Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

FOR THE PORT FOLIO.

SUGGESTIONS ON THE MOSAIC ACCOUNT OF THE DELUGE.

MANY cavils have been made to the Mosaic account of the deluge. It is a fair and manly mode of considering the question, to avoid pompous declamation, and to come down to particular facts with that decorum and gravity the importance of the subject demands. To answer specifically an objection not specifically stated, is beyond the power of man. Hence we may remark, that both the advocates and the opposers of this system have too often dealt in general abuse; railing has been answered by railing, until the original question has been abandoned and forgotten. Some have endeavoured to show that the ark, whose length was three hundred cubits, breadth fifty, and height thirty, could not possibly admit of dimensions large enough to contain seven of all the varieties of animals then denominated clean, and two of all the animals denominated unclean. Before this conclusion is so hastily caught at, it may not be amiss if we intreat those gentlemen to pause and produce the authentic documents by which they are able to inform us of the precise length of the ancient cubit. Unless they do this, they prove nothing. Some writers have fixed the ancient Hebrew cubit at the rate of twenty inches and a half, and others at eighteen. Here is uncertainty, then, in the very threshold. But allowing this Hebrew measure to have been either way, there is no sort of evidence that the standard of Noah has been preserved in either case. In the first stage of the world, before population became crowded, it is perfectly fair to presume that the standard of admeasurement was larger than it became afterwards. Where the whole earth was open to the hand of cultivation, and population proportionably thin, we may well believe every thing to have been transacted on a large scale. There could have been no possible motive for dealing in the minute. The inhabitants then had no, or, if any, but very faint conceptions of national differences, and must have considered themselves as the progenitors of nations afterwards to be established. When this time did arrive, and the productions of the earth, as well as the earth itself, acquired a facti

tious value by population and commerce, it is a legitimate presumption that they shortened the standard of admeasurement, or, in other words, the cubit, and still retained the ancient name.

We know that we differ from many able commentators, who believe that population before the flood, was more numerous than after. This conjecture they found on the longevity of the antediluvians. This of itself is an equivocal proof of the fact, and furnishes no safe foundation for conjecture. It does not appear at what period of life procreation ceased; but it is against all analogy to infer that this power was co-extensive with the existence of the patriarchs. So far as negative example can afford any light, it is in direct confirmation of our hypothesis. Lamech, the first polygamist mentioned before the deluge, had only four children by both wives. As there is no other instance of this kind before the flood, (a vice that was so common afterwards,) we may well presume that our animal appetites, subsequent to that period, were increased. Noah, at the age of five hundred years, had only three children, and, during the remnant of his life his wife was barren. There is, it is true, a catalogue of antediluvians mentioned who begat sons and daughters; but there is nothing further than this stated, and the great age to which their lives were extended is not enough to warrant the belief that population was redundant. And further, it is expressly stated, that "men then began to multiply upon the face of the earth." The example of Noah and his family, likewise, consisting only of eight persons, is another argument in our favour. If the earth was, then, the receptacle of so many miilions of the human race, as it is now, is it credible that Noah and his family should be the only righteous persons then living? The instance of Lot is not a precedent in point: that was a particular city, where we may suppose a society influenced by the conta gion of bad example. The same argument may, with strict propriety, be turned in favour of this hypothesis, namely, that the earth was corrupt, because the contagion of bad example could extend to the utmost limits of population, and amongst those but one man and his family were found righteous. Such seems a satisfactory solution of a thing otherwise difficult of comprehension.

However, whether these principles are correct or not, they. do not interfere with the argument that the standard of admeasurement underwent an alteration.

The Hebrew language was not copious; it was then in its infancy; and may it not well be conceived, that in case this shorter standard was then resolved on, they would rather use the ancient word so understood, than to adopt a new term? We know that even in our day nothing is more uncertain than such standards, and yet we use the same words, though susceptible of so many modifications. The difference between a yard, a mile, a foot, not to mention the different coins, is, among different nations of the earth, now so various, as to become an object of particular study. And, probably, those very gentlemen who have all this to learn, can, without any sort of hesitation, fix the precise length of Noah's cubit. Considering, then, the different state of society between that time and ours, would it not be something little short of a miracle, if a standard was then determined on that should have been followed so implicitly as a precedent by future ages, when all other standards have been found so equivocal and inconstant?

