Two objections have now to be noticed. The first refers to the _moon_, which must have been thrown off from the earth long before the dry land and vegetation appeared; and being so small, would have consolidated sooner. But when considered only as _lights_, as they are in the narrative, it is quite correct to place the moon with the sun; since moonlight is merely reflected sunlight, and must obviously have commenced at the same time. The other objection is, that according to Genesis, the earth seems to be the centre of everything, and even the sun exists solely for the sake of lighting the earth. But (as before pointed out) the narrative is only concerned with this earth; and while we know that sunlight is of use to the inhabitants of our planet, we do not know that it serves any other useful purpose. These, however, are but minor matters; the important point, as before said, is that Genesis places the formation of the sun _after_ that of light. This must have appeared when it was written, and for thousands of years afterwards, an obvious absurdity, since everyone could see that the sun was the source of light. We now know that it is correct. But how could the writer have known it, unless it had been divinely revealed? (7.) _Fishes and birds._ We next come to fishes and birds, which formed the commencement of animal life, and thus involved the beginning of _mind_ in some form; so Genesis (as before said) appropriately uses the word _create_ in regard to them. It is not clear whether the narrative means that they appeared at the same time, or successively, though here, as in other cases, the latter is the more probable. And science entirely agrees in thus placing fishes before birds and both of these after plants. This latter point indeed must be obvious to every naturalist, since the food of all animals is derived, either directly or indirectly, from the vegetable world. And Genesis is equally correct in emphasising the great abundance of _marine_ life at this period--the waters were to _swarm with swarms of living creatures_ (R.V. Margin), and also in specially alluding to the great _sea-monsters_ (wrongly translated _whales_ in A.V.), since these huge saurians were a striking feature of the time. The Hebrew word is said to mean _elongated_ or stretched-out creatures, and as several of them were over 50 feet long, no more suitable term can be imagined. But again we must ask how did the writer know that such creatures were ever plentiful enough, or important enough, to deserve this special mention? What are called _invertebrate_ animals, such as insects, and shell-fish, do not seem to be included in the narrative. But it never claims to describe everything that was created; and its extreme brevity, combined with the insignificance of these creatures, may well account for their being omitted. (8.) _Land animals._