• ベストアンサー
  • すぐに回答を!


The diffculties and disputes which attended the first revival of science have recurred in the present century in consequence of the growth of geology. It is in truth only the old question over again-precisely the same point of theology which is involved, although the difficulties which present themselves are fresh. The school books of the present day, while they teach the child that the earth moves, yet [they] assure him that it is a little less than six thousand years old and that it was made in six days. On the other hand, geologists of all religious creeds are agreed that the earth has existed for an immense series of years-to be [to be=it should be] counted by millions rather than by thousands:and that indubitably more than six days elapsed from its first creation to the appearance of man upon its surface. By this broad discrepancy between old and doctrine is the modern mind startled, as were the men of the sixteenth century [startled] when [they were] told that the earth moved.


  • 英語
  • 回答数1
  • 閲覧数102
  • ありがとう数0


  • ベストアンサー
  • 回答No.1
  • Nakay702
  • ベストアンサー率81% (8773/10784)

以下のとおりお答えします。 科学の最初の復活で係わった難問と論争は、地質学(地球科学)の成長の結果として今世紀に再燃しました。実際にはそれは古い質問の蒸し返し―正確に言えば包含される神学上の同一問題なのである。ただし、提示された難問部分は新鮮なものですが。現代の学校教科書は、地球が動くことを子どもに教えますが、地球はたかだか6000歳に過ぎず、しかも6日で作られたことまで保証しているのである。 他方では、宗教的信条を持つすべての地球学者が、地球は膨大な年月を経て存在してきた ― 何千年でなく何百万年と数えられる〔そうである=そうであるべきだ〕ということや、その最初の創造から地表面上に人が出現するまでには疑いなく6日以上が経過したということに同意している。この両者間の大きな不一致によって、16世紀の人々が、地球は動くと伝え〔られ〕たとき〔に驚かせられたの〕と同じように、現代人の心もまた驚かせられるのである。 以上、ご回答まで。 (なお、最後の部分、between以下に一部脱落があると思われますが、いかがでしょうか。)



  • 和訳お願い致します

    The word beginning,' he says, as applied by Moses in the first verse of the book of Genesis, expresses an undefined period of time which was antecedent to the last great change that affected the surface of the earth, and to the creation of its present animal and vegetable inhabitants, during which period a long series of operations may have been going on; which as they are wholly unconnected with the history of the human race, are passed over in silence by the sacred historian, whose only concern was barely to state, that the matter of the universe is not eternal and self-existent, but was originally created by the power of the Almighty.' The Mosaic narrative commences with a declaration that in the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.' These few first words of Genesis may be fairly appealed to by the geologist as containing a brief statement of the creation of the material elements, at a time distinctly preceding the operations of the first day; it is nowhere affirmed that God created the heaven and the earth in the first day, but in the beginning; this beginning may have been an epoch at an unmeasured distance, followed by periods of undefined duration during which all the physical operations disclosed by geology were going on.' The first verse of Genesis, therefore, seems explicitly to assert the creation of the universe; the heaven, including the sidereal systems; and the earth, especially specifying our own planet, as the subsequent scene of the operations of the six days about to be described; no information is given as to events which may have occurred upon this earth, unconnected with the history of man, between the creation of its component matter recorded in the first verse, and the era at which its history is resumed in the second verse: nor is any limit fixed to the time during which these intermediate events may have been going on: millions of millions of years may have occupied the indefinite interval, between the beginning in which God created the heaven and the earth, and the evening or commencement of the first day of the Mosaic narrative.'

  • 和訳お願い致します。

    This earth apparently so still and steadfast,lying in majestic repose beneath the aestherial vault,is a globular body of comparatively insignificant size, whirling fast through space round the sun as the centre of its orbit, and completing its revolution in the course of one year, while at the same time it revolves daily once about its own axis,thus producing the change of day and night. The sun,which seems to lead up each morning from the east and, traversing the skyey bridge,slides down into the west,is relatively to our earth motionless. In size and weight it inconceivably surpasses it. The moon,which occupies a position in thr visible heavens only second to the sun and far beyond that[that=the position]of every other celestial body in conspicuousness, is but a subordinate globe,much smaller our own, and revolving round the earth as it's centre,while it accompanies it [it=the earth]in its[its=the earth's]yearly revolutions about the sun.Of itself it has no luster and is visible to us only by the reflected sunlight.

