The Emporia news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1859-1881, 1872-12-13
EDUCATIONAL.
By PROF. s. s. sABcock.
SCIENCE AND RELIGION.

Mr.. EDITOR: In your excellent
paper of last week appeared an ar
ticls under the imposing title OF
"Religion Uersus Science" 1t i'm
mediately attracted my attention,
and having read it carefully, 1 de-
sire to make few remarks in re-
gard to the position SO confidently
taken by the writer.
1t is assuming altogether too much
to assert that there is any real con-
flict between the christian religion
and true science. On the contrary,
there must be the most complete
harmony between the proper deduc-
tons of science and q revelation
from God. Deity is the author of
them both hence it is simply abb
surd to suppose for a moment that
He would contradict himself by es-
tablishing in one department of His
works that which directly conflicts
with the laws controlling another.
The one therefore who in the be-
ginning said, "Let there be light"
also lit up the vaulted heavens with
all those brilliant luminsries which
shine like light in the windows of
heaven. He also disseminated
throughout nature those universal
laws which regulate and control the
whole mechanism of creation ac-
cording to the most complete order
and harmony. He also gave us the
Book of Revelation in which are
the purest moral preeepts, the
grandeat truths and the most SUBJ
lime statements the world has ever
known. When properly understood
there cannot be any conflict be-
tween these two departments of
Gods government, though widely
distinct in their great design, for
the same master hand has shap-
ed them both. If, therefore, we
think we have discovered any want
of harmony, we may rest assured
that we make it, and not God; that
it exists in our theories and deduc-
tions and not in Gods works.
II is indeed true that many
things were once supposed to
be q part of revelation which
subsequent investigation has shown
cannot be properly dsduced from
the Bible. These things have
rather been the tenets of par
ticular sects than of christianity.
For example, the very reference
made by the writer to Calico, and
the anathema hurled against him is
a case directly illustrating this
point. This public denunciation of
the claims of philosophy is charged
upon the christian religion. The
Bible is thus indirectly made respon-
sible for this act, as though the spirit
which prompted it sprGng naturally
from its own preceDts, but history
plainly teaches US that it was the
Romish church which was real
ly guilty of this infamous con-
duct. Now, we claim that
the Romish church is not the
christian religion, any moro than
a decayed branch is the whole
tree. There is, therefore, in such
remarks, an unfair assumption, If
not q wilful misrepresentation. At
all events there is . confounding
of terms which always have been
essentially distinct. Bearing in
mind this important consideration,
and taking the Book of Revelation
as we know 1t should be, the chris
tian religion is at once relieved of q
multitude of grievous burdens
which do not properly belong to 1t.
With this understanding we glad
IL join hands with all the scienti fic
men who have, by their patient in
vestigations cleared away much of
the rubbish that has covered up the
golden truths of revelation. They
have done much,-the onward
march of civilization still more
in separating from religion many
things that would now, if properly
belonging to our Bible, be fatal to
any claim of Divine inspiration.
In this respect they have been a
great help to religion and not him
drsnce, a warm friend and not foe ;
for they have assisted in furnishing
the evidence which proves that in
receiving the Bible we are not now
required to embrace what was once
regarded as essential to the Chris
tian faith. We do not, therefore,
wish to deny that science and civil
ization have materially changed the
views of mankind in regard to much
that was once considered essential
parts of the Bible. AT the same
. time we insist that the progress OF
more correct exegesis has shown
conclusively that these things never
; did actually belong to the Bible,
r In tracing these thoughts to theiI
Legitimate application, we can read.
1 lily conceive that there is no antag'
opism between true religion and
: true science. On the contrary
science is great help to enable ii
properly to understand the teach
v ings of revelation, and we gladly
0 avail ourselves of its profered as
7 sistance. But we must observe
r due caution right here; for all tina
: claims to belong to science and ar
n rogates to itself high sounding title
is not true science. Only thos'
8 which are unquestionabIy establish
ed principles should be admitted a
g the foundation of science. We wan
e facts and truths, not speculations
|. With this restriction all theorie
e ind hypothesis, however plausible
S are to be excluded, because of thei
Il manifest uncertainty. Under tn
test of this crucible. what is NOR
vague and unreliable than 9Th
. sciences" as they have been helt
: among men? What science is tn
O same now that it was two Thousand
i years ago. During all this time, q
4 Cicero admirably says: "Nihi
J, tam 0bsurde potest, quad non die
: ntur ab euiquo philosphoruna; viz
there has been no opinion so Wild.
sxtravsgant that it has not beer
= embraced by philosophers-by mel
; of science. A very large part o
the doctrines held by scientific mel
:. in past times has been found b.
e more accurate investigation to b
d simply ridiculous md, in conse