The Theistic Conception of the World / An Essay in Opposition to Certain Tendencies of Modern Thought

FOOTNOTES:

B. F. Cocker

[1] "The Old Faith and the New," vol. i. p. 107.

[2] Ibid. vol. i. p. 3.

[3] Ibid. vol. i. p. 158.

[4] "The Old Faith and the New," vol. ii. p. 35.

[5] Ibid. vol. ii. p. 19.

[6] "The Old Faith and the New," vol. ii. p. 213.

[7] Ueberweg's "History of Philosophy," vol. ii. p. 41.

[8] Ueberweg's "Logic," p. 91.

[9] This is mournfully conceded by Geo. Henry Lewes (an avowed Comtean): "No army of argument, no accumulation of contempt, no historical exhibition of the fruitlessness of its effort, has sufficed to extirpate the tendency toward metaphysical speculation. Although its doctrines have become a scoff (except among the valiant few), its method still survives, still prompts to renewed research, and still misleads some men of science. In vain History points to the failure of twenty centuries; the metaphysician admits the fact, but appeals to History in proof of the persistent passion which no failure can dismay; and hence draws confidence in ultimate success. A cause which is vigorous after centuries of defeat is a cause baffled but not hopeless, beaten but not subdued. The ranks of its army may be thinned, its banners torn and mud-stained; but the indomitable energy breaks out anew, and the fight is continued."—"Problems of Life and Mind," p. 7.

[10] "Every religion may be defined as an À priori theory of the universe. The surrounding facts being given, some form of agency is alleged which, in the opinion of these alleging it, accounts for these facts.... Nay, even that which is commonly regarded as the negation of all religion—even positive Atheism, comes within the definition; for it, too, in asserting the self-existence of Space, Matter, and Motion, which it regards as adequate causes of every appearance, propounds an À priori theory from which it holds the facts to be deducible."—Spencer, "First Principles," p. 43.

[11] "Philosophy begins in wonder: he was not a bad genealogist who said that Isis, the messenger of Heaven, is the child of Thaumas (Wonder); for Wonder is the feeling of a philosopher."—Plato, "TheÆtetus," § 155.

[12] Plato, "TimÆus," § 9.

[13] BÜchner, "Matter and Force," pp. 1-27.

[14] Spencer, "First Principles," pp. 235, 236.

[15] Hegel, "Philosophy of Religion," vol. i. p. 201.

[16] "Spiritual Philosophy of Coleridge," by Green, vol. i. pp. 1, 2.

[17] Isaiah xliii. 13; Exod. iii. 14: "I am that I am."

[18] "We can see the sun, we can greet it in the morning and mourn for it in the evening, without necessarily naming it, that is to say, comprehending it under some general notion. It is the same with the perception of the Divine. It may have been perceived, men may have welcomed it or yearned after it, long before they knew how to name it."—Max MÜller, "Science of Language," 2d Series, p. 454.

[19] "Meditations," vol. i. p. 313.

[20] "Works," vol. i. p. 218; vol. v. p. 18; Hamilton's "Philosophy," p. 176; Murphy's "Scientific Basis of Faith," p. 130.

[21] Morell, "Philosophy of Religion," p. 3.

[22] MÜller, "Christian Doctrine of Sin," vol. i. p. 28.

[23] Green, "Spiritual Philosophy," vol. i. p. 2.

[24] Morell, "Psychology," p. 61.

[25] Cousin, "Elements of Psychology," p. 452.

[26] Martineau's "Essays," p. 188, 2d Series.

[27] "TimÆus," ch. ix.

[28] "Philebus," § 50.

[29] "Sophist," § 72.

[30] "TimÆus," ch. ix. x.

[31] "Correlation and Conservation of Forces," p. 199.

[32] "Outlines of Astronomy," pp. 233-4; also "Familiar Lectures on Scientific Subjects," pp. 462, 475.

[33] "Human Physiology," p. 542; also art. "On Mutual Relation of Vital and Physical Forces," Philosophical Transactions, p. 730.

[34] "Natural Selection," p. 368. See Mivart, "Genesis of Species," p. 298; Laycock, "Mind and Brain," vol. i. pp. 225, 304; Murphy, "Scientific Basis of Faith," p. 51.

[35] "Reign of Law," pp. 123, 129; Cooke, "Religion and Chemistry," p. 340.

[36] "First Principles," p. 235. See also Challis, "Principles of Mathematics and Physics," p. 681.

[37] Comte, "L'Ensemble du Positivisme," p. 46.

[38] M'Vicar, "Sketch of Philosophy," p. 8.

[39] These terms are frequently and somewhat loosely employed as synonymous; but in reality each has its own peculiar shade of meaning. Here we employ the term Absolute to denote the underived, independent, incomposite, and immutable. Infinite is employed to denote the absence of all limitation—that which can not be bounded, measured, quantified. Perfect is employed to denote that which is complete, finished, self-sufficient—that which has no defect and no want. The unconditioned is a genus, of which the Infinite, Absolute, and Perfect are species—not conditioned by quantity, kind, or degree. For the Infinite there are no limits; for the Absolute no parts, no equals, and no change; for the Perfect no wants. See Calderwood, "Philosophy of the Infinite," p. 179; North American Review, Oct. 1864, pp. 407, 417.

[40] Saisset, "Modern Pantheism," vol. ii. p. 70.

[41] "The idea of God is the unity of three factors—the logical (intelligence), the ethical (love), and the physical (might)."—Dr. Martensen, "Die Christliche Ethik," § 19.

[42] Dr. Whedon, Meth. Qu. Review, Jan. 9, 1871, p. 164.

[43] As related to the purpose of Redemption. God the Father is the moving or actuating cause of Redemption, God the Son is the revealing and actualizing cause, and God the Spirit is the active and efficient cause. Father = Love; Logos = Revealer; Spirit = Life.

[44] The Justice, Truth, and Faithfulness of God are not properly regarded as attributes of the Divine nature, but as modes of Divine conduct or action, determined by the Holiness and Goodness of God. So Grace, Mercy, Compassion are but modifications of Divine Love viewed in relation to sinful, guilty, and suffering creatures, and their consideration belongs not to the doctrine of Creation, but of Redemption.

[45] Whedon, "On the Freedom of the Will," p. 316.

[46] For an exhaustive discussion of this subject, see MÜller, "Christian Doctrine of Sin," vol. ii. pp. 199-215.

[47] We make no pretensions to critical acquaintance with the Hebrew, but will hazard this suggestion, ?????? (aysah) is the most general term; its fundamental meaning is to do, to perform, to work, and may embrace both origination and formation. ?????? (bara) and ????? (yetsar) are more specific, the former denoting the origination of a new essence or substance, the latter formation or fashioning out of pre-existing materials. Thus we read in Gen. ii. 7: "And the Lord God formed [?????] man [i. e., the body of man] out of the dust of the earth." Here we have pre-existing matter. But in Gen. i. 27 we read, "And God created [??????] man [i. e., the soul of man] in his own image." Here we have no pre-existing material, for matter can not bear the image of God. (See Acts xvii. 29.) Bara must therefore here mean origination. Even in Gen. i. 21, where bara is employed in regard to the production of living creatures, we have the origination of something new: for vitality, sensitivity, perception are not properties of matter, neither can they be educed from any organization of matter.

[48] We can not help regarding this mode of reasoning as superficial and misleading. Gen. i. 27, "So God created [??????] man in his own image," refers to the spiritual nature of man which alone can bear the "image of God," and must mean origination. Gen. ii. 7, "And the Lord God formed [??????] man out of the dust of the earth," refers solely to the body of man. This distinction can scarcely be accidental.

[49] James i. 17.

[50] Rom. xi. 36.

[51] Lange's "Commentary," Introduction.

[52] We can not overlook the connection between Gen. i. 1 and John i. 1, and close our eyes to the light which the later announcement throws upon the former. It is most probable that by ?? ???? John means ?? a????, in eternity—that is, before all time-succession began. ???? here can have no relation to time. And why may we not accept the Platonic notion of "a creation in eternity," which itself constituted a beginning of time? Prior to finite succession and change, there can be no time.

[53] "God being limited neither in nor by any other existence, is infinite in a positive sense, inasmuch as his will alone imposes all limitation."—Ulrici, "Gott und die Natur," 1862, p. 535.

[54] Natura—that which is produced or born, that which is always becoming. Essentia—the fundamental, permanent being. See note 1 (Next footnote.)

