Chapter II: First Day (1)

_Section_ I.--CHAOS.

Inquiry into the origin of things natural to man --
Character of Moses as a sacred historian important --
Explanation of the term Created -- Chaotic state of the
elementary principles of matter -- Influence of the Spirit
of God upon the chaotic mass -- Opinions of the ancients --
Similitude between the first and second creation -- Agency of
the Holy Spirit in the work of regeneration asserted and proved.

As creatures possessed of conscious existence, and furnished with both intellectual and moral powers, it is very natural for us to inquire into the origin and first state of things; and, when difficulties present themselves, to meet with clear and satisfactory solutions of them, removing the darkness in which they were enveloped, affords to reflecting minds a high gratification. Without the aid of divine revelation, the creation of the world would have been involved in uncertainty, and our unassisted reason left to speculate in fields of wide conjecture. But in following the luminous torch of sacred communication, we are safely conducted to the first great Cause, by whose almighty _fiat_ matter was called into existence, and afterwards disposed and modified according to the plan devised by the eternal Mind.

Moses, considered as a man of scientific habits, being well versed in all the “wisdom of the Egyptians”--mathematical, physical, moral, and divine; could not but know that his cosmogony would have to pass the ordeal of critical investigation, and undergo the best of philosophical inquiry: that contemporaries, as well as future and remote nations and generations, would minutely examine his historical record; and science, in its progressive state of improvement, try the validity of his system: that it would meet the inquisitive eye of genius and learning, and fall into the hands of both sincere friends and insidious enemies to religious truth: that candor would patiently search into its pretensions, impartially weigh its evidence, and sober inquiry respect its claims: while narrow prejudice, blind bigotry, or superstitious enthusiasm, would dispute its authority, deny its veracity, and disdainfully reject its aid. But listening to an all-wise Instructor, following a Guide that could not deceive him; and disregarding the envenomed tongue of calumny, the lampooning pen of the satirist, the surly frown of literary pride, and the imperious authority of exalted rank; he committed to writing a true account of the creation of the world, for the information and religious improvement of mankind to the latest generation.

Viewed as the ground-work of all future revelations, if any defect or false position were discovered in his relation of things, that would deprive his history of credibility, and decisively prove him to have been led by the sallies of a vain and heated imagination, and not the Spirit of the living God. But of this there was no danger; and, as a distinguished author pertinently observes, “from the book of Genesis, almost all the ancient philosophers, astronomers, chronologists, and historians, have taken their respective _data_: and all the modern improvements and accurate discoveries in different arts and sciences have only served to confirm the facts detailed by Moses, and to show, that all the ancient writers on these subjects, have approached to, or receded from truth, and the phenomena of nature, in the exact proportion as they have followed the Mosaic history.” As a writer, Moses does not attack other systems, formed on this or that hypothesis; but in a simple and incontrovertible narrative, acquaints us with the origin of matter, and the progressive formation and completion of the solar system.

The Scriptures inform us, that Moses was privileged to converse with God “face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend,” and from him received clear and manifest revelations, not by visions, ecstasies, dreams, inward inspirations, or the mediation of angels, but familiarly and with confidence, by articulate sounds, in his own language. The Lord said, “With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches; and the similitude of the Lord shall he behold.” God being a Spirit, has neither shape nor parts, consequently is invisible, and cannot be seen by eyes of flesh: he is the most simple essence. When he speaks of himself as having a face, mouth, eyes, hands, &c, he adapts his language to our capacities, designing to express by these figures the perfections of his nature; but he is really one undivided essence. That which Moses saw, was only the _Shekinah_, a glorious brightness, the symbol of the Divine presence, and not the essence, which is invisible.

In giving an account of the true origin of things, he attends particularly to the _mode_, _agent_, and _time_ of their being produced. His history commences with the creation of matter, “In the beginning.” Before the creative acts mentioned by him, all was eternity. _Time_ signifies _duration_ measured by the revolutions of the heavenly bodies; but prior to the creation of these bodies, there could be no measurement of duration, and consequently no _time_; therefore, “In the beginning,” must necessarily mean the commencement of time which followed, or rather was produced by God’s creative acts, as an effect follows, or is produced by a cause.

[From several expressions in this chapter, it is obvious
that Mr. Wood considered the account given by Moses, in the
first chapter of Genesis, to apply to _universal creation_,
and not to be restricted to our _Solar System_. It is also
plainly inferable, that he considered this the _first exercise
of God’s creative energy in any way_. This view is entirely too
contracted, is not clearly warranted by the text of the sacred
historian, and is unnecessary.

There are no passages of Scripture which say distinctly,
the Mosaic creation is the first or only acts of creative
energy: but there are several which intimate the _previous
existence of creatures_, and of course imply a previous
exercise of creative power.

It is sufficiently clear that there were intelligent beings
existing at the creation of this world. Hence it is said, “the
morning stars sang together, and the sons of God shouted for
joy,” in view of the rising creation.

Since, therefore, the previous existence of intelligent
beings is established, we must, of course, assign to them some
_mode_ of subsistence; and this will compel us to assign at
least what must be _necessary_ to every creature, a _place of
abode_, suited to his wants and conditions, without which he
cannot subsist. Thus we establish even a _material_ creation,
_anterior_ to the creation mentioned by Moses.

