Chapter XV: Section 14: General Summary--Application--Cui Bono?

In the preceding sections it has been shown that the Copernican, or Newtonian theory of Astronomy is “an absurd composition of truth and error;” and, as admitted by its founder, “not necessarily true or even probable,” and that instead of its being a general conclusion derived from known and admitted facts, it is a heterogeneous compound of assumed premises, isolated truths, and variable appearances in nature. Its advocates are challenged to show a single instance wherein a phenomenon is explained, a calculation made, or a conclusion advanced without the aid of an avowed or implied assumption! The very construction of a theory at all, and especially such as the Copernican, is a complete violation of that natural and legitimate mode of investigation to which the term _zetetic_ has been applied. The doctrine of the universality of gravitation is an assumption, made only in accordance with that “pride and ambition which has led philosophers to think it beneath them to offer anything less to the world than a complete and finished system of nature.” It was said, in effect, by Newton, and has ever since been insisted upon by his disciples--“Allow us, without proof, the existence of two universal forces--centrifugal and centripetal, or attraction and repulsion, and we will construct a system which shall explain all the leading mysteries of nature. An apple falling from a tree, or a stone rolling downwards, and a pail of water tied to a string set in rapid motion were assumed to be types of the relations existing among all the bodies in the universe. The moon was assumed to have a tendency to fall towards the Earth, and the Earth and Moon together towards the Sun. The same relation was assumed to exist between all the smaller and larger luminaries in the firmament; and it soon became necessary to extend this assumption to infinity. The universe was parcelled out into systems--co-existent and illimitable. Suns, Planets, Satellites, and Comets were assumed to exist, infinite in number and boundless in extent; and to enable the theorists to explain the alternating and constantly recurring phenomena which were everywhere observable, these numberless and for-ever-extending objects were assumed to be spheres. The Earth we inhabit was called a _planet_; and because it was thought to be reasonable that the luminous objects in the firmament which were called _planets_ were _spherical_ and had _motion_, so it was only reasonable to suppose that as the Earth was a planet it must also be spherical and have motion--_ergo_, the Earth is a globe, and moves upon axes and in an orbit round the Sun! And as the Earth is a globe, and is inhabited, so again it is only reasonable to conclude that the planets are worlds like the Earth, and are inhabited by sentient beings! What reasoning! Assumption upon assumption, and the conclusion derived therefrom called a thing proved, to be employed as a truth to substantiate the first assumption! Such a “juggle and jumble” of fancies and falsehoods, extended and intensified as it is in theoretical astronomy, is calculated to make the unprejudiced inquirer revolt in horror from the terrible conjuration which has been practised upon him; to sternly resolve to resist its further progress; to endeavour to overthrow the entire edifice, and to bury in its ruins the false honours which have been associated with its fabricators, and which still attach to its devotees. For the learning, the patience, the perseverance, and devotion for which they have ever been examples, honour and applause need not be withheld; but their false reasoning, the advantages they have taken of the general ignorance of mankind in respect to astronomical subjects, and the unfounded theories they have advanced and defended, cannot but be regretted, and ought to be resisted. It has become a duty, paramount and imperative, to meet them in open, avowed, and unyielding rebellion; to declare that their unopposed reign of error and confusion is over; and that henceforth, like a falling dynasty, they must shrink and disappear, leaving the throne and the kingdom to those awakening intellects whose numbers are constantly increasing, and whose march is rapid and irresistible. The soldiers of truth and reason have drawn the sword, and ere another generation has been educated, will have forced the usurper to abdicate. The axe is lifted--it is falling, and in a very few years will have “cut the cumberer down.”

The Earth a Globe, and it is necessarily demanded that it has a diurnal and an annual and various other motions; for a globular world without motion would be useless--day and night, winter and summer, the half year’s light and darkness at the “North Pole,” and other phenomena could not be explained by the supposition of rotundity without the assumption also of rapid and constant motion. Hence it is _assumed_ that the Earth and Moon, and all the Planets and their Satellites move in relation to each other, and that the whole move together in different planes round the Sun. The Sun and its “system” of revolving bodies are now assumed to have a general and all-inclusive motion, in common with an endless series of other Suns and systems, around some other and “central Sun” which has been assumed to be the true axis and centre of the Universe! These assumed general motions with the particular and peculiar motions which are assigned to the various bodies in detail, together constitute a system so confused and complicated that it is almost impossible and always difficult of comprehension by the most active and devoted minds. The most simple and direct experiments, however, may be shown to prove that the Earth has no progressive motion whatever; and here again the advocates of this interminable and entangling arrangement are challenged to produce a single instance of so called proofs of these motions which does not involve an assumption--often a glaring falsehood--but always a point which is not, or cannot be demonstrated.

The magnitudes, distances, velocities, and periodic times which these assumed motions eliminate, are all glaringly fictitious, because they are only such as a false theory creates a necessity for. It is geometrically demonstrable that all the visible luminaries in the firmament are within a distance of a few thousand miles, not more than the space which stretches between the North Pole and the Cape of Good Hope; and the principle of measurement--that of plane triangulation--which demonstrates this important fact, is one which no mathematician, demanding to be considered a master in the science, dare for a moment deny. All these luminaries then, and the Sun itself, being so near to us, cannot be other than very small as compared with the Earth we inhabit. They are all in motion over the Earth, which is alone immoveable, and therefore they cannot be anything more than secondary and subservient structures, ministering to this fixed material world, and to its inhabitants. This is a plain, simple, and in every respect demonstrable philosophy, agreeing with the evidence of our senses, borne out by every fairly instituted experiment, and never requiring a violation of those principles of investigation which the human mind has ever recognized, and depended upon in its every day life. The modern, or Newtonian Astronomy, has none of these characteristics. The whole system taken together constitutes a most monstrous absurdity. It is false in its foundation; irregular, unfair, and illogical in its details; and in its conclusions inconsistent and contradictory. Worse than all, it is a prolific source of irreligion and of atheism, of which its advocates are, practically, supporters! By defending a system which is directly opposite to that which is taught in connection with all religions, they lead the more critical and daring intellects to reject the scriptures altogether, to ignore the worship, and doubt and deny the existence of a Supreme Ruler of the world. Many of the primest minds are thus irreparably injured, robbed of those present pleasures, and that cheering hope of the future which the earnest christian devotee holds as of far greater value than all earthly wealth and grandeur; or than the mastery of all the philosophical complications which the human mind ever invented.