[55] "We Arminians hold that God is freely good from eternity to eternity, just as man is good freely and alternatively for one hour. Infinite knowledge does not insure infinite goodness. Infinite knowledge (which is a very different thing from infinite wisdom) is not an anterior cause of infinite goodness; but both Infinite Wisdom and Infinite Holiness consist in and result from God's volitions eternally, and absolutely, perfectly coinciding with, not the Wrong, but the Right. God's infinite knowledge = omniscience, is an eternal, fixed, necessary be-ing; God's wisdom and holiness are an eternal volitional BECOMING; an eternally free, alternative putting forth of choices for the Right. God's omniscience is self-existent; God's wisdom and holiness are self-made, or eternally and continuously being made. God is necessarily omnipotent and all-knowing through eternity, but God is truly wise and holy through all eternity, but no more necessarily than a man through a single hour. God is holy therefore, not automatically, but freely; not merely with infinite excellence, but with infinite meritoriousness."—Whedon, "Freedom of the Will," p. 316.

[56] Lange, "Commentary" on Gen. i., p. 180.

[57] Poynting, quoted by Martineau in "Nature and God," p. 153.

[58] See also Heb. i.

[59] See MÜller's "Christian Doctrine of Sin," vol. ii. p. 146.

[60] Saisset, "Modern Pantheism," vol. ii. p. 119.

[61] "History of Modern Philosophy," vol. i. p. 94.

[62] "Essays," 1st Series, pp. 158, 161.

[63] "First Principles," p. 37.

[64] MÜller, "Christian Doctrine of Sin," vol. ii. p. 215.

[65] "Essays," 1st Series, p. 161.

[66] "Essays," 1st Series, p. 203.

[67] "Deus durat semper et adest ubique, et existendo semper et ubique durationem et spatium, Æternitatem et infinitatem constituit."—Principia, Schol. Gen.

[68] "Modern Pantheism," vol. i. p. 180.

[69] "Intuitions," p. 213.

[70] "System of Christian Doctrine," by Nitzsch, pp. 156-7.

[71] "The Human Intellect," p. 565.

[72] July, 1864.

[73] Stewart's Dissertation in "EncyclopÆdia Britannica," vol. i. p. 142.

[74] Even physical science rejects the notion of "pure space," and it may be reasonably doubted whether "absolute vacuity" has any place in the universe of God. As a question of science, the existence of the "vacuum" is doubtful. "It may be safely asserted that hitherto all attempts at producing a perfect vacuum have failed."—Grove, "Correlation of Physical Forces," p. 134. The general tendency of science is toward a denial of its existence (p. 137). As a question of metaphysics, the human reason can only find satisfaction in believing in a spiritual Being, a living Will which "inhabiteth eternity and immensity," and "filleth all in all" with living and life-giving fullness, so that "in Him we live and move and have being."—McCosh, "Intuitions of the Mind," p. 225.

[75] "By empty space I mean distance, I mean direction: that steeple is a mile off, and not here where I sit, and it lies southeast and not north."—Herschel, "Familiar Lectures on Scientific Subjects," p. 455.

[76] Taylor, "Physical Theory of Another Life," p. 26.

[77] "The idea of space—the idea of extension—is the logical condition of the admission of the idea of the body."—"History of Philosophy," vol. ii. p. 217.

[78] "Extension is only another name for space."—"Lectures on Metaphysics," vol. ii. p. 113.

[79] "Space and extension are convertible terms."—"First Principles," p. 48.

[80] See "Intuitions," p. 223, where the terms are employed as synonymous.

[81] "L'immensitÉ ou l'unitÉ de l'espace."—Cousin, "Histoire de la Philosophie du xviii^me SiÈcle," p. 121. "Infinity of extension."—McCosh, "Intuitions," p. 223. "Infinite immensity of space."—Hamilton, "Discussions," p. 36.

[82] "Lectures," vol. ii. pp. 114, 167.

[83] "Intuitions," p. 202.

[84] "Lectures," vol. ii. p. 169.

[85] "Lectures," vol. ii. p. 170

[86] "Discussions," etc., p. 36.

[87] "Philosophy," p. 357.

[88] "Intuitions," p. 208.

[89] "History of Philosophy," vol. i. p. 77.

[90] "History of Philosophy," vol. ii. p. 224.

[91] "When the succession of ideas ceases, our perception of duration ceases with it."—Locke, "Essays" (bk. ii. ch. xiv. § 4).

[92] Time and duration are confounded by McCosh ("Intuitions," p. 223), by Mahan ("Intellectual Philosophy," p. 22), and by Cousin ("History of Philosophy," vol. ii. p. 229).

[93] "Absolute time is eternity" (Cousin, "History of Philosophy," vol. i. p. 77). "L'ÉternitÉ ou l'unitÉ de temps" ("Histoire de la Philosophie du xviii^me SiÈcle," p. 121). "Eternity is the synonym of pure time" (North American Review, April, 1864, p. 115).

[94] "Mind is nothing but the series of our feelings as they actually occur, with the addition of infinite possibilities of feeling" ("Examination of Hamilton's Philosophy," vol. i. p. 253).

[95] "Intuitions," p. 206.

[96] "Intuitions," p. 206.

[97] "Intuitions," p. 252.

[98] Hamilton's "Lectures," vol. ii. p. 527.

[99] McCosh, "Intuitions," p. 205; Saisset, "Mod. Pantheism," vol. i. p. 193.

[100] Hamilton's "Logic," p. 55.

[101] "Intuitions," p. 211. See also Porter's "Human Intellect," p. 567.

[102] "Intuitions," p. 211.

[103] Strange as it may sound, Dr. McCosh says, at p. 202, that "we have an immediate knowledge of space in the concrete by the senses," and here he asserts that "space is not a substance," and therefore can not be perceived.

[104] "Opuscula," p. 752.

[105] "Discussions," p. 36.

[106] "Philosophy of the Infinite," pp. 319, 331.

[107] "Modern Pantheism," vol. i. p. 192.

[108] "Philosophy of the Infinite," p. 300.

[109] "Philosophy of the Infinite," p. 331.

[110] MÜller, "Christian Doctrine of Sin," vol. i. p. 243.

[111] "Familiar Lectures," p. 455.

[112] Martineau's "Essays," 1st Series, p. 158.

[113] Martineau's "Essays," 1st Series, p. 161.

[114] "Institutes of Theology," vol. i. pp. 76, 79.

[115] "Natural Theology," p. 23. The practice so common among writers of Natural Theology of fixing upon one line of proof of the being of God as the only valid method, and then disparaging and endeavoring to show the invalidity of all others, is highly reprehensible. The strongest arguments employed by the Atheists have been culled from the writings of these eccentric theologians. In the celebrated public discussion between Mr. Holyoake, the leader of the Secularists in England, and Mr. Brindley, "On the existence of God," the most telling arguments of Mr. Holyoake were drawn from the standard works on Natural Theology. How much more rational and commendable is the course of the philosopher: "There are different proofs of the existence of God. The consoling result of my studies is that these different proofs are more or less strict in form, but they have all a depth of truth which needs only to be disengaged and put in a clear light in order to give incontestable authority. Every thing leads to God. There is no bad way of arriving at Him, but we go to Him by different paths."—Cousin, "History of Philosophy," vol. ii. p. 418.

The argument for the being of a God in its completeness is at once Ontological and Cosmological, Etiological and Teleological. It is in the concurrence and synthesis of these separate but harmonious lines of proof that we have an unanswerable demonstration. For ourselves, we are convinced, with Neitzsch, that the Ontological proof is first and last; they who seek to invalidate this cut the ground from under all the rest.

[116] Herschel's "Outlines of Astronomy," p. 511.

[117] North American Review, October, 1864, p. 428.

[118] "By finite we generally mean that which is within reach, or may be brought within reach of our senses.... The powers, therefore, of our senses and mind place the limit to the finite, but those magnitudes which severally transcend these limits, by reason of their being too great or too small, we call infinite and infinitesimal."—Price, "Infinitesimal Calculus," vol. i. pp. 12, 13.

[119] Martineau, "Essays," 1st Series, p. 161.

[120] Hamilton, "Metaphysics," vol. ii. p. 539.

[121] Argyll, "Reign of Law," p. 117.

[122] "Essays," 1st Series, p. 206.

