Chapter VII: Sixth Day (2)

_The Pterodactyle._ This is a species of the saurian family
as those above. Its distinctive character is the _elongation of
its fourth toe_, so as to support a membrane for the purpose
of _flying_: hence its name, _wing-toed_. It is indeed a
curiosity. Its species is extinct.

_The Ichthyosaurus._ This is also a reptile of the lizard
kind: but because it so much resembles a _fish_; it has this
name, i.e. _fish-lizard_. It has a moderate tail--long pointed
muzzel armed with sharp pointed teeth; two huge eyes; breathed
air; swam in the water; crawled in marshy, reedy places, but
could not walk or run on land, having flat fins, or bony
paddles, somewhat like seals. The skeletons indicate some of
them to have been 25 feet long.

_The Plesiosaurus._ This animal, as its name imports,
was rather akin to lizards, than decidedly of the genus. Its
very peculiar characteristic is the immoderate length of its
neck, and the unexampled number of _vertebræ_ of which it is
composed. In other respects it approaches the ichthyosaurus.
Its remains indicate an animal, according to Cuvier, at least
30 feet long.

_The Iguanodon_, was of the lizard genus, three or four
times as large as the largest crocodile; having jaws equal in
size to the incisors of the rhinoceros, and crested with horns.
(DR. BUCKLAND.)

Many more creatures of the early periods of our earth might
be mentioned, which would come expressly under the title of
this volume; and the knowledge of which is durably preserved
in the fossils of the earth, all of which would confirm the
facts stated in the commencement of this paper, viz: that
during the first and grossest periods of our earth previously
to the creation of man, great numbers of genera and species
of huge and misshapen animals existed, which are now extinct.
For instance: the skeletons of animals of the _frog and
toad_ families, have been found so large, as to induce some
naturalists at first to call them _human remains_. A tapir has
been found the _size of an elephant_; and a species of the
_sloth tribe_ as long as a _rhinoceros_!!

These things will indeed appear incredible to the reader
at first; but let him recollect that the evidences of these
astonishing facts are contained in the solid crust of the
earth, and cannot be deceptive. They may be _seen, measured,
weighed, and put up so as to form the whole animal_, an object
of inspection to thousands.

There are but few fossil remains of _birds_ found in the
earth, and these are principally in the upper tertiary strata,
and in company with the fossil remains of such animals as are
companionable and serviceable to man. The reason of this is
obvious: the earth was not suitable for the habitation of birds
until it had become comparatively dry, and the seas had retired
in a great measure, and vegetation abundant. The aquatic genera
appeared first, of which there are a few remains. Moreover this
class of creatures could not be overtaken with any violent
catastrophe, so as to bury them in a body, or in particular
strata. It is, therefore, probable that birds, as a class, have
preserved their genera and species from the first; and are now
nearly the same in this respect, as well as in size, as in the
earlier periods of the world.

_Vegetables._--In the vegetable kingdom we are if possible,
more astonished than in the animal, of the ancient periods
of our earth. From their fossil remains, well and abundantly
preserved, it is very evident that the vegetation of the first
periods of our earth was abundant and heavy, beyond any thing
which we can conceive at this time. It cannot be doubted but
that the vegetative powers of the earth was very much greater
than at this time, or within the memory of man. This is evident
from the immense production of _vegetable coal_.

This statement may be rendered somewhat more credible when
it is recollected, that the earth, in its first periods, was
of a much higher temperature than now; and of course not only
produced more abundantly, but _all parts_ of the earth produced
vegetation in abundance. This is evident from the fact, that
within the arctic circle, where now reigns eternal winter, and
no vegetation can be found, there was anciently successive
products of heavy vegetation. (See appendix to our paper on
volcanos.) This is proven by plants being found fossilized
_on the spot, and in the position in which they grew; as
also the leaves and fruits of plants, which are known now to
be tropical, so well preserved, and in such a natural, easy
position as to prove clearly they grew on the spot on which
they were fossilized_.

The _flora_ of the primordial world was expressly a part
of the ‘Mosaic creation,’ and which is but little understood
as yet. Some of the principal plants were of the _fern_ and
_palm_ genera; but their size very far exceeded those now found
growing. By closely examining these fossil plants, it will be
found, _that they increase in size and quantity as the period
of their growth is distant from the time in which man was
created_: thus indicating _an increasing temperature of the
earth as we ascend in time_. This also corresponds with the
well known fact, _that the size of these plants now increases
progressively from the polar regions to the equator_.

Our author has given a concise and edifying description of
the principal families and individuals which now exist, and are
found in the earth. The above remarks are intended to direct
the attention to those _which have long since passed away_.]

The propriety of the distinction between clean and unclean beasts, mentioned in the Scripture, will appear on the first hearing of their names; for we find amongst the clean creatures, Oxen, Sheep, Goats, and Lambs: and on the other side, Lions, Tigers, Wolves, Foxes, Swine, Moles, and Serpents. It is evident that there is a wide difference between these two parties, with respect to their manners and ways of life.

