Science and the Scriptures
From Sir Wm. Dawson in “China’s Millions”
■ N COMPARING th e findings of science w ith the Biblical record, Sir W illiam Dawson, being a good Hebrew and In th e course of a conversation, he urged th a t any one who aims to in te rp re t th e first chapter of Genesis should know something of what is th ere described, and the exact meaning in the original of th e words used. “ If,” he said, “men of science were also Bible students, and theologians had more knowledge of science, th e re would be less discussion and more agreement. It is a rem arkable fact th a t th e men God chose to w rite th e Scriptures evi dently knew a great deal more about natu re, loved n atu re more, and looked upon it more as the work of God th a n most modern religious w riters do.” “ Is th e re any real discrepancy be tween science and the book of Genesis?” Sir W illiam was asked. “ In my judgm ent, none. I main tain, th at, so far as an inspired record can be compared w ith what is a t best a record we work out for ourselves, the correspondence between th e two is m ar velous. To my m ind th e first chapter of Genesis, in th e way in which it has anticipated discovery and still holds th e ground as something th a t cannot fairly be cavilled at, is itself a rem arkable proof of the inspiration of th e Bible. Those who attack Genesis either do not understand it or w ilfully m isrepresent it.” “W hat is your belief as to th e origin of m an?” he was asked. “ I know nothing about the origin of man except what I am told in the
Scripture— th a t God created him. I do not know anything more th a n th a t, and I do not know anybody who does: I would say w ith Lord Kelvin th a t th e re is noth ing in science th a t teaches th e ORIGIN of anything a t all. That man is a product, a divine creation, is all th a t I can say. So w ith th e first animal, it must have been a product of absolute creation. W ith man some thing new is introduced into th e world — a ration al and moral natu re, of which th e re is no trace in th e animal king dom. T hat is why in th e first chapter of Genesis man is said to have been ‘cre a te d ;’ an inferior term , ‘made,’ be ing usually employed in the case of anim als.” When Sir W illiam was asked if he would kindly define his a ttitu d e to the theory of evolution,-/-he replied th a t so many things pass under th a t name th a t an answer was difficult. ■ “You m ight,” he said, “ as well ask me whether I believe in theology. There is a ration al evolution, a purely hypo th etical evolution, and an irra tio n a l evolution, and they are all fighting among themselves. I believe in the evolution of a leaf from a bud, of a chicken from an egg, bu t I do not be lieve in th e evolution of anything from nothing, or of anything from something in which it was not potentially before. W hat has been evolved and w hat has been created science cannot a t present determ ine. It is a purely hypothetical question.” Sir W illiam was asked w hether his scientific investigations had affected his religious faith , either streng then ing or weakening it. “ I should not say,” he replied, “ th a t they have either strengthened or weak-
Greek Scholar, had an immense ad vantage over the m ajority of scientists.
WORK IN CHINA. (See Page 481 )
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker