[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

[K12ltsp-list] Now remove a large irregular piece from the outer, and a smaller piece



E, How could I love thee in thy sight, and live? THE

ANTIQUITY OF MAN. A PHILOSOPHIC DEBATE. _A._ I would like to hear
your opinions regarding the antiquity of our race: geologists are
daily becoming bolder and more unhesitating in their assertions on
the subject; and we are fast
drifting toward conclusions that seem to startle the

religious world, and threaten to upset our confidence in that Book
which
we have been accustomed to regard with profoundest reverence. _B._
Never, sir, never:
the hand of true science can never rise as the antagonist of
revelation:
revelation, rightly understood, must ever find in science a brother,
a protector, a friend. _A._ How would you
maintain your position, if the geologists should arrive
at a final conclusion on the subject, and declare positively that
men existed in the world twenty

or thirty thousand years ago? _B._ They have arrived at such a
conclusion already; that is to say, they have, in
a stratum which cannot be less than twenty thousand
years old, unearthed some skeletons of a mammal resembling man. But
let these skeletons resemble ours ever
so closely, I, for one, am not prepared to concede that these
creatures, when they existed, were men in the sense that we
are. Revelation declares quite explicitly that
the present race is not more than six thousand years old. _A._ What
theory, then, must we adopt respecting these human-shaped fossils?
Why

do you deny that they were men like us? _B._ Tell me what a human
being is, and I will answer your query. _A._ The definition would be
a somewhat prolix one. _B._ It will be sufficient
for our purpose that you admit two points

Attachment: ambusher.jpg
Description: Binary data


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]