After weighing the account which Moses gives in the first
chapter of Genesis, together with the facts and analogies in
Nature, the conclusion seems irresistible, _that he describes
only our Solar System_; which includes the seven primary
planets, Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, and
Herschel: the four asteroides, Vesta, Juno, Ceres, and Pallas:
and the eighteen moons which attend the primary planets.
Because,

1. As this account forms the introduction to a revelation
designed for the _human family only_, it is reasonable to
conclude it would have reference to those bodies only which
operate materially to their benefit or injury. But there are no
such bodies except in the Solar System.

2. Moses in describing the formation of the heavenly
bodies, mentions only the _sun_ and _moon_ in a conspicuous
manner: because, these are the only luminaries which contribute
_essentially_ to our comfort: and then, lest a beholder might
imagine God did not also make the other suns and stars, says
incidentally, “He made the stars also.”

3. The conclusion is clear from the fact, that _the Solar
System is complete in itself_: forming a perfect whole, which
could exist were all other stars and suns destroyed, and vice
versâ, all other systems could exist were the Solar System
destroyed.

4. It does not well comport with the character of the
Divine Being, when we consider his eternal power, infinite
wisdom, and boundless goodness, to suppose He never exercised
his creative energies but _once_, and that not until a few
thousand years since. Yet we are compelled to this conclusion,
however reluctantly, unless we restrict the Mosaic account of
the creation to our Solar System.

This argument will derive additional weight, when we
recollect the _immensity_ of God’s works taken together, and
the _illimitable space_ in which he has, and may, exercise his
creative energy. We may _approximate towards_ a very faint idea
of their immensity, by calling to mind the immense number of
_fixed stars_. All astronomers admit their number to be very
great indeed, but how many cannot be correctly known. There
may be millions whose light has not reached us yet. Of those
which may be detected, Professor _Vince_, says, there are at
least _seventy-five millions_; and each the centre of a system
as large, possibly much larger than our own. Indeed we can
scarcely approach towards a competent idea of _illimitable
space_. The nearest _fixed star_ is supposed to be Sirius, or
the dog-star, at the lowest calculation _twenty-two billions
of miles distant_. If we compute according to this analogy,
and say there are seventy-five millions of fixed stars, each
the _centre_ of a system, perfect, and independent: what mind
can conceive the illimitable space through which these worlds
must lie? Yet this would scarcely be an approximation towards
the true extent. Beyond this there is still _unoccupied space_,
“where existence sleeps in the wide abyss of possibility.”

It may, therefore, be asked with justice, whether a being
capable of creating, even in this limited view, would have
exercised his creative powers _but once_, and that not until
a few thousands years since? _Credat qui posset, non ego._
Who can tell what may have been the _successive_ creations,
durations, and, possibly, destructions of those worlds which we
see, and of others, of which the inhabitants of this earth have
never heard, whose light has not yet reached us since their
creation, though coming at the rate of nearly _twelve millions
of miles in a minute_?

Finally: A _succession_ of creative acts, whose
commencement runs back _almost_ parallel with eternity, and
will extend forward _almost ad infinitum_, seems to comport
best with the eternal, immense, and immutable activity, energy,
and goodness of the Divine Being.]

The word _created_ means, that God caused that to exist which, previously to this moment, had no being. The Rabbins, who are legitimate judges in a case of verbal criticism on their own language, are unanimous in asserting, that the word ברא _bara_ expresses the commencement of the existence of a thing, or its egression from nonentity to entity. It does not, in its primary meaning, denote the _preserving_ or _new forming_ things that had previously existed, as some imagine; but _creation_, in the proper sense of the term, though it has some other acceptations in other places. The supposition that God formed all things out of a pre-existing eternal nature, is certainly absurd: for, if there was an eternal nature besides an eternal God, there must have been two self-existing, independent, and eternal Beings, which is a most palpable contradiction. _Ex nihilo nihil fit_, “That out of nothing, nothing is produced” is a maxim that applies itself in every case where Deity is not concerned; it was the main argument used by Aristotle and his followers, but is completely refuted by the authority of Divine revelation. God created את השמים ואת הארץ _eth hashamayim veet haarets_, “the heavens and the earth.” The word את _eth_, which is generally considered as a particle, simply denoting that the word following is in the accusative or oblique case, is often understood by the Rabbins in a much more extensive sense, “The particle את _eth_,” says Aben Ezra, “signifies the _substance_ of the thing.” The like definition is given by Kimchi in his _Book of Roots_. “This particle,” says Mr. Ainsworth, “having the _first_ and _last_ letters of the Hebrew alphabet in it, is supposed to comprise the _sum_ and _substance_ of _all things_.” “The particle את _eth_,” says Buxtorf, Talmudic Lexicon sub voce, “with the Cabalists, is often mystically put for the _beginning_ and the _end_, as Α alpha and Ω omega are in the Apocalypse.” On this ground, these words should be translated, “God in the beginning created the _substance_ of the heavens, and the substance of the earth: i.e. the _prima materia_, or first elements, out of which the heavens and the earth were successively formed.”[23]

During the first state of things, Moses informs us, that “the earth was without form and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.” The original terms תהו _tohoo_, and בהו _bohoo_, translated, “without form and void,” convey the idea of confusion and disorder. The translation by Paginus, is _desert and emptiness_; in the Vulgate, it is _empty and void_; in the Septuagint, _invisible and incomposed_; from the Syriac, _desert and uncultivated_; the Samaritan is the same as the Vulgate; the Arabic, _covered with abysses_: these translations are allowed by the learned Walton. There is but little difference in their real meaning, and all the Versions express the first state of things.[24] The whole collection of matter, created in a fluid state, was a crude, indigested chaos: all belonging to our system, as the sun, moon, stars, earth, and seas, lay blended together in one vast, confused mass, without any arrangement of their constituent particles, heavy and light, dense and rare, fluid and solid, being all mixed together; air, water, and earth, (which have since obtained the name of elements,) were promiscuously scattered throughout.