[123] "Lectures," vol. ii. p. 406.

[124] "Prolegomena," p. 267-269.

[125] See Locke's "Human Understanding," bk. iv. ch. x., where a similar line of argument is pursued.

[126] Schellen, "Spectrum Analysis," p. 45.

[127] Sir John Herschel, "Natural Philosophy," § 28.

[128] "On Molecules," Lecture at the British Association at Bradford, in Nature, vol. viii. p. 441.

[129] "God is not merely spirit, but He has upon Himself a realistic nature. God did not create the world out of an absolute nothing. The something out of which God created it are his eternal potentialities—not merely logical (merely conceived by God), but at the same time also physical (essentially in God existing) potentialities. In these d???e?? God possesses both the something out of which He makes the world, and also the forces, instruments, and means by which He produces it. In this sense it is literally true: All things are of God (Rom. xi. 33). This admission of a supramaterial physis in God—this spiritual realism—furnishes not only an escape from the errors of a lifeless materialism and of an abstract spiritualism, but is the synthesis of the partial truth that is in both."—Bibliotheca Sacra, January, 1873, p. 191.

[130] Lange's Commentary, "Preliminary Essay," p. 126.

[131] See Whewell's "History of Scientific Ideas," vol. ii. p. 287.

[132] Ch. XXXIV.

[133] Whewell's "History of Inductive Sciences," vol. ii. p. 593.

[134] Spencer, "First Principles," p. 4.

[135] Spencer, "First Principles," p. 43.

[136] "Fragments of Science," p. 12.

[137] Inaugural Address before the British Association of Science, in Nature, vol. iv. p. 269.

[138] "Positive Philosophy," vol. i. p. 206.

[139] "Philosophy of Aristotle," p. 66.

[140] Prof. P. G. Tait, M.A., opening Address at the Edinburgh Meeting of the British Association of Science, in Nature, vol. iv. p. 271. See also Prof. Maxwell's Address at the Liverpool Meeting, in Nature, vol. ii. p. 422.

[141] Miller's "Testimony of the Rocks," p. 221.

[142] Sir William Thomson supposes that temperature to have been at least 7000° Fahr. See Thomson and Tait's "Natural Philosophy," vol. i. p. 716.

[143] "Fragments of Science," p. 158.

[144] Thomson and Tait, "Natural Philosophy," vol. i. p. 714. Winchell, "Sketches of Creation," p. 407.

[145] Mayer, "Celestial Dynamics: Correlation and Conservation of Forces," p. 315. The palÆobotanist Heer has described many species of tropical plants from Greenland, Alaska, and Spitzbergen.

[146] Thomson and Tait, "Natural Philosophy," vol. i. p. 714. Observations on over forty artesian wells in Central Alabama show an average increase of temperature of 1° for every 47 feet of descent.—Dr. Winchell, in "Proceedings of American Association," part ii. p. 102.

[147] Thomson and Tait, "Natural Philosophy," vol. i. p. 714.

[148] Pouillet estimates that the heat which reaches the surface of the earth from its interior at 200 cubic miles per diem. A cubic mile is the quantity of heat necessary to raise a cubic mile of water 1° Centigrade in temperature.

[149] Thomson and Tait, "Natural Philosophy," vol. i. p. 716.

[150] Thomson and Tait, "Natural Philosophy," vol. i. p. 721.

[151] See Winchell's "Sketches of Creation," chap. xxxvi.

[152] Proctor, "Other Worlds than Ours," p. 193. "More likely these have been totally absorbed by the lunar rocks."—Dr. Winchell.

[153] "Correlation and Conservation of forces," p. 245.

[154] North American Review, Oct., 1861, pp. 372-3.

[155] Mitchell's "Planetary and Stellar Worlds," p. 143.

[156] Tyndall, "Fragments of Science," p. 135.

[157] Quoted by Mayer, "Celestial Dynamics: Correlation and Conservation of Forces," p. 271.

[158] "Outlines of Astronomy," p. 308.

[159] Thomson and Tait, "Natural Philosophy," vol. i. p. 191.

[160] Thomson and Tait, "Natural Philosophy," vol. i. p. 191. Balfour Stewart, "Treatise on Heat," p. 372.

[161] Thomson and Tait, "Natural Philosophy," vol. i. p. 194; also Helmholtz, in "Correlation and Conservation of Forces," p. 242.

[162] Winchell, "Sketches of Creation," p. 422. If the whole solar radiation were employed in dissolving a layer of ice inclosing the sun, it would dissolve a stratum ten miles and a half thick in one day.

[163] Helmholtz, "Correlation and Conservation of Forces," p. 245.

[164] Energy is now defined as "the power of doing work," that is, the power, in virtue of its position (as a head of water, a raised mass, a coiled spring) or in virtue of its motion (as a falling mass, a current of wind, a projectile), to do work. The first is called Potential, the second Kinetic Energy. Besides these instances of Visible Energy, there is also Invisible Molecular Energy, divided into, (a) the Energy of electricity in motion; (b) the Energy of radiant heat and light; (c) the kinetic Energy of absorbed heat; (d) molecular potential Energy; (e) potential Energy caused by electrical separation; (f) potential Energy caused by chemical separation. Of these different kinds of Energy, the most available for work is Mechanical Energy, or Energy of visible motions and positions; the least available is universal heat, or radiant Energy.

[165] See article "Energy," in North British Review, May, 1864, and Balfour Stewart's "Treatise on Heat," p. 370.

[166] Stewart's "Elements of Physics," p. 357.

[167] "Die NaturkrÄfte in ihrer Wechselbeziehung," p. 89.

[168] "Correlation of Physical Forces," p. 187.

[169] American Journal of Science, July, 1864.

[170] Argyll, "Reign of Law," p. 121.

[171] Sir Isaac Newton entertained a similar opinion. "We may be able," he said, "to form some rude conception of the creation of matter, if we suppose that God by his power had prevented the entrance of any thing into a certain portion of pure space which is of its nature penetrable,... from henceforward this portion of space will be endowed with impenetrability, one of the essential qualities of matter; and as pure space is absolutely uniform, we have only to suppose that God communicated the same impenetrability to another portion of space, and we should obtain in a certain sort the notion of mobility, another quality which is essential to matter."—M. Coste, Note in the 4th Edition of his "French Translation of Locke's Essay." (M. Coste reports the above from Newton's lips.)

[172] Prof. Maxwell, in Nature, vol. ii. p. 219.

[173] M. Claude Bernard, Revue des Deux Mondes, 1867.

[174] "Dissertation on the Study of Natural Philosophy," § 28.

[175] Prof. Clerk Maxwell, F.R.S., "Lecture delivered before the British Association at Bradford," in Nature, vol. viii. p. 441.

[176] MÜller, "Christian Doctrine of Sin," vol. i. p. 28.

[177] "Logic," vol. ii. p. 527, 4th edition.

[178] "Mind and Brain," vol. i. pp. 107-8.

[179] "Mind and Brain," vol. i. p. 261.

[180] Nature, vol. iv. p. 270.

[181] See Murphy, "Habit and Intelligence," vol. i. p. 121.

[182] MÜller, "Christian Doctrine of Sin," vol. ii. p. 146.

[183] That man is the final end of the material creation is a principle recognized by scientific men. "The aim of the Creator in forming the earth, in allowing it to undergo the successive changes which geology has pointed out, and in creating successively all the different types of animals, was to introduce man upon the earth. Man is the end toward which all the animal creation has tended from the appearance of the PalÆozoic fishes."—Agassiz and Gould, "Principles of Zoology," p. 238. See Dr. Winchell's "Sketches of Creation," pp. 373, 374; Owen's "Anatomy of the Vertebrates," vol. iii. pp. 796, 808.

[184] Argyll, "Reign of Law," p. 213.

[185] See MÜller's "Christian Doctrine of Sin," vol. i. p. 237.

[186] Argyll, "Reign of Law," p. 219.

[187] G. Warrington, "The Week of Creation," p. 27.

[188] Rorison, "Creative Week," in Replies to "Essays and Reviews."

[189] Dr. Whedon, in Methodist Quarterly Review, July, 1862, p. 528.

[190] See "Creative Week," by Rorison, in Replies to "Essays and Reviews."

[191] "The waters of verse 2 is quite another thing than the water proper of the third creative day: it is the fluid (or gaseous) form of the earth itself in its first condition."—Lange.

