5. We have already noticed the connection be tween nNprizi and our only remaining word rpi, from their being associated by the sacred writer in the same sentence, Job xxxvii. 18 ; it tends to cor roborate this connection, that on comparing Gen. i. 6 (and seven other passages in the same chapter) with Deut. xxxiii. 26, we find rin of the former sentence, and copritj of the latter, both rendered by the LXX. o-replonca and fir/Immo:1nm in the Vulgate, whence the word ‘.fly-mamenP passed into our A. V. This word is now a well-under stood term in astronomy, synonymous with sky or else the general heavens, undivested by the dis coveries of science of the special signification, which it bore in the ancient astronomy [Ftrtma MENT]. For a clear exposition of all the Scripture passages which bear on the subject, we may refer the reader to Professor Dawson's Archaia (or Studies of the Cosmogony and Natural History of the Hebrew Scriptures'), especially chap. viii. ; and to Dr. M 'Caul on the Ilfosaic Record of Creation, in Aids to Faith ;' (or, what is substantially the same treatise in a more accessible form, his Notes on the First Chapter of Genesis, sec. ix., pp. 32-44). We must be content here, in reference to our term rp-i, to observe, that, when we regard its origin (from the root Yp."1, to spread out or expand by beating ; Ges. s. v. ; Fuller, Misc. Sacr. i. 6 ; liebr. W. B. s. v.), and its connection with, and illustration by, such words as nTriv.; clouds, a and the verbs MD xlviii. 13, My right hand hath spread out the heavens') and rILI) (Is. xl. 22, Who stretcheth out the heavens like a curtain' [literally, like fineness], and spreadeth them out as a tent), we are astonished at the attempt to control* the meaning of an intelligible term, which fits in easily and consistently with the nature of things, by a few poetical metaphors, which are themselves capable of a consistent sense when held subordi nate to the plainer passages of prose.
The Physics of the Bible. —A few general re marks on this subject in reference to recent speculations will suitably conclude this article. .Notwithstanding the tendency of critics to in terpret the statements of Scripture on physical facts by the wrong theories, and the national and temporary prejudices of antiquity, we are per suaded that on a deeper examination of the sacred text, these statements will be found to comport, with admirable precision, with the profoundest scientific conceptions of modern times. A thought ful writer has very lately said with much force and propriety : These utterances [on physical facts contained in the Bible] are in the mode of a per sonal consciousness that is older than the material framework of the creation ; they sound like the Creator's recollections of an eternity past ! If they contain no definite anticipations of the results of modem science, they are marvellously exempt from any approximate error akin to the misapprehen sions of later times. lt is as if He who framed the world out of nothing would speak of His own work to a certain limit, and not beyond it; the truth is uttered, but not the whole truth' (Isaac Taylor on the Spirit of the Hebrew Pothy, p. 146). When the word rpl, in addition to the sense of expan sion, which is so applicable to the aerial and etherial spaces which surround the earth, and stretch away to the abysses beyond, has the idea of _firmness assigned to it (in the LXX. arep&op,a, and Vulg. firmament), nothing in fact could better suit the requirement of the case than this combina tion of slab/lily and expansion. (I) If we regard only the atmospheric firmament, and contemplate the enormous quantity of water which is suspended over the earth—how enorrnous we may gather from the fact that the waters of all the river5 which flow into the sea, are but a part of the overflowings of the vast atmospheric reservoir—we, instead of wasting ingenuity in trying to construct a solid vault out of the Hebrew phrases, would be more congenially furthering the interests of true criti cism, if we patiently looked out for opportunities of adapting these phrases to the meteorological facts which reveal the need of a firmament, un solid, indeed, but yet stable, in which the Almighty may separate the waters which are above the fir mament from the waters below the firmament,' and so defend us from an outburst of the aqueous element, which would reduce our earth to its primeval chaos. When we see a cloud resolve itself into rain, and pour out thousands of gallons of water, we cannot comprehend how it can float in the atmosphere' (Koemtz, Course of Meteorology), bat we can appreciate the beautiful provision of that rp-_1, in which 'God bindeth up the waters in His thick clouds, and the cloud is not rent under them' (Job. xxvi. 8). Is. Vossius long ago rightly caught this idea by explaining the LXX. UTE pleated, by ` fulcimentunt, aut firmamentum ;' the cloud system being, as he says, the prop for maintaining and upholding the moisture of the firmament—' nubes per hoc fulcimentum [rpli in telligendm sunt tanquam fulcra, vehicula et 6-7-y665 Am-a humorum' (Auctar. Castig. ad Scriptt. a'e fEtat. Mundi, p. 15). (2) If we extend our view beyond the atmospheric to the sidereal firmament, we again require the same combination of expan sion and stability as before. The close of cent.