Those only are admitted among clean animals, which “divide the hoof and chew the cud.” Animals which divide the hoof are more inoffensive with their feet, than the several tribes of wild beasts, whose paws are armed with sharp claws, to seize their prey. Quadrupeds with a divided hoof tread surer than those whose hoof is entire; there being a plain mechanical reason why a foot, which presents several angles and edges, should take faster hold on the ground. They are not only surer footed, but also more orderly and regular in their progress. Sheep have a natural tendency to follow each other’s steps. They approach the fold, or return from it, in a train; as well as traverse their pastures in the like order. Oxen tread in the very footsteps of their predecessors: so that a drove of them, on passing through a deep and narrow road, leave the surface divided into a regular succession of ridges and furrows, as if it were the work of art. If animals could reason and dispute as men can, this plodding practice of the Ox might possibly be ridiculed by the Ass; as the orthodox believer, who is content to tread in the steps of his forefathers, is scoffed at by the rambling freethinker, who uses it as the privilege of his nature, to deviate into by-ways, untrodden by those who were much wiser than himself. _Sure footing_ is an image not improperly applied to elementary truth and science: whence it will not be unnatural to suppose, that this first character of the clean animals was intended to be expressive of rectitude and certainty of principle in moral agents. Error is various and changeable in its nature: but truth, being uniformly the same in all ages, will always be productive of sobriety and regularity in those who follow it.

The other character of clean animals is that of “chewing the cud;” a faculty expressive of that act of the mind, by which it revolves, meditates, and discourses on what it has laid up in the memory; and the word _ruminate_ has the same metaphorical meaning. An animal thus employed has the appearance of abstraction in its countenance, as if it were engaged in deep meditation; and it ruminates more particularly when lying in an horizontal position, for then the food is more easily recalled into the mouth from its temporary lodgment in the stomach. This character then, is expressive of devout thought and holy conversation: for the word of God is the food of the mind, which, being laid up in the heart, should be frequently revolved; so that being properly applied to the inward man, it may contribute to a daily increase in faith, purity, and goodness.

The clean animals were also _sacred_; that is, set apart by the law for the purpose of sacrifice. The propriety of which is evident: for if the worshipper, who offered an animal to God, meant by that act to devote himself, using the animal as his substitute or proxy; then certainly it was not fit that he should represent himself by an unclean creature, whose instincts and habits would convey an odious idea of his own person and character, and consequently make his devotion appear ridiculous. In order to make a sacrifice acceptable, it was requisite that the qualifications of the offerer should correspond with those of the offering. The innocent manners of a clean victim, were a tacit reflection on an unclean offerer. When the worshippers of the true God were corrupt in their principles or morals, their oblations were no longer either proper or acceptable: which was signified to them in those words of the prophet--“He that killeth an ox, as if he slew a man: he that sacrificeth a lamb, as if he cut off a dog’s neck: he that offereth an oblation, as if he offered swine’s blood.” The reason is added: “They have chosen their own ways, and their soul delighteth in their abominations.” But there is another sense in which the institution of sacrifice is to be understood: for every sacrifice had its prophetic use, and was prefigurative of the true sacrifice of Jesus Christ; with respect to whom it was necessary that every animal, preferred to this sacred application, should be recommended by every possible character of innocence, purity, and perfection: therefore the sacrifices were taken from the tribes of Sheep, Goats, and Oxen.

The diet of the Jews being thus immediately connected with the most solemn acts of religious adoration, the daily course of their living carried with it an exhortation to purity of mind and body, and directed their faith to its supreme object, the vicarious sacrifice of the Messiah. The moral necessities of man can only be supplied by the death and benefits of a propitiatory sacrifice, the common substitute of all mankind: whence God has mercifully ordained, as well by the present condition of creation itself, as by the appointment of revelation, that the life of his body should be sustained in like manner: thereby to remind us every day, that the life of man is in a state of forfeiture; and that there can be neither the preservation, nor the remission of sins, without the shedding of innocent blood. Thus does mankind conspire in offering up a daily sacrifice, and attesting the truth of the Christian doctrine, and many persons with the same insensibility that Caiaphas uttered a similar prophecy in its favor, “It is necessary that one man should die, that the whole people perish not.”

These clean and unclean animals, with respect to their several ways of life, are as opposite as their dispositions. Sheep, Oxen, Goats, Deer, &c, are formed into societies, they herd peaceably together, and are subject to the laws of government, as well for their own advantage as for the service of man. But beasts of prey roam by themselves in forests and deserts, incapable of entering into any friendly communion. They are so many single tyrants, who acknowledge no superior, but fight their way, and live in a state of hostility with the whole creation. If they ever unite in gangs, it is with the spirit of thieves and murderers, who are banded together only that they may plunder the innocent with greater security. And, like other depredators, they are all fond of darkness. When the sun goes down, the Lion stalks forth from his den: at which time the Sheep, under the direction of the shepherd, are retiring to their fold. And when the cattle are climbing up the mountains to their pasture, invited by the reviving rays of the rising sun, the tyrants of the night are warned back to their hiding-places.[173]

