7. Geology accords with the Bible in making it probable that this earth is destined to undergo the ordeal of fire. The earth has evidently undergone several destructions in some of which fire has been the principal agent; the heat of which has melted those rocks called igneous, and in which the remains of animals are never found. May we not, therefore, conclude, that, after man has read their contents, the aqueous rocks will also be melted, thus blotting out the old hand-writing to make room for a new, and as Peter says, "the heavens and the earth which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.”

Thus we see nature and revelation speak the same language. Let infidelity hide its head, and let all the believers of the Bible lift up their head and rejoice, for they have not followed cunningly devised fables.

Science from the deep caverns of the earth lifts up a mighty voice, and raises up its arm of strength, to uphold the hands of Moses. Its language even echoes back the annunciation of the Gospel-" Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world." Heaven's windows are opened, and truth looks down to hail science with joy as she ascends from the earth.

Truth springeth out of the earth, and righteousness looks down from heaven.*

·

*Of works on Geology, we would recommend the following:Hitchcock's Geology; Hitchcock's Religion of Geology; Foot Prints of the Creator, by Hugh Miller; The Old Red Sand Stone, by Hugh Miller; the Principles of Geology Explained, and viewed in their relations to Revealed and Natural Religion, by David King, LL. D.; The Annuals of Scientific Discovery, edited by David A. Wells, A. M.

APPENDIX.

After the 117 page was in type, I had an increasing dissatisfaction with the idea that the water that issued from our Saviour's side, came from the pericardium, as is maintained by commentators in general. My own little knowledge of anatomy taught me that there was no water there, except a little lubricating matter such as is found in the knee. I, at length, wrote to a medical gentleman of years and extensive practice, for an explanation of John 19th: 34th, but, instead of a simple note, I received the following elaborate and learned essay. As I heartily concur with its general theory, and think it cannot be confuted, I subjoin it entire.

Rev. ELI NOYES, D. D.

BOSTON, February 22d, 1853.

SIR. You ask me in your letter of the 12th ult., for an "ANATOMICAL EXPLANATION" of the text:-John 19th; 34th,-" But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water." To this, I now reply:

That "blood" should flow from such a wound might naturally be expected. The wound was so large and wide, that Christ afterwards said to Thomas: "Reach hither thy HAND and thirst it into my SIDE." Would HE have said this, if the wound had not been large enough to admit a man's hand? When he said, "Behold my hands," the expression is,— "Reach hither thy finger." The Greek word—logke-translated spear— was the Roman "lancea," or lance; and every military man had one,— besides other armor. Its length was generally about half that of the

pike, which was from sixteen to eighteen feet, sometimes longer. The lance, therefore, was about eight or nine feet long, and was sometimes called "the half pike." It consisted of a strong, stiff, wooden shaft, or handle, armed at once, or both ends with a sharp penetrating weapon called "the dart." The dart was made before that time-of iron, or brass-long, broad and sharp, with two edges, and pointed at the end. The lance, of course, could be used, either to cut, or thrust an enemy; and by having two edges, easily penetrated the fleshy parts of the body to a considerable depth, by cutting each way.*

Such a weapon pierced into the side of a man, nailed to a Cross high enough above the heads of the multitude, that those “standing afar off, could behold the things that were done," would necessarily occasion a flow of blood. But that alone would furnish no certain and positive proof that the body was dead. How many men have lived and got well, after losing much blood from deep and ghastly wounds in the side, it I would be tedious to enumerate. An author, of very high authority, says, it is a thing really wonderful, "that the thorax, containing the heart, lungs, and great vessels, should be so often wounded with so little danger! Many, no doubt, die, but numbers escape; for a wound of the substance of the lungs is far from being mortal." And again; "When the weapon is broad, and it has entered the substance of the lung, the hemorhage is considerable; blood is immediately extravasated in the cavity of the thorax, and also flows out of the external wound; the patient has a violent paroxysm of coughing in which some of the blood is ejected from the mouth; the air comes out of the chest with a hissing noise; the danger of such an injury depends upon the depth of the wound, and the size of the vessals which are opened. Some patients recover, while others die instantly, or in a very short space of time."†

M. Sabatier mentions a case, since noticed by Bell, Cooper and Dorsey, "of an officer, who was shot in the left side. The ball entered about where the bone and cartilage of the seventh true rib unite.”, (i. e. where the longest rib of either side unites with the breast bone,)" and

*See Grose on Ancient Armor, Vol. 2d; Rees' Cyclopædia, Vol. 21st; Roman Antiq. uities, &c.