The doctrine of the Earth’s rotundity and motion is now shown to be unconditionally false; and therefore the scriptures which assert the contrary, are, in their philosophical teachings at least, _literally true_. In practical science therefore, atheism and denial of scriptural authority have no foundation. If human theories are cast aside, and the facts of nature, and legitimate reasoning alone depended upon, it will be seen that religion and true philosophy are not antagonistic, and that the hopes which both encourage may be fully relied upon. To the religious mind this matter is most important, it is indeed no less than a sacred question, for it renders complete the evidence that the Jewish and Christian scriptures are true, and must have been communicated to mankind by an anterior and supernal Being. For if after so many ages of mental struggling, of speculation and trial, and change and counterchange, we have at length discovered that all astronomical theories are false, that the Earth is a plane, and motionless, and that the various luminaries above it are lights only and not worlds; and that these very doctrines have been taught and recorded in a work which has been handed down to us from the earliest times; from a time, in fact, when mankind could not have had sufficient experience to enable them to criticise and doubt, much less to invent, it follows that whoever dictated and caused such doctrines to be recorded and preserved to all future generations, must have been superhuman, omniscient, and, to the Earth and its inhabitants pre-existent.

To the dogged Atheist, whose “mind is made up” not to enter into any further investigation, and not to admit of possible error in his past conclusions, this question is of no more account than it is to an Ox. He who cares not to re-examine from time to time his state of mind, and the result of his accumulated experience is in no single respect better than the lowest animal in creation. He may see nothing higher, more noble, more intelligent or beautiful than himself; and in this his pride, conceit, and vanity find an incarnation. To such a creature there is no God, for he is himself an equal with the highest being he has ever recognised! Such Atheism exists to an alarming extent among the philosophers of Europe and America; and it has been mainly fostered by the astronomical and geological theories of the day. Besides which, in consequence of the differences between the language of Scripture and the teachings of modern Astronomy, there is to be found in the very hearts of Christian and Jewish congregations a sort of “smouldering scepticism;” kind of faint suspicion which causes great numbers to manifest a cold and visible indifference to religious requirements. It is this which has led thousands to desert the cause of earnest, active Christianity, and which has forced the majority of those who still remain in the ranks of religion to declare “that the Scriptures were not intended to teach correctly other than moral and religious doctrines; that the references so often made to the physical world, and to natural phenomena generally, are given in language to suit the prevailing notions and the ignorance of the people.” A Christian philosopher who wrote almost a century ago in reference to remarks similar to the above, says, “Why should we suspect that Moses, Joshua, David, Solomon, and the later prophets and inspired writers have counterfeited their sentiments concerning the order of the universe, from pure complaisance, or being in any way obliged to dissemble with a view to gratify the prepossessions of the populace? These eminent men being kings, lawgivers, and generals themselves, or always privileged with access to the courts of sovereign princes, besides the reverence and awful dignity which the power of divination and working of miracles procured to them, had great worldly and spiritual authority.... They had often in charge to command, suspend, revert, and otherwise interfere with the course and laws of nature, and were never daunted to speak out the truth before the most mighty potentates on earth, much less would they be overawed by the _vox populi_.” To say that the Scriptures were not intended to teach science truthfully, is in substance to declare that God himself has stated, and commissioned His prophets to teach things which are utterly false! Those Newtonian philosophers who still hold that the sacred volume is the Word of God, are thus placed in a fearful dilemma. How can the two systems, so directly opposite in character, be reconciled? Oil and water alone will not combine--mix them by violence as we may, they will again separate when allowed to rest. Call oil oil, and water water, and acknowledge them to be distinct in nature and value; but let no “hodge-podge” be attempted, and passed off as a genuine compound of oil and water. Call Scripture the Word of God--the Creator and Ruler of all things, and the Fountain of all Truth; and call the Newtonian or Copernican Astronomy the word and work of man, of man, too, in his vainest mood--so vain and conceited as not to be content with the direct and simple teachings of his Maker, but who must rise up in rebellion and conjure into existence a fanciful complicated fabric, which being insisted upon as true, creates and necessitates the dark and horrible interrogatives--Is God a deceiver? Has He spoken direct and unequivocal falsehood? Can we no longer indulge in the beautiful and consoling thought that God’s justice, and love, and truth are unchanging and reliable for ever? Let Christians--for Sceptics and Atheists may be left out of the question--to whatever division of the Church they belong, look at this matter calmly and earnestly. Let them determine to uproot the deception which has led them to think that they can altogether ignore the plainest astronomical teaching of Scripture, and endorse a system to which it is in every sense opposed. The following language is quoted as an instance of the manner in which the doctrine of the Earth’s rotundity and the plurality of worlds interferes with Scriptural teachings:--“The theory of original sin is confuted (by our astronomical and geological knowledge), and I cannot permit the belief, when I know that our world is but a mere speck, a perishable atom in the vast space of creation, that God should just select this little spot to descend upon and assume our form, and clothe Himself in our flesh, to become visible to human eyes, to the tiny beings of this comparatively insignificant world.... Thus millions of distant worlds, with the beings allotted to them, were to be extirpated and destroyed in consequence of the original sin of Adam. No sentiment of the human mind can surely be more derogatory to the Divine attributes of the Creator, nor more repugnant to the known economy of the celestial bodies. For in the first place, who is to say, among the infinity of worlds, whether Adam was the _only creature_ who was tempted by Satan and fell, and by his fall involved all the other worlds in his guilt.”[42]

[42] Encyclopædia Londenensis, p. 457, vol. 2.

The difficulty experienced by the author of the above remarks is clearly one which can no longer exist, when it is seen that the doctrine of a plurality of worlds is an impossibility. That it is an impossibility is shown by the fact that the Sun, Moon, and Stars are very small bodies, and very near to the earth; this fact is proved by actual non-theoretical measurement; this measurement is made on the principle of plane trigonometry: this principle of plane trigonometry is adopted because the Earth is a Plane; and all the base lines employed in the triangulation are horizontal. By the same practical method of reasoning, all the difficulties which, upon geological and astronomical grounds, have been raised to the literal teachings of the scriptures, may be completely destroyed. Instances:--The scriptures repeatedly declare that the Sun moves over the Earth--“His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it.” “He ariseth and goeth down, and hasteth to his place whence he arose.” “The sun stood still in the midst of heaven.” “Great is the Earth, high is the heaven, swift is the Sun in his course.” In the religious poems of all ages the same fact is presented. Christians especially, of every denomination, are familiar with, and often read and sing with delight such poetry as the following:--

“My God who makes the Sun to know
His proper hour to rise,
And to give light to all below
Doth send him _round the skies_.”

