4. _It may be inferred from the well preserved remains of

vegetables and animals of warm equatorial climates, in high

northern latitudes where they have not been found since the

memory of man._ This is a conclusive argument if its _data_

be well established. Because, if _tropical_ and _equatorial_

animals and fruits are _now_ found buried and fossilized

in Siberia, and the islands of the _arctic sea_, in such a

state of preservation as to forbid the supposition they were

transported thither, it will follow inevitably, that they _grew

there_, and there flourished, died, and were buried.

Moreover, if _herbivorous_ animals are found fossilized

in those high northern latitudes, under such circumstances as

forbid the supposition, that they were transported thither, it

will doubtless, follow, that not only _they_ lived there, but

also _luxuriant vegetation_ must at the same time have covered

the plains where their remains are entombed.

The inference which we are forced to draw from these

_data_, is this: _As no such tropical and equatorial animals or

plants have been known to exist there, nor even herbage of any

kind, on which such animals might subsist, since the memory of

man, there was a time anciently when the climate suited their

growth, and of course was very much warmer than it is known to

be now, its temperature then corresponding to the temperature

of the present equatorial regions, as it produced and subsisted

anciently the animals and plants which the tropical regions

produce and subsist at the present time, and which cannot

subsist in any other climates._

In proof of the above position, it is well known that

animals and plants have their peculiar climates, in which they

are _indigenous_, and out of which they cannot thrive, or even

live, if too far removed. It is also well known, that the

warmer, and more moist the climate is, the more luxuriant the

vegetation, and the more huge the animals.

Hence we are in the habit of denominating animals and

plants by the climates in which they are indigenous, as

_arctic_, or northern; _tropical_, or southern. Let us now see

if the tropical animals and plants once lived and flourished in

high northern latitudes. The best authorities follow.

“We proceed now to examine the remains of quadrupeds:

_these are found accumulated in regions where similar animals

do not_ NOW _exist_. Some are buried deep in gypsum.--Some

present themselves to view, accumulated in vast caverns, and

destitute of any envelope. The islands of Lachof, situated

to the NORTH _of Siberia_, are, according to a modern

traveller, _only heaps of sand, ice, and bones of elephants and

rhinoceros_, mixed with those of great cetaceous animals, and

even, agreeably to the latest accounts, with the remains of

gigantic birds.

“There have been found in _Siberia, whole carcases of the

elephant, covered with their_ FLESH and SKIN, preserved by the

frosts which prevail in those regions.--Germany has furnished

the greatest number (of bones:)--In France a great many bones

of the elephant have been met with.

“These discoveries, though as yet scarcely commenced, have

thrown already _a new light upon the revolutions which our

globe must have undergone, and upon the_ STATES WHICH MUST HAVE

PRECEDED THE PRESENT COURSE AND CONSTITUTION OF NATURE.

“These bones, presenting no trace of having been rolled

up and down, occurring only fractured as we find those of

our domestic animals, and sometimes joined together in the

form of skeletons, often even as it were heaped up in common

cemeteries, clearly demonstrate, _that the catastrophe which

has destroyed the living beings to which they belonged must

have overtaken them in the_ SAME CLIMATES WHERE WE MEET WITH

THESE RECORDS OF THEIR FORMER EXISTENCE.

“The quantity of nourishment which such huge animated

masses required, and their numbers, proved by the existence of

the carnivorous kinds, _render it probable that the countries

where we find their remains_ ONCE _enjoyed a temperature, if

not warmer, at least more favorable to vegetation_.” MALTE

BRUN, _Physical Geography, Book 12_.

In the above quotations, the data on which our argument

rests are so clearly sustained there needs no comment. The

authority given is unquestionable, and could be corroborated by

scores of weighty names, and in reference to all the _northern_

countries of Asia, Europe, and America.

It is impossible to read the above extracts without being

convinced that those tropical and equatorial animals lived,

flourished, and died _where_ their remains are _now_ found. And

it is equally impossible to avoid another conclusion; viz: that

there must have been a heavy vegetation on those plains, where

_now_ the rein-deer can scarcely pick up a blade of grass.

From these convictions no other inference can be drawn, but

that the temperature of the _frigid zones_, was anciently much

higher than at present; and of course the general temperature

of the earth also.

From the perfect preservation of these fossil remains; from

the fact that they are found in their relative position, bone

to bone, and, in some instances, with their _hair_, _skin_,

and _flesh undecayed_, it is obvious, _the animals must have

perished by a catastrophe which overwhelmed them suddenly, and

was, instantaneously followed by a freezing of the overwhelming

waters_. Such was the catastrophe of the _scripture deluge_,

which _physically_ was competent to perform the phenomena, as

shall be shown presently.

Let us now see if we do not arrive at the same conclusion

by examining the _fossil_ VEGETABLES.

At Portland, England, the Rev. Dr. Buckland finds fossil

plants _akin to the cycas family of Malabar_, from which he

concludes, “it is probable that the climate of these regions,

_at the time when the oolites_ (a series of rocky strata) _were

deposited, was of the same warm temperature with that_ (the

tropical) _which produces a large proportion of the existing

cycadeæ_.” URE, _New Syst. Geol._ p. 433.

“The remarkable development of these vegetables

(equisetums) during the first (or coal measure) period of

vegetation, and their size in the second (or oolitic) period,

_smaller_ than before, but still far greater than our existing

equisetums, accord with many other facts, furnished by fossil

vegetables of many other families, to lead us to regard the

_climate of the earth, at these remote epochs, to have been

hotter than the hottest of modern climates_.” _Ibid_, p. 443.

“There is no doubt, however, that _palms with fan-shaped

leaves covered Europe with their lofty vegetation at this

remote period, in regions where no species of these plants

could_ NOW _grow_!” _Ibid_, p. 452.

The palm is well known to be a _tropical_ plant, and cannot

thrive, except in a warm climate. The climate of Europe, when

it grew in the north, must have been tropical. Indeed, in

all parts of northern Europe _tropical flowers_, _leaves_,

and _fruits_ are found in such a state of preservation as to

convince the most incredulous, _that they must have grown

on the spot_; which would be to convince him of the high

temperature, anciently, of those regions.

“Professor Kounizin describes in the Isis for 1821, immense

beds of fossil wood in several localities of the governments

of Novogorod and Twer in the _north_ of Russia, _where no such

trees are now found to grow_.

“Near Constand on the river Necker, M. Autenrieth found an

entire forest of the trunks of _palm trees_, buried along with

the remains of elephants.” _Ure, Ibid_, p. 455.

“The fossil shells found in the strata of England, and

France, and the contiguous countries, having for the most part,

no _antitypes alive except in equatorial regions_, harmonize

with the preceding details.” _Ibid_, p. 456.

To the above testimony might be added the _caves_ in

Germany, England, and France, in which great quantities of

bones are found in such a state of preservation, and under such

circumstances as to show that the animals whose bones are found

were in the habit of frequenting these caves, and perished

in them suddenly, as their remains are found mixed with sand

and gravel, _but not water-worn_. Of these bones, the great

majority are those of the hyæna; hence these dens, specially in

England, are called _hyæna dens_. In them are also found the

bones of other animals _gnawed_ by the hyænas.

From these facts there can be no doubt but the hyæna

inhabited England, France, and Germany, and dwelt in these

caves, and here perished when the sudden catastrophe of the

flood overtook him. This argues beyond doubt that these

countries were once _warm_, _when these tropical animals lived

in them_.

5. _The same fact may be inferred from the immense amount

of vegetable matter which was necessary to supply the materials

for the coal measures._ This is an irresistible argument in

view of the _immense amount_ of coal in the bowels of the

earth, which must be of _vegetable origin_. Because at the

ratio of vegetable product of _our age_, the earth would not

produce a sufficient amount to form the coalbeds, short of

millions of years.

The _vegetative power_ of the earth, therefore, must have

been anciently very much greater than at present, which could

only be on the supposition of a _warmer_ and more moist climate.

Moreover, the fact that tropical plants are known to have

contributed almost entirely to the formation of coal measures

in the _northern latitudes_, is proof direct. This is clear

from the fact that their roots, stems, leaves, flowers, and

fruits are found impressed on the coal, in such a manner that

there can be no mistake; and the _perfection_ of the impression

forbids the supposition that they were _transported_ thither

from tropical climates.

“Brown coal and black coal, the former sometimes called

wood coal, is found chiefly in diluvial or alluvial ground.

It contains, besides charcoal and bitumen, _various vegetable

principles, and the branches or trunks of trees_ partially

decomposed, _which mark the origin of this kind of coal_.”