[192] "We must beware of thinking of a mass of elementary water.... Here is meant the gaseous fluid as it forms a unity with the air."—Lange, p. 168.

[193] ?????? ?????? = soul of life.—Lange.

[194] Whedon.

[195] Hence a???, time, or the all of time, is used to express the all of the finite, the universe. See Heb. i. 2, xi. 3, where a???e? is equivalent to universe.

[196] See Special Introduction by Prof. T. Lewis, in Lange's "Commentary."

[197] Lange's "Commentary" on Genesis, Introduction, p. 131.

[198] "In a conversation held some years ago by the author (Sir J. Herschel) with his lamented friend, Dr. Hawtrey, Head-Master and late Provost of Eton College, on the subject of Etymology, I happened to remark that the syllable Ur or Or must have some very remote origin, having found its way into many languages, conveying the idea of something absolute, solemn, definite, fundamental, or of unknown antiquity, as in the German Ur-alt (primeval), Ur-satz (a fundamental proposition), Ur-theil (a solemn judgment)—in the Latin Oriri (to arise), Origo (the origin), Aurora (the dawn)—in the Greek ???? (a boundary, the extreme limit of our vision, whence our horizon), ????? (an oath or solemn obligation, etc.). 'You are right,' was his reply, 'it is the oldest word of all words: the first word ever recorded to have been pronounced. It is the Hebrew for Light'" (????, AOR).—"Familiar Lectures on Scientific Subjects," p. 219.

[199] See "Week of Creation," by Geo. Warrington, p. 13.

[200] The critical reader will discover a slight difference of opinion between Dr. Winchell and myself in regard to how much of chapter i. is to be regarded as the "Exordium" of the Hymn of Creation. Dr. Winchell includes verses 1 and 2; I incline, however, to the opinion that it is embraced in verse 1. The reasons which weigh with me are the following: 1. The chaos or the darkness of verse 2 is clearly recognized as "the evening" of the first day, "And God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night; and there was evening and morning: one day." I do not see how on a fair interpretation of the sacred poem we can escape the conclusion that the first day embraces "the evening and morning"—that is, the primal darkness of verse 2, and the creation of dawning light. This conception furthermore harmonizes with the Hebrew usage, which always regarded the preceding night as part of the one natural day. The Hebrew Sabbath commenced at six o'clock on Friday evening. Thus we read in Leviticus xxiii. 32, "From even to even shall ye celebrate your Sabbath." Hence also the evening—morning = day (?????-e???)—of Daniel viii. 14. 2. The division I have made is the one which has been followed by the best Hebrew scholars, whose opinion is entitled to the highest deference in this connection. The independent character of the opening sentence of Genesis was affirmed by such judicious and learned men as Calvin, Bishop Patrick, and Dr. D. Jennings. The early fathers of the Church, as St. Gregory of Nazianzen, St. Justin Martyr, Origen, St. Augustine, and others, held that there was a considerable interval between the creation related in the first verse, and that of which an account is given in the third and following verses. See "The Pre-Adamite Earth," by Dr. Harris, p. 281.

[201] Breman Lectures, M. Fuchs "On Miracles," p. 105.

[202] See ante, p. 61.

[203] Lange, in loco.

[204] Faraday.

[205] "Three direct acts of the Deity may be recognized, viz., the creation of matter, of life, and of mind."—Prof. Hinrich, American Journal of Science and Arts, vol. xxxix. p. 57.

[206] See M. Claude Bernard, Revue des Deux Mondes, December 15, 1867; Prof. Norton, American Journal of Science, July, 1864; Cooke, "Religion and Chemistry," p. 330.

[207] North British Review, March, 1868, p. 127. This is the doctrine of the first physicists of the age, of Sir William Thomson (see Nature, vol. i. p. 551; vol. ii. p. 421; and especially vol. iv. pp. 265-6), of Prof. Maxwell (see Nature, vol. ii. p. 421), of Prof. Tait (see Nature, vol. iv. p. 271), also of Clausius and Rankine. See also Prof. Hinrich, "On Planetology," in American Journal of Science, vol. xxxix. p. 283; and Prof. Norton, "On Molecular and Cosmical Physics," American Journal of Science, vol. xlix. pp. 24, 33.

[208] Cooke's "Religion and Chemistry," p. 129.

[209] North British Review, March, 1868, p. 127; also Prof. Tait, in Nature, vol. iv. p. 271.

[210] See Beale, "Protoplasm," pp. 69-71, 88, 108; Carpenter, "Human Physiology," pp. 46, 865-6.

[211] Beale, "Protoplasm," pp. 67-8.

[212] See Agassiz's "Methods of Study in Natural History," p. 287; also Grindon, "Life, its Nature," etc., pp. 189-190.

[213] Cuvier, "Animal Kingdom," p. 32.

[214] Methodist Quarterly Review, January, 1867, p. 143.

[215] Herschel, "Familiar Lectures on Science," p. 218; "Outlines of Astronomy," § 599; North British Review, 1868, p. 127.

[216] Dr. Winchell, "Sketches of Creation," pp. 66, 67.

[217] Dr. Winchell, "Sketches of Creation," p. 374.

[218] Dana, "Geology," pp. 745, 746.

[219] The theory of "Divine superintendence and control" falls very little, if any thing, short of the ever-present and pervading energy which we advocate. At least, the arguments which would establish such a relation of the Deity to the material universe as amounts to "superintendence and control," would go far to establish the doctrine of a real presence and agency of God pervading and upholding all nature. Superintendence and control imply some agency, some efficiency, and some intervention of righteousness or mercy to secure other ends than those secured by the established course of nature, for whoever overrules steps on a field beyond his ordinary rule. The physical laws are, therefore, simply God's uniform mode of governing the world. This is the conclusion which is reached by Proctor ("Other Worlds than Ours"). In his chapter on "Supervision and Control" (ch. xiii.), he says: "Thus we are led to the conclusion that all things happen according to set physical laws; and without, by any means, adopting the view that the Almighty exercises no special control over his universe, we see strong reason to believe that the laws which He has assigned to it are sufficient for the control of all things. Indeed, as far as all things take place in accordance with laws which the Almighty must assuredly have Himself ordained, we may say that every event which has happened or will happen throughout infinite time is the direct work and indicates the direct purpose and will of Almighty God" (pp. 329, 332); and further, "He who made the laws may annul or suspend them at his pleasure" (p. 333).

[220] St. Augustine's "De Civitate Dei," xii. 25, 26; Neander's "Church History," vol. ii. p. 605; Nitzsch, "System of Christian Doctrine," p. 193; MÜller's "Christian Doctrine of Sin," vol. i. p. 248; Harris's " Pre-Adamite Earth," p. 103; Young's "Creator and Creation," pp. 57, 58; Chalmers's "Astronomical Discourses," Dis. iii. pp. 91, 98.

[221] "De Civitate Dei," xii. 25; xiii. 26.

[222] Contra Gentiles, ii. 38.

[223] "Summa Universalis," pt. i. q. 105, art. 5.

[224] "Evidences of Natural and Revealed Religion," Prop. xiv. Dugald Stewart, after quoting the above, adds, "My opinion on this subject coincides with that of Dr. Clarke" ("Philosophy of the Active and Moral Powers of Man," vol. ii. p. 29).

[225] "Sermons," vol. ii. pp. 178, 179.

[226] Thomson's "Seasons."

[227] Holyoake, "Discussion with Townley," p. 68.

[228] Croonian Lecture, "On Matter and Force," p. 94. Is it not significant that Dr. Jones must write his "First Cause" without the initial capitals?

[229] Powell, "Essays and Reviews," p. 139.

[230] Powell, "Christianity and Judaism," p. 11.

[231] Dr. Harris, "Pre-Adamite Earth," p. 104.

[232] Amos i. 2.

[233] Hedge, "Reason and Religion," p. 74.

[234] "Essays and Reviews," p. 102.

[235] McCosh, "Intuitions," p. 276.

[236] "Logic," vol. ii. pp. 117, 118.

[237] Hamilton's "Lectures on Metaphysics," vol. i. p. 102.

[238] Whewell, "Novum Organon Renovatum," p. 7.

[239] "Familiar Lectures on Science," pp. 218, 284, 140.

[240] "Physiological Anatomy," by Todd, Bowman, and Beale, p. 19; Nicholson's "Biology," p. 14.

[241] Jevons, "Principles of Science," vol. ii. pp. 433, 434.

