Augustine when he composed the "City of God"
+(p. 706).
+<end quote>
+
+Has any one ever disputed the contention, thus solemnly
+enunciated, that the doctrine of evolution was not invented the
+day before yesterday? Has any one ever dreamed of claiming it as
+a modern innovation? Is there any one so ignorant of the history
+of philosophy as to be unaware that it is one of the forms in
+which speculation embodied itself long before the time either of
+the Bishop of Hippo or of the Apostle to the Gentiles? Is Mr.
+Gladstone, of all people in the world, disposed to ignore the
+founders of Greek philosophy, to say nothing of Indian sages to
+whom evolution was a familiar notion ages before Paul of Tarsus
+was born? But it is ungrateful to cavil at even the most oblique
+admission of the possible value of one of those affirmations of
+natural science which really may be said to be "a demonstrated
+conclusion and established fact." I note it with pleasure, if
+only for the purpose of introducing the observation that, if
+there is any truth whatever in the doctrine of evolution as
+applied to animals, Mr. Gladstone's gloss on Genesis in the
+following passage is hardly happy:--
+
+<quote>
+God created
+(a) The water-population;
+(b) The air-population.
+
+And they receive His benediction (v. 20-23).
+
+6. Pursuing this regular progression from the lower to the
+higher, from the simple to the complex, the text now gives us
+the work of the sixth "day," which supplies the land-population,
+air and water having been already supplied (pp. 695, 696).
+<end quote>
+
+The gloss to which I refer is the assumption that the "air-
+population" forms a term in the order of progression from lower
+to higher, from simple to complex--the place of which lies
+between the water-population below and the land-population
+above--and I speak of it as a "gloss," because the pentateuchal
+writer is nowise responsible for it.
+
+But it is not true that the air-population, as a whole, is
+"lower" or less "complex" than the land-population. On the
+contrary, every beginner in the study of animal morphology is
+aware that the organisation of a bat, of a bird, or of a
+pterodactyle presupposes that of a terrestrial quadruped; and
+that it is intelligible only as an extreme modification of the
+organisation of a terrestrial mammal or reptile. In the same way
+winged insects (if they are to be counted among the
+"air-population") presuppose insects which were wingless, and,
+therefore, as "creeping things," were part of the land-
+population. Thus theory is as much opposed as observation to the
+admission that natural science endorses the succession of animal
+life which Mr. Gladstone finds in Genesis. On the contrary, a
+good many representatives of natural science would be prepared
+to say, on theoretical grounds alone, that it is incredible that
+the "air-population" should have appeared before the
+"land-population"--and that, if this assertion is to be found in
+Genesis, it merely demonstrates the scientific worthlessness of
+the story of which it forms a part.
+
+Indeed, we may go further. It is not even admissible to say that
+the water-population, as a whole, appeared before the air and
+the land-populations. According to the Authorised Version,
+Genesis especially mentions, among the animals created on the
+fifth day, "great whales," in place of which the Revised Version
+reads "great sea monsters." Far be it from me to give an opinion
+which rendering is right, or whether either is right. All I
+desire to remark is, that if whales and porpoises, dugongs and
+manatees, are to be regarded as members of the water-population
+(and if they are not, what animals can claim the designation?),
+then that much of the water-population has, as certainly,
+originated later than the land-population as bats and birds
+have. For I am not aware that any competent judge would hesitate
+to admit that the organisation of these animals shows the most
+obvious signs of their descent from terrestrial quadrupeds.
+
+A similar criticism applies to Mr. Gladstone's assumption that,
+as the fourth act of that "orderly succession of times"
+enunciated in Genesis, "the land-population consummated in man."
+
+If this means simply that man is the final term in the
+evolutional series of which he forms a part, I do not suppose
+that any objection will be raised to that statement on the part
+of students of natural science. But if the pentateuchal author
+goes further than this, and intends to say that which is
+ascribed to him by Mr. Gladstone, I think natural science will
+have to enter a <i>caveat.</i> It is not by any means certain
+that man--I mean the species <i>Homo sapiens</i> of zoological
+terminology--has "consummated" the land-population in the sense
+of appearing at a later period of time than any other. Let me
+make my meaning clear by an example. From a morphological point
+of view, our beautiful and useful contemporary--I might almost
+call him colleague--the horse (<i>Equus caballus</i>), is the
+last term of the evolutional series to which he belongs, just as
+<i>Homo sapiens</i> is the last term of the series of which he
+is a member. If I want to know whether the species <i>Equus
+caballus</i> made its appearance on the surface of the globe
+before or after <i>Homo sapiens,</i> deduction from known laws
+does not help me. There is no reason, that I know of, why one
+should have appeared sooner or later than the other. If I turn
+to observation, I find abundant remains of <i>Equus caballus</i>
+in Quaternary strata, perhaps a little earlier. The existence of
+<i>Homo sapiens</i> in the Quaternary epoch is also certain.