_Bakewell’s Geology_, p. 111.

“Wood coal, or brown coal, is found in low situations

and appears to have been _formed of heaps of trees_ buried

by inundations under beds of clay, sand, or gravel.--In some

specimens of this coal the _vegetable fibre, or grain_, is

perceptible in one part, and the other part is reduced to

coal.” _Ibid_, p. 121.

“In wood coal we may almost seize nature in the fact of

making coal, before the process is completed. These formations

of coal are of far more recent date than that of common coal,

though their origin must be referred to a former condition

of our globe, _when the vegetable productions of tropical

climates flourished in northern latitudes_. The _vegetable

origin_ of common mineral coal appears to be established by its

association with strata _abounding in vegetable impressions_,

by its close similarity to wood coal, (which is undoubtedly a

_vegetable product_) and lastly by the decisive fact, that some

mineral coal in the Dudley coal-field is _entirely composed of

the layers of mineralized plants_.” _Ibid_, p. 122.

“When we see the multitude of reeds filled and surrounded

with sandstone, having their thin scaly bark _converted into

a true coal_, it is _impossible to doubt of its vegetable

origin_.” _Ure’s New System Geol._ p. 166.

Quotations from the best authorities might be multiplied

to the same effect, but it is deemed unnecessary. It remains

to repeat the question, _Could such an amount of vegetable

matter have been accumulated, short of millions of years, at

the ratio of the present vegetative powers of the earth?_ It is

impossible. The only remaining conclusion is, the vegetative

power of the earth anciently was much greater than at present,

which could not have been except its temperature was much

higher also.

In conclusion on this question, it is necessary to say,

that the reduction of the earth’s temperature would be gradual,

in a natural way, by the heat flying off into celestial spaces,

until the crust became so thick and compact as to prove a

perfect non-conductor of caloric. Then the surface of the earth

would depend on the heating power of the sun altogether.

The thickening of the crust of the earth would be attended

with earthquakes, volcanos, and partial deluges, the natural

and necessary results of the oxidations of the metals. Hence

we would have different strata of rocks, sand, gravel, &c,

deposited at different times, and over different sections of

the country. Hence also forests would be overthrown, and the

vegetation of years be thrown together in the nearest lakes

or seas; which explains the origin of _coal-basins_. This

state of things also well explains the alternations of strata

of different kinds, as sand, gravel, chalk, fresh and salt

water deposites, &c, as well as the dislocations, fractures,

contortions, and confusions observable in the structure of the

earth’s crust.

There are however various phenomena which indicate

clearly that there was _a general and sudden reduction of

temperature_. The state of preservation, in which those animals

in Siberia are found, proves this. The vestigia of the _last_

great revolution in our globe clearly indicate the DELUGE

to have been the cause of this general and sudden reduction

of temperature. This would be the natural consequence of

_submerging_ the earth in water: and the suddenness of the

event is well attested both by the scriptures, and the physical

history of our earth.

The action of the deluge does not come within the

contemplation of this volume, and therefore will not be noticed

here.]

The air is another storehouse of fire. When lucid igneous particles

are strongly attracted to one another in great quantities, their heat

becomes intolerable, and is capable of destroying the most solid

bodies. It is well known, that when converged in the focus of one of

Hartsocker’s burning-glasses, they will produce wonderful effects: tin,

lead, or any soft metal, will dissolve at the first touch; and iron,

which requires a very strong fire for liquefaction, will melt before

one of these glasses almost as soon as applied. They will consume

wood, though wet, in a moment; vitrify bricks and pumice stones, and

dissolve earthen vessels full of water; and plume-allum, which will

resist the fire of the hottest glass-houses, without alteration, is

instantly melted. Even gold, that resists the force of common fire, is

soon liquefied by their powerful agency. This plainly shows us that,

provided there were not a wise and almighty Providence, superintending

all his works, those materials which are of the greatest utility to the

harmony and order of things, would have a direct tendency to destroy

the whole. If lucid igneous particles were to form solid bodies, and

depart from their state of fluidity, they would, in an instant, reduce

this globe to ashes, or render it liquid fire. Were they all of one

kind, it is probable they might unite in solid bodies; but the wisdom

of Providence has formed them of various colors, and of different

reflections and refrangibility. This prevents them from associating in

such a manner as to do harm, which can only be produced by converging

them with some instrument which prevents their flying off. As all

these have not the same degree of reflexibility and refrangibility, but

as some are capable of greater reflections and refractions than others,

they cannot, without force, be united in one solid body, yet they are

all serviceable for important purposes, contributing to the happiness

of man, and the welfare of all living creatures.

Considering the extent of fire, and that its property is, when put into

motion, to consume all combustible substances within its reach, it is

astonishing that the world has not long since been destroyed! This

terrible element is at present restrained and directed by its almighty

Creator; but divine revelation informs us, that a period will arrive

when its utmost energies shall be called into action. The apostle Peter

asserts, that “the heavens and earth, which are now, by the same word

are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and

perdition of ungodly men;--in the which the heavens shall pass away

with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat; the

earth also, and the works that are therein shall be burnt up.” Again

he says, “looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God,

wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements

shall melt with fervent heat.” The _passing away of the heavens_

means the same as their being _dissolved by fire_. The word Ῥοιζηδὸν

signifies with a _very loud_ and _terrible noise_: with a sound

resembling that of a great _storm_. In this place it more particularly

denotes the horrid crackling noise of a wide-spreading fire.

“The cloud-capp’d towers, the gorgeous palaces,

The solemn temples, the great globe itself

Yea, all which it inherit, shall _dissolve_;

And, like the baseless fabric of a vision,

Leave not a wreck behind.”

The word rendered _melt_, is a metaphor taken from _metals_,

dissolving in the fire, or _wax_ before the flame; so will the fierce

and spreading fire of the last day _melt down_ this globe, and its

surrounding atmosphere.[36] That the world was to be dissolved by fire

was the opinion of Anaximander, Anaxiphanes, Anaxagoras, Archelaus,

Diogenes, and Leucippus.[37] The inference which the apostle deduces

from this view of the general and final conflagration of the world,

is highly impressive. “Seeing then that all these things shall

be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy

conversation and godliness.”

* * * * *

_Section_ III.--LIGHT.

Motion of luminous and fiery particles the first cause

of light -- Light the most simple body --Velocity of light

-- Light diffusive -- Light the medium through which objects

become visible -- Light beautiful, or its rays of different

colors -- Light a visible resemblance of its Divine Author,

in his spirituality, simplicity, purity, energy, goodness,

manifestation, glory.

Moses, in the original word אור _aur_, seems plainly to hint at the

operation of a principle in the universe which, as a second cause,

produced the phenomenon of _light_. This, most probably, was the motion

of the luminous and fiery particles in the chaotic mass which, at the

Divine command, separated themselves from the other gross materials of

the miscellaneous composition, and by an attractive sympathy associated

in one body.

It is conjectured, that light was at first impressed on some part of

the heavens, or collected in some lucid body. Dr. Wall says, Though the

sun was not yet formed into a compact body, yet the most subtile and

active particles had already begun to fly together to the centre of the

solar system, which gave some light; though probably not so great as

when afterward they made the compact body of the sun. And the earth,

which was then only a round lump of mud, or muddy salt-water, being

turned, as it has been ever since, upon its own axis, receiving that

light on its several hemispheres successively, made night and day, or

evening and morning. Milton gives his opinion in the following lines:

“Let there be light! said GOD; and forthwith light

Ethereal, first of things, quintessence pure,

Sprung from the deep; and from her native east

To journey through the aery gloom began,

Spher’d in a radiant cloud; (for yet the sun

Was not;) she in a cloudy tabernacle

Sojourn’d the while.”

Light, after a short progression, concentrated in the sun, the common

centre of our system; the various parts of this system, by his central

light or fire, are balanced, and, by mutual attraction, move in the

expanse, according to fixed laws, or determined distances.[38]

Light was once considered to be a property or quality of matter only;

but more recently it has been discovered to be a _body_, a very subtile

fluid, consisting of minute particles. We have no certain knowledge of

its nature; though a collection of its rays make other things visible,

yet its constituent parts themselves are most exquisitely small, and

quite imperceptible; and therefore it approaches the nearest to the

nature of spirit.[39]

Of all material bodies, light is the most _simple_. Most others are

compounded of several parts, not only of different, but sometimes of

contrary natures: but light is an unmixed body. It is also a most

pure matter; It has no defilement in itself, neither is it capable

of contracting pollution from other objects. When it shines upon a

dunghill or sepulchre, which sends forth the most offensive effluvia,

it still remains uncontaminated.