The blindness of the Mole, the petulance and immodesty of the Dog, the subtlety of the Fox, the poisonous teeth and double tongue of the Serpent, afford ample scope for reflection. The Egyptian hieroglyphics were certain visible representations of creatures, whose inclinations and actions led to the knowledge of those truths which they intended for instruction. A profane and voluptuous man was represented by a Swine, whose filthy disposition caused it to be hated by all the eastern people. A great hypocrite, or a notorious dissembler of wicked intentions, was expressed by a Leopard, because this animal acts craftily, concealing his head that he may with less difficulty catch his unwary prey; for the creatures are as much alarmed at his presence, as they are pleased with the agreeable scent of his body: when therefore they approach him, delighted with the perfume, he will cover his head with his paws, till they come within his reach. An incorrigible person was also expressed by a Leopard’s skin, because its spots no art can remove. A Chamelion likewise was the hieroglyphic of a hypocrite, who can accommodate himself to any religion that will serve his turn; for this animal can change its color. A stupid, ignorant person, an enemy to religion, was signified by an Ass; and one that was not acquainted with men and things, or knew not how to acquit himself with decency and propriety in the world, was painted with the head and ears of an Ass. The Egyptians were accustomed to put the heads of animals on the bodies of men, to express the dispositions and conduct of those persons they were intended to represent. A Tiger, being a most fierce animal, signified a savage, cruel, revengeful disposition, opposed to all goodness. A Fox is notorious for his craftiness; therefore he is an emblem of a subtile person, under the influence of wicked thoughts and intentions.[174]

Rams, and Bullocks of Bashan, Lions, or any animal of prey, are figures frequently used by the sacred writers for cruel and oppressive tyrants and conquerors. “Hear this word, ye kine of Bashan, which oppress the poor.” Bashan was a very fruitful place, a fine and fattening pasture, in which were the best fed and strongest cattle. To these, the prophet compares the great men among the Israelites, especially their judges and magistrates, who were proud, insolent, wanton and mischievous, like the bulls of Bashan; who oppressed the poor, as high fed cattle push and gore the weaker sort. “The Lion is come up from his thicket, and the destroyer of the Gentiles is on his way; he is gone forth from his place to make thy land desolate: and thy cities shall be laid waste without an inhabitant.” By this animal is meant Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, so termed on account of his great power and fierceness; and as the Lion is commonly in the forest among the thicket, so this terrible political ruler had his strong hold and principal seat at Babylon, which residence he left to commit awful desolation among the cities of Judah and Israel.

The prophet Isaiah, with a boldness and majesty becoming the herald of the Most High, begins his prophecy with calling on the whole creation to attend, when Jehovah speaks. “Hear, oh heavens; and give ear, oh earth; for the Lord hath spoken; I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against me.” A charge of gross insensibility and ingratitude is then brought against the Jews; by contrasting their conduct with that of the Ox, and the Ass, which is the most stupid of animals. “The Ox knoweth his owner, and the Ass his master’s crib: but Israel doth not know, my people do not consider.” What a cutting reproof! what an indelible reproach! to have been favored with the best means of instruction, and yet to be exceeded by the herd of the stall! To perish for lack of knowledge, after having had the best means to acquire it, evinces the grossest inattention, and most censurable insensibility.

The prophet Jeremiah lamented the wickedness of the age in which he lived, and the vice and immorality that every where abounded. He saw with grief of heart the holy Sabbath profaned, the worship of God neglected, and his house and ordinances defiled. While a sorrowful witness to their gross abominations, he saw the punishments that awaited their immorality, and then wept over what he could not amend. He gave them faithful admonitions from God, but they disregarded them, and drank in iniquity like water, and drew sin as with a cart-rope: because they had been _taught_ to do evil (for so the margin reads,) trained up in their evil ways, had learned to sin by precept and example, and were great proficients in vicious pursuits: from their youth their natural propensity to evil had increased by continued practice, till sinning was become habitual, and there was little hope left of amendment. Therefore he exclaims, “Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the Leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil.” The Ethiopian’s skin is of so sable a hue, that no water can wash it white. A Leopard’s skin is beautifully spotted, which is not the result of accident, but nature, and cannot be defaced. By these two similes the prophet designs to represent, not only the natural impossibility without Divine aid, but also the extreme difficulty of habitual sinners learning to do well, after they have long accustomed themselves to do evil. The least sin is to be avoided, the least growth of sin to be prevented; for sin indulged in thought will beget desire, desire will break out into action, action will grow into custom, custom will settle into habit, and then, there is the utmost danger of both body and soul being irrecoverably lost.

When our Saviour sent forth his apostles to preach the Gospel, he informed them of the hardships, dangers, and discouragements they would have to encounter, in the faithful discharge of their ministry; especially after his resurrection, when they would be deprived of his personal presence; for we do not read of any great persecutions they endured while he was with them. These sufferings he foretold, that they might not be surprised at their approach; and that, by the accomplishment of this prediction, their faith might be confirmed. “Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of Wolves.” Here we have a prediction of their perilous condition; they were to be as Sheep in the midst of Wolves. And what situation more dangerous! What can sheep, that are feeble creatures, and destitute of natural armour to defend themselves, expect, in the midst of ravenous wolves, but to be rent and torn to pieces? So those, amongst whom the apostles were to be sent, would have as great an inclination, arising from their malicious dispositions, to destroy them, as wolves have from their nature to devour sheep. Wicked men are like wolves, whose nature it is to destroy and devour sheep; they are of a diabolical disposition towards the ministers of the Gospel.