“When from the chambers of the east
His _morning race_ begins,
He never tires _nor stops to rest_,
But round the world he shines.”

“God of the morning, at whose voice,
The cheerful sun makes haste to rise,
And, like a giant, doth rejoice,
To _run his journey through the skies_.”

“He sends the sun _his circuit round_,
To cheer the fruits and warm the ground.”

“How fair has the day been!
How bright was the Sun!
How lovely and joyful
The _course that he run_.”

All the expressions of scripture are consistent with the fact of the Sun’s motion. They never declare anything to the contrary. Whenever they speak of the subject it is in the same manner. The direct evidence of our senses confirms it; and actual and special observations, as well as the most practical scientific experiments, declare the same thing. The progressive and concentric motion of the Sun over the Earth is in every sense demonstrable; yet the Newtonian astronomers insist upon it that the Sun does not really move, that it only _appears_ to move, and that this appearance arises from the motion of the Earth; that when, as the scriptures affirm, the “Sun stood still in the midst of heaven,” it was the _Earth_ which stood still and _not_ the Sun! that the scriptures therefore speak falsely, and the experiments of science, and the observations and applications of our senses are never to be relied upon. Whence comes this bold and arrogant denial of the value of our senses and judgement, and the authority of scripture? The Earth or the Sun moves. Our senses tell us, and the scriptures declare that the Earth is fixed and that it is the Sun which moves above and around it; but a _theory_, which is absolutely false in its groundwork, and ridiculously illogical in its details, demands that the Earth is round and moves upon axes, and in several other and various directions; and that these motions are _sufficient to account for_ certain phenomena without supposing that the Sun moves, _therefore_ the Sun is a fixed body, and his motion is _only apparent_! Such _reasoning_ is a disgrace to philosophy, and fearfully dangerous to the religious interests of humanity!

Christian ministers and commentators find it a most unwelcome task when called upon to reconcile the plain and simple philosophy of the scriptures with the monstrous teachings of theoretical astronomy. Dr. Adam Clark, in a letter to the Rev. Thomas Roberts, of Bath,[43] speaking of the progress of his commentary, and of his endeavours to reconcile the statements of scripture with the modern astronomy, says: “Joshua’s Sun and Moon standing still, have kept me going for nearly three weeks! That one chapter has afforded me more vexation than anything I have ever met with; and even now I am but about half satisfied with my own solution of all the difficulties, though I am confident that I have removed mountains that were never touched before; shall I say that I am heartily weary of my work, so weary that I have a thousand times wished I had never written one page of it, and am repeatedly purposing to give it up.”

[43] Life of Adam Clark, 8vo Edition.

The Rev. John Wesley, in his journal, writes as follows:--“The more I consider them the more I doubt of all systems of astronomy. I doubt whether we can with certainty know either the distance or magnitude of any star in the firmament; else why do astronomers so immensely differ, even with regard to the distance of the Sun from the Earth? Some affirming it to be only three and others ninety millions of miles.”[44]

[44] Extracts from works of Rev. J. Wesley, 3rd Edition, 1829.
Published by Mason, London, p. 392, vol. 2.

In vol. 3, page 203, the following entry occurs:--“January 1st, 1765.--This week I wrote an answer to a warm letter published in the _London Magazine_, the author whereof is much displeased that I presume to doubt of the ‘modern astronomy.’ I cannot help it. Nay, the more I consider the more my doubts increase; so that at present I doubt whether any man on earth knows either the distance or magnitude, I will not say of a fixed Star, but Saturn or Jupiter--yea of the Sun or Moon.”

In vol. 13, page 359, he says:--“And so the whole hypothesis of innumerable Suns and worlds moving round them vanishes into air.” And again at page 430 of same volume, the following words occur:--“The planets revolutions we are acquainted with, but who is able to this day, regularly to demonstrate either their magnitude or their distance? Unless he will prove, as is the usual way, the magnitude from the distance, and the distance from the magnitude. * * * Dr. Rogers has evidently demonstrated that no conjunction of the centrifugal and centripetal forces can possibly account for this, or even cause any body to move in an ellipsis.” There are several other incidental remarks to be found in his writings which shew that the Rev. John Wesley was well acquainted with the then modern astronomy; and that he saw clearly both its self-contradictory and its anti-scriptural character.

It is a very popular idea among modern astronomers that the stellar universe is an endless congeries of systems, of Suns and attendant worlds peopled with sentient beings analogous in the purpose and destiny of their existence to the inhabitants of this earth. This doctrine of a plurality of worlds, although it conveys the most magnificent ideas of the universe, is purely fanciful, and may be compared to the “dreams of the alchemists” who laboured with unheard of enthusiasm to discover the “philosopher’s stone,” the _elixir vitæ_, and the “universal solvent.” However grand the first two projects might have been in their realisation, it is known that they were never developed in a practical sense, and the latter idea of a solvent which would dissolve everything was suddenly and unexpectedly destroyed by the few remarks of a simple but critical observer, who demanded to know what service a substance would be to them which would dissolve all things? What could they keep it in? for it would dissolve every vessel wherein they sought to preserve it! This idea of a plurality of worlds is but a natural and reasonable conclusion drawn from the doctrine of the Earth’s rotundity. But this doctrine being false its off shoot is equally so. The supposition that the heavenly bodies are Suns and inhabited worlds is demonstrably impossible in nature, and has no foundation whatever in Scripture. “In the beginning God created the Heaven and _the Earth_.” One Earth _only_ is created; and the fact is more especially described in Genesis, ch. i., v. 10. Where, instead of the word “Earth” meaning both land and water as together forming a globe, as it does in the Newtonian astronomy, only the _dry land_ was called _earth_,” and “the gathering together of the waters called He seas.” The Sun, Moon, and Stars are described as lights only and not worlds. A great number of passages might be quoted which prove that no other material world is ever in the slightest manner referred to by the sacred writers. The creation of the world; the origin of evil, and the fall of man; the plan of redemption by the death of Christ; the day of judgement, and the final consummation of all things are invariably associated with _this Earth alone_. The expression in Hebrews, ch. i., v. 2, “by whom also he made the _worlds_,” and in Heb., ch. ii., v. 3, “through faith we understand that the _worlds_ were framed,” are known to be a comparatively recent rendering from the original Greek documents. The word which has been translated _worlds_ is fully as capable of being rendered in the singular number as the plural; and previous to the introduction of the Copernican Astronomy was always translated “_the world_.” The Roman Catholic and the French Protestant Bibles still contain the singular number; and in a copy of an English Protestant Bible printed in the year 1608, the following translation is given:--“Through faith we understand that _the world_ was ordained.” So that either the plural expression “worlds” was used in later translations to accord with the astronomical notions then recently introduced, or it was meant to include the Earth and the spiritual world, as referred to in:--