+Evidence has been adduced in favour of man's existence in the
+Pliocene, or even in the Miocene epoch. It does not satisfy me;
+but I have no reason to doubt that the fact may be so,
+nevertheless. Indeed, I think it is quite possible that further
+research will show that <i>Homo sapiens</i> existed, not only
+before <i>Equus caballus,</i> but before many other of the
+existing forms of animal life; so that, if all the species of
+animals have been separately created, man, in this case, would
+by no means be the "consummation" of the land-population.
+
+I am raising no objection to the position of the fourth term in
+Mr. Gladstone's "order"--on the facts, as they stand, it is
+quite open to any one to hold, as a pious opinion, that the
+fabrication of man was the acme and final achievement of the
+process of peopling the globe. But it must not be said that
+natural science counts this opinion among her "demonstrated
+conclusions and established facts," for there would be just as
+much, or as little, reason for ranging the contrary opinion
+among them.
+
+It may seem superfluous to add to the evidence that Mr.
+Gladstone has been utterly misled in supposing that his
+interpretation of Genesis receives any support from natural
+science. But it is as well to do one's work thoroughly while one
+is about it; and I think it may be advisable to point out that
+the facts, as they are at present known, not only refute Mr.
+Gladstone's interpretation of Genesis in detail, but are opposed
+to the central idea on which it appears to be based.
+
+There must be some position from which the reconcilers of
+science and Genesis will not retreat, some central idea the
+maintenance of which is vital and its refutation fatal. Even if
+they now allow that the words "the evening and the morning" have
+not the least reference to a natural day, but mean a period of
+any number of millions of years that may be necessary; even if
+they are driven to admit that the word "creation," which so many
+millions of pious Jews and Christians have held, and still hold,
+to mean a sudden act of the Deity, signifies a process of
+gradual evolution of one species from another, extending through
+immeasurable time; even if they are willing to grant that the
+asserted coincidence of the order of Nature with the "fourfold
+order" ascribed to Genesis is an obvious error instead of an
+established truth; they are surely prepared to make a last stand
+upon the conception which underlies the whole, and which
+constitutes the essence of Mr. Gladstone's "fourfold division,
+set forth in an orderly succession of times." It is, that the
+animal species which compose the water-population, the air-
+population, and the land-population respectively, originated
+during three distinct and successive periods of time, and only
+during those periods of time.
+
+This statement appears to me to be the interpretation of Genesis
+which Mr. Gladstone supports, reduced to its simplest
+expression. "Period of time" is substituted for "day";
+"originated" is substituted for "created"; and "any order
+required" for that adopted by Mr. Gladstone. It is necessary to
+make this proviso, for if "day" may mean a few million years,
+and "creation" may mean evolution, then it is obvious that the
+order (1) water-population, (2) air-population, (3) land-
+population, may also mean (1) water-population, (2) land-
+population, (3) air-population; and it would be unkind to bind
+down the reconcilers to this detail when one has parted with so
+many others to oblige them.
+
+But even this sublimated essence of the pentateuchal doctrine
+(if it be such) remains as discordant with natural science
+as ever.
+
+It is not true that the species composing any one of the three
+populations originated during any one of three successive
+periods of time, and not at any other of these.
+
+Undoubtedly, it is in the highest degree probable that animal
+life appeared first under aquatic conditions; that terrestrial
+forms appeared later, and flying animals only after land
+animals; but it is, at the same time, testified by all the
+evidence we possess, that the great majority, if not the whole,
+of the primordial species of each division have long since died
+out and have been replaced by a vast succession of new forms.
+Hundreds of thousands of animal species, as distinct as those
+which now compose our water, land, and air-populations, have
+come into existence and died out again, throughout the aeons of
+geological time which separate us from the lower Palaeozoic
+epoch, when, as I have pointed out, our present evidence of the
+existence of such distinct populations commences. If the species
+of animals have all been separately created, then it follows
+that hundreds of thousands of acts of creative energy have
+occurred, at intervals, throughout the whole time recorded by
+the fossiliferous rocks; and, during the greater part of that
+time, the "creation" of the members of the water, land, and
+air-populations must have gone on contemporaneously.