Our Saviour also gave his apostles advice, how to conduct themselves in such very unpleasant and dangerous circumstances. “Be ye therefore wise as serpents,” not cunning as foxes, whose aim is to deceive others; but as serpents, whose policy is only to defend themselves, when they are in danger. A serpent’s wisdom appears in a care to guard and secure its head, that it may not be hurt; in stopping its ears against the voice of the charmer, which it does, says a certain naturalist, by laying one ear close to the ground, and stopping the other with its tail; and in sheltering itself in the clefts of a rock, when in danger. So should Christ’s ministers, in a time of peril, use all lawful means for their own safety and preservation; they should be wary and circumspect to keep themselves from harm, either of body or soul. “And harmless as doves.” Ministers should be meek, do no person any harm, bear no ill-will, be without gall, as is said of the dove; though their enemies should be fierce and savage, like wolves, yet they must not study how to revenge the injuries done them. It should be their continual care to be inoffensive, in word and deed: wisdom and innocence should dwell together. Ministers must not be altogether doves, lest they fall into danger; nor altogether serpents, lest they injure others; but they must be both serpents and doves, the one for wisdom, the other for innocence.

“That thou mayst injure no man, dove-like be,
And serpent-like, that none may injure thee!”

Our Saviour likewise cautions his followers against false teachers. “Beware of false prophets.” The term _prophet_ in the Scripture, signifies one who foretells things to come; this is the most proper signification of the word. It also means one who expounds the predictions of the Old Testament. And sometimes we are to understand by it, one employed in the ministry of the Gospel; in this sense a prophet and a teacher are reciprocal terms. So that by prophet here our Saviour means false teachers, who, pretending authority from God, exercised themselves in the ministry, and published false doctrine, or at least represented truth in a corrupt manner, with a fraudulent intention, from base motives, and for vile ends; by whose doctrine persons were in no small danger of being seduced from their simplicity, and drawn away from the truth, sincerity, and power of godliness; into a dead and lifeless formality, and an empty show of religion and piety. Now against such men, Christ, in the days of his public ministry, warned his hearers, to prevent their deception, apprising them that they would “come in sheep’s clothing.” They disguised their dangerous principles and base intentions, under a show of external religion, and fair professions of love, that, thereby they might deceive others. “But inwardly they are ravening Wolves.” They were as dangerous to the souls of men, as ravenous Wolves are to Sheep, which watch for an opportunity to seize their prey, silently approach the sheep-fold to see whether the dogs be asleep, or the shepherd be absent: so false teachers with wretched hypocrisy and sophistry, counterfeit sincerity, humility, and sanctity; and were it not for this semblance of piety, their efforts to injure the church of God would be ineffectual. He compares these false teachers to Wolves, especially on account of their cruelty. These animals are not content to satisfy their hunger, but will destroy multitudes merely to gratify their voracious nature. So false teachers strive to injure the whole church of God, and thus destroy souls.

Our Saviour exhorted his auditory to the exercise of Christian prudence, in the dispensing of spiritual things. “Give not that which is holy unto the Dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before Swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.” The deep things of God, relating to doctrines, are not to be divulged to those who are wallowing in sin; neither are the great things he has done in his people to be declared to profane, furious persecutors: but both classes of wicked men may be reproved on proper occasions. By Dogs, our Saviour means froward, perverse, malicious, revengeful, boisterous, incorrigible, and irreclaimable sinners, who scorn holy institutions, mock at every thing sacred, scoff at religion, deride the word of God, and all serious reproofs and admonitions, whether given by parents, masters, ministers, governors, and others; who are ready to persecute those who preach the Gospel, and endeavor to promote their salvation. By Swine, he means such sinners as are profane and sensual, and like Swine wallow in the mud of sin and wickedness; to whom it is as pleasant to live in their beastly lusts, as it is for Swine to wallow in the mire; and to disregard, abuse, and trample on holy things.

St. Peter, in showing what all men are in the sight of God, before they receive his grace, and what those are who turn apostates from the truth, alludes to two offensive actions of Dogs and Swine. “It has befallen to them according to the true proverb, the Dog is turned to his vomit, and the Sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.” Blackwall says, this proverb, with great propriety and strength, marks out the sottishness and odious manners of persons enslaved to sensual appetites and carnal lusts; and the extreme difficulty of reforming vicious and inveterate habits. As a Dog, observe Bishop Patrick, when he has vomited up his meat which made him sick, is no sooner well but he returns to it, and eats it up again, forgetting how ill it agreed with him; so an imprudent person commits the same error over again, for which he formerly smarted. The evil nature remaining, and at last gaining the ascendency, in a man, who had through grace reformed his life, renders him like the loathsome and detestable Sow, as Dr. Doddridge remarks; for the Sow that was washed from the filthiness she had before contracted, having still the same unclean nature prevailing, is returned to wallow in the mire, and so makes herself as filthy as she had ever been before. And, adds Dr. Whitby, these two proverbs are expressive of the folly of those men who return to those vices they had formerly renounced.