_Hebrews_ ii., 5--“For unto angels hath he not put into subjection _the world to come_.”

_Ephesians_ i., 21--“Far above all principality and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named not only in _this world_, but also in _that which is to come_.”

_Luke_ xviii., 29, 30--“There is no man that hath left house, or parents, or brethren, or wife, or children, for the kingdom of God’s sake, who shall not receive manifold more in this _present time_, and in _the world to come_ life everlasting.”

_Matthew_ xii., 32--“Whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in _this world_ neither in the _world to come_.”

The Scriptures teach that in the day of the Lord “the Heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat,” and the “stars of Heaven fall unto the Earth even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs when shaken of a mighty wind.” The Newtonian system of astronomy declares that the stars and planets are mighty worlds--nearly all of them much larger than this Earth. The fixed stars are considered to be suns, equal to if not greater than our own sun, which is said to be above 800,000 miles in diameter. All this is proveably false, but to those who have been led to believe it, the difficult question arises,--“How can thousands of stars fall upon the Earth, which is many times less than any one of them?” How can the Earth with a supposed diameter of 8000 miles receive the numerous suns of the firmament many of which are said to be a million miles in diameter?

These stars are assumed to have positions so far from the Earth that the distance is almost inexpressible; figures indeed may be arranged on paper but in reading them no practical idea is conveyed to the mind. Many of them are said to be so distant that should they fall with the velocity of light or above one hundred and sixty thousand miles in a second, or six hundred millions of miles per hour, they would require nearly two millions of years to reach the Earth! Sir William Herschel in a paper on “The power of telescopes to penetrate into space,” published in the _Philosophical Transactions_ for the year 1800, affirms, that with his powerful instruments he discovered brilliant luminaries so far from the Earth that the light from them “could not have been less than _one million nine hundred thousand years in its progress_.” Again the difficulty presents itself--“If the stars of Heaven begin to fall to-day, and with the greatest imaginable velocity, millions of years must elapse before they reach the Earth!” But the Scriptures declare that these changes shall occur suddenly--shall come, indeed, “as a thief in the night.”

The same theory, with its false and inconceivable distances and magnitudes, operates to destroy all the ordinary, common sense, and scripturally authorised chronology. Christian and Jewish commentators, unless astronomically educated, hold and teach that the Earth, as well as the Sun, Moon, and Stars, were created about 4,000 years before the birth of Christ, or less than 6,000 years before the present time. But if many of these luminaries are so distant that their light would require above a million of years to reach us; and if, as we are taught, bodies are visible to us because of the light which they reflect or radiate, then their light _has_ reached us, because we have been able to see them, and therefore they must have been shining, and must have been created at least _one million nine hundred thousand years ago_! The chronology of the bible indicates that a period of six thousand years has not yet elapsed since “the Heavens and the Earth were finished, and _all_ the Host of them.”

In the modern astronomy, Continents, Oceans, Seas, and Islands, are considered as together forming one vast Globe of 25,000 miles in circumference. This has been shown to be fallacious, and it is clearly contrary to the plain, literal teaching of the scriptures. In the first chapter of Genesis, we find the following language: “and God said let the waters under the heaven be gathered unto one place, and let the _dry land_ appear; and it was so. And God called the dry land _Earth_, and the gathering together of the waters called He Seas.” Here the Earth and Seas--Earth and the great body of waters, are described as two distinct and independent regions, and not as together forming one Globe which astronomers call “the Earth.” This description is confirmed by several other passages of scripture.

2 _Peter_, iii., 5--“For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the Word of God the Heavens were of old, and the Earth _standing out of the waters and in the waters_.”

_Psalms_ cxxxvi., 6--“O give thanks to the Lord of Lords, that by wisdom made the heavens, and that _stretchet out the earth above the waters_.”

_Psalms_ xxiv., 1, 2--“The earth is the Lord’s and the fulness thereof; the world and they that dwell therein: for he hath _founded it upon the seas, and established it upon the floods_.”

_Hermes_ (New Testament Apocrypha)--“Who with the word of his strength fixed the heaven; and _founded the earth upon the waters_.”

_Job_ xxvi., 7--“He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the Earth upon nothing.”

Some think that the latter part of this verse, “hangeth the Earth upon nothing,” favours the idea that the Earth is a globe revolving in space without visible support; but Dr. Adam Clark, although himself a Newtonian philosopher, says, in his commentary upon this passage in Job, the literal translation is, “on the hollow or empty waste,” and he quotes a Chaldee version of the passage which runs as follows: “He layeth the Earth upon the waters nothing sustaining it.”

It is not that He “hangeth the Earth upon nothing,” but “hangeth or layeth it upon the waters” which were empty or waste, and where before there was nothing. This is in strict accordance with the other expressions, that “the Earth was founded upon the waters,” &c., and also with the expression in Genesis, “that the face of the deep was covered only with darkness.”

If the Earth were a globe, it is evident that everywhere the water of its surface, the seas, lakes, oceans, and rivers, must be sustained the land, the Earth must be under the water; but if the land and the waters are distinct, and the Earth is “founded upon the seas,” then everywhere the sea must sustain the land as it does a ship or any other floating mass, and there is water below the earth. In this particular as in all the others, the scriptures are beautifully sequential and consistent:--

_Exodus_ xx, 4--“Thou shalt not make unto thee any likeness of anything in heaven above or in the Earth beneath, or in the _waters under the Earth_.”

