being formed from one all-common matter or source, and that they are so far destructible. Because we cannot in sense-sight see atoms as the smallest particles of matter, come or cease to be, that is no proof that they are not being continually created just as certainly as germs are. Just as it is a matter of sense-certainty that flowers, fruit, etc., come to be and cease to be, so it is equally a matter of reasoncertainty that atoms, molecules and germs come to be and cease to be. It is, however, only logical philosophy that can furnish demonstration here, as in all other departments of Nature and Spirit.

The microscope has extended the sphere of senseperception, but only to show that the various germpoints cannot be thus distinguished one from the other, and that reason-thought only can prove that difference is, and must be, in them. We cannot but conclude that they are different in their nature, even though the microscope shows no difference to the eye of sense, since one germ grows into a cherry tree, another becomes an apple tree, another a fly, another a whale, and another a man; environment alone cannot cause all the difference in the development. 'God giveth it a body as it hath pleased Him, and to every seed his own body.' I suppose even no physicist expects to see by sense-perception gravitation or consciousness, which belong to the sphere of reason and understanding; in the same way it is impossible by mere sense-vision to distinguish between germ-points, as they may be termed. It is vain to try to confute us by declaring that we are not embryologists, for the study of embryology does not, and cannot, with the best instruments, go far enough. In spite of the parallelism which scientists state to exist between individual and ancestral development, extended knowledge has caused a

' reluctance to attach detailed importance to the embryological argument for evolution.'

The most superficial view of Nature forces home the conviction of creation and generation in time of new germs of life in the vegetable, animal, and human worlds-germs which, as such, were at one time non-existent, just as you and I, in our empirical being, once did not exist. It is of no use to cry evolution and to allege that all new germs are evolved from pre-existent germs and cells (by natural selection), for no theory of evolution can logically set aside the necessity and reality of creation, since it cannot be doubted that new germs do come into being. Indeed, this idea of a coming to be of what once did not exist in sensible form, involves the idea of absolute creation, and this is what the theory of evolution was thought, and even intended, to have set aside as incredible in the light of advancing science. Properly looked at, evolution is only another name for creation, and thereby, as a theory of existence, it annihilates itself and does not avoid the necessity of an intelligent Creator. To suppose that any theory of evolution can set aside the fact of direct creation is a mere freak of a vain imagination. Evolution creates nothing, yet creation is a self-evident fact of existence and reason, and cannot be successfully ignored by any mode of mere plausible reasoning. The prevalent idea of evolution does not mean growth and improvement. The idea of growth has always been familiar, but not the growth of man out of an animal.

Creation, however it may be explained, involves essentially the idea of a personal Creator. That which is created must possess the thought and mind of the Creator, and therefore must always be absolutely dependent on its Creator for its existence.

Consequently, the philosophy of the one can only be realized in and through the other, and therefore they cannot be properly regarded and treated as independent units, but as the absolute unity of the total whole of existence.

The statements of the Bible are in no way inconsistent with a sound philosophical treatment of this subject, but rather assist in the attainment of a genuine system of philosophy. Thus, 'All things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made.' 'He was in the world, and the world was made by Him.' Paul speaks of Christ as the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature for by Him were all things created that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions, principalities or powers: all things were created by Him and for Him, and He is before all things, and by Him all things consist.'

We may note that if an opponent of the evolutionary theory quote any of Darwin's remarks, he is at once met with the answer, that the true theory of evolution has now outgrown Darwin; yet with all present-day scientists and evolutionists he (Darwin) is regarded not only as a great scientist and philosopher, but has even been named a second and greater Newton (this we have already referred to in another connection), though with him design was nowhere, with Newton everywhere. As touching these claims, we summarize the following quotations from Darwin :

'It is mere rubbish thinking at present of the origin of life one might as well think of the origin of matter.'

As to the origin of matter, I have never troubled myself about such insoluble questions.'

'The old argument from design in Nature . . . fails, now that the law of natural selection has been discovered.'

'I have long regretted that I truckled to public opinion, and used the pentateuchal term of creation, by which I really meant "appeared," by some wholly unknown process.

The word 'truckled' revealed the peculiar moral working of Darwin's mind. With him there was no real God, nor any real design in Nature-his‘Deity ' was 'Natural Selection,' yet he concludes the Origin with the words, There is grandeur in this view of life, its several powers having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one,' which can only be considered as very misleading to his religious friends and readers. We see the same trait in dealing with the polar bear case. 'In North America the black bear was seen by Hearne, swimming for hours with widely-open mouth, thus catching, almost like a whale, insects in the water,' (Origin of Species, page 141). He writes to Lyell afterwards in reference to this: 'I do here show the first step by which conversion into a whale would be easy, would offer no difficulty.' He strikes the bear story out of the second edition of the Origin in deference to Lyell, but it goes to his heart' to do so, and then he deliberately re-inserts it in the sixth edition. To give weight to this example, he calls Hearne 'an excellent observer.' To Hooker he exclaims, ‘What a book a devil's chaplain might write on the clumsy, wasteful, blundering, low and horrible works of Nature.' Surely this is not the grandeur of the view of life breathed by the Creator into a few forms,' but rather agrees with Darwin's accidental evolution, not with true science. Are these the words of a sober scientist? They can only be intended to

disparage the idea of design, and of Nature as the work of an all-wise Creator. It cannot be that such a trifler with Nature could be a great scientist, much less a great philosopher. Some inadvertencies we can readily allow in really great men, but these statements of Darwin, when all they involve is reflected upon, render it hard to regard him as such, however generous and genial he may have been in his general intercourse with men.

There are many frank admissions seemingly not antagonistic to the orthodox theology of the Bible in the writings of Darwin apt to mislead the unwary, as also in many other writers who are endeavouring to square the teaching of the Bible and Christianity with the doctrine of Evolution.

6

Organic evolution necessarily falls back for its beginning on the Nebular Hypothesis of Kant, and that means with the physicists' a primordial vapourous matter diffused through space,' so Darwin conceives 'from a single slight variation of accident and chance' appeared a proteine compound,' then some single prototype,' then again four or five primordial forms.' All this contains no intelligible origin or beginning of anything. To try to conceive an eternal, inactive God existing in an infinite, universal gas, only makes the matter worse. The wisdom of the world (the wisdom ruling in Nature) is one with the wisdom of God, so even in the mythologies of Greece and Rome Minerva is conceived as springing full-armed from the Head of Jupiter. This shows that a gradual evolution of one form of organic matter out of another was to the Greeks and Romans unthinkable.

With origin or beginning, in the strict and true sense of the word, Darwin never troubled himself, for he said, 'It is mere rubbish thinking of the origin