[The author is undoubtedly mistaken when he considers light

“of all material bodies--the most simple,” and “an unmixed

body.”

It is well known that a beam, or pencil, of light, as

emitted from the sun, is _not_ a simple body, but is capable of

being divided into seven prismatic colors. The image which is

formed by the refraction of the pencil, by means of a prism, is

called a _Spectrum_, and clearly exhibits the compound nature

of light. The refracted rays of the Spectrum may be collected

and made to constitute a pencil of light again, which will be

white, or colorless as before.

If this prismatic Spectrum be examined closely, it will

be found that the different colored rays differ very much

in their _heating_, _illuminating_, and _chemical_ powers.

Dr. Herschell, and other experimenters, have found that the

_orange_ rays possess a greater illuminating power than the

red; and the _yellow_ more than the orange: but the _maximums_

of illumination lies in the _brightest yellow_ or _palest

green_.

There is also a very sensible difference in the _heating_

power of these colored rays. By passing the bulb of a

delicate air thermometer through the different colored rays,

it indicates the greatest heat in the _red_ rays; next in

the _green_, and so on diminishing to the _violet_. But

the maximum of heat has been ascertained to be immediately

_beyond_ the red rays, and of course _out_ of the Spectrum,

in an _unilluminated_ spot: thus indicating that there are

_invisible_ rays possessing a greater heating power than any of

the seven colored rays. These are called _calorific rays_.

By the experiments of Ritter and Wallaston it is now

satisfactorily ascertained that there are also _chemical rays

which excite neither heat nor light_, and lie on the _other

side_ of the Spectrum from the invisible calorific rays, just

without the violet. It is true, the chemical effect can be

distinguished even to the green rays, but this seems to be by

_diffusion_, or a species of sympathy. The sensible chemical

power is exerted just without the violet rays.

This fact is established more clearly by Berard. He

concentrated, by a lens, all the portion of the Spectrum from

the green to the red rays, and made them act on muriate of

silver _two hours_ without effect. He then concentrated all

the portion of the Spectrum from the green to the violet rays,

and made them act on muriate of silver, and _they blackened it

in less than six minutes_. Thus, evidently, are detected very

different properties in the different portions of the prismatic

Spectrum.

Instead, therefore, of light being a “simple substance,”

and “unmixed” it is found to be decidedly _compound_. It is

capable of being divided into seven differently colored rays,

and these rays, according to their natural properties, into

three classes: the _illuminating_ rays, _calorific_ rays, and

_chemical_ rays.]

The rays of light always proceed in _straight lines_, unless diverted

by some intervening body. They are subject to the laws of attraction

like other small bodies. If a stream of light be admitted through a

small hole into a dark room, and the edge of a knife be applied, it

will be diverted from its natural course, and _inflected_ towards it.

When the rays of light are thrown back by any opposing body, they are

said to be _reflected_. When in passing from one medium to another,

they are inflected or diverted from their rectilineal course, they

are said to be _refracted_; and this property of light is called its

_refrangibility_. Refraction arises from this, that the rays are more

attracted by a dense, than by a rare medium.

The _velocity_ of light is prodigious, and almost incredible; it moves

at the rate of near 200,000 miles in _a second_ of time! Roemer, a

Danish philosopher, was the first who found the means of determining

the velocity of light, by the difference of time in the eclipses

of Jupiter’s satellites, when the earth was on the same, or on the

contrary side of the sun, with that planet. This point may be easily

proved; for when the earth is between the sun and this planet, those

eclipses will happen about 8¼ minutes sooner, than according to the

tables; but when the earth is in the contrary position, the eclipses

happen about 8¼ minutes later than they are predicted by the tables.

Hence, therefore, light takes up about 8¼ minutes in passing from the

sun to the earth, a distance of 95,513,794 miles; and it takes about

16½ minutes of time to go through a space equal to the diameter of the

earth’s orbit, which is at least 190 millions of miles in length; which

is near a million of miles swifter than the motion of a cannon-ball,

which flies with the velocity of about a mile in eight seconds.[40]

In comparing this velocity of light with that of a cannon-ball, it

has been observed, that light passes through a space in about eight

minutes, which a cannon-ball with its ordinary velocity, could not

traverse in less than thirty-two years! The velocity of sound bears a

very small proportion to that of light. Light travels, in the space of

eight minutes, a distance in which sound could not be communicated in

seventeen years; and even our senses may convince us, if we attend to

the explosion of gunpowder, &c, of the almost infinite velocity of the

one compared with that of the other.[41] Were the propagation of the

rays of light less rapid, the darkness would be very slowly dissipated,

and great inconveniences would result to the inhabitants of the earth.

The _divisibility_ of the parts of matter is no where more apparent

than in the minuteness of the particles of light. The unobstructed rays

of light which proceed from a candle, will, almost instantaneously,

fill a space of two miles; and it has been computed, says Dr. O.

Gregory, that there fly out of the end of the flame of a burning

candle, in a second of time, ten thousand millions of times more such

particles than there are visible grains of sand in the whole earth.

Dr. Nieuwentyt has computed, that an inch of candle, when converted to

light, becomes divided into 269,617,040 parts, with 40 ciphers annexed;

at which rate there must issue out of it, when burning, 418,660, with

39 ciphers more, particles in the second of a minute; vastly more than

a thousand times a thousand million of times the number of sands the

whole earth can contain; reckoning ten inches to one foot, and that 100

sands are equal to one inch.[42] As sound is propagated only at the

rate of 1,142 feet in a second, a particle of light must be 786,000

times more subtile than a particle of air. If the particles of light

were not extremely small, their velocity would be highly destructive.

Indeed, were they equal in bulk to the two millionth part of a grain of

sand, this impulse would not be less than sand shot from the mouth of a

cannon. If the particles of light had more density, they would not only

dazzle us by their splendor, but injure us by their heat.

There is no creature of God that _diffuses_ itself, and whose influence

reaches so far and wide, and fills so large a vacuum, as light. All

that inconceivable space between this globe and the fixed stars, a

distance which numbers cannot reach, is replete with light. Nay, the

space in which it is diffused is not less than the universe itself; the

immensity of which exceeds the conception of human understanding. It is

from this almost unlimited diffusion of light that the very remotest of

the heavenly bodies in the solar system become discernible, either by

the naked eye or by telescopes. And had we instruments that could carry

our sight as far as the light is extended, we should discover those

bodies which are placed at the very extremity of the universe.[43]

Light is the _medium_ through which objects become _visible_ to us.

It is owing to it, that we are enabled to behold and contemplate the

wonderful works of the great Creator; to discover unexplored systems

in the trackless regions of unbounded space, to imbibe knowledge from

things created, to hold intercourse with each other, to steer the

hollow bark to distant climes, and to investigate the records of all

science. Without its aid, the world would have been an inhospitable

wilderness, involved in sable shades of perpetual night. “Truly the

light is sweet, and a pleasant thing it is for the eyes to behold it.”

Light _beautifies_ every delightful object which comes within the reach

of its rays.

“Nature’s resplendent robe!

Without whose vesting beauty all were wrapt

In unessential gloom.”

All colors are rays of light differently reflected. The cause of their

diversity was first rationally accounted for by Sir Isaac Newton. He

has shown that color is not a specific property of bodies, but is

caused by the different rays of light being reflected from the surface

of the body; the rest of the rays passing into or through the body. He

discovered that in the rays of light are all the colors in nature; and

the primary colors he considered to be seven in number, namely, red,

orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo and violet; and that bodies appear

of different colors, as they have the property of reflecting some rays

more powerfully than others. These colors are poetically enumerated by

Thomson.

“First the flaming _red_

Sprung vivid forth; the tawny _orange_ next;

And next delicious _yellow_; by whose side

Fell the kind beams of all-refreshing _green_:

Then the pure _blue_, that swells autumnal skies,

Ethereal play’d; and then, of sadder hue,

Emerg’d the deepen’d _indigo_, as when

The heavy-skirted evening droops with frost;

While the last gleamings of refracted light

Dy’d in the fainting _violet_ away.”

Since the time of this justly celebrated philosopher, it has been

objected, that the seven colors above mentioned are not primitive.