+
+If we represent the water, land, and air-populations by <i>a,
+b,</i> and <i>c</i> respectively, and take vertical succession
+on the page to indicate order in time, then the following
+schemes will roughly shadow forth the contrast I have been
+endeavouring to explain:
+
+Genesis (as interpreted by      Nature (as interpreted by
+     Mr. Gladstone).                 natural science).
+       <i>b b b                         c1 a3 b2
+          c c c                         c  a2 b1
+          a a a                         b  a1 b
+                                        a  a  a</i>
+
+So far as I can see, there is only one resource left for those
+modern representatives of Sisyphus, the reconcilers of Genesis
+with science; and it has the advantage of being founded on a
+perfectly legitimate appeal to our ignorance. It has been seen
+that, on any interpretation of the terms water-population and
+land-population, it must be admitted that invertebrate
+representatives of these populations existed during the lower
+Palaeozoic epoch. No evolutionist can hesitate to admit that
+other land animals (and possibly vertebrates among them) may
+have existed during that time, of the history of which we know
+so little; and, further, that scorpions are animals of such high
+organisation that it is highly probable their existence
+indicates that of a long antecedent land-population of a
+similar character.
+
+Then, since the land-population is said not to have been created
+until the sixth day, it necessarily follows that the evidence of
+the order in which animals appeared must be sought in the record
+of those older Palaeozoic times in which only traces of the
+water-population have as yet been discovered.
+
+Therefore, if any one chooses to say that the creative work took
+place in the Cambrian or Laurentian epoch, in exactly that
+manner which Mr. Gladstone does, and natural science does not,
+affirm, natural science is not in a position to disprove the
+accuracy of the statement. Only one cannot have one's cake and
+eat it too, and such safety from the contradiction of science
+means the forfeiture of her support.
+
+Whether the account of the work of the first, second, and third
+days in Genesis would be confirmed by the demonstration of the
+truth of the nebular hypothesis; whether it is corroborated by
+what is known of the nature and probable relative antiquity of
+the heavenly bodies; whether, if the Hebrew word translated
+"firmament" in the Authorised Version really means "expanse,"
+the assertion that the waters are partly under this "expanse"
+and partly above it would be any more confirmed by the
+ascertained facts of physical geography and meteorology than it
+was before; whether the creation of the whole vegetable world,
+and especially of "grass, herb yielding seed after its kind, and
+tree bearing fruit," before any kind of animal, is "affirmed" by
+the apparently plain teaching of botanical palaeontology, that
+grasses and fruit-trees originated long subsequently to animals
+all these are questions which, if I mistake not, would be
+answered decisively in the negative by those who are specially
+conversant with the sciences involved. And it must be
+recollected that the issue raised by Mr. Gladstone is not
+whether, by some effort of ingenuity, the pentateuchal story can
+be shown to be not disprovable by scientific knowledge, but
+whether it is supported thereby.
+
+<quote>
+There is nothing, then, in the criticisms of Dr. Reville but
+what rather tends to confirm than to impair the old-fashioned
+belief that there is a revelation in the book of Genesis
+(p. 694).
+<end quote>
+
+The form into which Mr. Gladstone has thought fit to throw this
+opinion leaves me in doubt as to its substance. I do not
+understand how a hostile criticism can, under any circumstances,
+tend to confirm that which it attacks. If, however, Mr.
+Gladstone merely means to express his personal impression, "as
+one wholly destitute of that kind of knowledge which carries
+authority," that he has destroyed the value of these criticisms,
+I have neither the wish nor the right to attempt to disturb his
+faith. On the other hand, I may be permitted to state my own
+conviction, that, so far as natural science is involved,
+M. Reville's observations retain the exact value they possessed
+before Mr. Gladstone attacked them.
+
+
+Trusting that I have now said enough to secure the author of a
+wise and moderate disquisition upon a topic which seems fated to
+stir unwisdom and fanaticism to their depths, a fuller measure
+of justice than has hitherto been accorded to him, I retire from
+my self-appointed championship, with the hope that I shall not
+hereafter be called upon by M. Reville to apologise for damage
+done to his strong case by imperfect or impulsive advocacy.