The chaotic mass remained in this primitive state, till God was pleased to assimilate, assort, and arrange the materials,--out of which he built up, in the space of six days, the whole of creation.[25] _The Spirit of God_, represented us sitting upon the vast abyss, like a bird, while either in the act of incubation or fostering its young, _moved_ or brooded _upon the face of the waters_, communicating, by his vital energy, life and motion to the unformed chaos.

Some writers understand by רוח אלהימ _the Spirit of God_, a “mighty sweeping wind,” a “tremendous tempest,” separating diversified particles of the elementary principles of matter, and combining those of the same kind together. But this is making an effect to be produced by a cause, which, as yet, had no existence; nor, as a cause, is it sufficient to produce so great an effect. To make an effect superior to its cause, is as absurd and contradictory as to say, a long line and a short one are equal. That the single Hebrew word רוח _ruach_, the Greek πνευμα _pneuma_, the Latin _spiritus_, and the ancient Saxon _ghost_ or _gast_, signifies _wind_, as well as the vital breath, the soul of man, a created spirit good or evil, is readily admitted. But concerning the phrase רוח אלהימ, _the Spirit of God_, so frequently used in the Scriptures of the Old Testament, there is not one instance that it signifies _wind_, and to attempt to force such meaning upon it, is a most manifest violation done to the text. By _the Spirit of God_, is meant the third subsistence in the Divine essence, distinguished from the person of the Father, and that of the Son; he is called a _Spirit_, to signify his spiritual and immaterial nature, as well as to express his mighty agency; and the works of which he is the author can only be effected by an omnipotent power.

Milton, who was well versed in the Hebrew language, in his address to the Holy Spirit, says,

“Thou from the first
Wast present, and with mighty wings outspread,
Dove-like, sat’st brooding on the vast abyss,
And mad’st it pregnant.”

The Holy Spirit, by his vital influence, infused that efficient power into the great mass of matter, which was necessary for the assumption of different forms, and the discharge of the assigned functions of selecting and arranging the materials out of which the world is formed. By brooding over the mingled earth and water, says Dr. Owen, “he communicated a prolific virtue; and inlaid them with the seeds of animal life; and therefore the earth and the water brought forth all sorts of creatures in abundance, according to the seeds and principles communicated to them by the cherishing motion of the _Spirit of God_.”

As several of the ancients have described the elementary principles of all things to be a gloomy chaos, consisting of _darkness_ and _water_, we may easily infer from what source they derived this notion. Aristotle observes, the theologists and natural philosophers agreed, that all things were produced, as the former said, “out of night;” or, as the latter, “out of a confused mixture.” Whatever knowledge the inhabitants of Chaldea had of the creation of the world, they ascribe to the teaching of an amphibious monster denominated Oannes. He taught his auditors, that there was a time when all things were darkness and water, in the midst of which various monsters of horrible forms received life and light. Over this chaotic mass presided the demon Omoroca, a mythological personification of the ocean. At length arrived the destined hour of the creation. The monster Omoroca fell subdued beneath the victorious arm of Belus; the animals which composed her empire were annihilated; and the world was formed out of her substance. Oannes, however, taught, that this physiological description was to be taken merely in an allegorical sense, and that the whole fable alluded to the aqueous origin of the universe. Matter having been thus created, Belus divided the darkness from the light, separated the earth from the heavens, disposed the world in order, and called the starry host into existence.

According to the Phœnician system, the principle of the universe was a _dark air_, and a _turbulent evening chaos_; an opinion not very dissimilar to that given by Moses. Sanchoniathon afterward ascribes to material operation the origin of that which may be denominated the will or desire of God, when in his great wisdom he thought fit to create the world out of nothing. From this personification of Divine love, a chaotic mixture was produced, and within it were comprehended the rudiments of all things.

The cosmogony of the ancient Egyptians, though more obscure, is given by Diodorus Siculus. “Damascius having inquired about what was the first principle in the world, gives this as an ancient Egyptian doctrine. The Egyptians have chosen to celebrate the first cause as _unspeakable_. They accordingly style it _darkness unknown_ and mention it with a three-fold acclamation. Again. In this manner the Egyptians styled the first principle _an inconceivable darkness; night and darkness past all imagination_.” This is perfectly consonant to passages from the same author, quoted by Dr. Cudworth. “There is one origin of all things, celebrated by the name of _unknown_ (incomprehensible) _darkness_.” Again. “They hold, that the first beginning or cause of things was _darkness beyond all conception; an unknown darkness_.”

Hesiod mentions, “A chaos as first existing. Next was produced the spacious earth, the seat of the immortals; Tartarus hid within the recesses of the ample globe; and divine love, the most beautiful of the deities. From chaos sprung Erebus, and black night; and from the union of night and Erebus were born ether and the day.”[26] Zeno, of Cittium, the founder of the Stoics, said, Hesiod meant by the chaos, “Water, out of which all things were formed, which by concretion became firm earth.”