But we have not yet done with this subject. Another important question remains. After these gentlemen, in defiance of such obstacles, have told us the precise length and breadth of Noah's ark, they have then to prove, that all the different varieties of animals then inhabiting the earth, were as numerous as they at present are.

We know this, that the desire of procreation is the strongest appetite amongst all living animals, raging in unequal degrees throughout all the various classes. We further know, (for this physical fact is capable of complete demonstration,) that where this cannot be enjoyed among animals of the same species, it is so strong as to suspend the natural antipathy which they bear to those of another. This boundary in the natural classification of animals, is only preserved where there is, among their own kinds, objects sufficient for indulgence. We further know, that among animals there are likewise unequal degrees of abhorrence; that one species will herd together with another, without any contest whatever. Now, we have to reflect, that among the ani

mals preserved in the ark, there was a great disparity of species. Of beasts that were clean, (or those that part the hoof and are cloven-footed, and chew the cud,) there were seven males and seven females. Of those that were unclean, (or those whose description did not comport with the foregoing,) there were only two of the same species, male and female. It is obvious that this exception comprehends nearly all the wild and ferocious animals, equally the terror of man and beast, and which, among their own species, could not find sufficient for intercourse. The inference to be drawn is, that, in many instances, the distinction of species must have been broken down.

The same remark applies, and with equal force, to the birds, which we do not think necessary to illustrate more largely. Hence we presume has arisen that complexity and difficulty in the classification of animals, so much complained of by physiologists. Indeed the marks of affinity that we discover between the different species of fowl and beast, all favour this construction, and so far from opposing, are so many arguments in support of the Mosaic account of the deluge.

It is probable also, that this intermixture was designed by Divine Providence to answer wise and benevolent purposes. How few, if any, of all the bcasts now possess the exterminating ferocity of the tiger, or the indefensible imbecility of the lamb! These we believe to comprehend the two extremes of injury and impotence. By the intercourse above alluded to, we may suppose the varying qualities of the different species to have been interchanged and imparted. We may suppose that the offspring was rendered more capable of self-defence, and with a less propensity to do an injury, thus combining and attempering the opposite qualities of the parents. The harmony of the brute creation might thus have been preserved, and additional security bestowed upon man. On any other principle than the desire of procreation, it would be difficult to explain how the different animals were preserved in their emancipation from the ark, and how the weak avoided the persecution of the strong. As they were preserved for that purpose, there is no impropriety in the suggestion that this appetite was rather inflamed than abated. On this hypothesis, then, we shall find that the

security which man at present derives in the society of animals, so far his superiors in strength and agility, may be traced to this very dispensation of his Maker.

Wherever the Deity graciously permits mortal intelligence to explain his designs, we discover traces of infinite wisdom. This is sufficient to warrant us in the belief, that those parts still hidden by an impenetrable veil, are founded in the depths of certain although inscrutable wisdom and mercy.

H. P.

CORRESPONDENCE.-FOR THE PORT FOLIO.

You will undoubtedly smile, Mr. Editor, when you are in formed that your correspondent is communing with you on a subject of which he is totally ignorant. I attended, sir, the exhibition in the academy of fine arts, and was pleased and delighted with the charming varieties of light and shadow which the pencil presented. I was led from thence to reflect on the delicacy and importance of an art that could arrest a thing so subtle and transitory as a sunbeam, and make it shine and sparkle for ages yet to come. I was delighted to think that forms of matter, possessing such tenuity as rays of light, of a nature so subtle that they form the boundary lines between substance and space, were capable of being so disposed as to have all the permanence of a marble statue. We are taught, not only by inspiration but by the evidence of our own senses and perceptions, that the life of man is as fugitive and as precarious as a shadow, Yet we have lived to see the day when this shadow outlives the man, and we behold his face written in sunbeams when his body is mouldering in the dust. We become acquainted with forms of exist ence we have never seen, and have conceptions as vivid and distinct as those who have enjoyed their society and converse. I was therefore induced to look upon painting as the link that connected the living and the dead. I considered that the body literally vanished into a shade, and that this shade possessed a longevity far beyond the body. I was again led to reflect, that

« AnteriorContinuar »