It seems very obvious that there can be only three primitive colors,

namely, red, yellow, and blue; since all the colors can be made by

means of these. It has lately been advanced by Prieur, that the

primitive colors are violet, green, and red; that the yellow is formed

with red and green, the latter being in excess; and that when the red

is in excess, they form orange; the green and violet form blue. The

colors excited by the different refrangible rays do not appear to

determine what are the primitive colors, since we find that different

rays are capable of producing the same color, as a mixture of the

yellow with the red produces orange. And it must be admitted, that the

violet rays excite, in some degree, the idea of red along with the

blue; as in the green, the yellow and blue may be discerned, but none

of the red. When the different colored rays are mixed together, either

by recomposition, or by getting each color by a separate Spectrum, the

result will be white light. Hence Sir Isaac Newton concluded, that

when the rays are promiscuously reflected from any surface it will

appear white. He also found, and the discovery has since been confirmed

by the experiments of Dr. Herschell, that the different colored rays

have not by any means the same illuminating power. The violet rays

appear to have the least luminous effect, the indigo more, the blue a

little more, the green very great, between the green and the yellow the

greatest of all, the yellow the same as the green, and the red less

than the yellow.[44] From experiments it is found, that those rays of

light are of the largest quantity that paint the brightest colors;

and of all these, the red rays have the least refrangibility. Without

light vegetables would have no color, but would appear white; this has

been remarkably illustrated by Professor Robison. Some bodies absorb

one colored ray, others another, while they reflect the rest. This is

the cause of color in bodies. A red body, for instance, reflects the

red rays and absorbs the rest. A white body reflects all the rays, and

absorbs none; while a black body, on the contrary, absorbs all the

rays, and reflects none:[45] this shows, that black colored apparel is

very improper during the heat of summer, or in tropical climates.

[There is one difficulty scarcely mentioned, and surely

not accounted for, in the preceding chapter: i.e. _How are we

to reconcile the creation of light on the first day, and the

creation of the sun not until the fourth?_

This has been a standing proposition since the revival

of learning. There can be no doubt but the account of the

creation, arrangement and nature of the world, as given

by Moses, is correct; and would so appear to the most

philosophically scientific, could we ascertain certainly

the meaning of the sacred historian, and did we understand

perfectly the phenomena of nature.

It is reasonable to suppose that the discoveries in natural

philosophy would tend to influence the explanations of Moses’

account. This is the fact. These discoveries have produced two

theories in regard to light: The _vibratory_, or Cartesian; and

the _corpuscular_, or Newtonian.

The Newtonian theory supposes the sun to be the original

and principal source of light; and that light is emitted

from the sun’s surface in inconceivably small _corpuscles_,

in such rapid succession, and in straight lines, as to seem

a continuous ray, though, in reality, the particles are a

thousand miles apart in their approach to the earth.

This is the most popular of modern theories, and the only

one, as I recollect, employed by commentators in illustrating

the account of Moses; or rather in solving the difficulty by

reconciling this theory with his account.

Some have supposed the sun was created long before, our

earth, and that his beams took effect on our earth, as now, on

the fourth day from his creation. Others have supposed that

the sun and earth were created _simultaneously_, but that the

sun’s beams did not fully penetrate our atmosphere, so as to

make himself distinctly visible as now, until the fourth day.

In both these cases it is supposed that the words of Moses,

in regard to the creation of the sun on the fourth day, are

to be interpreted of his _appearance_, and _influence_ on the

earth, by dispensing light. But this does not account for the

_existence_ of light _from the first to the fourth day_. This

is an insuperable objection here.

Finding the foregoing theories pressed with this

insurmountable difficulty, other commentators have supposed,

Light was a real substance, created _simultaneously_, and in

conjunction with the original chaotic mass of our earth; and

when God said “Let there be light, and there was light,” He,

by his divine power, caused the chaotic light to separate

itself from the earth, and, departing, _to condense_ in the

body of the sun; or, as some would probably say, in view of Dr.

Herschell’s solar discoveries, in the phosphoric clouds which

surround the real body of the sun. In this case, if the light

concentrated in the body of the sun, then that luminary must be

a body of _condensed light_: if in the solar phosphoric clouds

of Dr. Herschell, then those clouds would be _condensed light_.

This body of condensed light is considered the source of our

solar light, which flies off from it in the form of rays or

beams.

DR. URE, in his Chemical Dictionary, article LIGHT, takes

this view. He says, “We learn from scripture, that light

pre-existed before this luminary (the sun) and that its

_subsequent condensation_ in his orb was a particular act of

Almighty Power. The phosphorescence of minerals, buried since

the origin of things in the bowels of the earth, coincides

strictly with the Mosaic account of the creation. We shall

therefore regard light as the first born element of chaos,

as an independent essence, universally distributed through

the mineral, vegetable, and animal world, capable of being

disengaged from its latent state by various natural and

artificial operations.”

This theory, as I understand Dr. Ure’s view, has _two_

advantages, and _three_ disadvantages. It accounts for the

production of light on the _first_ day, as Moses says. It

also accounts for the _artificial production_ of light by

friction between bodies which have never been exposed to solar

light, by combustion, compression, &c. For though it supposes

light “subsequently condensed” in the sun, I presume it does

not suppose _all_ the light thus transferred from the earth,

and condensed: much of it is latent, and combined with other

substances, from which it is evolved by friction, combustion,

compression, &c.

But this ingenious theory, which is mentioned by our

author, and attributed to Dr. Wall, is pressed with _three_

difficulties:

1. It does not suppose the existence of the sun until the

_fourth_ day, and of course no common centre of attraction to

the earth and other planets. But it is impossible to conceive

of the _safe existence_ of the planets _previous_ to the

existence of their common center, which now regulates their

order and motion. This is an insuperable difficulty, unless we

resort to a “particular act of Almighty Power.”

2. If the body of the sun be “condensed light,”

_abstracted_ from the earth, the scene of its creation, then

we must suppose that _a body more than a million times

greater than the earth was drawn off from it_, which indeed

would require an “act of Almighty Power,” and is utterly

irreconcilable to the laws of attraction.

3. This view also destroys the idea of the sun’s being

an opake and habitable globe, unless we could conceive the

inhabitants capable of dwelling in “condensed light;” which

supposition is at variance with all our ideas of rational

existence. Hence it robs the mind of the pleasing and almost

intuitively correct idea of the sun’s being a habitable globe.

These difficulties appeared so great that others, and

particularly Dr. Adam Clarke, have offered a new mode of

interpretation, founded on the Newtonian theory as improved by

Dr. Herschell. Dr. Clarke supposes that _caloric_, or latent

heat, was produced on the first day, when God said, “let there

be light; and there was light.” In this case he considers that

latent heat and latent light are, probably, the same: or that

it is the same subtile substance diffused throughout creation,

which is capable of producing heat and light, when properly

excited.

Yet, in his remarks on the sun, he embraces Dr. Herschell’s

ideas of the sun’s real body being opake and habitable,

surrounded by phosphoric clouds which are the source of our

solar light. Of course the Doctor only transfers the source

of light from the real body of the sun to these phosphoric

clouds with which he is invested. Our solar light then comes by

_impulsion_ from these clouds, and not from the sun’s real body.

These clouds are supposed to give light to the _Solar_

inhabitants also, the intensity of which is regulated by a

stratum of clouds placed _below_ the _outer_ phosphoric clouds,

and which defends the sun’s real body from too great degree of

light.

This is Dr. Herschell’s supposition, and seems to be pretty

well established.

This ingenious theory solves the difficulty under notice,

by supposing that _caloric_, and not light, is intended in

the third verse, where God said, “Let there be light.” And by

supposing latent light, as well as latent heat, it seems to

provide for the well known existence of light in combination

with many, if not all, terrestrial substances; and yet it

refers to the sun as the principal source of light, which

according to this interpretation, was not necessary to the

existence of the substance intended in the third verse--“Let

there be light, and there was light.”

This theory has another most excellent suggestion, viz:

that the heat excited by the sun at the earth’s surface, is

produced by the luminous rays of the sun combining with the

caloric in the atmosphere, and other substances at the surface

of the earth. This suggestion supposes a very close affinity,

if not identity in the matter of light and heat.

Although this explanation approaches much nearer a

satisfactory solution of the difficulty in question, yet it is

by no means unembarrassed.

In the first place it is built upon a singular translation

of a word. The text, according to this theory, should be, “And

God said let there be _caloric_, and there was caloric.”

This may be the text; but I cannot help thinking, that a bias

to a system of philosophy, and a strong desire to _cut_ the

difficulty rather than _solve_ it, suggested this translation.

The text seems to have been so generally and uniformly

understood of light, it would be difficult to alter it. It

would be better to suspect a defect in our knowledge of the

source and nature of light.