* * * * *

_Section_ II.--MAN.

BODY: -- Its Creator -- Formation -- Vitality -- Blood
-- Heart -- Arteries and Veins -- Digestion --Respiration --
Glands -- Absorbents -- Nervous System -- Organs of Sense --
Bones -- Sinovia --Muscles -- Tendons -- Cellular Membrane --
Skin. SOUL: -- Its Immateriality -- Freedom --Immortality --
Moral Image -- Adam’s Dominion over the Creatures -- Woman --
Paradise.

All things necessary, convenient, and delightful, being prepared for the accommodation of Man: light, that he might see; air, that he might hear and breathe; dry land, on which he might walk; herbs and fruit-trees, for his gratification and sustenance; fish, fowl, cattle, and creeping things, for his service: then God proceeded to make him, as the last and greatest display of his wisdom and power, the master-piece of all sublunary creatures, whose creation alone is represented in the sacred History, as an effect resulting from a divine consultation. “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” It appears from the ingenious Parable of Protagoras in Plato, it was a very ancient opinion that _man_ was last created after the other living creatures.

In all the former works, God only said, Let such and such things be, and they were; he spake the word, and it was done. But now, when Man was to be made, God is spoken of as calling a council, “Let _us_ make man, in _our_ image, after _our_ likeness.” This imports that Man was to be a creature different from all that had been produced, and far more excellent and wonderful in his constitution; a compound of flesh and spirit, heaven and earth, put together, the visible image of the Divine glory, and dedicated and devoted to his Creator’s service. Man was the work of ELOHIM, the Divine Plurality, marked here more distinctly by the plural pronouns US and OUR; all the Three Subsistencies in the Godhead are represented as united in counsel and effort to bring into existence this astonishing creature.

Aben Ezra, a Jewish Rabbi, imagined that the souls of all men were made on the first day of the creation, and that God consulted them to obtain their consent before he would assign them bodies of flesh, hereafter to be created. This is a groundless hypothesis, derived from the Platonic philosophy; for God says, “Let us make man in our image,” which shows that Adam’s soul had then no existence, for in that case, it doubtless would have been in the image of God.

Some other Jewish Doctors, as Manasseh ben Israel, ridiculously conceived that God spake to the elements. But this is more absurd than the former; for the expression, “Let us make man,” implies capacity of consultation in those spoken to, and real efficiency. But the elements are not intelligent beings, neither efficient, but only material parts of man.

Nor does God here speak to the angels, as the authority of the Paraphrase, which is called Jonathan’s, suggests. The words of the Paraphrase are these: “God said to the angels, which ministered before him, Let us make man.” It is a noted saying of the Jewish Rabbis, that God does nothing without consulting his family above: they mean, his holy angels. Several heretics, in the first and second centuries of Christianity, were of opinion, that this lower world was made by angels. This notion is likewise erroneous: God here speaks to those in whose image man was to be formed, but he was not made in the image of angels.

It is pretended by those who are enemies to the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity, that this is a figurative way of speaking, only to express the dignity of God, not to denote any plurality in him; that he here speaks in the plural number after the manner of princes, who say, We will and require, or, It is our pleasure. But this is only a far-fetched invention, to evade the doctrine of the Trinity, by persons in latter times, and no way agreeable to the first ages of the world, or the Hebrew style. Melchizedeck, Abimelech, Pharoah, and Balak, all speak in the singular number. The kings of Israel used the same style, as did Saul, David, and even Solomon in all his glory. And also the Eastern monarchs: “I (Darius) make a decree. I, even I, Artaxerxes the king, do make a decree.” Nor is there in the Scriptures one example to the contrary.

Beside, how absurd it is to suppose that God would borrow his mode of speaking from a practice which did not exist! And even granting this possible, yet the cases are not parallel. For though a King, or Governor, may say _us_ and _we_, there is certainly no figure of speech that will allow a single person to say, _one of us_, when he speaks of _himself_. It is a phrase that can have no meaning, unless there be more persons than one concerned. Yet in addition to US and OUR, this we find is the style in which God has spoken of himself.

There are some persons who maintain, in opposition to the clear light of revelation, that there is but one Subsistence in the Divine Nature. This was the opinion of the Sabellians, a denomination which arose in the third century; and, certain persons, in modern times, have embraced the same. These contend that God here speaks to himself, as consulting with himself, to create man, and that, though the words be plural, yet the sense is singular, as if he had said, Let _me_ make man.

One of the Persons, or Subsistencies in the Godhead, here speaks to the other Two, and who more likely than the Father, who is first in the order of arrangement, as given by the sacred Writers. The Father, not the Son, is the first; the Son, not the Holy Spirit, is the second; and the Holy Spirit, not the Father, is the third. Hence, the Father, when he said, “Let us make man,” addressed himself to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, who were therein joint and equal Creators with him. “None saith, Where is God my Maker?” in the Hebrew, _Makers_, is the language used in the Book of Job, implying a Plurality of Persons in a Unity of Essence: a phraseology like that of Solomon, “Remember thy Creator,” in the original, _Creators_. The prophet Isaiah adopts the same style, “Thy Maker is thine husband,” in the Hebrew, _thy Makers are thy Husbands_. Thus it evidently appears, that this consultation was among the Persons in the Godhead; that all the Three, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, were concerned in man’s creation; and were therein joint Creators, equal in nature, power, and efficiency.

