I do not deny that it is perfectly _conceivable_ that the Creator might
have designed the forms in one order, and that the actual production or
evolution of the corresponding living creatures might not have been (for
reasons not understood) exactly, or even at all, coincident with the
order.
But it is impossible to deny the strong feeling of probability that the
commands would _begin_ to be worked out, in the order in which they were
uttered.
And here it is that the correspondence which undoubtedly exists, gives
rise to controversy.
From one point of view it is just enough to encourage the "period"
holders to try and arrange a scheme; but it is just hot enough to
prevent their opponents (justly) taxing them with straining or
"torturing" the text and failing fairly to make out their case after
all. From another point of view the correspondence is so far
established, and so undeniably unprecedented (in human cosmogonies) and
noteworthy, as to demand imperatively our careful consideration and
compel us to account for it.
It will be observed, first of all, that the whole "creation" (omitting
all incidental and preparatory works) is stated in _groups_ each having
an order within itself.
_Group_ 1. God created (both land and water) "vegetation"--plants
yielding seed, fruit-trees.
_Group_ 2.
Pages:
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219