Again: this view seems to suppose a _consecutive_ creation,

which is at variance with a seemingly well settled opinion,

in regard to the _Solar System_, and even at variance with

Dr. Clarke’s own remarks on Gen. chap. i, v. 2. On this verse

he says: “God seems at _first_ to have created the elementary

principles of _all things_.”

Finally: as his view is Newtonian, it is liable to all

the objections to which that theory is liable: such as the

_diminution_ which would take place at the source from whence

the light came; and the _destructive force_ with which it would

fall at the surface of the earth.

These considerations, with others, have influenced many of

the most learned and acute philosophers to look for another

theory. Our own countryman, Dr. Franklin, felt them. He says,

in a letter dated April 23, 1752, in reference to the theory,

of light being _particles of matter driven off from the sun’s

surface_; “Must not the smallest portion conceivable have, with

such a motion, a force exceeding that of a twenty-four pounder

discharged from a cannon? Must not the sun diminish exceedingly

by such a waste of matter, and the planets, instead of drawing

near to him, as some have feared, recede to greater distances,

through the lessoned attraction? Yet these particles with this

amazing motion, will not drive before them, or remove the

least, and slightest dust they meet with, and the sun appears

to continue of his ancient dimensions, and his attendants move

in their ancient orbits.”

He then supposes the phenomena of light may be more

satisfactorily solved by supposing a subtle fluid, universally

diffused, which is invisible _when at rest_, but _becomes

visible when put in motion_, by affecting the nerves of the

eye, as the vibrations of the air affect the ear, and produce

the sensation of sound; and that the different degrees of

intensity in the vibrations, will account for the different

colors. _See Nicholson’s Encyclopedia_, LIGHT.

This is the _vibratory_ or Cartesian system of light. As

already suggested, it supposes the existence of a subtle,

luminiferous ether, diffused throughout the universe, pervading

every particle of matter, and is capable of being put in

motion, so as to become visible, by the sun, as the grand

natural _excitant_, friction, combustion, compression, &c.

The _laws_ of the vibrations of this luminiferous fluid, are

precisely the same with those ascertained, and determined, in

regard to light as commonly understood. This luminiferous fluid

is to be considered an elementary substance, and was created

when the different substances composing the chaotic mass were

created. At its first creation, like caloric, it was in a

_latent_ state, as no excitant as yet had put it in motion.

It is to be understood, therefore, that the substances of

each planet in the _Solar System_, as well as the sun himself,

were created _simultaneously_ in a chaotic state, at their

proper relative distances from each other: that the requisite

quantity of each elementary substance was present in each mass:

but as caloric, and this luminiferous ether were _latent_,

these masses were solid, frozen lumps; inactive and lifeless;

and darkness necessarily prevailed. This then was the original

condition of the elements of our Solar System, according to

the scriptures. “And the earth was without form and void; and

darkness was upon the face of the deep.” Gen. i, 2.

In order, therefore, to produce a quickening in these

masses, which rendered them _soft_, it was only necessary to

call the latent caloric, and this luminiferous ether into

action, which would agitate, and bring to light the whole

mass, and thus commence the arrangement and organization of

the Solar System. However, as there was no exciting cause

_then_ in operation, it is evident the Almighty must have given

the _first_ impulse to these elements. This he did, and the

important fact is recorded by Moses in these words: “AND THE

SPIRIT OF GOD MOVED UPON THE FACE OF THE GREAT DEEP,” Jehovah

saying at the same time, “LET THERE BE LIGHT.”

Here is the Mosaic account of the production of light,

and possibly heat also, which took place on the _first_ day.

The same process went on _simultaneously_ in the sun and

planets, and the continued action cleared up their respective

atmospheres, and the _sun_ became visible at the earth’s

surface on the _fourth_ day. Hence, the sun was said to have

been _made_ on the fourth day.

This solution of the difficulty is consistent with the

account of Moses; and also all the well ascertained phenomena

of light can be satisfactorily explained by it. It will

naturally lead the mind to observe the resemblance between the

phenomena of light and heat, and impel us to the conclusion,

that light, or vision, is the _effect_ of a material cause, as

heat is of caloric: and it is natural to suppose this cause

is in the same relation to light, that caloric is to heat. Of

course we should conclude that light, or the luminiferous ether

in a latent state, enters into combination with all substances,

as does caloric; and at the same time a large proportion of it

is _free_, or in motion, and of course sensible to the eye, as

_free_ caloric is to the sense of feeling. Moreover we must

conclude that this latent light is capable of being set free

or evolved by the exciting influence of the sun, as also by

friction, compression, combustion, chemical action, &c. It

will be of advantage, therefore, to establish the fact of the

existence of _latent_ light, in combination with terrestrial

substances.

That this is the fact may be proven by a single reflection

on the process of _combustion_. It is a daily observation that

light is produced by _burning_ bodies. Let us suppose these

bodies burnt at midnight in a close room; still light will

be given out copiously and constantly. _Whence_ this light?

The natural and obvious answer is, it was in combination in

a _latent state_ with the burning bodies, and by combustion

it was set free, and thrown out, and thus put the surrounding

luminiferous ether in motion.

It is said by some, the light evolved in this case is not

from the burning bodies, but from the oxygen which is supplied

by the air to support the combustion. This does not alter the

case at all: for then the light was in combination with the

oxygen, and was invisible, being in a latent state, until it

was set free from the oxygen by combustion.

The same conclusion is obtained in the process of

_compression_ and _expansion_. If atmospheric air, or oxygen

be suddenly compressed in a glass syringe; or if a glass ball,

filled with the latter, be suddenly broke _in vacuo_, a _flash

of light_ is instantly perceived. In this case the light

suddenly becomes visible, which was invisible before, being

latent in combination with the air. (URE.)

We arrive at the same conclusion in case of _friction_. It

is well known that pieces of wood can be made to _blaze_ by

rubbing them together. But it is not so well known, that two

pieces of rock crystal, or quartz, taken from any depth in the

earth, and which cannot be supposed to have ever been in the

light of the sun, when rubbed quickly together, even _under

water, will give out volumes of light_. _Whence_ this light?

from the quartz doubtless. Of course it must have been in a

latent state, and was set free by friction. Let it be strictly

observed, the crystals _never were exposed to the light of the

sun, of course could not have derived this light from that

luminary_.

We must come to the same conclusion, in regard to the light

given out by _animal_ substances. Many _insects_ are known to

have the power of evolving light, or putting the surrounding

luminiferous ether in motion, which is the same. Putrescent

animal matter has been observed to possess it, in some cases,

in a very great degree; sufficiently to illuminate a room, or

pantry, for hours together. In some instances the fingers of

those who touched the luminous flesh, became luminous.

This is eminently the case in regard to some fishes. A

species of fish called PHOLAS, has the power of evolving a

large quantity of light. This power is greater when the fish is

sound and fresh. Pliny mentions this fish, and says it rendered

the hands and clothes of persons luminous. When put in water,

under proper circumstances, it renders the water luminous. But

when put in milk, a single _pholas_ made seven ounces of it so

luminous as to enable one to distinguish the faces of persons

present. _Ency. Brit. Art._ LIGHT.

The evolution of light from the sea in the night, is a fact

of common observation, and is sometimes so great as to enable

one to read large print on a ship’s deck. _Ency. Brit. Art._

LIGHT.

In all the above instances, and many more might be added,

the light evolved, or, (which is the same thing in this

investigation,) the luminiferous ether put in motion, must have

been in a state of combination with the substances from which

it was evolved. The only question which remains is this: _Was

all this light transmitted from the sun, and become latent and

combined at the earth’s surface by absorption?_

It would certainly be hazardous to answer this question in

the affirmative. For how could we account for the evolution of

light from those bodies which have never been subject to the

sun’s influence?

Again: If all this light had been transmitted from the

sun, it will inevitably follow, that there was a time when

the quantity of light at the surface of the earth, and in

combination with terrestrial bodies, _was very small_, and of

course combustion, friction, and compression of bodies produced

anciently a much smaller quantity of light than now; because

there was a smaller quantity in combination.

It is evident that this supposition would come to this

conclusion: _The quantity of light, in combination at the

earth’s surface, has increased in the same ratio as the

increase of the duration of the influence of the sun on the

earth: and, by consequence, the quantity of light produced by

artificial means has increased in the same proportion._ Of

course, fires and candles burn more brightly now than they did

five thousand years since.

Though this conclusion is legitimate from the foregoing

supposition, yet it is at war with common sense, and the

current observations of the world.

We are therefore compelled to conclude that the MATTER _of

light_ is diffused throughout the universe, as is caloric, and

that it is evolved, or put in motion by the influence of the

sun; as also by artificial and chemical means; as combustion,

compression, friction, chemical action, &c.

