These are the words of Dr. Pye Smith,[123] of whose name as an authority, both in matters of science and philology, no one need be ashamed. Dr. Redford says, “We ought to understand Moses as saying, indefinitely, far back, and concealed from us in the mystery of eternal ages, prior to the first moment of mundane time, ‘God created the heavens and the earth.’” “My firm persuasion is,” says Dr. Harris, “that the first verse of Genesis was designed by the Divine Spirit to announce the absolute origination of the material universe by the Almighty Creator, and that it is so understood in the other parts of Holy Writ; that, passing by an indefinite interval, the second verse describes the state of our planet immediately prior to the Adamic creation; and that the third verse begins the account of the six days’ work.” Dr. Davidson, in his “Sacred Hermeneutics,” says,—“If I am reminded, in a tone of animadversion, that I am making science, in this instance, the interpreter of Scripture, my reply is, that I am simply making the works of God illustrate His word in a department in which they speak with a distinct and authoritative voice; that it is all the same whether our geological or theological investigations have been prior, if we have not forced the one into accordance with the other. And it may be deserving consideration whether or not the conduct of those is not open to just animadversion who first undertake to pronounce on the meaning of a passage of Scripture, irrespective of all appropriate evidence, and who then, when that evidence is explored and produced, insist on their _à priori_ interpretation as the only true one.” But I quote no more: such are some of the eminent theological contributions to this department of science:—satisfactory in this respect, that a fair interpretation of Scripture does not require us to fix any precise date, much less the inconsiderable one of six thousand years, as the period of the earth’s formation.