In the work of Aristophanes, we meet with a similar passage. “Chaos, and night, and black Erebus, and wide Tartarus, first existed; at that time, there was neither earth, air, nor heaven. But in the bosom of Erebus, black-winged night produced an aërial egg; from which, in due season, beautiful Love, decked with golden wings, was born. Out of dark chaos, in the midst of wide-spreading Tartarus, he begot our race, and called us forth into the light.”[27]

It is unnecessary to multiply quotations to prove, that the ancients were not only acquainted with the cosmogony of Moses, but received it as true; to which they added their own coloring.

[It is now generally agreed by cosmogonists, commentators,
biblical critics, and natural philosophers, that the
_substance_ of the earth certainly, and probably the materials
of the Solar System, was first created in a chaotic state, and
subsequently arranged in order. This opinion is very ancient
and almost universal, found in all nations. Ovid, an ancient
heathen poet, has well described this chaos:

Ante mare et terras, et, quod teget omnia, Cœlum,
Unus erat toto naturæ vultus in orbe,
Quem dixére Chaos; rudis indigestaque moles,
Nec quicquam nisi pondus iners; congestaque eodem.
Non bene junctarum discordia semina rerum.

Before the seas, and this terrestrial ball,
And heaven’s high canopy that covers all:
_One_ was the face of nature if a face:
_Rather a rude and indigested mass:
A lifeless lump, unfashioned and unframed,
Of jarring seeds, and justly_ CHAOS _named_.--Dryden.

Notwithstanding the general prevalence of this opinion,
and the high authorities which support it, the reader must not
imagine it is absolutely _universal_. Some eminent men have
suggested, that the earth, and matter generally, was created in
a _solid_ state at first. This is the view taken by Mr. Ure, of
the Andersonian University. He supposes _the earth was created
a solid ball, or spheroid, regular on its surface, without
hills and vallies, and immersed in a crust of ice, which
completely and uniformly surrounded it: that it was a cold
lifeless lump; heat not yet having pervaded it_. The first, and
all quickening operation of heat he supposes to be indicated
by these words of Moses: “And the Spirit of God moved on the
face of the waters.” He supposes, all the matter of our earth
is in the same relative position, in which it was when it first
existed at the command of God; _except such cases in which some
subsequent force has disarranged it_. These cases he supposes
to have been many, and to have operated to the _upheaving_
the mountains, and hollowing out the beds of the sea, &c. He
says of the earth: “The central mass composed, most probably,
of the metallic bases of the earths and alkalies, as volcanic
phenomena seem to attest, would fuse, when first the calorific
energy was made to actuate the body of the earth, and the
exterior parts would oxydize into the crust of mineral strata,
and the outermost coat of all, the fixed ice, would melt into
the moveable _waters_.” _New Syst. of Geol. B. 1. chap. 1. p.
7._

Perhaps Mr. Ure’s view might be improved, and made
to approximate much nearer the common opinion, possibly
identified with it, by supposing the mass of matter composing
our earth, was confusedly mixed,--and of course chaotic--but
was in a frozen, hard, inactive state: that the quickening
energy, which softened and fused it, was simultaneous with its
revolution on its axis. The consequence then would be precisely
what we find it to be; viz: an enlargement of the equatorial
diameter, and a flattening of the poles. This I conceive to be
the true theory in this case.

Mr. Ure confirms his view by a quotation from Sir Isaac
Newton; Optics, Book 3. towards the conclusion. “It seems
probable to me that God in the beginning formed matter in
solid, massy, hard, impenetrable, movable particles, of such
sizes and figures, and with such other properties, and in such
proportions to space, as most conduced to the end for which he
formed them. All material things seem to have been composed
of the hard and solid particles above mentioned, variously
associated in the _first creation_ by the counsels of an
intelligent agent. For it became him who created them to set
them in order; and if he did so, it is unphilosophical to seek
for any other origin of this world, or to pretend that it might
rise out of chaos by the mere laws of Nature; though being once
formed, it may continue by those laws for many ages.”

I have given this quotation precisely as I found it in
Mr. Ure’s New System of _Geology_, B. 1. chap. 1. p. 10.
Considering the well founded reputation of Newton, it adds very
much to the probability of the above theory: yet it seems to
me to be at variance with the commonly received impression of
Newton’s opinion on this subject. I have not his work at hand
to examine it.

The Encyclopedia Britannica, Article _Earth_, seems to
favor this view. It says, “The common notion of the earth’s
being originally a chaos, seems neither to have a foundation in
reason, nor in the Mosaic account of the creation.”

The reader will here perceive high authorities on both
sides, and all claiming to agree with Moses. The weight of
evidence seems to be in favor of a chaotic creation, which
does _not_ necessarily imply that the mass was created in a
_soft_ state. But the configuration, and internal structure of
the earth abundantly prove it was in a soft, or compressible
state when it was assuming its present form and structure.
This condition was the effect of the quickening energy of the
Spirit of God. The difference between the _equatorial_ and
_polar_ diameters of the earth, which is now well established,
and is about twenty-seven miles, can scarcely be accounted for,
without supposing the substance of the earth, at least to a
great depth, to have been partially or wholly fluid; in which
case, by turning round rapidly on its own axis, it would assume
the shape it is known to possess. It may, indeed, be said, the
Almighty could give it any shape and qualities he pleased, and
we cannot well object to it.