[242] Argyll, "Reign of Law," p. 100.

[243] Laycock, "Mind and Brain," vol. i. p. 225.

[244] Beale, "Protoplasm," pp. 39, 42, 109.

[245] Beale, "Protoplasm," pp. 104, 117; Laycock, "Mind and Brain," vol. i. pp. 222, 224; Liebig, "Organic Chemistry," p. 69.

[246] Spencer, "First Principles," p. 128.

[247] By Energy we understand "the power of doing work," or overcoming resistance, which in nature is something perfectly intelligible and measurable, equivalent in all cases to the product of the mass into the square of the velocity. By Force we understand "that which originates motion." All the forms of Energy have therefore their origin in Force, and Force has its origin in the Will of the Deity.

[248] Quoted from "Positive Philosophy," by Dr. McCosh, "Divine Government," p. 167.

[249] Science has been defined as the "knowledge of these deviations from the great laws of nature formularized in contingent or derivative laws."—Laycock, "Mind and Brain," vol. i. p. 221.

[250] "Fragments of Science," p. 162.

[251] Spencer, "First Principles," p. 128.

[252] Montesquieu, "Spirit of Laws," bk. i. ch. i.

[253] Herschel, "Natural Philosophy," § 27.

[254] "Astronomy and Physics," p. 224.

[255] Thomson and Tait, "Natural Philosophy," vol. i. p. 164; Mayer, "Correlation and Conservation of Forces," p. 335.

[256] Stewart's "Physics," p. 103.

[257] Stewart's "Physics," pp. 114, 353.

[258] Stewart's "Physics," p. 356.

[259] Murphy, "Habit and Intelligence," vol. i. p. 22.

[260] Professor Charles Brooke, in Nature, vol. vi. p. 125.

[261] "Familiar Lectures on Scientific Subjects," pp. 469-472.

[262] "Natural Philosophy," vol. i. pp. 190, 191.

[263] Ibid. p. 194.

[264] North British Review, vol. xl. pp. 182, 183.

[265] Helmholtz, "Correlation and Conservation of Forces," p. 245.

[266] This is the hypothesis of Helmholtz, Mayer, and Thomson.

[267] Tyndall, "Fragments of Science," p. 31; Murphy, "Habit and Intelligence," vol. i. p. 23.

[268] Murphy, "Habit and Intelligence," vol. i. p. 43.

[269] Professor Norton, "On Molecular Physics;" American Journal of Science and Arts, vol. iii, 3d Series, pp. 329-331.

[270] Tyndall, "Fragments of Science," p. 76.

[271] "Principia," Def. viii. p. 8.

[272] "Does every grain of salt and pepper in a million salt-cellars and pepper-casters individually and separately pull and actually move the sun and fixed stars?"—De Morgan.

[273] North British Review, vol. xlviii. March, 1868, p. 125.

[274] Third Letter to Bentley.

[275] Nature, vol. iii. p. 51; vol. ii. p. 422.

[276] Nature, vol. i. p. 551.

[277] Delivered at the Royal Institution, and reported in Nature, vol. vii. Nos. 174, 175.

[278] North British Review, vol. xlviii. March, 1868; "Correlation and Conservation of Forces," p. 368; Amer. Jour. of Science and Arts, vol. xlix. p. 24.

[279] North British Review, vol. xlviii. p. 127; Nature, vol. vii. p. 343.

[280] "Familiar Lectures on Science," p. 90.

[281] Picton, "Mystery of Matter," p. 49.

[282] Herschel, "Familiar Lectures on Science," p. 467.

[283] Sir William Thomson, "Papers on Electrostatics and Magnetism," p. 419.

[284] North British Review, vol. xlviii. p. 127.

[285] We do not by any means assert that two substances can not occupy the same point in space at the same moment in time. We accept the Hegelian maxim that "two substances may occupy the same point in space at the same time provided their qualities are essentially different." If the qualities of the ether are essentially different from gross matter, then to call ether "matter" is to confound and mislead the mind. May not ether be a "tertium quid" between matter and mind?

[286] Prof. Clerk Maxwell, in Nature, vol. ii. p. 421.

[287] Sir William Thomson, in Nature, vol. iv. p. 266.

[288] Sir W. Thomson, in Nature, vol. i. p. 551.

[289] Nature, vol. ii. p. 421.

[290] Philosophical Magazine, 1868.

[291] Thomson and Tait, "Natural Philosophy," vol. i. p. 164.

[292] Nature, vol. viii. p. 280; also Challis, "Principles of Mathematics and Physics," pp. 685-687.

[293] American Journal of Science and Arts, vol. xlix. pp. 32, 33.

[294] How gravitation may result from the interception of the Cosmic Force of Repulsion is explained by Prof. Norton at pp. 26-28, and still more fully in vol. iii. 3d Series, May, 1872, pp. 332, 336.

[295] American Journal of Science and Arts, vol. xlix. p. 34.

[296] American Journal of Science and Arts, vol. xlix. p. 33.

[297] See vol. i. pp. 217-284.

[298] "Intellectual System of the Universe," vol. i. p. 224.

[299] Ibid. p. 271.

[300] Ibid. p. 244.

[301] Ibid. p. 271.

[302] "Intellectual System of the Universe," vol. i. pp. 223-4.

[303] Todd, Bowman, and Beale, "Physiological Anatomy and Physiology of Man," p. 25.

[304] "Habit and Intelligence," vol. ii. p. 5.

[305] Ibid. p. 8.

[306] Ibid. p. 5.

[307] Ibid. pp. 6, 7.

[308] "On Natural Selection," p. 360.

[309] "Genesis of Species," p. 294.

[310] "Habit and Intelligence," vol. ii. p. 5.

[311] "Habit and Intelligence," vol. ii. p. 160.

[312] "Scientific Basis of Faith," p. 43.

[313] "Scientific Basis of Faith," p. 14.

[314] "Habit and Intelligence," vol. ii. pp. 4, 7.

[315] Ibid. p. 8.

[316] Ibid. vol. i. p. 89.

[317] "Scientific Basis of Faith," pp. 351, 352.

[318] "Scientific Basis of Faith," pp. 46, 47.

[319] Ibid. pp. 51, 52.

[320] "Habit and Intelligence," vol. ii. p. 7. "Pantheism asserts the absolute UNITY and permanence of SUBSTANCE with its two attributes of matter and force(= extension and thought), and their innumerable modifications which go to form all the phenomena of the universe."—Dr. Cohn. Under this definition, Mr. Murphy must be ranked a Pantheist. He knows but of ONE SUBSTANCE underlying all phenomena.

[321] "Scientific Basis of Faith," p. 29.

[322] Ibid. p. 14.

[323] Ibid. p. 36.

[324] Ibid. p. 35.

[325] Ibid. p. 47.

[326] "Intellectual System of the Universe," vol. i. p. 223.

[327] "Scientific Basis of Faith," p. 52.

[328] "Intellectual System," vol. i. p. 224.

[329] "On Natural Selection," p. 372.

[330] Tyndall, "Fragments of Science," p. 104.

[331] "Unity of Worlds," p. 230.

[332] Tyndall.

[333] By the statical properties of matter we understand extension, limit, position, impenetrability, and inertia. We have no idea that there is a vis inertiÆ in matter. Vis inertiÆ is a forceless force, which is an absurdity. Inertness in matter is not a force, but the opposite of a force—a passivity which requires a force in order to change.

[334] Faraday, "Correlation and Conservation of Forces," p. 368.

[335] Clerk Maxwell, in Nature, vol. ii. p. 421; Herschel, "Familiar Lectures on Science," p. 467.

[336] Professor Norton, in the American Journal of Science and Arts, July, 1864, p. 64; Herschel, "Familiar Lectures on Science," p. 467; Dr. Carpenter, "Human Physiology," p. 542.

[337] Revue des Deux Mondes, 1867.

[338] Anaxagoras.

[339] Dr. Carpenter, in Nature, vol. vi. p. 312.

[340] Herschel, "Familiar Lectures on Science," p. 467.

[341] For other illustrations, see Cooke's "Religion of Chemistry," pp. 326-8; Grove, "Correlation and Conservation of Forces," pp. 116, 117.

[342] Dr. Cohn, of the University of Breslau, in Nature, vol. vii. p. 137.