Dr. Waterland says, that this text, _Let us make man_, has been understood of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, or at least of Father and Son, by the whole succession of Christian writers, from the times of the apostles; which is a circumstance of considerable importance, and will impress the minds of sincere and impartial men. That the Christian Fathers were unanimous in their judgment, that these words were spoken by the Father to the Son, or Spirit, or both, appears in their works, from which we shall adduce a few proofs.

_Barnabas_ says:--“And for this the Lord was contented to suffer for our souls, though he be the Lord of the world; to whom God said, the day before the formation of the world, Let us make man after our image and similitude.”[175]

_Hermas_:--“He was present in counsel with his Father for the forming of the creature.”[176]

_Theophilus_ of Antioch:--“He directed these words, _Let us make man_, to none other than his own Word and his own Wisdom.”[177]

_Irenæus_:--“His Word and Wisdom, his Son and Spirit, are always present with him, to whom also he spake, saying, _Let us make man_, &c.”[178] Again:--“Man was fashioned after the image and likeness of the uncreated God, the Father willing his creation, the Son ministering and forming him, the Holy Ghost nourishing and increasing him.”[179]

_Tertullian_:--“Nay, because his Son is ever present with him, the second person, his Word; and the third, the Spirit in the Word; therefore he spake in the plural, _Let us make man in our image_.”[180]

_Novatian_:--“Who does not acknowledge the Son to be the second person after the Father, when he reads that it was said to the Son by the Father, _Let us make man_.”[181]

_Origen_:--“To him also spake he (the Father,) _Let us make man after our image_.”[182]

_Athanasius_:--“Who is this that God converses with here? To whom are these notifications and determinations of his pleasure directed? Not to any of the creatures already made; much less to those things which were not yet created; but, undoubtedly to some person, who was then present with the Father, to whom he communicated his councils, and of whose agency he made use in the creation of them. And who could this be but his eternal Word? With whom can we conceive the Father holding his conference, but with his Son, the divine LOGOS, that Wisdom of God, that was present with him, and acted with him, in the creation of the world, who was in the beginning with God, and was God? and who saith of himself, _When he prepared the heavens, I was there; when he appointed the foundations of the earth, then was I by him, as one brought up with him_.”

_St. Augustine_:--“Had God said no more than, Let _us make man_, it might, with some color, be understood as spoken to the angels, whom the Jews pretend he employed in framing the body of man, and other creatures; but seeing it immediately follows, _after our image_, it is highly profane to believe, that man was made after the similitude of angels; and that the similitude of God and angels is one and the same.”

_St. Ambrose_ speaks to the same purpose:--“God would not speak thus to his servants, because it is not to be thought, that servants were partners with their Lord, in his works of creation; or the works with their Author. And, supposing this should be admitted, that the work was common to God and angels, yet the image was not common.”

Nay, the second Council of Sirmium, which was held in 351, pronounced an anathema on all those who denied this. The words of the Council are these:--“If any say, that the Father did not speak to the Son, when he said, _Let us make man_, but that he spake to himself, let him be accursed.”[183]

_Epiphanius_:--“This is the language of God to his Word, and Only-begotten, as all the faithful believe.”[184] And again he says, “Adam was formed by the hand of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost.”[185]

I observe more at large from _Irenæus_, that he rejects the notion of the Jews and Heretics, who supposed God spake to his angels. For disputing against Heretics, who attributed the creation of the world to angels, and powers separate from the one true God, he says thus:--“Angels did not make us, nor did they form us; neither was it in their power to make the image of God: none but the Logos could do this; no powers distinct from the Father of all things: for God did not want their assistance in making the things which he had ordained. For his Word and his Wisdom, the Son and the Holy Ghost, are always with him; by whom and with whom, he made all things freely, and of his own accord; to whom also he spake in these words, _Let us make man in our image and likeness_.”[186]

The testimony of Dr. Kennicott will be respected by those who are lovers of the truth. “God, says he, being about to create man, is introduced saying--_Let_ US _make man in_ OUR _image, after our likeness_; in consequence of which the historian tells us--_so God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him_. It is evident then, that God created man in his own image; this is mentioned thrice by way of emphasis, and to prevent, if possible, all possibility of misconstruction. Now what God did, was certainly what he proposed to do; God created man in his own image, that is, in the image of the Godhead, and therefore God proposed to create him in the image of the Godhead. But if God proposed to create him in the image of the Godhead, the proposal must have been made to the Godhead; because the words are--_Let us make man in_ OUR _image_. And if the proposal be here made by God to the Godhead, it is absurd to suppose it made to the same Person that makes it; and consequently reasonable to think it made to the other two persons in the Unity of the Godhead.”[187]

The creature now to be made is man.[188] _And God said, Let us make man._ It is evident that God, by introducing the creation of man with this peculiar phraseology, intends to impress the mind with a sense of something extraordinary in his formation. The word אדם _Adam_, which is translated _man_, is intended to designate the _species_ of animal, which is vastly superior to all the rest. Though the same kind of organization may be found in Man, as appears in the lower animals, yet, as one observes, there is a variety and complication in the parts, a delicacy of structure, a nice arrangement, a judicious adaptation of the various members to their great offices and different functions, a dignity of mien, and perfection of the whole, which are sought for in vain in all other creatures.