_Genesis_ xliv, 25--“The Almighty shall bless thee with the blessings of heaven above, and blessings of the _deep that lieth under_.”

_Deut._ xxxiii, 13--“Blessed be his land, for the precious things of heaven; for the dew; and for the _deep which couched beneath_.”

_Deut._ iv, 18--“Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves, and make no similitude of anything on the Earth, or the likeness of anything that is in the _waters beneath the Earth_.”

The same idea prevailed among the ancients generally. In Ovid’s Metamorphoses, Jupiter, in an assembly of the gods, is made to say, “I swear by the infernal _waves which glide under the Earth_.”

If the earth is a distinct structure standing in and upon the waters of the “great deep,” it follows that, unless it can be shown that something else sustains the waters, that the depth is fathomless. As there is no evidence whatever of anything existing underneath the “great deep,” and as in many parts of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans no bottom has been found by the most scientific and efficient means which human ingenuity could invent, we are forced to the conclusion that the depth is boundless. This conclusion is again confirmed by the scriptures.

_Jeremiah_ xxxi, 37--“Thus saith the Lord, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar, the Lord of Hosts is His name. If these ordinances depart from before me, saith the Lord, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever. Thus saith the Lord: if heaven above can be measured, and the _foundations_ of the _Earth searched out beneath_, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel.”

From the above it will be seen that God’s promises to his people could no more be broken than could the height of heaven, or the depths of the Earth’s foundations be searched out. The fathomless deep beneath--upon which the Earth is founded, and the infinitude of heaven above, are here given as emblems of the boundlessness of God’s power, and of the certainty that all his ordinances will be fulfilled. When God’s power can be limited, heaven above will no longer be infinite; and the mighty waters, the foundations of the earth may be fathomed. But the scriptures plainly teach us that the power and wisdom of God, the heights of Heaven, and the depths of the waters under the Earth are alike unfathomable; and no true philosophy ever avers, nor ever did nor ever can aver, a single fact to the contrary.

In all the religions of the Earth the words “up” and “above” are associated with a region of peace and happiness. Heaven is always spoken of as _above_ the _Earth_. The scriptures invariable convey the same idea:--

_Deut._ xxvi., 15--“Look _down_ from Thy holy habitation, from Heaven, and bless Thy people Israel.”

_Exodus_ xix., 20--“And the Lord came _down_ upon Mount Sinai.”

_Psalm_ cii., 19--“For he hath looked _down_ from the height of his sanctuary: from Heaven did the Lord behold the Earth.”

_Isaiah_ lxiii., 15--“Look _down_ from Heaven, and behold from the habitation of Thy holiness and of Thy glory.”

_Psalm_ ciii., 11--“For as the Heaven is high _above the Earth_.”

2 _Kings_ ii., 11--“And Elijah went _up_ by a whirlwind into Heaven.”

_Mark_ xvi., 10--“So then after the Lord had spoken unto them he was received _up into Heaven_.”

_Luke_ xxiv., 51--“And it came to pass, while He blessed them, He was parted from them, and carried _up into Heaven_.”

If the Earth is a globe revolving at the rate of above a thousand miles an hour all this language of scripture is necessarily fallacious. The terms “up” and “down,” and “above” and “below,” are words without meaning, at best are merely relative--indicative of no absolute or certain direction. That which is “up” at noon-day, is directly “down” at midnight. Heaven can only be spoken of as “above,” and the scriptures can only be read correctly for a single moment out of the twenty-four hours; for before the sentence “Heaven is high above the Earth” could be uttered, the speaker would be descending from the meridian where Heaven was above him, and his eye although unmoved would be fixed upon a point millions of miles away from his first position. Hence in all the ceremonials of religion, where the hands and eyes are raised upwards to Heaven, nay when Christ himself “lifted up his eyes to Heaven and said, Father, the hour is come,” his gaze would be sweeping along the firmament at rapidly varying angles, and with such incomprehensible velocity that a fixed point of observation, and a definite position, as indicating the seat or throne of “Him that sitteth in the Heavens” would be an impossibility.

Again: the religious world have always believed and meditated upon the word “Heaven” as representing an infinite region of joy and safety, of rest and happiness unspeakable; as “the place of God’s residence, the dwelling place of angels and the blessed; the true palace of God, entirely separated from the impurities and imperfections, the alterations and changes of the lower world; where He reigns in eternal peace. * * It is the sacred mansion of light, and joy, and glory.[45]” But if there is a plurality of worlds, millions upon millions, nay, an “infinity of worlds,” if the universe is filled with innumerable systems of burning suns, and rapidly revolving planets, intermingled with rushing comets and whirling satellites, all dashing and sweeping through space in directions, and with velocities surpassing all human comprehension, and terrible even to contemplate, where is the place of rest and safety? Where is the true and unchangeable “palace of God?” In what direction is Heaven to be found? Where is the liberated human soul to find its home--its refuge from change and motion, from uncertainty and danger? Is it to wander for ever in a labyrinth of rolling worlds? To struggle for ever in a never ending maze of revolving suns and systems? To be never at rest, but for ever seeking to avoid some vortex of attraction--some whirlpool of gravitation? The belief in the existence of Heaven, as a region of peace and harmony “extending (above the Earth) through all extent,” and beyond the influence of natural laws and restless elements, is jeopardised, if not destroyed, by a false and usurping astronomy, which has no better foundation than human conceit and presumption. If this ill-founded, unsupported philosophy is admitted by the religious mind, it can no longer say that--

“Far above the sun, and stars, and skies,
In realms of endless light and love,
My Father’s mansion lies.”

[45] Cruden’s Concordance, article “Heaven.”

The modern theoretical astronomy affirms that the Moon is a solid opaque, non-luminous body; that it is, in fact, nothing less than a material world. It has even been mapped out into continents, islands, seas, lakes, volcanoes, &c., &c. The nature of its atmosphere and character of its productions and possible inhabitants have been discussed with as much freedom as though our philosophers were quite as familiar with it as they are with the different objects and localities upon Earth. The light, too, with which the Moon so beautifully illuminates the firmament is declared to be only borrowed--to be only the light of the Sun intercepted and reflected upon the Earth. These doctrines are not only opposed by a formidable array of well-ascertained facts (as given in previous sections), but they are totally denied by the scriptures. The Sun and Moon and Stars are never referred to as worlds, but simply as _lights_ to rule alternately in the firmament.