As it regards the interior, or central parts of our planet,
our author has said nothing, and possibly he would give
this very good reason for his silence--_we can know nothing
certainly_. Still, however, we may subjoin the conjectures of
some eminent philosophers.

Some suppose the central parts of our globe to be
_cavernous_ or _hollow_. The principal argument for this
theory is the transmission of _sound_ and _motion_ through vast
extents of country, in case of volcanoes and earthquakes. It is
supposed this could not be done so perfectly and extensively,
unless we suppose some _aëriform_, or _gaseous_ body within the
earth, by means of which it might be transmitted: which would
be to suppose it _cavernous_ or _hollow_.

Dr. Halley supposes the earth is a hollow sphere, in
which there is inclosed a central magnetic globe, and by the
motions of this globe the variations of the magnetic needle are
produced.

Our own ingenious, but unfortunate countryman, _Symms_,
supposed the earth to be hollow, and inhabited within, and its
interior accessible to us. He argues, there is no necessity,
for the purposes of gravitation, or for any other purposes, to
suppose the earth solid to the centre: And it is inconsistent
with the divine beneficence to suppose such an amount of matter
as this globe would be, if solid, should have been created to
afford so small a portion, _scarcely one-fourth_, fit for the
actual habitation of man, for whom principally it was created.
He, therefore, supported, that the interior of the earth was an
immense cavern blessed with changes of season, succession of
day and night, cold and heat, and inhabited by human beings,
and other animals. He supposed the poles of the earth were
hollow, and this hollow entrance gradually verged round towards
the equator; and ships have, without knowing it, been within
the verge, from whence they found no difficulty of returning.

Others have supposed the central parts of our globe are
solid. This is the common supposition, and is principally
supported by these two arguments:--As the attraction of
gravitation depends on the _quantity_ of matter, as well as
the distance; unless we suppose the earth a _solid_ body it
will not be able to exert a sufficient attractive influence on
the moon to keep her in her orbit. Again: it is ascertained
by actual experiment, that the _mean_ density of the earth is
about _five_ times that of water: from which it is infered it
is solid, and must increase in density from the surface to the
centre, in order to give this high mean proportion over the
bodies at its surface.

The increasing density of the earth, from the surface to
the centre is owing to _compression_ in part, and partly to the
supposed fact, that the heavier substances are placed nearer
the centre. Thus we find the different strata of rocks indicate
the same. Granite is the heaviest and lowest rock _in situ_.

Some have supposed that _iron_, probably nearly in a
metallic state, constitutes the nucleus of our earth. This idea
seems to have been suggested to account for the influence of
the earth on a magnetic needle.

But the most splendid, and very probable conjecture is
founded on the experiments of Berzelius, and Sir H. Davy, on
the earths, which experiments prove them to have _metallic
bases_ universally: hence all our earths are _metallic oxides_.
From these circumstances it is conjectured, that the nucleus
of our globe is constituted of the metals in a pure, or nearly
pure state, which are the bases of our earths, alkalis, and
alkaline earths.

It would almost seem a legitimate conjecture to suppose the
substances of our globe were, at _first, metals_ and _gases_:
that the oxygen, combining with the metals formed earths, and
alkalis; and the gases combining among themselves formed air,
water, &c. This would be a chemical process, and necessarily
_fuse_ and soften the earth, and introduce the process of
cooling, which would proceed from the surface towards the
centre. Hence some eminent philosophers have conjectured that
there is a great degree of heat in the interior of the earth
yet: probably the central parts are in a state of igneous
fusion. Some recent researches of Cordier tend to establish
this opinion. The amount of evidence in favor of this
conjecture is increasing annually, and probably will prevail.
See the _additional_ paper on _volcanos_ in this volume.]

* * * * *

_Section_ II.--_Fire._

Omnific word -- Moving principles in Nature -- Criticism
on the original word אור aur -- Creation of fire -- Its nature
-- Friction exciting the action of fire -- Fire attracted by
bodies -- Fire conducted -- Fire in a state of combination --
Fire elastic -- Expansive force of fire -- Subterraneous fires
-- Earthquakes and Volcanic Eruptions -- Air a storehouse of
fire -- General and final Dissolution of Nature by fire --
Fire a symbol of the Deity, in his gracious presence, vital
influence, transforming energy, and destructive operation.

The sacred historian here informs us of the first regular production reduced from the chaotic mass. With an astonishing majesty of expression, God said, יהי אור ויהי אור YEHI AUR, _vayehi aur_, _Let there be light: and there was light_. Or, more literally, _Be light: and light was_. Pagninus translates the words יהי אור YEHI AUR, literally, _Sit lux, Be light_. In the Greek it is γενεθητω φῶς, _Be light made_, or _generated_. In the Vulgate, _Fiat lux_, which is much the same as the Greek. The celebrated Dionysius Longinus, meeting with this passage in the Septuagint, considered it as a specimen of the _true sublime_. Though a heathen, he thus expresses himself: “So likewise the Jewish lawgiver, (who was no ordinary man) having conceived a just idea of the divine power, he expressed it in a dignified manner; for at the beginning of his laws he thus speaks: GOD SAID--_What?_ LET THERE BE LIGHT! _and there was light_. LET THERE BE EARTH! _and there was earth_.”[28]

Here we may inquire, Whether this was a word uttered with a sound, like that which God spake from mount Sinai in giving the Law; or only the exercise of the inward faculty of reason or understanding? It could not be a word spoken with a sound, for that requires air as its _medium_, and none as yet existed; neither was there any ear to hear, nor any use of such words. Nor could it be any exercise of the Divine Mind, now beginning to think of the creation and formation of things; for this purpose was in his thoughts from eternity. The meaning therefore is, that God did, without any instruments, toil, labor, alteration, or delay, for the manifestation of his own infinite goodness, wisdom, power, and will, actually working like a powerful word or command, instantaneously produce _light_.[29] Thus

“Dark Chaos heard his voice.”