[343] Carpenter, "Human Physiology," p. 542; Herschel, "Outlines of Astronomy," pp. 233, 234; Wallace, "On Natural Selection," p. 368; Murphy, "Scientific Basis of Faith," p. 51; Laycock, "Mind and Brain," vol. i. pp. 225, 258-9, 304.

[344] "First Principles," p. 235.

[345] Letter to the author.

[346] The distinction made by Dr. Carpenter between molecular (bioplasmic) and somatic (individual) life is important: molecular life is a cosmic force, somatic life is an individualized force; the former is the direct action of Deity, the second is the indwelling of a created but yet dependent spiritual entity in a vitalized organism.

[347] "On the Mutual Relation of the Vital and Physical Forces," Philosophical Transactions, 1850, p. 730. See also Laycock, "Mind and Brain," vol. i. p. 304; Wallace, in Nature, vol. vi. p. 285.

[348] Huxley, "Introduction to the Classification of Animals."

[349] Nature, vol. iv. p. 269.

[350] "God in Nature," in Old and New, 1872, p. 163.

[351] Methodist Quarterly Review, July, 1871, p. 499.

[352] "All atomic forces are incessant forces that are made up of impulses which are renewed every instant."—Professor Norton, in the American Journal of Science and Arts, vol. iii. 3d Series, p. 331.

[353] Sir W. Thomson, in Nature, vol. iv. p. 266.

[354] Grove, "Correlation and Conservation of Forces," pp. 15, 18, 199. See also the words of Dr. Mayer in the same volume, p. 341.

[355] Mr. Wallace, the author of the theory of natural selection, denies its applicability to man. Man is "a being apart," a "being superior to nature." "He has not only escaped 'natural selection' himself, but he is actually able to take away some of that power from nature which, before his appearance, she universally exercised" ("On Natural Selection," pp. 325, 326). See also Lubbock's "Prehistoric Times," last chapter.

[356] "Lectures on the History of Rome," vol. ii. p. 59.

[357] Laurent, "Études sur l'Histoire de l'HumanitÉ," vol. v. p. 14.

[358] Cousin, "History of Philosophy," vol. i. p. 160.

[359] "Nichomachean Ethics," bk. i. ch. ii.

[360] Ibid. bk. i. ch. x.

[361] Ibid. bk. x. ch. viii.

[362] Nitzsch, "System of Christian Doctrine," p. 172.

[363] MÜller, "Christian Doctrine of Sin," vol. ii. p. 146.

[364] Acts xvii. 25-28.

[365] Laurent, "Études sur l'Histoire de l'HumanitÉ," vol. v. p. 12. Not all the Stoics seem to have understood this "necessity" in so rigorous a sense. Cleanthes would exempt the evil actions of men from necessity: "Nothing takes place without Thee, O Deity, except that which bad men do through their own want of reason; but even that which is evil is overruled by Thee for good, and is made to harmonize with the plan of the world."—Hymn to Zeus.

[366] Laurent, "Études sur l'Histoire de l'HumanitÉ," vol. v. p. 12.

[367] The statement of the text will remain unaffected by any theory as to the derivation of the material organism of the primitive man. If the hypothesis be true that "man is the descendant of some pre-existent generic type, the which, if it were now living, we would probably call an ape," this can only be affirmed of the body of man, and the statement is still correct that "God formed man of the dust of the earth." The body of the ape and the body of man are formed of the same materials. But, as Prof. Cope, a thorough-going Evolutionist, remarks, this material nature can not bear or be "the image of God," for "God is a spirit," and "a spirit hath not flesh and bones" (Luke xxiv. 39). The image of God must inhere in that spiritual nature which was inbreathed by God, and consists in reason, conscience, and moral liberty. (See Cope, "On the Hypothesis of Evolution," pp. 33, 34.) This theory as to the descent of man's material organism from some pre-existent generic type does not by any means involve the conclusion of Sir J. Lubbock that "the primitive condition of mankind was one of utter barbarism." We may grant that the primitive condition of man was one of childhood ignorance and inexperience, a state in which his intellectual and moral nature was undeveloped; but this is not "Savagism." Barbarism is the lapse and deterioration of man. Even if it could be shown that primeval man was destitute of the industrious arts, "it would not afford the slightest presumption that he was also ignorant of duty or ignorant of God" ("Primeval Man," by the Duke of Argyll, p. 132). "Whenever we can trace back a religion to its first beginnings, we find it free from many blemishes that affect it in its later stages" (Max MÜller, "Chips from a German Workshop," vol. i., preface). The most ancient form of religion was the Monotheistic (Grimm, "Deutsche Mythologie," p. xliv. 3d ed.). See also "Les Origines Indo-EuropÉennes," vol. ii. p. 720, by M. Adolphe Pictet.

[368] Agassiz and Gould's "Zoology," p. 238.

[369] "On Limbs," p. 88.

[370] "On the Skeleton and Teeth," p. 228.

[371] "Anatomy of the Vertebrates," vol. iii. p. 796.

[372] "The Harmonies of Nature," by Dr. C. Hartwig, pp. 46, 47.

[373] "Typical Forms and Special Ends," R. McCosh and Dr. Dickie, p. 352.

[374] "History of Philosophy," vol. i. p. 169.

[375] "Geographical Studies," p. 34.

[376] Ritter, "Geographical Studies," p. 314; Guyot, "Earth and Man," p. 34.

[377] Ritter, "Geographical Studies," p. 34; Guyot, "Earth and Man," p. 35.

[378] See Guyot, "Earth and Man", pp. 268-270.

[379] Cousin, "History of Philosophy," vol. i. pp. 169-170.

[380] "Adam and the Adamites."

[381] Article "Ararat," in Smith's Dictionary.

[382] It is called in Ptolemy Naxuana, and by Moses Chorenensis, the Armenian historian, Idsheuan, but at the place itself Nachidsheuan, which signifies "the first place of descent." See Whiston's note on p. 87, vol. i. of Josephus.

[383] "Antiquities," bk. i. chap. iii. § 5.

[384] Ibid. bk. i. chap. iii. § 6. Scaliger was the first to draw the attention of scholars to the writings of Berosus. In his work "De Emendatione Temporum" he has collected his fragments, and vindicated their authenticity. Berosus is always quoted with respect by English divines, and Niebuhr has sustained his claims to be regarded as a reliable authority. In more than one place he speaks of Armenia as the resting-place of the ark. See Rawlinson's "Historical Evidences," p. 63, and note liii.

[385] "Antiquities," bk. i. chap, iii. § 6.

[386] "For instance, in the very second verse, the great discovery of Schlegel, which the word Indo-European embodies—the affinity of the principal nations of Europe with the Arian or Indo-Persic stock—is sufficiently indicated by the conjunction of the Madai or Medes (whose native name is Mada) with Gomer of the Cymry, and Javan of the Ionians. Again, one of the most recent and unexpected results of modern linguistic inquiry is the proof which it has furnished of an ethnic connection between the Ethiopians or Cushites, who adjoined on Egypt, and the primitive inhabitants of Babylonia; a connection which was positively denied by an eminent ethnologist only a few years ago, but which has now been sufficiently established from the cuneiform monuments. In the tenth chapter of Genesis (vers. 8-10) we find this truth thus briefly stated: 'And Cush begat Nimrod,' the 'beginning of whose kingdom was Babel' (ver. 11). So we have had it recently made evident from the same monuments that 'out of that land went forth Asshur, and builded Nineveh'—or that the Semitic Assyrians proceeded from Babylonia and founded Nineveh long after the Cushite foundation of Babylon. Again, the Hamitic descent of the early inhabitants of Canaan, which had often been called in question, has recently come to be looked upon as almost certain, apart from the evidence of Scripture; and the double mention of Sheba, both among the sons of Ham, and also among those of Shem (vers. 7 and 28), has been illustrated by the discovery that there are two races of Arabs—one (the Joktanian) Semitic, the other (the Himyaric) Cushite or Ethiopic."—Rawlinson's "Historical Evidences," pp. 71, 72.

[387] Asiatic Society's Journal, vol. xv.

[388] Rawlinson's "Herodotus," vol. i. p. 523.

[389] "Cosmos," vol. i. p. 348.

[390] Article "Botany," EncyclopÆdia Britannica, vol. v.; also "Geographical Botany;" and Guyot, "Earth and Man," p. 251.

[391] Guyot, "Earth and Man," p. 255.

