New-York tribune., 1874-12-16

and here again it s necessary that the Bible ss the
nature This In modern science has keony per-
ceived that pushed 1t INTO the most popular hype
thesis OF the day. with strange Inconsistency however
denying the ydence Of design Bit look again at the
Scripture In this matter we shall hnd that u Occupies
here also q somewhat broader standpoint Theology of
nature Ia an understood thug Let's analyze 1t for
very few moments and compare II WIN tue teaolnRs o.
natural science 1t resolves the designs OF Goa INTO
three parts FIRST the higher creation according
TO the Scripture Is the pleasure OF the Creator nmsr
They were created for his pleasure. TaIs Is point Of
eleologg. When Darwin, perhaps NOT wisely asserts
Deity alone would II proved DO fatal 60 his theory. no
% b up se,e WS m denyies vine eyg the
end of God In his works. Aud yet Darwin in his later
works been obliged to reccde so far from thus that
no has been said have given II up. Tho instinct of
beauty is TOO strong 10 man 10 ALLOW most scientific
given TO us IN that strange man, whether you
ne knowledge him tbcOl0gian or nOt-5trauss-yho,
I'm ms last production, to emOody this In his
conception OF the cosmos He had this strnnge plnDe-
stc conception of this strange cosmos worBing IN an
ment of tne trt presented 10y the Bble with rd 10
the design OF Cod The second OBJECT 10 the gooa OF
man. who Is the shadow and image OF ms MIker. AMI
has dominion over this world. IL science Ike conelu-
sion may be drawn that nun IL tne typ, OF human ni
ture aud he enjoys tho favor of ruling nabui|
things by the virtue Uf his viii aud reason.
BY yir ue OF this and in harmony win his own ideas
thropomorpDc IN mis- view Of God. Those who hold
man himself derived from blind physical force or 40
only great and leading part OF the Panheisthic All,
should he tue last to deny such AN
AMI thro nOrphsm either IN scieuce or religion.
Finally, the Bible represents God rs caring i"r tho
welfare OF all his lower crcatures not by daily detaiI
but by grand provision OF na ufal law TO science al
this becomes the wonderful aud complicated adaptation
of ali the elements Of each other. which it Is
Joy and glory Of scieuce to discover and e1pouD
ami which maniests even when 1t refuses to admii
that Intelligent purpose design can De dieerDed
therein but in regard to this objection to the ea Of
design am sorry to say some men OF sccnce ,oos
at 1t from TOO partial point OF View,
have even rdiculed IN our day and spokes
1t in the strongest terms as t was sometnina ~
tery absurd. These men In doing this do Volehce 70
their facts, since tho seyeres6 klnd OF inauceh
must lead VI 10 the conclusion tnat suon au pIaIon;
as we perceive, especially In the more cOmpIlcatod
animal and vegetable Structures are lncomprenehSios
Oh any presumption of bllnd concurrence.
Even MIL who seems at ono ono sms to have taken ,',
argument, ad niEs iEs force and was srck with tne
fact that alter canysssng the various argument, "a
favor OF the existence OF G)d no rejeoei one AFTER
another, and comes In tue end 10 take up ile
argument Of desgn, and after scanning it critically.
says this argument has lnductve yalur especially wncn
you look at the compcateh series OF aliustments woa
exist the order OF the higher animals, and he seems
TO say tna 10 his own MUD hs Is the only remahinS
argument for the existence Of God.
Now 1t a curious fact in connection VIII hls mat
this Is tne only knd OF Proof & %se9 she 0 Of Cod Is
takes granted the existence OF God usually as some
tareESr GH'V conGesoend, sno9d say~to argne
existence OF God this IL the one argument u presents
The creation Of the world :" Even in His persond
power ,,ll His divinity m,dPssxacts plainly Te'a wh9,
Jjhn Stuart Mill says Ia his PHILOSOPHY;
The only thing this fact OF HIS power aud
made. Is not that CURIOUS coincidence, when
all these nnSs % Which point vneo 0n' t" does es
deal with these natural matters takes hold Of them ia
the right in way which we ND meets the cas-, ..
the most pronounced skrpo or our own lime just a5
much those who were tho cotemporaries Of tae'e
Bible writersi
OF law use and plan, tue BDle recoSnzs type or plan
in nature IL brings Gus tho likeness OF man as the
archetype on the one hand 1t Is fnli or harmones oe
tween natural spiritual things tnat links ali
things together. with another and with inc pat
simple way that child can understInd 1t. Tao
Bible full Of the plan or type presented In natlrs
Silence IN our day full OF this idea but 1t parts
company with the Bible when the question OF derivation
All things arc derived from God. and many things from
one another, it would not invaidate the idea
from Scripural pOut OF vlew But any attempt
of this Kind ~ deduce all things by evolution from
types Inorganic atoms, made wthou, tne erea,
power Is not and cannot DC anylhinR reethS upoa
a scientific basis OF induction. 100.
On tho other hand, the Bioe takes It's stand as the
onerate. by law, AMI by q wise presclence has
a logical and consistent theory OF the universe.
Se nyetrtoas Of nature We cannot represent
system as either making God worker OF unnecessary
workman or arthcer. If we descend to such
statements. wo do place ourselves upe.
to plan or type in the mind OF G'd
harmonzing with each other all the thing. in nature
to correspond the highest Results of science IN
regard to this proceeds either ron he gGordnre W
men of science imperfect representation OF thc
ID vine Truth given ny the friends or the Bible.
Under thus third head propose 70 show that these
great doctrines which e nearly at tn base OF the geu
era principles OF science or natural law progress In
nature adaptation OF all things in use, tue grand type
patttr or plan pervading nture. are as plaln In tue
Rbe as IN the deductions OF scieuce, aud that where
fhr Bble appears to take dif rent view from mOiern
scientlsts we fad it it takes larger Wow.
Instead OF being narro" restricted merely 10 naturd
laws. -.
Now aimed in this Introductory lecture to show that
there Il common ground for the student OF che Bible and
The student Of nature II they fall antagonsm. is
must be because or the other has become
too narrow aud partial. Bat l dwell III this
lecture merely generdties. II remains to show that
these general statements L nave made are true' an
that the Bible true nature. In doing thls shdi
have To OF the vast mass OF matter aVdaoo
for only few leading points, an sha try 10 meet
"a MANY as possible of the difficulties ana mlsc1ncop-
tions that are prevalent eithor among Chrlsuans oe
scientific students.
The programme Of the lectures will be as folowS To-
morrow night it will be "The Genesis and COlsdtu-
lion Of the Universe According to tho Bble and
Science :" Thursday Tne Science Of the Earth III Us
Relations to the Bi0le :" Friday, tue Origin AMI HIS
tory OF Life According to tho Bible and Soence; MOO
day. Dec 81, Primitive Man According to tho BiOlo
and Science :" Tuesday, Dec. g. "R.vieW oil LeadDs
Schools OF Scientific Thought"
MEASURES For GOOD UE1LIH