ch God has endowed man for that end.

But the author believes that the Mosaic account is practically correct,
or perhaps we should say harmonious with the truth. It may be truthful
without being all the truth, or truthful and still be very defective. He
considers that when scientific knowledge is complete, the Scripture,
rightly interpreted, will be found in harmony with its final
conclusions. How Moses was made acquainted with the events of creation
is a matter upon which it is impossible to be positive. The author sees
no objection to the suggestion that he may have witnessed a series of
pictures or visions, the result of which upon his mind is given in the
hymn of creation. This explanation of the Biblical narrative forms but a
small part of the work, which is chiefly given to a discussion of the
views and positive discoveries of scientific men which relate to the
production of the world. It is a remarkable tribute to the overmastering
power of positive knowledge. Science and theology are mingled in an
extraordinary way, but a way that is now necessary, for there is not one
province of human thought that has not been compelled to acknowledge the
great possibilities of inductive reasoning. Dr. Cocker labors to
establish the old faith on the new ground. He is a man of great reading
and has a strong belief in the religion to which he has given his heart.
Every question is approached in the firm faith that when rightly
interpreted it will be found to sustain the Christian religion. This is
the fundamental fault of the work. It is a plea for a cause that does
not need it, for a cause that is quite as apt to lose as to gain by the
defence. The difficulty with this method of meeting the hypothesis of
science is that the scientific views are themselves in a state of
unstable equilibrium. They may topple at any moment, and then the
correspondence that eager devotees have found between them and the Bible
is a slur that falls altogether on the religion and not on the science.
This is a great error, and those who are drawn into it belittle the
cause that is dear to them. While our author is catholic in his reading,
he does not seem to assign to all writers in his field their just value.
His quotations, the fresh, the obsolete, the trustworthy, and the
doubtful, are mingled in a confusion that only the experienced can
penetrate. His book is creditable to his unshaken faith, and it
presents the religious aspect of modern knowledge