[392] Guyot, "Earth and Man," pp. 264, 265; Wallace, "On Natural Selection," pp. 324-6; Martineau, "Essays," 1st Series, p. 126.

[393] Guyot, "Earth and Man," p. 304.

[394] See Article "Philosophy," in Smith's "Dictionary of the Bible." See also Shairp, "Culture and Religion," pp. 40-46.

[395] "Palestine was from the beginning an isolated land, as Israel was an isolated people, and therefore for thousands of years both have been unintelligible to the world at large. No great highway led through Palestine from people to people; all passed by it, and not over it; all its coast was without favorable harbors. No one of the pagan states of antiquity could come into close geographical, mercantile, political, and religious relations with a people existing under the sway of Jehovah."—Ritter, "Geographical Studies," p. 43.

[396] Article "Philosophy," in Smith's "Dictionary of the Bible."

[397] Ritter, "Geographical Studies," pp. 342, 343.

[398] Guyot, "Earth and Man," p. 307.

[399] "The conjugal tie was held sacred, and polygamy prohibited."—De PressensÉ, "Religions before Christ," p. 160.

[400] Merivale, "Conversion of the Roman Empire," p. 92.

[401] "God," said Plato, "is supremely good" ("Republic," book ii. ch. 18); and "virtue is likeness or assimilation to God" ("TheÆtetus," § 384).

[402] Milman, "Latin Christianity," vol. i. p. 357.

[403] Guyot, "Earth and Man," p. 322.

[404] Wallace, "On Natural Selection," p. 326.

[405] "First Principles," p. 38.

[406] Ibid. p. 496.

[407] Buchanan, "Modern Atheism," p. 285.

[408] "Scientific Basis of Faith," p. 6.

[409] "First Principles," p. 43.

[410] Without referring to the writings of theologians, we may take any definition of religion which incidentally occurs in general literature. For example, Froude defines religion as "the attitude of reverence in which noble-minded men instinctively place themselves toward the Unknown Power which made man and his dwelling-place. It is the natural accompaniment of their lives, the sanctification of their actions and their acquirements. It is what gives to man in the midst of the rest of Creation his special elevation and dignity" ("History of England," vol. xii. p. 560).

[411] "Essays," 1st Series, p. 178.

[412] Preface to the seventh edition of the Address before the British Association of Science at Belfast.

[413] Preface to the seventh edition of the Address before the British Association of Science at Belfast.

[414] Dr. Tyndall subsequently defends his course by saying, "The kingdom of science cometh not by observation and experiment alone, but is completed by fixing the roots of observation and experiment in a region inaccessible to both, and in dealing with which we are forced to fall back upon the picturing power of the mind"—"Einbildungskraft"—the force of imagination (Preface to seventh edition). Are we then to believe that the imagination is the source of scientific principles, that it has any "power of intuition, or can in any way create its own objects?" Why does he not fall back on his "Anschauungsgabe," or faculty of rational intuition, and admit that he is in the region of the metaphysical? See "Fragments of Science," p. 130.

[415] "???? ????t??," xxxi.

[416] This is admitted even by those who regard prayer for physical change, as, for example, the averting of disease or the fall of rain, to be "irrational and unconsciously irreverent." "I repeat that no theory of the universe, no philosophy of human nature, and no conclusion of science can ever lay an arrest upon the instincts of the universal heart in the presence of calamity, and with the prospect of its increase. Let men philosophize as they will, and let science march where it will (conquering realm after realm, and reducing all under the rigor of law), the human spirit will always 'cry unto God' in times of crisis, and will find immeasurable solace in 'committing its causes' unto Him; for the instinct to pray for relief in times of anxiety or of peril is one which can never be exorcised from the heart of man. But it does not follow that it will always (or that it ought ever) to imagine that by so doing it can deflect the order of nature or induce God to alter his prearrangements. The relief obtained is in the act of submission and of filial trust, not in the notion of being able to persuade an infinitely powerful and sympathetic Listener" ("Prayer: 'The Two Spheres:' They are Two," by the Rev. William Knight, Contemporary Review, December, 1873, p. 35). Of course we have no reason to expect that Dr. Tyndall should yield his judgment to the authority of Scripture, but we may legitimately expect the Rev. William Knight, of the Free Church of Scotland, to defer in some measure to James v. 13-18.

[417] Preface to the seventh edition of Dr. Tyndall's "Address."

[418] "Scientific Basis of Faith," p. 39.

[419] "When ten men are so in earnest on one side that they will sooner be killed than give way, and twenty are earnest enough on the other to cast their votes for it but will not risk their skins, the ten will give the law to the twenty in virtue of the robuster faith, and of the strength that goes along with it."—Froude, "History of England," vol. xii. p. 562.

[420] "Fragments of Science," p. 350.

[421] "Only in the domain of Freedom can there exist the moral."—Martensen, "Christian Ethics," p. 1.

[422] "Fragments of Science," p. 39.

[423] "Questions such as these derive their present interest in great part from their audacity."—Tyndall.

[424] See "Fragments of Science," pp. 38 and 64-65.

[425] Contemporary Review, December, 1873, p. 30.

[426] Tyndall, "Fragments of Science," p. 160.

[427] Preface to the Address before the British Association of Science at Belfast.

[428] Preface to the seventh edition.

[429] Contemporary Review.

[430] Mansel, "Prolegomena Logica," p. 280.

[431] "History of Civilization."

[432] Comte, "Positive Philosophy," vol. i. p. 45.

[433] "No record of coincidences can prove a causal connection, or even suggest it—unless the instances are exceptionally numerous, and unless other causes leading to the result are excluded by the rigid methods of verification."—"Prayer: 'The Two Spheres:' They are Two,"Contemporary Review, Dec., 1873, p. 39.

[434] See pp. 386-7.

[435] Dr. Tuke, "Influence of the Mind on the Body in Health and Disease," p. 351.

[436] "Fragments of Science," pp. 36-39.

[437] "Fragments of Science," p. 40: "The assumed permanence of natural laws."

[438] Ibid., p. 60.

[439] "Fragments of Science," p. 64.

[440] Jevons, "Principles of Science," vol. ii. p. 434.

[441] "Fragments of Science," p. 64.

[442]Ibid. p. 38.

[443] "On the Relation of God to the World," pp. 187-201.

[444] See Coleridge, "Works," vol. i. pp. 152, 263; Hamilton, "Metaphysics," vol. i. p. 40.

[445] Fleming, "Vocabulary of Philosophy," in loco.

[446] See Jevons, "Principles of Science," vol. ii. p. 440; Spencer, "First Principles," p. 128.

[447] Carpenter, "Mental Physiology," p. 692; see Lewes, "Problems of Life and Mind," vol. i. p. 336.

[448] Essential properties "are those which admit neither of intension nor remission of degrees."—Newton, Regula Tertia Philosophandi, "Principia," lib. iii

[449] Maxwell, "Theory of Heat," p. 310; and also in Nature, vol. ii. p. 421.

[450] By "causes" is here meant nothing more than all the antecedent conditions. The statement makes no real distinction between "causes" and "conditions." "We can not predicate of any physical agency that it is abstractedly the cause of another." "Causation is the will of God."—Grove, "Correlation and Conservation of Forces," pp. 15, 199.

[451] See Murphy, "Habit and Intelligence," vol. ii. p. 157; "Scientific Basis of Faith," pp. 75, 76; J. S. Mill, "Logic," vol. ii. ch. xxii. § 1.

[452] "Logic," bk. iii. ch. xvi. See also McCosh, "Intuitions," pp. 275-7.

[453] "Scientific Basis of Faith," p. 79.

[454] "Principles of Science," vol. ii. p. 465.

[455] Murphy, "Scientific Basis of Faith," pp. 80 and 49-51; Jevons, "Principles of Science," vol. ii. p. 438.

[456] Grove, "Correlation and Conservation of Forces," p. 193.

[457] "First Principles," chs. xiii. and xiv.

[458] Wallace, "On Natural Selection," p. 266.

[459] "Positive Philosophy," vol. i. p. 153-156.

[460] "Fragments of Science," p. 64.

[461] Jevons, "Principles of Science," vol. ii. p. 434.

[462] Grove, "Correlation and Conservation of Forces," p. 24.

[463] "There is one wonderful condition of matter, perhaps its only true indication, namely, inertia."—Faraday, "Correlation and Conservation of Forces," p. 368; Maxwell, "Theory of Heat," p. 86.