This conclusion is much strengthened by the fact, that the

_existence of caloric_ is well ascertained, _not as proceeding

from the sun_, but in combination with all terrestrial

substances; and also by the fact of the constant _analogy_

between the phenomena of light and heat. This analogy is so

strong and striking that we are compelled to conclude, _if

heat be the effect of a real substance, light must be also_.

Indeed the analogy is so strong that it almost convinces us of

the _identity_ of the matter of heat, light, electricity, and

galvanism.

Notwithstanding the amount of evidence is against this

supposition at present, yet there is a strong tendency in

recent philosophical experiments to confirm it; and I am

inclined to believe that future discoveries will confirm this

identity. Some of the most obvious evidences in favor of it may

be introduced here.

1. Almost all the celebrated authors and experimenters have

occasionally _suggested_ the probability of this identity.

Mr. Turner, Elements of Chemistry, p. 67, says, in reference

to heat and light: “It has been supposed that _they are

modifications of the_ SAME AGENT; and though most persons

regard them as independent principles, yet they are certainly

allied in a way which at present is inexplicable.” Again,

p. 71. “Mr. Leslie conceives that light when absorbed, _is

converted into heat_.” Dr. Henry (Art. Light,) says, “A new

fact has been lately ascertained by Dr. Delaroche, which seems

to point out _a close connection_ between heat and light,

_and a gradual passage of the one into the other_. The rays

of _invisible_ heat pass through glass with difficulty at a

temperature below that of boiling water; but they traverse

it with a facility always increasing with the temperature,

as it approaches the point at which bodies become luminous.”

“The general facts, says Sir H. Davy, of the refraction and

effects of the solar beam, offer an analogy to the agencies

of electricity.” (_Ure, Chemical Dictionary, Article Light._)

It is well known that this view pressed itself strongly on

the attention of Sir Isaac Newton, during his philosophical

investigation. _See Ure, Chem. Dic. Art. Light._

2. This identity is strongly suggested by the constant and

striking analogy between the laws of heat and light.

_First:_ The color of surfaces has an influence on the

passage of light and heat.

_Secondly:_ The power of light, heat, and electricity

diminishes as the squares of their distances.

_Thirdly:_ The particles of heat, light, and electricity,

are _idio-repulsive_.

_Fourthly:_ The passage of the electric spark is generally

attended with the production of light and heat.

_Fifthly:_ Heat is emitted in all directions from the

surface of an ignited body: so is light from the surface of a

burning body.

_Sixthly:_ The laws of reflection are the same in light and

heat.

Other coincidences might be established, and other

celebrated names added.

If this identity should be established finally, it would

not effect the doctrine of the foregoing pages in the least. It

would only be necessary to say, the luminiferous fluid of this

essay is the well established substance now called caloric.

_Addenda on Light._

1. It is now generally admitted that the real body

of the sun is surrounded with a peculiar set of clouds,

_phosphorescent_ in their nature. It is also allowed that these

clouds do not emit heat. And as it is well known that no one of

the _planets_ has such clouds, but receive their light from the

sun, _it is extremely probable that these phosphorescent clouds

are intended by the Creator, to be the great dispenser of light

to the solar system, by operating as the exciting cause to put

the luminiferous ether in motion throughout the solar system_.

By a parity of reasoning, each centre of a system may be

invested with similar clouds, which operate in the same way in

reference to the planets which belong to it.

2. If light were a real substance, _as commonly

understood_, solar light must proceed from the sun by

_impulsion_, and artificial light from burning bodies by

_evolution_. Take the case of burning bodies. A single candle

placed two miles above the surface of the earth in the air, and

lighted up in that position, will _instantly illuminate a space

of two miles in every direction from itself, or a spherical

space four miles in diameter_. In this case a sufficient

quantity of light is instantly evolved to fill this space,

and the evolution continues as long as the candle burns. The

question upon this fact is this: Can it be supposed that there

is a sufficient quantity of light, in combination with a single

candle, or the oxygen necessary to keep up its combustion, to

fill a spherical space four miles in diameter for several hours

together? This would indeed be almost incredible in view of the

space filled by light evolved from a single candle.

But this difficulty would be satisfactorily solved upon

the supposition that light is the _effect_, produced by a

luminiferous ether, universally diffused, and put in motion,

by which it becomes visible, by the sun, burning bodies,

&c. Because, the motion which renders the luminiferous

ether visible, commences instantly upon the commencement of

combustion, and is propagated from the point of combustion _in

right lines_, under the appearance of rays of light: but the

motion ceases instantly on the cessation of combustion, and of

course darkness instantly ensues.]

After having attended to the production of _light_, and noticed some

of its properties, it is a paramount duty to contemplate its glorious

Author; especially as by this mysterious production he himself has

chosen to be represented. If creatures be excellent, what must be

the Creator? and to admire the former without adoring the latter,

would be profane and atheistical. “The Deity,” says Sir Isaac Newton,

“in infinite space, as in his own _sensorium_, has an intimate

perception of all things:” so we, possessing intellect, should “look

through nature up to nature’s GOD.” Then matter, however rarefied or

diversified, would serve as his minister to introduce us into his

presence. A pious ancient, on being asked by a profane philosopher, How

he could contemplate high things, since he had no books? answered, That

he had the whole world for his book, ready open at all times, and in

all places, and that he could therein read things heavenly and divine.

As the visible creation is the outward expression of the existence of

God, and displays several of his infinite perfections; so we should

study him in the works of nature, and trace him in the operation of his

hands.

The late excellent and pious Bishop Horne very beautifully

observes,--“When the angels beheld the dark and disordered state of

created nature upon its first production, they were, doubtless, thrown

into some perplexity to conceive how it should ever be made a means of

manifesting forth the glory of the Creator. But when they saw the light

spring up, at the Divine command, from that blackness of darkness, and

fix its residence in its tabernacle the sun, illuminating and adorning

the firmament of heaven with its glorious show, and the earth with its

beautiful furniture, all formed out of rudeness and confusion, then

they confessed that the difficulty of the work served only to display

the skill of the workmaster, which is proportionally estimated by the

unpromising nature of the materials.

In like manner, whoever views the chaos to which the infinite wisdom of

a presiding Providence sometimes permits the moral world to be reduced

by the prevailing power of the prince of darkness, and the agency of

his instruments, will scarce be able, at first, to discern any traces

of the Divine counsels in a mirror so sullied and clouded over by the

enormities of sinful men. Yet let him wait with patience for a little

season, and those clouds shall pass away; a light shall shine, and some

great end present itself to sight, so worthy of God, so beneficial to

man, that standing amazed at a power able to bring the greatest good

out of the greatest evil, he will be forced to cry out concerning the

economy of the spiritual system, as David did concerning the operations

of the natural--‘Oh Lord, how manifold are thy works! In wisdom hast

thou made them all.’”[46]

* * * * *

_Section_ IV.--DAY AND NIGHT.

Original terms of Day and Night -- Motion the effect of

a Divine power -- Commencement of Time -- Utility of Day and

Night -- Religious improvement of Time -- Sin moral darkness --

The Gospel a Light to dispel it -- A Christian the subject of

a transition from the one state to the other.

The separation of _light_ from the _darkness_, was the work of the

_first day_. This was an arrangement made by infinite Wisdom, as

well as a display of almighty power. When this took place, it is

highly probable that God gave to the earth its rotation upon its own

axis, to produce the necessary succession of _day_ and _night_. “The

word ערב _éreb_, which we translate _evening_, comes from the root

ערב _ârab_, to _mingle_, and properly signifies that state in which

neither absolute darkness, nor full light, prevails. It has nearly

the same grammatical signification with our _twilight_, the time that

elapses from the setting of the sun till he is eighteen degrees below

the horizon, and eighteen degrees before he arises. Thus we have the

morning and evening twilight, or _mixture_ of light and darkness, in

which neither prevails; because, while the sun is within eighteen

degrees of the horizon, either after his setting, or before his rising,

the atmosphere has power to refract the rays of light, and send them

back to the earth. The Hebrews extended the meaning of this term to the

whole duration of night, because it was ever a _mingled_ state; the

moon, the planets, or the stars, tempering the darkness with some rays

of light. From the _ereb_ of Moses came the Ερεβος _Erebus_ of Hesiod,

Aristophanes, and other heathens, which they _deified_, and made with

_nox_, or night, the parent of all things. The word בקר _boquer_,

which we translate _morning_, from בקר _boquar_, he _looked out_, is a

beautiful figure, which represents the morning as _looking out_ at the

east, and illuminating the whole of the upper hemisphere.”[47]

All bodies continue in a state of rest, till they are put into motion

by some external force impressed on them. Motion is the removal of a

body from one place to another, or a continual change of place.[48]

Any force acting on a body to move it, is called a _power_. The

_momentum_, or quantity of motion, is in proportion to the force

impressed. The heavier any body is, the greater is the power required

to move it.