_Genesis_ i., 14, 16--“And God said let there be _lights_ in the firmament of the Heaven to divide the day from the night. * * * And God made two _great lights_--the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night.”

_Psalm_ cxxxvi., 7, 9--“O give thanks to Him that made _great lights_: the Sun to rule by day, the Moon and Stars to rule by night.”

_Jeremiah_, xxxi., 35--“The Sun is given for a light by day, and the ordinances of the Moon and of the Stars for a light by night.”

_Ezekiel_, xxxii., 7, 8--“I will cover the Sun with a cloud; and the Moon shall not give _her light_.” “All the bright lights of Heaven will I make dark over thee.”

_Psalm_ cxlviii., 3--“Praise him Sun and Moon, praise him all ye Stars of light.”

_Isaiah_ xiii., 10--“The Sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the Moon shall not cause _her_ light to shine.”

_Matthew_ xxiv., 29--“Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the Sun be darkened, and the Moon shall not give her light.”

_Isaiah_ ix., 19, 20--“The Sun shall be no more thy light by day; neither for brightness shall the _Moon give light_ unto thee. * * Thy Sun shall no more go down; neither shall thy Moon withdraw itself.”

_Psalm_ cxxxvi., 7 to 9--“To him that made great lights, the Sun to rule by day, the Moon and Stars to rule by night.”

_Job_ xxv., 5--“Behold even to the Moon, and _it_ shineth not.”

_Ecclesiastes_ xii., 2--“While the Sun, or the light, or the Moon, or the Stars be not darkened.”

_Isaiah_ xxx., 26--“The light of the Moon shall be as the light of the Sun; and the light of the Sun shall be sevenfold.”

_Deuteronomy_ xxxiii., 14--“And for the precious fruits brought forth by the Sun, and for the precious things put forth by the Moon.”

In the very first of the passages above quoted the doctrine is enunciated that various distinct and independent _lights_ were created. But that two _great_ lights were specially called into existence for the purpose of ruling the day and the night. The Sun and the Moon are declared to be these great and alternately ruling lights. Nothing is here said, nor is it in any other part of scripture said, that the Sun is a great light, and that the Moon shines only by reflection. The Sun is called the “greater light to rule the day,” and the Moon the “lesser light to rule the night.” Although of these two “great lights” one is less than the other, each is declared to shine with its own light. Hence in Deuteronomy, c. 33, v. 14, it is affirmed that certain fruits are specially brought forth by the influence of the Sun’s light, and that certain other productions are “put forth by the Moon.” That the light of the sun is influential in encouraging the growth of certain natural products; and that the light of the Moon has a distinct influence in promoting the increase of certain other natural substances, is a matter well known to those who are familiar with horticultural and agricultural phenomena; and it is abundantly proved by chemical evidence that the two lights are distinct in character and in action upon various elements. This distinction is beautifully preserved throughout the sacred scriptures. In no single instance are the two lights confounded. On the contrary, in the New Testament, St. Paul affirms with authority, that “there is one glory of the Sun, and another glory of the Moon, and another glory of the Stars.”

The same fact of the difference in the two lights, and their independence of each other is maintained in the scriptures to the last. “The Sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the Moon became as blood.” If the Moon is only a reflector, the moment the Sun becomes black her surface will be blackened also, and not remain as blood, while the Sun is dark and black as sackcloth of hair!

Again: the modern system of astronomy teaches that this earth cannot possibly receive light from the Stars, because of their supposed great distance from it: that the fixed Stars are only burning spheres, or Sun’s to their own systems of planets and satellites: and that their light terminates, or no longer produces an active luminosity at the distance of nearly two thousand millions of miles. Here again the scriptures affirm the contrary doctrine.

_Genesis_ i., 16-17--“He made the Stars also; and God set them in the firmament _to give light upon the earth_.”

_Isaiah_ xiii., 10--“For the Stars of Heaven and the constellations thereof shall not _give their light_.”

_Ezekiel_ xxxii., 7--“I will cover the Heaven, and make the _Stars_ thereof _dark_.”

_Joel_ ii., 10--“The Sun and the Moon shall be dark, and the _Stars_ shall withdraw _their shining_.”

_Psalm_ cxlviii., 3--“Praise him Sun and Moon: promise him all ye _Stars of Light_.”

_Jeremiah_ xxxi., 35--“Thus saith the Lord, which giveth the Sun for a light by day; and the ordinances of the Moon and of _the Stars_ for a _light by night_.”

_Daniel_ xii., 3--“They that turn many to righteousness shall _shine_ as the _Stars_ for ever and ever.”

These quotations place it beyond doubt that the Stars were made expressly to shine in the firmament, and “to give light upon the Earth.” In addition to this language of scripture, we have the evidence of our own eyes that the Stars give abundant light. “What beautiful star-light!” is a common expression: and we all remember the difference between a dark and starless night, and one when the firmament is as it were studded with brilliant luminaries. Travellers inform us that in many parts of the world, where the sky is clear and free from clouds and vapours for weeks together, the Stars appear both larger and brighter than they do in England; and that their light is sufficiently intense to enable them to read and write, and to travel with safety through the most dangerous places.