Man is a compound creature, consisting of two distinct essential parts, body and soul. The union of these constitutes man, for neither of them when separated can be so denominated. The body was made before the soul, and formed out of the earth, or, as עפר _âpher_ implies, the _dust_. “The Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground.” He afterwards pronounced, _Dust thou art_. This led Solomon to affirm, “All are of the dust.” The Apostle adds, “The first man was of the earth, dusty,” as Ainsworth renders it. And we are said to “dwell in houses of clay,” and to have our “foundation in the dust.” Of the soul it is said, “God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life:” רוח חיים _ruach chayim_, the breath of LIVES; i.e. animal, intellectual, and spiritual. While this breath of God expanded the lungs, and set them to play, his inspiration gave both spirit, understanding, and felicity. Thus we see that the soul and the body are not the same thing; the one is of the earth, the other is from God. The Rabbins say, “The form of the soul is not compounded of the elements, &c, but is of the Lord from heaven. Therefore when the material body, which is compounded of the elements, is separated, and the breath perishes because it is not found, but with the body, and is needful for the body in all its actions; this form (i.e. the soul) is not destroyed, &c, but continues for ever. This is that which Solomon by his wisdom said, ‘Then shall the dust return unto the earth as it was; and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.’”

As the formation of man’s body was effected previously to the infusion of his soul, we shall attend to the same order, in attempting to elucidate this important and very interesting subject. The word ייצר _jitzer_, rendered _he formed_, observes Mr. Benson, is not used concerning any other creature, and implies a gradual process in the work, with great accuracy and exactness. It is properly used of potters forming vessels on the wheel; and Rabbi D. Kimchi says, that, when used concerning the creation of man, it signifies the formation of his members. Bishop Patrick intimates, that the body of man was made not of _dry_, but _moist_ dust; and that this agrees with the Hebrew JITZER, _formed_, which is used concerning potters, who make their vessels of _clay_, not of _dry_ earth. Diodorus Siculus says, “Man was made out of the _slime_, or _mud_, of the Nile.” The word of the Lord once came to Jeremiah, saying, “Arise, and go down to the potter’s house, and there I will cause thee to hear my words. Then I went down to the potter’s house, and, behold, he wrought a work on the wheel. And the word of the Lord came to me, saying, Behold, as the clay is in the potter’s hand, so are ye in mine hand!” A scene like this is presented to our imagination by the words of Moses; the Lord God _formed_, moulded, or modelled man, as a potter does; we see the work, observes Bishop Horne, as it were upon the wheel, rising and growing under the hands of the Divine Artificer!

But, to give the thing a stronger impression on the mind, we will suppose, says Judge Hale, that this figure rises by degrees, and is finished part by part, in some succession of time; and that, when the whole is completed, the veins and arteries bored, the sinews and tendons laid, the joints fitted, and liquor (transmutable in blood and juices) lodged in the ventricles of the heart, God infuses into it a vital principle, whereupon the liquor in the heart begins to descend, and thrill along the veins, and a heavenly blush arises in the countenance, such as scorns the help of art, and is above the power of imitation. The image moves, it walks, it speaks; it moves with such a majesty, as proclaims it the lord of the creation, and talks with such an accent and sublimity, as makes every ear attentive, and even its great Creator enter into converse with it: were we to see all this transacted before our eyes, I say, we could not but stand astonished at the thing; and yet this is the exact emblem of man’s formation.

The human body is an excellent piece of workmanship, the shape and contexture of it admirable, evidently superior to that of all other animals, and the brightest visible display of the wisdom of the Divine Architect. The erect posture, figure, stature, use of every part, and symmetry of the whole, cannot but excite admiration. The fabric of the eye, the texture of the brain, the configuration of the muscles, the disposition of the nerves, the construction of the bones; the veins and arteries, spread throughout the system, the former to return the blood to the heart, and keep that mysterious engine playing, which throws the vital fluid through the latter with prodigious force, to animate and invigorate every part; and many other important particulars, which we shall now proceed to mention and illustrate, are not only manifest proofs of the great excellence of this system, but also of the skill, contrivance, and consummate wisdom of God.

When we take a general view of the animal world, we find the numerous individuals which compose it, differing considerably in the phenomena which their economy exhibits. Man, and the higher orders of animals, are characterized by the constant performance of many complex and active functions; as respiration, digestion, circulation, &c. Torpid or hibernating animals display this singular peculiarity, that these functions are performed for several months, and suspended for several months, alternately. In another modification of animated matter, namely the egg, the evidences of vitality would not be exhibited, were not certain agents applied to evolve them, and, when thus called forth, they cannot be resumed after long suspension.