The Psalmist, touching on the subject of creation, says, “He spake, and it was done: he commanded, and it stood fast”--יעמד _jagnamad, it stood forth_, as a servant at his master’s command, prepared to do his will, and to execute his pleasure.[30]

The divine commandment which produced light, says an intelligent writer, must be considered as operating on the properties of matter already created; and as light is found to proceed from the motion of luminous particles, we must conceive some central force, or attracting power, to be the instrument of producing this phenomenon of light, by its attractive or propelling properties. There seem to be moving principles in all nature, which, when put in action by the first Cause, produce natural effects according to established laws, which cannot be altered unless by the first Mover. As the Hebrew word תהומ _tehom, abyss_, translated _deep_, signifies also to move with a sort of confused motion; we may justly conclude that the chaotic mass had some gravitating powers in it, before the forming of the system; and that attracting and repelling force was naturally and originally in the universe; and that the first Mover gave them in a regular course, the specifical direction, and systematical attractions. What our distinguished philosopher, Sir Isaac Newton, has suggested concerning attraction and gravitation, even in point of philosophy, appears to agree with the Principia of Moses.

Another author writes, Whether Moses intended a philosophical account of light in this place, I will not pretend to say; but one thing is certain, that he makes use of a word which points out some of the principal properties of light. The original word אור _aur_ signifies that body which renders objects visible, which we call _light_; it also signifies _fire_, and perhaps Moses intended to point out in one word, what in our language requires two, _light_ and _fire_. When we consider the words of Moses, it appears evident that what is in our version called _light_, is in the Hebrew rather something that sends forth light. The original word אור _aur_ may signify any thing that makes things visible by emitting particles of light. When the Almighty said, “Let there be אור _aur, light_,” it is not certain that he meant elementary fire, or original unpropagated light. It is more probable that he intended by that word, a body that sent forth light by means of the motion of similar particles of luminous and igneous matter.

Whatever may be the philosophic differences between these two, _light_ and _fire_, continues the same author, we are certain that they are seldom separated. The origin of that light which now renders bodies visible to us, seems chiefly to be _fire_, though light and fire are not inseparably connected; for light may be propagated where there is no fire, as from putrid bodies, &c, and fire may be where there is no light, as in iron, sulphur, &c.

The Hebrew word אור _aur_, signifies not only light, but _fire_. God created this powerful agent on the first day, and diffused it through every part of nature; because without it no operation could be carried on and perfected. T. Bartholine quotes Aristotle as saying, “That fire is the efficient cause of all things.” Robison says, “Heat is susceptible of fixation--of being accumulated in bodies, and, as it were, laid up till we have occasion for it; and we are as certain of getting the stored-up heat, as we are sure of obtaining from our drawers the things we put in them.”[31] It pervades all bodies: this is not the case with any other substance we know of--not even light. It lies hid in every thing around us. It is a substance which we are ever in want of; it is therefore deposited on every side, and is ready for every exigency.

_Caloric_ is the name given by modern chemists, to that substance by whose influence the phenomena of heat are produced, and which had before been distinguished by the terms _igneous fluid_, _matter of heat_, and other analogous denominations. In order to give precision to chemical language, it was necessary to adopt a word by which to distinguish between the substance which produces the sensation we call heat, and the sensation itself; these being connected as cause and effect; for whenever caloric becomes fixed in a body, it loses its property of affording heat. Whatever is the nature of that quality in bodies called heat, we are assured it does resemble the sensation of heat. A man whose mind is destitute of the cultivation of science, if endued with common sense, never imagines the sensation of heat to be in the fire; he only imagines that there is something in fire which occasions this sensation.

Though we are well acquainted with the effects of fire, we know but little of its nature. It is so active, as well as powerful a principle, that it eludes all our researches. We may, however, define it to be the phlogiston or inflammable principle, which pervades in a greater or less degree all substances. Boerhaave thinks it is a fluid of a nature peculiar to itself; that it was created such as it is, and cannot be altered in its nature or its properties; that it naturally exists in equal quantities in all places; and that it is wholly imperceptible to our senses, being only discoverable by such effects as in its operation it produces.[32]

That fire is really a substance, and not a quality, appears from its acting upon other substances, the reality of which has never been doubted. Charcoal, in its natural state, contains within its pores a large quantity of air; but if charcoal is heated, this air is expelled by the fire, which assumes its place, and occupies the pores of the charcoal. The burning of lime also, which deprives it of a great part of its weight by expelling the fixable air, demonstrates that fire, as a substance, enters into the pores of the lime, and forces out those other substances which are least intimately combined with it.

