Having thus thrown myself upon my reader’s candour, by a clear avowal of the spirit in which such controversies ought to be conducted, let us together proceed to the purpose of this chapter. Between Geology and Scripture interpretation there _are_ apparent and great contradictions—that all admit: on the very threshold of our future remarks, let us allow most readily that between the usually recognised interpretations of Scripture and the well-ascertained facts of Geological science, there are most appalling contradictions; and the questions arising thence are very important, both in a scientific and in a theological point of view. Is there any method of reconciliation, by which the harmony of the facts of science with the statements of the Bible can be shown? Where is the real solution to be found? Are we mistaken in our interpretations, or are we mistaken in our discoveries? Have we to begin religion again _de novo_, or may the Bible and the Book of Nature remain just as we have been accustomed to regard them; both as equally inspired books of God, waiting only the service and worship of man, their priest and interpreter? These are questions surely of no common importance. Neither the Christian nor the doubter act a consistent part in ignoring them. Should the Christian say, “I want no teachings of science: I want no learned phrases and learned researches to assist me in understanding my Bible: for aught I care, all the ‘ologies’ in the world may perish as carnal literature: I know the Book is true, and decline any controversy with the mere intellectual disputant;” and if the Christian should go on to add, as probably he would in such a state of mind, and as, alas! too many have done to the lasting disgust and alienation of the thoughtful and intelligent: “These are the doubts of a ‘philosophy falsely so called:’ science has nothing to do with Revelation: they have separate paths to pursue; let them each go their own way: and should there come a collision between the two, we are prepared to give up all science once and for ever, whatever it may teach, rather than have our views upon Revelation disturbed:”—now, if the Christian talks like that, he is acting a most unwise part. He is doing in his limited sphere of influence what the Prussian Government intended to have done when Strauss’ “Life of Christ” appeared. It was the heaviest blow that unbelief had ever struck against Christianity, and the Government of Prussia with several theological professors were disposed to prosecute its author, and forbid the sale of the book. But the great Neander deprecated this course, as calculated to give the work a spurious celebrity, and as wearing the aspect of a confession that the book was unanswerable. He advised that it should be met, not by _authority_, but by _argument_, believing that the truth had nothing to fear in such a conflict. His counsel prevailed, and the event has shown that he was right.