+But, perhaps, I may be permitted to add a word or two, on my own
+account, in reference to the great question of the relations
+between science and religion; since it is one about which I have
+thought a good deal ever since I have been able to think at all;
+and about which I have ventured to express my views publicly,
+more than once, in the course of the last thirty years.
+
+The antagonism between science and religion, about which we hear
+so much, appears to me to be purely factitious--fabricated, on
+the one hand, by short-sighted religious people who confound a
+certain branch of science, theology, with religion; and, on the
+other, by equally short-sighted scientific people who forget
+that science takes for its province only that which is
+susceptible of clear intellectual comprehension; and that,
+outside the boundaries of that province, they must be content
+with imagination, with hope, and with ignorance.
+
+It seems to me that the moral and intellectual life of the
+civilised nations of Europe is the product of that interaction,
+sometimes in the way of antagonism, sometimes in that of
+profitable interchange, of the Semitic and the Aryan races,
+which commenced with the dawn of history, when Greek and
+Phoenician came in contact, and has been continued by
+Carthaginian and Roman, by Jew and Gentile, down to the present
+day. Our art (except, perhaps, music) and our science are the
+contributions of the Aryan; but the essence of our religion is
+derived from the Semite. In the eighth century B.C., in the
+heart of a world of idolatrous polytheists, the Hebrew prophets
+put forth a conception of religion which appears to me to be as
+wonderful an inspiration of genius as the art of Pheidias or the
+science of Aristotle.
+
+"And what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and
+to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?"
+
+If any so-called religion takes away from this great saying of
+Micah, I think it wantonly mutilates, while, if it adds thereto,
+I think it obscures, the perfect ideal of religion.
+
+But what extent of knowledge, what acuteness of scientific
+criticism, can touch this, if any one possessed of knowledge, or
+acuteness, could be absurd enough to make the attempt? Will the
+progress of research prove that justice is worthless and mercy
+hateful; will it ever soften the bitter contrast between our
+actions and our aspirations; or show us the bounds of the
+universe and bid us say, Go to, now we comprehend the infinite?
+A faculty of wrath lay in those ancient Israelites, and surely
+the prophet's staff would have made swift acquaintance with the
+head of the scholar who had asked Micah whether, peradventure,
+the Lord further required of him an implicit belief in the
+accuracy of the cosmogony of Genesis!
+
+What we are usually pleased to call religion nowadays is, for
+the most part, Hellenised Judaism; and, not unfrequently, the
+Hellenic element carries with it a mighty remnant of old-world
+paganism and a great infusion of the worst and weakest products
+of Greek scientific speculation; while fragments of Persian and
+Babylonian, or rather Accadian, mythology burden the Judaic
+contribution to the common stock.
+
+The antagonism of science is not to religion, but to the heathen
+survivals and the bad philosophy under which religion herself is
+often well-nigh crushed. And, for my part, I trust that this
+antagonism will never cease; but that, to the end of time, true
+science will continue to fulfil one of her most beneficent
+functions, that of relieving men from the burden of false
+science which is imposed upon them in the name of religion.
+
+This is the work that M. Reville and men such as he are doing
+for us; this is the work which his opponents are endeavouring,
+consciously or unconsciously, to hinder.
+
+
+FOOTNOTES
+
+(1) <i>The Nineteenth Century.</i>
+
+(2) [Earlier, if more recent announcements are correct.]
+
+(3) It may be objected that I have not put the case fairly
+inasmuch as the solitary insect's wing which was discovered
+twelve months ago in Silurian rocks, and which is, at present,
+the sole evidence of insects older than the Devonian epoch, came
+from strata of Middle Silurian age, and is therefore older than
+the scorpions which, within the last two years, have been found
+in Upper Silurian strata in Sweden, Britain, and the United
+States. But no one who comprehends the nature of the evidence
+afforded by fossil remains would venture to say that the non-
+discovery of scorpions in the Middle Silurian strata, up to this
+time, affords any more ground for supposing that they did not
+exist, than the non-discovery of flying insects in the Upper
+Silurian strata, up to this time, throws any doubt on the
+certainty that they existed, which is derived from the
+occurrence of the wing in the Middle Silurian. In fact, I have
+stretched a point in admitting that these fossils afford a
+colourable pretext for the assumption that the land and air-
+population were of contemporaneous origin.
+
+
+
+
+
+End of PG's The Interpreters of Genesis and the Interpreters of Nature
+This is Essay #4 from "Science and Hebrew Tradition"
+
diff --git a/old/4saht10.zip b/old/4saht10.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d1445e5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/4saht10.zip