Collision or friction of solid bodies, is the means most generally used for exciting the action of fire. The vacuities of all solid bodies are replete with fire, so that it is impossible to agitate or separate their parts swiftly, without giving the same rapid motion to the element contained within them. When a piece of hardened steel is struck with a flint, some particles of the metal are scraped away from the mass, and so violent is the fire which follows the stroke, that it melts and vitrifies them. If the fragments of steel are catched upon paper, and viewed with a microscope, you will find most of them perfect spherules, and very highly polished. Their sphericity demonstrates that they have been in a fluid state, and the polish upon their surface shows them to be vitrified; the fire being disengaged with violence, disposes the particles of the substance to combine with the vital air, while this air accelerates the combustion. The whole of the heat produced is not afforded by the body itself, because in proportion as the interior fire is disengaged, the external air acts upon the body and gives out fire.

If the irons at the axis of a coach-wheel are applied to each other, without the interposition of some unctuous matter to keep them from immediate contact, they will become so hot when the carriage runs swiftly along, as to set the wood on fire; and the fore wheels being smallest, and making more revolutions, will be most in danger. The same will happen to mill-work, or any other machinery, if the necessary precautions are neglected. It is no uncommon practice with a blacksmith to use a plate of iron as an extemporaneous tinder-box; for it may be hammered on an anvil till it becomes red hot, and will fire a match of brimstone. A strong man who strikes quick, and keeps turning the iron, so that both sides may be equally exposed to the force of the hammer, will perform this in less time than would be expected. If in the coldest season you lay one dense iron plate upon another, and press the upper one, by a weight, on the lower one, and then rub the one over the other; by reciprocal motions, they will first grow warm, and at length so hot, as in a short time to emit sparks, and at last grow red hot, as if taken out of a vehement fire.

It is not necessary that the substance should be very hard; a cord rubbed backwards and forwards swiftly against a post or a tree will take fire; a stick of wood pressed against another which is turned swiftly about in a lathe, will soon make it turn black and emit smoke. Even the palms of your hands, if you rub them briskly together, when they are dry, will smell as if they were scorched. The method of exciting fire by rubbing two sticks of wood together, was anciently practised by country people, and is still retained in some parts of the world. The manner is exactly described in Captain Cook’s voyage. The inhabitants of New-Holland are there said to produce fire with great facility, and spread it in a wonderful manner. To produce it, they take two pieces of _soft_ dry wood; one is a stick about eight or nine inches long, the other piece is flat. The stick they shape into an obtuse point at one end, and pressing it upon the other, turn it nimbly by holding it between both their hands, as we do a chocolate mill, often shifting their hands up and down, and then moving them down upon it to increase the pressure as much as possible. By this method they get fire in less than two minutes, and from the smallest spark they increase it with speed and dexterity.

The matter of fire is attracted more or less by all bodies. When any heated body comes in contact with a cold one, the former loses a part of its heat, and both of them become equally warm. If heated iron is laid upon a stone, its heat will flow into the stone; if thrown into the water, the heat will be diffused through the water. If a number of different substances, as metals, wood, wool, &c, are brought together into a place where there is not a fire, if they are of different temperatures, that is of different degrees of heat, the fire will be attracted from the hottest to those that are colder, till a perfect equilibrium is produced, or till they have all acquired the same temperature, as may be proved by applying the thermometer successively to each of them.

It does not appear, however, that all bodies have an equal attraction for the matter of fire. If a rod of iron is put into the fire for a short time, the end which is at a moderate distance from the fire will almost burn the hand; but a rod of wood, of the same length will be consumed to ashes at the end which is in the fire, before the other end is sufficiently heated to burn the hand. A ball of lead, and a ball of wool, may be of exactly the same temperature by the thermometer, but they will not appear of the same degree of heat on applying the hand. If they are of a temperature below that of our bodies, the lead will appear much colder than the wool, because it attracts the heat more rapidly from the hand; if they are of a higher temperature, the lead will appear much hotter, from the facility with which it parts with its heat. This property in bodies is called their _conducting_ power; and those bodies through which the element of fire most rapidly circulates, are called good conductors.

The power of conducting the matter of fire seems to depend upon the texture of bodies, that is, upon the contact of their parts; hence the excessive slowness with which heat is communicated to bodies of a rare and spongy texture. Thus flannel, wool, and feathers, are considered as warm coverings, not because they possess more heat in themselves--for they serve to preserve any cold body in a cool state better than other substances--but because they prevent the escape of the animal heat from our bodies.

The matter of fire will exist in a state of combination, in a _latent_ state, so as not to be perceptible to our senses. It will be found by observation, that every body which exists contains a quantity of the matter of fire in a fixed or neutralized state, disarmed of all its active, penetrating, and destructive qualities, like an acid and an alkali in combination.

Fluids, from their very nature and constitution, contain a greater quantity of caloric in a latent state than solid bodies: indeed it is now universally admitted, and may be easily proved, that the fluidity of all bodies is altogether owing to the quantity of fire which they retain in this latent or combined state, the elasticity of which keeps their particles remote from each other, and prevents their fixing into a solid mass. All bodies, therefore, in passing from a fluid to a solid state, emit a quantity of fire or heat. When water is thrown upon quick lime, it is absorbed by the lime, and in this state it is capable of retaining a much smaller quantity of caloric than in its natural state; on the slacking of lime, therefore, a very intense heat is produced, the matter of fire which preserved the water fluid being disengaged and detached. If spirit of vitriol is added to strong oil of turpentine, they will condense into a solid mass, and a great quantity of heat will be sensibly emitted. Upon the same principle it will be found, on the other hand, that when any body passes from a solid to a fluid state, the adjacent bodies will be deprived of a quantity of their natural heat.