xviii.,' says Humboldt, through the new paths opened to the investigation of astronomical truths by the itnprovement of the infinitesimal calculus, has the merit of having. demonstrated the stability of the planetary system' (Cosmos iii. 451, 452). A thoughtful reader, who peruses Humboldt's state ment of the principal elements of this stability,' will not be at a moment's loss to detect in these profound discoveries of modern science a much more congruous idea of the ` firmament,' or strength of the Inn, than in the cosmological dreams of solid heavens and crystalline vaults. (3) A third illustration of the suitableness of the word firmament is well supplied by Professor Young The term is not so inappropriate as objectors have imagined. If there be any one thing in the whole of material creation which is permanent in situation, firmly and imnzovably con tinuing ever in the same place, that thing is the ethereal fluid to which the term is applied. What we call its /notion is mere vibmtory agitation, with out any bodily translation of material. There is not the slightest reason to suppose, from any thing that science makes known respecting it, that the great body of the ether in which all the heavenly luminaries are placed—the firmament—has ever stirred from the position in which the Creator at first placed it. Look, too, at the most ordinary phenomena of light. lt is never blown about by the winds, or in the least agitated by atmospheric commotions ; for in the most violent storm we see the shadow of an unmoving object remaining itself still unmoved. Light pursues its course unaffected by these surrounding disturbances, and what would prostrate even the firmest oak cannot so much as bend aside the slenderest sunbeam (Science eluci dative of Scripture, pp. loo, lot). Surely no word could more happily express such subtle fixity as Irp:1; while the versions crrepeonm and firma mentuni are only defective in the idea of expansion, not erroneous in their idea of finnness and sta bility.'t Poetical Descriptions of Physical Facts.—We have already censured that quality in the new criticism which sets a literal construction on a passage of poetry, and on that ground condemns its statement as erroneous. We will take a pro. minent instance for the purpose of illustrating the absurdity of the practice. In Job. xxxvii. 18, Elihu asks : Hast thou with Him spread out the sky which is strong- and as a molten looking-glass?' This, it is contended, supports the theory of a solid firmament.* But this is to destroy the difference between the simplicity of prose and the metaphor of poetry. How much truer to common sense, the basis of sound criticism, was Luther's view, when he interpreted the metallic firmness of the sky here to have respect not to the material but to the divine word, which can make the softest thing in nature into the strongest and the firmest' (On Genesis i. 6). Luther's comment is the more reasonable, because the word sky is p+prici, which • we have seen signifies clouds. Now no one who has carefully watched the clouds, will wonder at Elihu's description—for the fantastic grandeur of these skyey prodigies has inspired still more strik ing exaggerations of poetic fancy. It would be easy to illustrate this by quotations from the poets and descriptive writers even of recent times, whose works abound in gorgeous pictures of massive cloudland and solid heavens, which all feel must not critically be construed as representing literal but phenomenal facts. We see that such descrip tions coexist side by side with rigorous science, without giving or receiving injury or discredit; that therefore the Hebrew poetry when indulging in highly-w rought but yet perfectly imaginable ex pressions, cannot, according to the rules of rea sonable interpretation, be deemed incompatible with true and unexaggerated science, any more than the fancy flights of modern poetry, when depicting natural phenomena in their fantastic phases, can be legitimately held to be, in any critical sense, con tradictory to the declarations of the most advanced modem philosophy.
We have omitted, while treating of the original words for heaven, to adopt the usual practice of giving in every case the equivalents in the LXX. and the Vulg-ate. The extreme variations would have greatly increased our labour, without com mensumte advantage, as one instance will at once shew ; the noun pr)i.1,.' (see above, 4) is rendered twice in the Sept. by evlip, eight times by vecbav, four times by veqSos, once by obpavbs, once by orepionla, and once by do-rpov (besides twice by korh, and once by waXalcoua, in passages which hardly fall under the subject of our article) ; Aquila rendered this word by (Hp, and Symmachus by aalp. The Vulgate is much more uniform ; fifteen times it has tmnslated the word nubes, twice athera, and as often arks, and once (Is. xl. 15) "ulvis. The extremely frequent word ptn;7 and the N. T. obpavbs, obpavol are (as might be ex pected) rendered commonly, if not always, byealum, and pl. cerli,-orum,-os, in the Vulg. [and obpavbs, (not often obpavol plur.) in the O. T. by LXX.1- P. H.