matter stand as regards the work of the fourth day, the creation of the stars, or to speak more correctly, the establishment of the present relation between the earth and the sun and the other stars? Those palæontological periods cannot have been without sunlight, or without an atmosphere,-the last is said to have been created only on the second day. The petrified animals had eyes, and in many of the petrified trees we even find the rings, which evidently show that light and even the seasons must have existed, so that probably the alternation of day and night took place.

Geologists conclude from the nature of the primæval plants and animals that in those days the atmospheric, climatic, and other natural conditions of the earth were different from what they are at present; the greater number think that the temperature then was higher, and was more equal over all the earth. But it is impossible to say with certainty what were the conditions of the earth in this respect, still less therefore can we ascertain how they were brought about. Genesis does not exclude the possibility of the existence of light and an atmosphere in that primæval period; for there is nothing to prevent our concluding from the narrative that it was light before the thohu wabohu, that on the first day it became light again at God's command, that from thenceforth the alternation of day and night as it at present exists was established, and that the present atmosphere of the earth was formed on the second day. We need not decide whether in the primeval age light which illumined the earth was connected with the sun, we have already seen that we can imagine light even separated from the sun,-or whether, as some

the

believe, the earth was surrounded by a photosphere. Genesis does not contradict the first idea; for, as I have already said, neither the formation of the stars nor the first connection of light with them need be assumed to be the work of the third day, but only their establishment in their present function of giving light upon the earth. The present illumination of the earth by the stars has only existed since the third day; it was not yet the case in the first three days, either because the stars did not yet possess the power of shining, or-and according to this theory this would be the correct view-because the earth with its atmosphere was not susceptible to light on those days, it was only on the fourth day that the formation of the earth and its atmosphere had proceeded so far that thenceforth the light of the sun and the other stars could operate as it still does upon it. Before the thohu wabohu the earth may no doubt have existed in a condition which was analogous to the present one, although not exactly like it; Moses does not say so, because his narrative does not touch upon that period, and precisely for that reason his words do not exclude the idea.

You will not misunderstand the uncertainty with which I speak with reference to many details, and my speaking only of possibilities. As regards the Bible I say quite certainly and clearly, that as these things do not belong to its special province it either does not speak of them at all, or it makes use of such vague and general expressions, that although we can ascertain with complete certainty from its narrative every statement of religious importance, to questions of scientific

importance we receive no answer. By this means it leaves a wide field for scientific investigation; and if we can say so little with any certainty about the earliest periods of our planet, and if what we do say is full of hypotheses, that is not the fault of the Bible, which is not called upon to give us information on this subject, but is caused solely by the fact that natural science, to which the Bible entirely abandons the task of searching out these things, has not yet attained, and from the nature of the subject cannot well attain to any certain results.

It is therefore no doubt perfectly allowable, exegetically, to transfer the paleontological periods to the time before the work of the six days. But although I admit that on this the main point I agree with those who support this theory, I must at the same time express myself just as decidedly against several other notions, which have by some been connected with this so-called theory of restitution.

You will remember that by many the destruction of the earlier condition, which brought about the formlessness and desolation described in the second verse, has been connected with the fall of the angels, and that it has been supposed in consequence of this that the fallen angels were before their fall inhabitants of the earth. I have already mentioned my reasons for objecting to this hypothesis in general, but there are other and graver objections to the way in which it is connected with paleontology. this subject I quote Westermayer, who bases his remarks on the arguments of Kurtz, Delitzsch,

On

and

others.1 He says: The organisms which are found petrified in our rocks probably did not exist on the earth when the latter was the dwelling-place of the angels who afterwards fell. For "the animal and vegetable world could not have been a fitting adornment for a place inhabited by angels, and the monstrous, horrible sanguinary and ugly shapes which come to light in the fossil remains of the primeval animals could not possibly have delighted angelic eyes, for even we men can only look at such specimens with a certain horror mingled with astonishment.' The creation and destruction of the primeval animals would therefore have taken place not before the destruction of the original form of the earth, which is designated as the thohu wabohu in the second verse of Genesis, but during the time which comprised the thohu wabohu. God wished to restore the world which had been destroyed in consequence of the fall of the angels. Genesis announces the beginning of this creative activity of God in the words: "The Spirit of God moved (or brooded) upon the face of the water." But when "by the fructifying brooding of the Divine Spirit on the waters of the deep, creative forces began to stir, the devils who inhabited the primæval darkness, and considered it their own abode, saw that they were to be driven from their possessions, or at least that their place of habitation was to be contracted, and they therefore tried to frustrate God's plan of creation, and exerted all that remained to them

1 Kurtz, Bibel und Astronomie, p. 539. Delitzsch, Genesis, p. 137. Drechsler, see Delitzsch, p. 539. Keerl, Schöpfungsgesch. p. 537. Cf. Zöckler, Gesch. der Beziehungen, ii. p. 516.

of might and power to hinder or at least to mar the new creation." With the permission of the Creator, therefore, "when the Spirit of God began to act creatively on the waters, demoniacal powers interfered with the brooding of the Divine Spirit, not indeed themselves creating, but in such a manner as in some way unknown to us to tamper with the fruitful waters, and to introduce monstrous shapes, unnatural intermixtures, mutual destruction, disease, and death, among the races of animals created by God." In this way arose "the horrible and destructive monsters, these caricatures and distortions of creation." The divine creation was therefore also "a struggle with the powers of wickedness." "Whole generations called into existence by God succumbed to the corruption of these powers, and for that reason had to be destroyed." They were buried in the strata, and "in the work of the six days God caused the devil to feel His power in all earnest, and made his enterprise appear miserable and vain."

I must admit that I cannot well imagine how demoniacal powers could "interfere" with the divine creation, could "spoil and mar the divine efforts of creation," etc. But supposing it to mean that because of the devil God's creations did not succeed according to His idea, or that the devils had corrupted the races of animals created by God, it must be obvious that this view is more in accordance with the dualistic doctrine of a good and a bad god who are equal and opposed to one another, than with the position which the devil occupies in the Christian religion. No doubt dualism is expressly excluded, in that creative power is denied to the devil, and his interference in the creation