[This theory of what is called _burning lime_, is not
sufficiently clear. Fire does not enter into the pores of the
lime by burning. The mineral commonly used for procuring _quick
lime_ is the _carbonate_ of lime, or common _limestone_, which
is composed of carbonic acid with a small quantity of water,
43, and lime 57, in 100 parts. By submiting it to a strong
heat, the carbonic acid is driven off, and the quick or pure
lime remains, which is an _oxide of calcium_. The loss in
weight is owing to the expulsion of the carbonic acid, with
the small portion of water. By adding water to the quick lime,
it is dissolved, and falls into a powder. This process is
called _slacking lime_, and the product, _slack-lime_. During
the process a large quantity of heat is disengaged; and if
the slacking be done in the dark, _light_ is also observed to
be thrown out. This heat is given out by the _water_, not the
lime. The lime having a _greater affinity_ for the _hydrogen_
of the water than exists between the hydrogen and oxygen in
water, seizes upon it, and the _oxygen passes off_, together
with the _latent caloric_ of the water, and thus the heat is
produced which is observed in slacking lime. The hydrogen of
the water combines with the lime and becomes solid, forming
an _hydrate of lime_, which is the common slacked lime used in
mortar.]

The matter of fire is _elastic_, as is proved evidently from all its effects. There is indeed reason to believe, that caloric is the only fluid in nature which is permanently elastic, and that it is the cause of the elasticity of all fluids which are esteemed so. From the elasticity of this element it results, that all natural bodies can only retain a certain quantity of it, without undergoing an alteration in their state and form. Thus a moderate quantity of fire admitted into a solid body expands it; a still larger quantity renders it fluid; and if the quantity is still increased, it will be converted into vapor.

Caloric expands all bodies which it penetrates, more or less, in proportion to its quantity, and to the nature of those bodies. The expansion of water, even previous to its assuming the form of vapor, may be seen in an easy experiment. If a quantity of cold water, contained in a clear flask, is immersed in a vessel of boiling water; as the heat enters, the water in the flask will be seen to rise in the neck till it overflows.

An iron rod a foot long being heated red hot, became 1-60 longer than before; and a glass cylinder, a fathom long, under the same circumstances, gained 1-50 in length. A metalline ring thus heated was increased 9-100 in its diameter; and a glass globe became extended 1-100 part by the heat of the hand only applied to its surface.[33]

The _general_ effects of caloric are to increase the bulk of the substances with which it unites, and to render them specifically lighter than they were before; but in whatever quantity it is accumulated in bodies, it never adds to their absolute weight. Caloric favors the solution of salts, and promotes the union of many substances. In other cases it serves to separate bodies already united; so that in the hands of chemists it is the most useful and powerful agent with which they are acquainted. It is the cause of fluidity in all substances which are capable of becoming fluid, from the heaviest metal to the lightest gas. Let it be remembered that _all_ fluids are formed from solids by an addition of caloric; and that, by abstracting this caloric, solids would be reproduced. It insinuates itself among their particles, and invariably separates them in some measure from each other. We have reason to believe that every solid substance on the face of the earth might be converted to a fluid, or even a gas, were it submitted to the action of a very high temperature in peculiar circumstances.[34]

[The general and aggregate bearing of the facts and
experiments which are now known, render the statement here
made by Mr. Wood extremely probable, viz; That caloric is a
very subtle fluid which pervades in large quantities every
particle of matter in the universe--that it is the agent which
regulates the _densities_ of all bodies, and by consequence,
regulates in some measure their _weight_ and _dimensions_. It
is considered as an almost settled question, _that a stratum
of caloric surrounds each ultimate particle of every body, so
that the ultimate particles of bodies do not, and cannot be
made to touch each other_. Their inherent inclination to come
into actual contact is called their _attraction of cohesion_:
the power of this attraction is in proportion to the distance
at which they are kept from each other by the atmosphere of
caloric which intervenes between them. This atmosphere of
caloric is _idio-repulsive_: of course the particles of caloric
have an inherent _repulsion_ among themselves, and are ever
struggling to get further asunder.

This idio-repulsive nature of caloric is the great, and
constant antagonist power to the attraction of cohesion.
Caloric has a tendency to drive the particles of matter further
from each other, and these particles have a mutual tendency
to approach. Hence these two principles are ever in conflict.
As a general rule we may say, when the attraction of cohesion
prevails greatly, the body becomes _solid_: when the two forces
are pretty nearly balanced, the body becomes _liquid_: when the
caloric prevails greatly, the body becomes _gaseous_.

There is sufficient reason to believe, that _every_ body
in nature might be raised to a _gaseous_ state by the addition
or action of a sufficient quantity of caloric: and there is,
probably, a sufficient quantity in nature, to render the whole
_universe_ gaseous, were it sufficiently excited to a state
of freedom. It is a well known fact, that _all the metals are
fusible by heat_, and many of them have been _volatalized_, and
it is extremely probable all of them may be.

As caloric regulates the density of bodies, by resisting
and modifying the influence of the attraction of cohesion: if
it were entirely withdrawn from nature, or the whole of it
rendered perfectly latent, _all matter would become perfectly_
SOLID and FIXED: even _water_ and _air_ would assume the
_solidity of the diamond_.

We must, therefore, regard caloric as the great
conservative principle of the Universe, and yet capable, if
called into action, of destroying it instantly.

These views strongly corroborate _our_ paper on _chaos_.]