There are but three possible ways of accounting for motion:--either

by supposing that there has been an infinite succession of impulses

communicated from one body to another from eternity, without any active

principle either in matter or without it: or, that there is an active

principle in matter that renders it self-active, and motion essential

to it: or, else, that there is a Being distinct from matter, and is the

cause of its motion.

An infinite succession of impulses, without an active or moving

principle, will never give birth to motion, because this would be to

produce an effect without the assistance of a cause. This absurdity

was asserted by Spinosa; yet when urged by his friends to explain how

matter could ever come into motion, if motion was neither essential to

matter, nor proceeded from any external cause, he always avoided giving

a direct answer. This conduct makes it reasonable to believe, that he

himself would have given up his account of motion, if he could have

saved his atheistical scheme and his reputation.

That motion is essential to all matter, and action as much an attribute

of matter, as extension or solidity; and, consequently, every atom of

matter is necessarily self-moving, or active from the necessity of its

own nature, is asserted by Toland. Though he thought fit to reject the

hypothesis of Spinosa as indefensible, yet he believed in the atheistic

notion, that motion is essential to matter, and thinks it will be

sufficient without troubling the Supreme Being. The reason which has

always determined mankind to look out for a cause of motion extrinsical

to matter, was this: though they could easily conceive it capable of

being moved and divided; yet the conceiving of it to be undivided, and

unmoved, was a more simple notion of matter, than the conceiving it

divided and moved. This being first in order of nature, and an adequate

conception of it too, they thought it necessary to inquire, how it

came out of this state, and by what causes motion, from whence this

diversity in matter arose, could come into the world?

Descartes, though he allowed the infinity of matter, as well as Toland,

was yet sensible that even this would not alter the nature of matter,

nor the idea that every person had of its inactivity, and therefore

could see no way of altering its primitive idea, and reconciling it

with the motion of matter, but by introducing an infinite Being, who

had sufficient power to rouse matter out of that sleepy state in which

its original idea had represented it.[49]

That such a circumstance exists, and what it is, a French author very

clearly states. He says, The universe is composed of matter, and, as a

system, is sustained by motion. Motion is not a property of matter,

and without this motion the solar system could not exist. Were motion a

property of matter, that undiscovered and undiscoverable thing, called

perpetual motion, would establish itself. It is because motion is not

a property of matter, that perpetual motion is an impossibility in

the hand of every being but that of the Creator of motion. When the

pretenders to atheism can produce perpetual motion, and not till then,

they may expect to be credited.

The natural state of matter, as to place, is a state of rest. Motion,

or change of place, is the effect of an external cause acting upon

matter. As to that faculty of matter called _gravitation_, it is the

influence which two or more bodies have reciprocally on each other to

unite and be at rest. Every thing which has hitherto been discovered

with respect to the motion of the planets in the system, relates only

to the laws by which motion acts, and not to the cause of motion.

Gravitation, so far from being the cause of motion to the planets that

compose the solar system, would be the destruction of the solar system,

were revolutionary motion to cease; for as the action of spinning

upholds a top, the revolutionary motion upholds the planets in their

orbits, and prevents them from gravitating and forming one mass with

the sun.

“By ceaseless action all that is subsists;

Constant rotation of the unwearied wheel

That nature rides upon, maintains her health,

Her beauty, her fertility. She dreads

An instant’s pause, and lives but while she moves.

Its own revolvency upholds the world.”

In one sense of the word, philosophy knows, and atheism says, that

matter is in perpetual motion. But the motion here meant refers to

the state of matter, and that only on the surface of the earth. It

is either decomposition, which is continually destroying the form of

the bodies of matter, or recomposition, which renews that matter in

the same or another form, as the decomposition of animal or vegetable

substances enter into the composition of other bodies. But the motion

that upholds the solar system is of an entirely different kind, and is

not a property of matter. It operates also to an entirely different

effect. It operates also to perpetual preservation, and to prevent any

change in the state of the system.

Giving then to matter all the properties which philosophy knows it

has, or all that atheism ascribes to it, and can prove, and even

supposing matter to be eternal, it will not account for the system

of the universe, or of the solar system, because it will not account

for motion, and it is motion that preserves it. When, therefore, we

discover a circumstance of such immense importance, that without it the

universe could not exist, and for which neither matter, nor any, nor

all, the properties of matter can account, we are by necessity forced

into the rational and comfortable belief of the existence of a cause

superior to matter, and that cause is GOD.

The motion of the earth, therefore, is an effect of Divine power,

because there is none other equal to it; and the constant operation of

the same cause is requisite to perpetuate its progress. How amazing

it is that this globe, so large in circumference, should move at all!

Plato attributes motion to the power of God, “How is it possible,” he

argues, “for so prodigious a mass to be carried round for so long a

time, by any natural cause? For which reason,” he says, “I assert God

to be the cause, and that it is impossible it should be otherwise.”[50]

“Every thing that is moved,” adds Aristotle, “must of necessity be

moved by some other thing; and that thing must be moved, either by

another, or not by another thing. If it be moved by that which is moved

by another, we must of necessity come to some Prime Mover that is not

moved by another. For it is impossible that what moves, and is moved by

another, shall proceed _ad infinitum_.”[51] Since motion then is not

a property of matter, but an effect produced by the power of a Divine

agent, what a constant display we have of this efficient energy, in

moving this earth, and with such a surprising, swiftness! Surely all

men should fear and reverence a Being, who possesses and exercises

such a power! He who created all things out of nothing, could, if he

pleased, extinguish the light, and shake the solid earth into atoms!

When the ponderous wheel of nature first began to move, _time_,

consisting of days, months, years, and ages, and measured by the

duration and revolutions of the heavenly bodies, commenced.

_Time_ (in eternity parenthesis)

Is measur’d by successive days and months,

Seasons and years; which closely like the links

Of an extended chain progressive join:

Or as a clock, with all its hidden springs

And constant motions, wound up to the top,

Begins its course, revolving until down.

The distinction between _day_ and _night_ is a wise and gracious

provision for man. In the morning, after the weary limbs have repaired

their exhausted vigor by the indulgence of soft repose, we are pleased

with the blessing of light; and, after a few fleeting hours engaged

in our diversified pursuits of the day, we begin to court the evening

shades, pleased again to enjoy that balmy retreat which alone refits

us for the fatigues of the ensuing day. When a few fleeting hours

are spent, the day is no longer gratifying; but its light becomes

burdensome, and we wish for the shadows of the evening to be stretched

over us. This sable period is scarcely gone, when we welcome the

dawning day, and leave the place of our rest with gladness.

_Day_ and _night_, and their alternate changes, are adapted to suggest

useful thoughts, and calculated to employ our serious meditation.

“From night to day, from day to night,

The _dawning_ and the _dying_ light

Lectures of heavenly wisdom read;

With silent eloquence they raise

Our thoughts to the Creator’s praise.

And neither sound nor language need.”

A force continually impressed by the supreme Being produces and

preserves these different and useful motions, which measure out that

portion of time assigned us, for the performance of his work, and

the securing of our own salvation. We are directed in his word how

to employ this important _talent_ lent to us; also warned to guard

against a misapplication of it, and told that a day will come when we

shall have to give an account of our stewardship. As _day_ is afforded

for the management of those employments which could not be done in

the night, how unwise would it be to postpone such concerns till the

approach of darkness? So the short period of life is given us that we

may “work out our own salvation.” We are favored with the light of

Divine truth to illuminate our understandings; the operation of the

Holy Spirit to influence our wills; and our pressing necessities should

impel us to perform what God requires.

The Greeks have two words for _time_, χρονος and καιρος: the former

signifies time in general; and the latter that part of it which is

proper for doing a thing--the present season in which any thing to be

done may be done fitly and to advantage. Accordingly Solomon says,

“To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under

heaven.”

What the apostle says to the Christians at Ephesus is equally

applicable and interesting to persons in succeeding ages of the world;

giving a view of the importance of time, and directing to a right

improvement of it. “See that ye walk circumspectly, not as fools, but

as wise, redeeming the time, because the days are evil.”