[464] Stewart, "Physics," p. 357.

[465] Ibid. p. 355.

[466] "Correlation and Conservation of Forces," p. 195.

[467] "Fragments of Science," p. 39.

[468] "Fragments of Science," p. 420.

[469] Nature, vol. viii. p. 280.

[470] Nature, vol. vi. p. 125.

[471] "Familiar Lectures on Science," p. 469.

[472] "Principles of Science," vol. ii. p. 83.

[473] Maxwell, "Theory of Heat," p. 92.

[474] Challis's "Mathematical Principles of Physics," p. 107; Herschel, "Familiar Lectures on Science," p. 467.

[475] "It is pretty much the same to the greater number even of the instructed hearers whether a man of science say 'I know' or 'I suppose;' they only ask after the result and the authority by which it is supported, not the grounds of the doubts. It is thus not to be wondered at if earnest investigators do not willingly shock the confidence of their readers in what the former may think true and demonstrable by the enumeration of ideas of the correctness of which they do not feel themselves quite secure."—Helmholtz, "On John Tyndall," in Nature, vol. x. p. 301.

[476] Jevons, "Principles of Science," vol. ii, p. 466.

[477] "Fragments of Science," p. 40.

[478] Ibid. p. 40.

[479] Marsh, "Man and Nature," chs. i. and iii.; Lyell, "Principles of Geology," pp. 713-717.

[480] Wallace, "On Natural Selection," pp. 324-326; Lyell, "Principles of Geology," pp. 681-688, 579-590.

[481] "Fragments of Science," p. 421.

[482] Contemporary Review, July, 1872.

[483] Grove, "Correlation and Conservation of Forces," p. 20.

[484] Ibid.

[485] Spencer, "First Principles," pp. 235, 252.

[486] Challis, "Mathematical Principles of Physics," p. 681.

[487] Herschel, "Familiar Lectures on Science," p. 461.

[488] Carpenter, "Mental Physiology," p. 703.

[489] Whewell, "Astronomy and Physics," p. 224.

[490] 1 Cor. xii. 6.

[491] "??a?e ???af?se?a? a?t??" = truly feel or touch Him.

[492] See Ritter, "History of Philosophy," vol. i. p. 200.

[493] "Memorabilia," bk. i. ch. iv.

[494] "TimÆus," ch. viii.; also "Second Alcibiades," which is a discourse on prayer.

[495] "Laws," bk. v. ch. i.; bk. x. ch. xii.; "TheÆstetes," § 83.

[496] "Apology," § 19.

[497] "Philebus," § 84.

[498] 1 Cor. viii. 6.

[499] Eph. iv. 6.

[500] 1 Cor. xii. 6.

[501] "Without God there is no great man. It is He who inspires us with great ideas and exalted designs. When you see a man superior to his passions, happy in adversity, calm amid surrounding storms, can you forbear to confess that these qualities are too exalted to have their origin in the little individual whom they ornament? A god inhabits every virtuous man, and without God there is no virtue."—Seneca, "Epistles," 41, 73.

[502] See "Creator and the Creation," by Dr. Young, pp. 57, 58.

[503] See MÜller, "Christian Doctrine of Sin," vol. i. pp. 248, 249.

[504] Some theologians affirm that this "image of God" was utterly and totally lost in the fall. Such an unqualified statement does not, however, seem warranted by Scripture. After the fall, the sanctity of human life is still grounded upon the fact that man is "made in the image of God" (Gen. ix. 6), and Paul affirms of man, as man, that he is "the image and glory of God" (1 Cor. xi. 7).

[505] "History of Philosophy," vol. i. p. 115.

[506] See Psa. viii. 6; 1 Cor. xi. 7; Col. iii. 10; Eph. iv. 24.

[507] See Dr. Young's "Christ of History," pp. 136-138.

[508] Butler's "Analogy," pt. i. ch. iii.

[509] "Reign of Law," by the Duke of Argyll, p. 121.

[510] Nature, vol. vi. p. 312.

[511] Coleridge's Works, vol. i. p. 152.

[512] Cousin, "True, Beautiful, and Good," pp. 287-289.

[513] Sewell's "Christian Morals," p. 339.

[514] R. W. Hamilton.

[515] Dr. Thomas Brown.

[516] R. W. Hamilton.

[517] Sophocles, "Antigone," v. 450-460.

[518] Quoted by Dr. Brown from "Lucani Pharsalia," bk. ix.

[519] "Fiji and the Fijians," by Williams and Calvert, p. 22.

[520] "Missionary Travels and Researches in South Africa," p. 153.

[521] Chalmers's "Institutes of Theology," vol. ii. p. 294.

[522] "The Creator and the Creation," by John Young. LL.D., pp. 101-2. See also "Man Primeval," by Dr. Harris, p. 109; Hamilton's "Revealed Doctrine of Rewards and Punishments," p. 67.

[523] "True, Beautiful, and Good," p. 286.

[524] "Hand-book of Moral Philosophy," p. 184. See also Cairns's "Treatise on Moral Freedom," p. 222; and Hazard on "Causation and Freedom in Willing," p. 7; Dr. Alexander, "Outlines of Moral Science," p. 125: Sir John Herschel's "Familiar Lectures on Science," p. 461; Carpenter's "Human Physiology," p. 543; Wallace, "On Natural Selection," p. 367; Beale's "Protoplasm," p. 121.

[525] "Prolegomena Logica," p. 122.

[526] "Lectures on Metaphysics," vol. i. p. 373; also Porter's "Human Intellect," p. 95.

[527] Quoted by Hamilton in "Notes on Reid," p. 616.

[528] "Discussions," p. 587.

[529] "The feeling of responsibility is unmeaning unless it presupposes the reality of freedom."—Murphy, "Scientific Basis of Faith," p. 85.

[530] "The miraculous interpositions recorded in the Scriptures are not inconsistent with this fundamental axiom, for they are effects of the will of God as the cause."—McCosh, "Divine Government," p. 113.

[531] "Divine Government," p. 541.

[532] See McCosh's "Divine Government," p. 113, and Mill's "Logic," p. 114, vol. ii., English edition.

[533] Whedon, "Freedom of the Will," p. 87.

[534] Whedon, "Freedom of the Will," p. 92. "Every intelligent effort is an exercise of originating creative power which makes the future different from what it would have been but for the exercise of this power."—Hazard, "On Causation," p. 87.

[535] "Philosophy," p. 511.

[536] "Philosophy," p. 508.

[537] "Prolegomena Logica," App., note C.

[538] Whedon, "Freedom of the Will," p. 32.

[539] Ibid., p. 56.

[540] See Calderwood's "Hand-book of Moral Philosophy," pp. 196, 197.

[541] MÜller's "Christian Doctrine of Sin," vol. ii. p. 56.

[542] Whedon, "Freedom of the Will," p. 130.

[543] Whedon, "Freedom of the Will," p. 135.

[544] Ibid., p. 193.

[545] Whedon, "Freedom of the Will," p. 158.

[546] "Intuition," etc., p. 472.

[547] Whedon, "Freedom of the Will," p. 171.

[548] Whedon, "Freedom of the Will," p. 173.

[549] "So long as there are fluctuations at all, even though they be of infinitesimal magnitude as compared with the total, statistical regularity does not exclude all room for freedom."—Murphy, "Scientific Basis of Faith," p. 84.

[550] "Prolegomena Logica," p. 280.

[551] On self-limitation of the Divine will, see MÜller, "Christian Doctrine of Sin," vol. ii. pp. 208-212.

[552] This is unquestionably the doctrine of Scripture, "Whom He foreknew, them also He did predestinate."

[553] Bushnell, "Nature and the Supernatural," p. 50.

[554] Whedon, "Freedom of the Will," p. 273; MÜller, "Christian Doctrine of Sin," vol. ii. pp. 236-247.

[555] Whedon, "Freedom of the Will," p. 283.

[556] Bushnell, "Nature and the Supernatural," p. 83.

[557] Ibid., p. 99.

[558] Luke xii. 47, 48.

[559] Matt. xi. 21-24.

[560] Whedon, "Freedom of the Will," pp. 355-357.

[561] Hamilton, "Revealed Doctrine of Rewards and Punishments," p. 88.

[562] "The formation of noble human characters is the highest work that man, or, so far as we know, that God can be engaged in."—Murphy, "Scientific Basis of Faith," p. 39.

Clyx.com