  • 和訳お願い致します。

    The question of the meaning of the word bara,'create,'has been previously touched upon;it has been acknowledged by good critics that it doesn't of itself necessarily imply 'to make out of nothing upon the simple ground that it is found [to be]uesd in cases where such a meaning would be inapplicable . But the difficultly of giving to it the interpretation contended for by Dr Buckland and of uniting with this the assumption of a six days' creation, such as that described in Genesis, at a comparatively recent period, lies in this,that the heaven itself is distinctly said to have been formed by the division of the waters on the second day. Consequently , until. The first Mosaic day of creation, there was no sky, no local habitation for the sun,moon and stars, even supposing those bodies to have been included in the original material. Dr Buckland doesn't touch this obvious difficulty, without which his argument that the sun and moon might have been contemplated as pre-existing , although they aren't stated to have been set in the heaven until the forth day, is of no value at all.

  • 和訳お願い致します。

    The Romish Church,it is presumed,adheres to the old views to the present day. Protestant instincts,however,in the 17th century were strongly in sympathy with the augmentation of science[science=scientific knowledge],and consequently Reformed Churches more easily allowed themselves to be helped over the difficultly,which, according to the views of inspiration then held and which have survived to the present day,was in reality quite as formidable for them as for those of the old faith. The solution of the difficultly offered by Galileo and others was that the object of a rebelation or divine unveiling of mysteries must be to teach man things which he is unable and must ever remain unable to find out for himself:but not physical truths,for the discovery of which he has faculties specially proved by his Creater.Hence it was not unreasonable that,in regard to matters of fact marely,the Sacred Writings should use the common language and assume the common belief of mankind,without purporting to correct errors upon points morally indifficult.So in regard to such a text as 'The world is established it cannot be moved'[Psalms93.1],though it might imply the sacred penman's ignorance of the fact that the earth does move,yet it does not put forth this opinion as an indispensable point of faith.And this remark is applicable to anumber of texts which presents a similar difficalty.

  • 和訳お願い致します。

    The hypothesis adopted by Dr Buckland was first promulgated at a time when the gradual and regular formation of the earth's strata wasn't seen or admitted so clearly as it is now. Geologists were more disposed to believe in great catastrophes and sudden breaks. Buckland's theory supposes that, previous to the appearance of the present races of animals and vegetables,there was a great gap in the globe's history—that the earth was completely depopulated as well of marine as land animals; and that the creation of all existing plants and animals was coeval with that of man. This theory is by no means supported by geological phenomena, and is we suppose, now rejected by all geologists whose authority is valuable . Thus writes Hugh Miller in 1857, 'I certainly did once believe with Chalmers and with Buckland that the six days were simply natural days of twenty-four hours each, that they had comprised the entire work of existing creation, and that the latest of the ages was separated by a great chaotic gap from our own. My labours at the time as a practical geologist had been very much restricted to the palaeozoic and secoundary rocks, more especially to the old red and Carboniferous systems of the one division and the oolitic system of the other ;and the long-extinct organisms which I found in them certainly didn't conflict with the view of Chalmers. All I found necessary at the time to the work of reconciliation was some scheme that would permit me to assign to the earth a high antiquity and to regard it SSS scene of many succeeding creation. During the last nine years, however, I have spent a few weeks every autumn in exploring the late formations, and acquainting myself with their particular organisms.

  • 和訳お願い致します。

    'The second verse may describe the condition of the earth on the evening of this first day(for in the Jewish mode of computation used by Moses each day is reckoned from the beginning of one evening to the beginning of another evening). This first evening may be considered as the termination of the indefinite time which followed the primeval creation announced in the first verse, and[may be considered]as the commencement of the first of the six succeeding days in which the earth was to be filled up and peopled in a manner fit the reception of mankind. .We have in this second verse a distinct mention of earth and waters as already existing and involved in darkness ;their condition also is described as a state of confusion and emptiness (tofu bofu), words which are usually interpreted by the vague and indefinite Greek term 'chaos',and which may world. At this intermediate point of time the preceding undefined geological periods had terminated, a new series of events commenced, and the work of the first morning of this new creation was the calling forth of light from a temporary darkness which had overspread the ruins of the ancient earth'.