If it be true that the Stars and the Planets are not simply lights, as the scriptures affirm them to be, but magnificent worlds, for the most part much larger than this earth, then it is a very proper question to ask--“are they inhabited?” If the answer be in the affirmative, it is equally proper to inquire “have the first parents in each world been tempted?” If so, “have they fallen?” if so, “Have they required redemption?” And “have they been redeemed?” “Has each world had a separate Redeemer? or has Christ been the Redeemer for every world in the universe?” And if so, “did His suffering and crucifixion on this Earth suffice for the redemption of the fallen inhabitants of all other worlds? Or had He to suffer and die in each world successively? Did the fall of Adam in this world involve in his guilt the inhabitants of all other worlds? Or was the baneful influence of Satan confined to the first parents of this Earth? If so, why so? and if not, why not? But, and if, and why, and again--but it is useless thus to ponder! The Christian philosopher must be confounded! If his religion be to him a living reality, he will turn with loathing or spurn with indignation and disgust, as he would a poisonous reptile, a system of astronomy which creates in his mind so much confusion and uncertainty! But as the system which necessitates such doubts and difficulties has been shown to be purely theoretical; and to have not the slightest foundation in fact, the religious mind has really no cause for apprehension. Not a shadow of doubt remains that this World is the only one created; that the sacred Scriptures contain, in addition to religious and moral doctrines, a true and consistent philosophy; that they were written for the good of mankind, at the direct instigation of God himself; and that all their teachings and promises are truthful, consistent, and reliable. Whoever holds the contrary conclusion is the victim of an arrogant false astronomy, of an equally false and presumptuous geology, or a suicidal method of reasoning--a logic which never demands a proof of its premises, and which therefore leads to conclusions which are contrary to nature, to human experience, and to the direct teaching of God’s word, and therefore contrary to the deepest and most lasting interests of humanity. “God has spoken to man in two voices, the voice of inspiration and the voice of nature. By man’s ignorance they have been made to disagree; but the time will come, and cannot be far distant, when these two languages will strictly accord; when the science of nature will no longer contradict the science of scripture.”[46]

[46] Professor Hunt.

CUI BONO.--“Of all terrors to the generous soul, that _Cui bono_ is the one to be the most zealously avoided. Whether it be proposed to find the magnetic point, or a passage impossible to be utilised if discovered, or a race of men of no good to any human institution extant, and of no good to themselves; or to seek the Unicorn in Madagascar, and when we had found him not to be able to make use of him; or the great central plateau of Australia, where no one could live for centuries to come; or the great African lake, which, for all the good it would do us English folk might as well be in the Moon; or the source of the Nile, the triumphant discovery of which would neither lower the rents nor take off the taxes anywhere--whatever it is, the _Cui bono_ is always a weak and cowardly argument: essentially short-sighted too, seeing that, according to the law of the past, by which we may always safely predicate the future, so much falls into the hands of the seeker, for which he was not looking, and of which he never even knew the existence. The area of the possible is very wide still, and very insignificant and minute, the angle we have staked out and marked impossible. What do we know of the powers which nature has yet in reserve, of the secrets she has still untold, the wealth still concealed? Every day sees new discoveries in the sciences we can investigate at home. What, then, may not lie waiting for the explorers abroad? Weak and short-sighted commercially, the _cui bono_ is worse than both, morally. When we remember the powerful manhood, the patience, unselfishness, courage, devotion, and nobleness of aim which must accompany a perilous enterprise, and which form so great an example, and so heart-stirring to the young and to the wavering, it is no return to barbaric indifference to life to say, better indeed a few deaths for even a commercially useless enterprise--better a few hearths made desolate, and a few wives and mothers left to bear their stately sorrow to the end of time, that the future may rejoice and be strong: better a thousand failures, and a thousand useless undertakings, than the loss of national manhood or the weakening of the national fibre. Quixotism is a folly when the energy which might have achieved conquests over misery and wrong, if rightfully applied, is wasted in fighting windmills; but to forego any great enterprise for fear of the dangers attending, or to check a grand endeavour by the _cui bono_ of ignorance and moral scepticism, is worse than a folly--it is baseness, and a cowardice.[47]”

[47] _Daily News_ of April 5, 1865.

The above quotation is an excellent general answer to all those who may, in reference to the subject of this work, or to anything which is not of immediate worldly interest, obtrude the _cui bono_? But as a special reply it may be claimed for the subject of these pages--

First,--It is more edifying, more satisfactory, and in every sense far better that we should know the true and detect the false. Thereby the mind becomes fixed, established upon an eternal foundation, and no longer subject to those waverings and changes, those oscillations and fluctuations which are ever the result of falsehood. To know the truth and to embody it in our lives and purposes our progress must be safe and rapid, and almost unlimited in extent. None can say to what it may lead or where it may culminate. Who shall dare to set bounds to the capabilities of the mind, or to fix a limit to human progress? Whatever may be the destiny of the human race truth alone will help and secure its realisation.

Second,--Having detected the fundamental falsehoods of modern astronomy, and discovered that the Earth is a plane, and motionless, and the only material world in existence, we are able to demonstrate the actual character of the Universe. In doing this we are enabled to prove that all the so-called arguments with which so many scientific but irreligious men have assailed the scriptures, are absolutely false; have no foundation except in their own astronomical and geological theories, which being demonstrably fallacious, they fall to the ground as valueless. They can no longer be wielded as weapons against religion. If used at all it can only be that their weakness and utter worthlessness will be exposed. Atheism and every other form of Infidelity are thus rendered helpless. Their sting is cut away, and their poison dissipated. The irreligious philosopher can no longer obtrude his theories as things proved wherewith to test the teachings of scripture. He must now himself be tested. He must be forced to demonstrate his premises, a thing which he has never yet attempted; and if he fails in this respect his impious vanity, self-conceit and utter disregard of justice, will become so clearly apparent that his presence in the ranks of science will no longer be tolerated. All theory must be put aside, and the questions at issue must be decided by independent and practical evidence. This has been done. The process--the _modus operandi_, and the conclusions derived therefrom have been given in the early sections of this work. They are entirely consonant with the teachings of scripture. The scriptures are therefore literally true, and must henceforth either alone or in conjunction with practical science be used as a standard by which to test the truth or falsehood of every system which does or may hereafter exist. Philosophy is no longer to be employed as a test of scriptural truth, but the scriptures may and ought to be the test of all philosophy. Not that they are to be used as a test of philosophy simply because they are _thought_ or _believed_ to be the word of God, but because their literal teachings in regard to science and natural phenomena, are demonstrably correct. It is quite as faulty and unjust for the religious devotee to urge the scriptures against the theories of the philosopher simply because he _believes_ them to be true, as it is for the philosopher to urge his theories against the scriptures only because he disbelieves the one and believes the other. The whole matter must be taken out of the region of belief and disbelief. The Christian will be strengthened and his mind more completely satisfied by having it in his power to demonstrate that the scriptures are philosophically true, than he could possibly be by the simple belief in their validity, unsupported by practical evidence. On the other hand the Atheist who is met by the Christian upon purely scientific grounds, and who is not belaboured with enunciations of what his antagonist believes, will be led to listen and to pay more regard and respect to the reasons advanced than he could possibly concede to the purely religious argument, or to an argument founded upon faith alone. If it can be shown to the atheistical philosopher that his astronomical and geological theories are fallacious, and that all the expressions in the scriptures which have reference to natural phenomena are literally true, he will of necessity be led to admit that, apart from all other considerations, if the _philosophy_ of the scriptures is demonstrably correct, then possibly their _spiritual_ and _moral_ teachings may also be true; and if so, they may and indeed must have had a divine origin; and if so they are truly the “word of God,” and after all, religion is a grand reality; and the theories which speculative adventurous philosophers have advanced are nothing better than treacherous quicksands into which many of the deepest thinkers have been engulphed and lost. By this process many highly intelligent minds have been led to desert the ranks of Atheism and to rejoin the army of Christian soldiers and devotees. Many have rejoiced almost beyond expression that the subject of the Earth’s true form and position in the universe had ever been brought under their notice; and doubtless great numbers will yet be induced to return to that allegiance which plain demonstrable truth demands and deserves. To induce numbers of earnest thinking human beings to leave the rebellious cause of Atheism and false philosophy; to return to a full recognition of the beauty and truthfulness of the scriptures, and to a participation in the joy and satisfaction which religion can alone supply, is a grand and cheering result, and one which furnishes the noblest possible answer to the ever ready “CUI BONO.”

