disputants. Hence we conclude this
prodigality of misstatement, this exuberance of mendacity, is an
effervescence of zeal _in majorem gloriam Dei_. Elsewhere he tells us
that "the idea of the author of the 'Vestiges' is, that man is the
development of a monkey, that the monkey is the embryo man, so that _if
you keep a baboon long enough_, _it will develop itself into a man_."
How well Dr. Cumming has qualified himself to judge of the ideas in "that
very unphilosophical book," as he pronounces it, may be inferred from the
fact that he implies the author of the "Vestiges" to have _originated_
the nebular hypothesis.

In the volume from which the last extract is taken, even the hardihood of
assertion is surpassed by the suicidal character of the argument. It is
called "The Church before the Flood," and is devoted chiefly to the
adjustment of the question between the Bible and Geology. Keeping within
the limits we have prescribed to ourselves, we do not enter into the
matter of this discussion; we merely pause a little over the volume in
order to point out Dr. Cumming's mode of treating the question. He first
tells us that "the Bible has not a single scientific error in it;" that
"_its slightest intimations of scientific principles or natural phenomena
have in every instance been demonstrated to be exactly and strictly
true_," and he asks:

"How is it that Moses, with no greater education than the Hindoo or
the ancient philosopher, has written his book, touching science at a
thousand points, so accurately that scientific research has
discovered no flaws in it; and yet in those investigations which have
taken place in more recent centuries, it has not been shown that he
has committed one single error, or made one solitary assertion which
can be proved by the maturest science, or by the most eagle-eyed
philosopher, to be incorrect, scientifically or historically?"

According to this the relation of the Bible to science should be one of
the strong points of apologists for revelation: the scientific accuracy
of Moses should stand at the head of their evidences; and they might urge
with some cogency, that since Aristotle, who devoted himself to science,
and lived many ages after Moses, does little else than err ingeniously,
this fact, that the Jewish Lawgiver, though touching science at a
thousand points, has written nothing that has not been "demonstrated to
be exactly and strictly true,"