  • 和訳お願い致します。

    Our earth then is but one of the lesser pendants of a body[a body=the sun]which is itself only an inconsiderable unit in the vast creation.And now if we withdraw our thoughts for the immensities of space and look into the construction of man's obscure home,the first question is whether it has ever been in any other condition than that in which we now see it,and if so,what are the stages through which it has passed,and what was its first traceable state. Here geology steps in and successfully carriers back the history of earth's crust to a very remote period,until it arrives at a region of uncertainty,where philosophy is reduced to mere guesses and possibilities and pronounces nothing definite. To this region belong the speculation which have been ventured upon as to the original conccretion of the earth and planets our of nebular matter of which the sun may have been the nucles.

  • 和訳お願い致します。

    On the revival science in the 16th century,some of the earliest conclusions at which philosophers arrived were found to be at variance with popular and long-established belief.The Ptolemaic system of astronomy ,which had then full possession of the minds of men,contemplaced the whole visible universe from the earth as the ammovable centre of things. Copernicus changed the earth to an inconspicuous globule, a merely subordinate member of a family of planets , which the terrestrials had untill then foudly imagined to be but [but=only]pendants and ornaments of their own habitation. The Church naturally took a lively interest in the disputes which arose between the philosophers of the new school and those who adhered to the old doctrines,inasmuch as the Hebrew records,the basis of religious faith,manifestly countenanced the opinion of the earth's immobility and certain other views of the univers very incompatible with those propounded by Copernicus. Hence arose the official proceedings against Galileo in consequence of which he submitted to sigh his celebrated recantation,acknowledging that the sun is the centre of the world and immovable from its place is absurb,philosophically false,and formally heretical,because it is dxpressly contrary to the Scripture'and that 'the proposition that the earth is not the centre of the world,norimmovable but that it moves and also with a diurnal motion is absurb,philosophically false,and at least erronesos in faith'.

  • 和訳お願い致します。

    There is one other class of interpreters, however, with whom I find it impossible to agree, -- I mean those who take the six days to be six periods of unknown indefinite length. This is the principle of interpretation in a work on the Creation and the Fall, by the Rev. D. Macdonald; also in Mr. Hugh Miller's posthumous work, the Testimony of the Rocks, and also in an admirable treatise on the Præ-Adamite Earth in Dr. Lardner's Museum of Science. In this last it is the more surprising because the successive chapters are in fact an accumulation of evidence which points the other way, as a writer in the Christian Observer, Jan.1858, has conclusively shown. The late M. D'Orbigny has demonstrated in his Prodrome de Palæontologie, after an elaborate examination of vast multitudes of fossils, that there have been at least twenty-nine distinct periods of animal and vegetable existence -- that is, twenty nine creations separated one from another by catastrophes which have swept away the species existing at the time, with a very few solitary exceptions, never exceeding one and a-half per cent, of the whole number discovered which have either survived the catastrophe, or have been erroneously designated. But not a single species of the preceding period survived the last of these catastrophes, and this closed the Tertiary period and ushered in the Human period. The evidence adduced by M. D'Orbigny shows that both plants and animals appeared in every one of those twenty-nine periods. The notion, therefore, that the days' of Genesis represent periods of creation from the beginning of things is at once refuted. The parallel is destroyed both in the number of the periods (thirty, including the Azoic, instead of six), and also in the character of the things created. No argument could be more complete; and yet the writer of the Præ-Admite Earth, in the last two pages, sums up his lucid sketch of M. D'Orbigny's researches by referring the account in the first chapter of Genesis to the whole creation from the beginning of all things, a selection of epochs being made, as he imagines, for the six days or periods.' In this trenchant manner do theological geologists overthrow one another's theories.

  • 和訳お願い致します。

    The other point which has to be noted with regard to this criterion is as follows. I again quote from " Animal Intelligence :"— " Of course to the sceptic this criterion may appear un satisfactory, since it depends, not on direct knowledge, but on inference. Here, however, it seems enough to point out, as already observed, that it is the best criterion available ; and, further, that scepticism of this kind is logically bound to deny evidence of mind, not only in the case of the lower animals, but also in that of the higher, and even in that of men other than the sceptic himself. For all objections which could apply to the use of this criterion of mind in the animal kingdom, would apply with equal force to the evidence of any mind other than that of the individual objector. This is obvious, because, as I have already observed, the only evi dence we can have of objective mind is that which is furnished by objective activities ; and, as the subjective mind can never become assimilated with the objective so as to learn by direct feeling the mental processes which there accompany the objective activities, it is clearly impossible to satisfy any one who may choose to doubt the validity of inference, that in any case, other than his own, mental processes ever do accompany objective activities.