Omphalos : $b an attempt to untie the geological knotGosse, Philip Henry
Religion
Omphalos : $b an attempt to untie the geological knot
Gosse, Philip Henry
Bible and geology; Creation; Evolution (Biology)
It is not necessary,--at least it does not seem so to me,--that all the
members of this mighty commonwealth should have an actual, a diachronic
existence; anymore than that, in the creation of a man, his foetal,
infantile, and adolescent stages should have an actual, diachronic
existence, though these are essential to his normal life-history. Nor
would their diachronism be more certainly inferrible from the physical
traces of them, in the one case than in the other. In the newly-created
Man, the proofs of successive processes requiring time, in the skin,
hairs, nails, bones, &c. could in no respect be distinguished from the
like proofs in a Man of to-day; yet the developments to which they
respectively testify are widely different from each other, so far as
regards the element of time. Who will say that the suggestion, _that the
strata of the surface of the earth, with their fossil floras and faunas,
may possibly belong to a prochronic development of the mighty plan of
the life-history of this world_,--who will dare to say that such a
suggestion is a self-evident absurdity? If we had no example of such a
procedure, we might be justified in dealing cavalierly with the
hypothesis; but it has been shown that, without a solitary exception,
the whole of the vast vegetable and animal kingdoms were created,--mark!
I do not say _may_ have been, but MUST have been created--on this
principle of a prochronic development, with distinctly traceable
records. It was _the law of organic creation_.
It may be objected, that, to assume the world to have been created with
fossil skeletons in its crust,--skeletons of animals that never really
existed,--is to charge the Creator with forming objects whose sole
purpose was to deceive us. The reply is obvious. Were the concentric
timber-rings of a created tree formed merely to deceive? Were the growth
lines of a created shell intended to deceive? Was the navel of the
created Man intended to deceive him into the persuasion that he had had
a parent?[102]
These peculiarities of structure were inseparable from the adult stage
of these creatures respectively, without which they would not have been
what they were. The Locust-tree could not have been an adult _Hymenaea_,
without concentric rings;--nay, it could not have been an exogenous tree
at all. The _Dione_ could not have been a _Dione_ without those
foliations and spines that form its generic character. The Man would not
have been a Man without a navel.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account