iSee Dr. John Bell on the Nature and Cure of Wounds, third edition, page 257 Also Professor Thomson's Reports of observations in Military Hospitals in Belgium, after the Battle of Waterloo, page 82. And Rees's Cyclopædia, Vol. 40, Wounds of the Thorar or Chest.

came out in the situation of the circular angle of the same rib, and which rib was broken in two places. The neighboring part of the first false or short rib was also broken behind." Near the back part of the body "incissions were made," and both holes made larger, to "enable the Surgeon to take away several splinters of bone In consequence of the dangerous nature of the accident, the patient was bled," in the course of a few days, "twenty-six times, with a view of relieving the fever, difficulty of breathing, and spitting of blood. In about a fortnight, he was more comfortable, and passed some of the ensuing days in a tolerably easy state. On the twenty-fourth day, he was moved to another place; and became more unwell. Febrile symptoms again took place, and two more bleedings were practised. The critical state of the patient led the Surgeon to re-examine the wounds. On passing his finger into the posterior wound, where the ball came out, a foreign body was felt, and when extracted, proved to be a piece of the patient's coat. A spicula of bone was also felt, more deeply lodged, which required the second enlargement of the wound, before it could be taken out. On the thirtieth day from the receipt of the wound, the bad symptoms again returned, and two more bleedings were practised. The patient then complained, for the first time, of something pricking him in a deep situation between the two openings of the wound. It was found impracticable to ascertain the cause of this sensation without dividing all the parts that intervened between the two openings of the wound, and which formed a space of seven or eight finger breadths. This serious operation was resolved on in consultation, and M. Guerin set about it by cutting, from within outward, the parts between the two ribs, with the aid of a finger introduced into the posterior wound. Care was taken not to cut near the lower edge of the upper rib. In this way the whole track of the ball was laid open, and in the middle of it, a very sharp splinter of bone was found, sticking in the substance of the lung. This was removed and the wound dressed with simple applications. From that day, all the bad symptoms ceased and the cure was completed at the end of four months.*

(Obs. de Guerin in Mem. de l'Acad. de Chirurgie, Tom. 2. 4 to.)

In the above case, it may be noticed, that previous to the last "serious operation," both openings of the wound had been enlarged by the Surgeon's knife, to enable him to feel and extract with his finger and

*Abstract. See Dorsey's Cooper, Vol. 2, p. 300 and 301, Philadelphia, 1810.

thumb, or finger and forceps, "several splinters of bone," and one at least "deeply lodged." The incissions necessary for that purpose, must have been made at least three finger-breadths in length, at the place where the ball entered; and four finger-breadths at the more fleshy parts "behind"-where the ball came out; making both openings seven fingerbreadths in length, before the last operation. If, to this, be added, the seven or eight finger-breadths of space, between the two openings, the whole length of the wound, after the last operation, must have been fourteen or fifteen finger-breadths in extent ! "A finger-breadth is a measure of two thirds of an inch." Consequently, fourteen fingerbreadths would equal nine inches and one third; and fifteen fingerbreadths, ten inches. Whether a common sized man might not, "thrust" two hands at once, into the side of another-thus cut open more tnan nine, if not ten inches in length, and deep into the cavity of the thorax; is a question for any one to determing by merely measuring a common sized hand. It was at first a "Gun-shot wound," which is usually far more difficult to heal than one made with a cutting instrument, knife, sword, or "spear." Yet, formidable as it undoubtedly was, "the cure was completed-at the end of four months!"

This case, taken from scores of others on record, equally wonderful, is mentioned to show, that a large wound in the side with a flow of blood only, affords no absolute proof that the BODY WAS DEAD.

But M. Sabatier's report makes no mention of water, and for the best of all reasons-there was no water! The patient was a living man; and bis recovery from such a wound is ample proof to my mind, that he possessed at the time of the accident, good health and a strong and vigorous constitution.

But John testifies, "and forthwith, came there out blood and water." He gives no opinion as to the quantity. The blood came out first, and then the water. Had they flowed out together, both would have appeared like blood, "and he that saw it," could not have been positive there was any water. If the extent of the wound was sufficient to admit a man's hand, as indicated by what Christ said to Thomas; it was large enough to discharge more than three or four quarts in a very short time, or "forthwith." But without intending to intimate any precise quantity, one thing appears certain, that the flow of water must have been in sufficient quantity, and have flowed for a time long enough to attract the special and deliberate notice of John; for otherwise he could not have