1857.] " Science and the Bible. 389
vation of reason or nature to a level with the Bible.1
There are few that will see heresy or a " pious fraud" in the phrase "
Science and the Bible." Yet some further illustration of the relation
of the two revelations to one another, and to man and truth, may not be
unprofitable.
1
The " World-Problem" says, on page 183: "It is this putting nature and
the Bible on a seeming par [that is to be dreaded] ; a practice of
which some are so fond, though all the real deference is in reality
paid to Science in every case of seeming collision. It is this
patronizing parallel, now so commonly run between the ' two books,' as
they are styled, ' the book of Nature and the book of Revelation,' and
of which we have such a fine specimen at the close of Professor Dana's
article. These are the things most hostile to the Bible, most injurious
to a true and hearty faith. This is the real naturalism."
Is this remark about Professor Dana true ? The sentiment is often repeated in the " World· Problem." Is it true? We cite from that closing paragraph, that the reader may judge: —
" The universe and the Bible are consecutive parts of one glorious volume : the former teaching of infinite harmonies, coming up from the deep past, and of man's relation through Nature to God ; the latter of man's relation through his own soul to God, and of still loftier harmonies in the eternal future ; the first part, telling
not only of the wisdom and power of God, but also of man's exaltation,
at the head of the kingdoms of life, the being towards whom, with
prophetic eye, all nature was looking through the course of ages,
preparing his earthly abode, arranging every ridge, and plain, and sea,
and living thing, for his moral and intellectual advancement, and with
so much beneficence that man, when he came to take possession of the
domain, found everywhere lessons of love and adoration, and read in his
own exaltation a hope, though a trembling hope, of immortality; the second part, after
a chorus epitomizing the former revelation, pursues its closing
thought, Man in his relation to his Maker, makes that hope of
immortality sure, and points out the way of life, by which he may enter
into everlasting communion with God his Creator and Redeemer. If
students of nature fail of that way of life, it is not that science is
evil, but man fallen."—Bib. Sac, Jan. 1856, p. 129.
Page
217, the work says : " But it is folly to talk of Professor Dana's
views of the Bible account. What he presents does not lean upon the
Bible at all, and he takes no pains even to give it that appearance." Is this true ?
Page
140, we read : " There is one thing connected with this matter of 'the
eternity of matter,' that really tries the patience. We allude to the
bugbear of Platonism raised by such writers as Mr. Lord and Professor
Dana, and the stereotyped charge they make, that Plato taught this
doctrine." Is this truth ? Has Professor Dana made any such
charge ? Platonism has been charged on Professor Lewis, but not this
doctrine on Plato, not even by way of implication. And, moreover, the
Platonism was in effect acknowledged in the " Six Days of Creation,"
by the citation of the similar views of Plato.
Page
225, it is stated, that " The most astonishing thing of all is, the
fact that this poor natural knowledge,—poor, we mean, in the attitude
assumed by the reviewer [Professor Dana], though having a beauty and an
honor when it
33*
Flickr
Stumbleupon
Scribd