Although we are ignorant of the nature of the cause which regulates the uniform performance of this series of phenomena, thus more or less extensively displayed in the economy of different animals, we are nevertheless convinced that such a cause must exist, and are hence naturally led to distinguish the phenomena by some appropriate term. Thus observing that the human body, and the bodies of animals which bear it resemblance, possess locomotive powers, can regulate their actions, and are capable not only of resisting the laws which govern inanimate substances, but are enabled to act upon these substances in direct opposition to these laws, we employ the terms life, vitality, and vital power, to express the phenomena which thus distinguish animate from inanimate matter; and in order simply to determine the import of those terms, we may take a general view of those powers which a living animal body possesses, and which cease with its existence.

When we compare the living with the dead body, the most striking circumstance we observe is, that the former was surrounded by the same chemical agents which are capable of producing the decomposition and destruction of its soft parts after death; hence it becomes evident, that its component elements must have been sustained and preserved by some superior power, which ceases to act at the moment of its dissolution.

Of all the phenomena which enter into the general idea of life, this power of self-preservation, or the capability of resisting the laws which govern inanimate matter, appears the most essential. Without this principle we can form no conception of life, since it evidently exists without interruption till the moment of dissolution. It is this principle which, communicated to an egg, enables it to resist for a certain period the powers of heat, cold, and putrefaction; a principle of which the addle or barren egg is entirely devoid. Thus we find from Mr. J. Hunter’s experiments, that an impregnated egg is longer in freezing than an addle egg, and every one knows that the former remains sweet or free from putrefaction much longer. This principle, which we may consider the most simple state of existence, is limited in its duration; and for its maintenance, the performance of no active function is necessary. Hence it continues in the egg either quiescent for a certain time, and is gradually destroyed; or, by the agency or stimulus of heat, it acquires the accession of the power of action, which assimilates inanimate matter into a living form, and, at length, exhibits in the chick all the phenomena of a more perfect state of existence, which may be distinguished by the term active life. In this state, many other phenomena of vitality are exhibited. Besides the power of self-preservation, an internal principle of support and reparation, and the power of performing the important actions of circulation, respiration, digestion, &c, which are subservient to this principle, is given to animals. These form the features of what we call life, as it appears in man, and the higher orders of animals, and certainly constitute its most useful, though not most essential part. For how little superior is an egg, or a torpid animal, to vegetable or inanimate matter, till the former contain a living chick, the latter become an active animal? Thus, though life may subsist under the quiescent form of self-preservation, it requires the accession of certain principles, and a power of performing various important actions, to display its chief characters. The economy then of an egg, and of a perfect animal, such as man, may be considered as examples of the most simple and extensive phenomena of vitality. These, however, are more or less perfectly exhibited in the different orders of animals. It belongs, for instance, to the economy of certain animals, which at one time of the year perform active functions, to become torpid at the approach of winter. In these creatures, respiration, digestion, and every function which characterizes active life, is suspended; as in the egg, the principle of self-preservation, that latent spark of vitality, alone remains, by which we distinguish torpidity from death. This condition, however, is not of long continuance; at the approach of summer’s warmth, the power of action is again called forth, active functions are superadded to the principle of self-preservation, and life, before quiescent and obscure, now resumes its most perfect form; or, in other words, the animal just now inert and motionless, respires again; its heart beats, its blood circulates, its muscles resume their accustomed motions, and it leaves its winter quarters in search of food. Having now assumed the nature of an active animal, the performance of the functions characteristic of that state (which we shall now proceed to describe) becomes requisite; and, first, the circulation of a fluid which we call _blood_.[189]

This fluid differs in its appearance in the different orders of animals, though, in its essential properties there is little variety; the appearance of the blood in man, and the more perfect animals, is that of a red fluid, having a certain degree of viscidity, not being limpid like common water. Though it appears to be a homogenous fluid whilst circulating, or at the moment it escapes from its vessels, it is composed of three parts, essentially differing from each other; of _particles_, upon which the color of the blood depends; of _coagulating lymph_, which has the property of becoming spontaneously solid under certain circumstances, and from which various structures in the body are formed; and of a limpid fluid called _serum_, which dilutes the coagulating lymph, and fits it for circulating through blood vessels of a very minute size. In some of the lower orders of animals, however, the color of the particles of the blood is green, in others white, corresponding with the color of the animal; in others there is no color whatever in the blood, so that it is either void of particles, or they are transparent, so as not to be seen. But this deficiency must be considered as making no great difference in the blood itself, as its particles do not appear to be its most essential part. Many microscopical observations have been made to determine the size of a single particle of the blood, and according to the observations of several philosophers, the diameter of a single particle in man has been computed at the 3,000th part of an inch. The size of the particles in red blooded animals, is found not to correspond with the size of the animal. They are as large in the mouse as the elephant, larger in some insects than in man, smaller in the ox. They are in prodigious numbers, so as to give color to the blood, and of all its parts appear to be renewed the most slowly; thus when animals are frequently bled, the flesh becomes paler and paler.[190]