In addition to the numerous quotations which have been given from sacred scriptures, and proved to be true and consistent, it may be useful briefly to refer to the following difficulties which have been raised by the scientific objectors to scriptural authority:--“As the earth is a globe, and as all its vast collections of water--its oceans, lakes, &c., are sustained by the earthy crust beneath them, and as beneath this ‘crust of the earth’ everything is in a red-hot molten condition to what place could the excess of waters retire which are said in the scriptures to have overwhelmed the whole world? It could not sink into the centre of the earth, for the fire is there so intense that the whole would be rapidly volatilised, and driven away as vapour. It could not evaporate, for when the atmosphere is charged with watery vapour beyond a certain degree it begins to condense and throw back the water in the form of rain; so that the waters of the flood could not sink from the earth’s surface, nor remain in the atmosphere; therefore if the earth had ever been deluged at all, it would have remained so to this day. But as it is not universally flooded so it never could have been, and the account given in the scriptures is false.” All this specious reasoning is founded upon the assumption that the earth is a globe: this doctrine, however, being false, all the difficulties quickly vanish. The earth being “founded on the seas” would be as readily cleared of its superfluous water as would the deck of a ship on emerging from a storm. Or as a rock in the ocean would be cleared after the raging waves which for a time overwhelmed it had subsided.

“Thou coveredst the Earth with the deep as with a garment; the waters stood above the mountains. At thy rebuke they fled; and at the voice of thy thunder they hasted away ... down by the valleys unto the place which thou hast founded for them.”[48]

[48] Psalm civ.

“Thou didst cleave the Earth with rivers; and the overflowing of the waters passed by; and the deep uttered his voice and lifted up his hands on high.”[49]

[49] Hab. iii. 9-10.

The surface of the Earth standing above the level of the surrounding seas, the waters of the flood would simply and naturally run down by the valleys and rivers into the “great deep,”--into which “the waters returned from off the earth continually ... until the tenth month, and on the first day of the month were the tops of the mountains seen.”[50]

[50] Gen. viii. 2-5.

Again; as the Earth is a Globe and in continual motion, how could Jesus on being “taken up into an exceedingly high mountain see all the kingdoms of the world, in a moment of time?” Or, when “He cometh with clouds and every eye shall see him,” how could it be possible, seeing that at least twenty-four hours would elapse before every part of the Earth would be turned to the same point? But it has been demonstrated that the Earth is a Plane and motionless, and that from a great eminence every part of its surface could be seen at once; and, at once--at the same moment, could every eye behold Him, when “coming in a cloud with power and great glory.”

FINIS.

S. HAYWARD, PRINTER, GREEN STREET, BATH.

Transcriber’s Notes

Inconsistent and unusual spelling, punctuation etc. have been
retained; accents on (French) words have not been corrected. The
inconsistent nesting and pairing of quote marks often makes it
difficult to determine where a quote starts or ends.

Page 20: ... as represented in figure 10 ... changed to ... as
represented in figure 9 ....

Page 13, A B is the line-of-sight, and C D the surface of the water
...: C nor D are depicted in the illustration.

Page 27, Fig. 15 and accompanying text: the number 4 in the
illustration appears to be misplaced.

Page 77, “Sun’s altitude at the time of Southing ...: there is no
closing quote mark.

Page 142, 143 and Fig. 31: the lower case reference letters are
present as upper case letters in the illustration.

Page 193, ... only the dry land was called earth,” ...: the opening
quote marks are missing.

Page 198, ... stretchet out the earth above the waters ...: as
printed in the source document; both "stretched" and "stretcheth"
appear in other sources.

Page 211, ... “did His suffering and crucifixion ...: the closing
quote mark is lacking.

Changes made:

Footnotes and illustrations have been moved out of text paragraphs.

Some obvious minor typographical and punctuation errors have been
corrected silently.

Terrestial has been changed to terrestrial (3x), trignometry to
trigonometry (2x), incondescent to incandescent (3x).

Illustration captions for Figs. 27, 28 and 31-34 have been added.

Page 10: ... to lesson the difference ... changed to ... to lessen
the difference ....

Page 51: ... from Port Jackson to Cape Horn as 8.000 miles ...
changed to ... from Port Jackson to Cape Horn as 8,000 miles ....

Page 64-65: replicated text deleted.

Page 133: exclamation mark inserted after Neptune has only _one
third_ of this volume (as in surrounding text).

Page 134: Professer Schumacher changed to Professor Schumacher.

Page 139: M. Foucalt’s communication describing his experiments ...
changed to M. Foucault’s communication describing his experiments ....

Page 141: Ille sante aux yeux ... changed to Il saute aux yeux ....

Page 171: ... south cost of Norway ... changed to ... south coast of
Norway ...; The Troudhjem Light ... changed to The Trondhjem Light
...; Lower Farn Island Light changed to Lower Farne Island Light.

Page 193: ... the heavenly bodies are Sun’s ... changed to ... the
heavenly bodies are Suns ....