_Walking_, in the Scripture style, is a word frequently used to denote

the whole course of a man’s life and conversation, including all

his thoughts, words and actions. Walking _circumspectly_, ακριβως,

signifies correctly, accurately, consistently, or perfectly. In

another place the same word is rendered _diligently_. Herod said to

the wise men come from the east, Go to Bethlehem, and search ακριβως,

_diligently_, narrowly, for the young child Jesus. But the word

_circumspect_ is from the Latin _circumspicio_, and signifies to

look round about, on all hands, to be every way watchful, wary, and

cautious, in order to avoid danger, discern enemies before they come

too nigh, and secure a man’s interest by every possible and lawful

means.[52]

The necessity of this duty is suggested in the Greek text, βλεπετε ουν

_see then_ or _therefore_, take care of this as a matter of the highest

concern and greatest importance; it is that on which your all depends.

He adduces a cogent reason for this--“Not as fools, but as wise.” As if

he should say, It is your _wisdom_ to walk circumspectly, and not to

walk so would be your _folly_: to walk circumspectly is the wisdom that

God recommends to you, and which is adapted to make you truly wise,

both in this world and in that which is to come.

The word _redeeming_, εξαγοραζομενοι, literally signifies _buying

time_. The term _buying_ is proper in reference to civil contracts,

but it is here applied morally. Properly speaking, time cannot be

bought: it is a commodity for which all the treasures in the world

would not be an equivalent. Its price is above rubies. But the

term imports the great value of time, and intimates that we should

be willing to suffer any privation or inconveniences, rather than

lose it. _Redeeming_ properly implies the laying down a price for

re-purchasing or recovering that which was ours, but which has fallen

into the possession of another. A captive sometimes is redeemed out

of the hand of an enemy. Now, in this sense, to redeem time already

past is impossible, for when once gone it is irrecoverable. So that

by _redeeming_ time, nothing else can be understood but a diligent

and prudent improvement of it, which is the only way in our power

to counterbalance the loss we have sustained by our former neglect.

The effects of our past negligence should be counteracted by double

diligence in future: we should do much work in a little time. This is

to redeem that time, concerning which we have allowed worldly business,

unprofitable visits, sensual indulgence, carnal recreations, and vain

thoughts, to rob us, and, as it were, to take and keep us captive. To

redeem time then is to be diligent in future, wisely improving it so as

may make amends for our very culpable remissness. Future diligence is,

as it were, the price of redemption paid down for what we had mortgaged

into the hands of those things which we have suffered to deprive us of

it.

The argument used to enforce the practice of this duty is, “because the

days are evil.” Time, in itself, properly speaking, is neither good nor

evil; but in regard to the moral state of mankind may be so called.

The days here primarily intended by the apostle, denominated _evil_,

were those of his own time, in which he himself and his contemporaries

lived, and which abounded with trouble and danger, by reason of the

opposition made by unbelieving Jews and Gentiles against Christianity.

But all our days, as well as those, may be called evil, because of

the prevalence of sin, Satanic delusion, and hostility of the ungodly

against real religion. Many persons can adopt the language of the

patriarch Jacob, “Few and evil have the days of the years of my life

been.” Job gives a similar testimony, “Man that is born of a woman, is

of few days, and full of evil.”

The whole argument runs thus: seeing that you cannot enjoy true quiet

and substantial comfort in this terrestrial abode, and are in danger

of being quickly deprived of all opportunity of getting and doing

good, fail not to improve the present time to the best advantage, in

reference to the future state, that you may secure for yourselves a

happy and glorious eternity.

* * * * *

Footnotes - Chapter II

[23] See Dr. A. Clarke on Gen. i. 1.

[24] Barington’s Dissertations, &c, p. 82.

[25] An eminent chemist and philosopher, Dr. Priestley,

has very properly observed, that it seems plain that Moses

considered the whole terraqueous globe as being created in

a _fluid_ state, the earthly and other particles of matter

being mingled with the water. The present form of the earth

demonstrates the truth of the Mosaic account, for it is well

known, that, if a soft or elastic globular body be rapidly

whirled round on its axis, the parts at the poles will be

flattened, and the parts on the equator, midway between the

north and the south poles will be raised up. This is precisely

the shape of our earth; it has the figure of an _oblate

spheroid_, a figure pretty much resembling the shape of an

_orange_. It has been demonstrated by admeasurement, that the

earth is flatted at the poles, and raised at the equator. This

was first conjectured by Sir Isaac Newton, and afterwards

confirmed by M. Cassini, and others, who measured several

degrees of latitude at the equator and near the north pole,

and found that the difference perfectly justified Sir Isaac

Newton’s conjecture, and consequently confirmed the Mosaic

account. The result of the experiments instituted to determine

this point, proved, that the diameter of the earth at the

equator is greater by more than _twenty-three_ and _a half_

miles than it is at the poles, allowing the polar diameter to

be 1-334 part shorter than the _equatorial_, according to the

recent admeasurements of several degrees of latitude made by

Messrs. Mechain and Delambre. L’Histoire des Mathem. par M. de

la Lande, tom. iv, part v, liv. vi: and Dr. Adam Clarke, on

Gen. i. 10.

[26] Hesiod. Theog. 116.

[27] Aristoph. Aves, 694.

[28] Longin, sect. ix, Edit. Pearce.

[29] Walker’s History of the Creation, p. 8, 9.

[30] Benson on the Text.

[31] Preface to Dr. Black’s Lectures, by Robison.

[32] Carpenter’s Lectures on the Works of Creation, vol. i.

p. 87.

[33] Boerhaave’s Chem. by Shaw, vol. i. p. 299.

[34] Parkes’s Chemical Catechism, or Rudiments of

Chemistry, chap. ii.

[35] Contemplative Philosopher, vol. ii. p. 149, 150.

[36] See Dr. Burnet’s Theory, vol. ii, p. 30.

[37] Apud Stob. Eclog. Phys. p. 44.

[38] That light is a fluid which encompasses the earth,

and requires only to be agitated by some other inflamed body,

in order to render it perceptible, is an hypothesis, says a

celebrated German divine, that has been adopted by the most

eminent philosophers. “It is certain, at least, that there is

a great difference between _fire_ and _light_. The latter is

incomparably more subtile than the former. It penetrates glass,

and other transparent bodies, in a moment; whereas fire does it

very slowly. The pores of glass are consequently large enough

to give a free passage to the light, while the fire meets with

more resistance, because it is less subtile. Fire moves more

slowly than light. Let burning coals be brought into a room,

the heat diffuses itself very slowly, and the air becomes

warm by degrees; but the moment a candle is brought into an

apartment, the whole is suddenly illuminated; and wherever

the rays can reach the parts become more visible. From these

facts, and some others, it is concluded, that fire and light

are different substances; although we generally see them both

together, and find that one may produce the other. But the

consequence drawn from this is possibly false.”

[39] A new material has recently been introduced in

this country, for the purpose of lighting houses, streets,

manufactories, &c, namely, the inflammable gas of coals.

When coals are burning in a common fire-place, a flame more

or less luminous, according as it is more or less encumbered

with incombustible smoke and vapor, issues from them; and

very frequently emit some very beautiful streams of a flame

remarkably bright. All this arises from the gases which are

extricated from the coal by the heat. It was natural to imagine

that such gas might be received in proper reservoirs, and, on

being forced out of small apertures, and lighted, would serve,

as the flames of candles, to illuminate rooms or other places.

The trial was easily made, and has been attended with the

desired effect.

[40] Dr. Rees’s New Cyclopædia, Art. Light; and Dr. O.

Gregory’s Lessons, Astronomical and Philosophical p. 157.

[41] Gregory’s Economy of Nature, vol. i, p. 173.

[42] See Relig. Philos. vol. iii, pp. 869, 870, Fourth

Edition.

[43] Sturm’s Reflections, vol. iii, p. 184.

[44] Dr. Rees’s Cyclopædia, Art. Light.

[45] Parkes’s Rudiments of Chemistry, chap. xii.

[46] Sermon on 1 Pet. ii, 21.

[47] Dr. Adam Clarke on Gen. i, 31.

[48] When Zeno, the Prince of the Stoics, was endeavoring

to prove, by a sophistical argument, that there was no

motion, Diogenes, the cynic, who had come into his school to

hear him, quickly started up and walked: which was an ocular

demonstration of motion, and sufficient to refute all his

sophisms adduced to the contrary.

[49] See Gurdon’s Sixth Sermon at Boyle’s Lecture.

[50] Plato in Epinom.

[51] Aristot. Physic. lib. vii, c. 5.

[52] Dr A. Clarke on Eph. v, 15.

* * * * *