New-York tribune., 1874-12-16
THE LECTURE.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: Inc SuDJccC on
which have invited to address you this evening
Is the Relation OF the BIoe Science and In doing
shall endeavor to adhere closely possible
TO the subject. II Is O subject which has
OF late claimed great deal or public at
tenton, and in the remarks 1 shall have to
make shall seek to direct your attenOn to Its consid
GRAFTON from the point OF view Of students Of science
rather than that OF tneoogans. You will thus under
stand my point OF view. and in addition 1
wish to explain that when the idea OF de-
llvering this of lectures first sug
eested to me. 1 entertained tho notion of a
course OF lectures to be addressed to students rather
than to general audience I shall, therefore, in
this as well as in all my succeeding lee
lures Keep this thought closely In Wow, whie
at the time shall try to give as clearly possible
all points which be Of special interest e. audiences
Of whatever nature that may favor me with their pres
ence.
DISTINCTION BETWEEN SCIENCE AND RELIGION
Between science and religion there is wide distinc
ton and there is much truth In the distinction. but
does not contain tho whole truth else IL would be
comparatively to draw lines between the domains
of religion and science, which reasonable men would
not desire TO- see exist; but It i' quite
true that the iuhrmity Of nature is liable to create
strong prejudice in the minds Of scientific men against
divine Interpretation IA they term 1t, and the attr-
urng TO God OF any arbitrstons of aPd. caPri.
with science or with revelation. The true
position of Of science IL which tends to
progression. Revelation stands where 1t always was
while science Is continually MOVING aud II We attempt
10 compare them with each other our comparison
must be with revelation as 1t always was
and with science as it is at the broad
points of progress which happens TO have reached at
the time of which we are speaking or writing IL Is
very much like traveller viewing the great palisades
Of your Hudson. II he stands continually In
one place and looks at them they always seem
new granleurs rise before him, and the wonders OF
nature appear In more varying forms Thus 1t Is with
science and religion Tho student staining upon the
Of uncertainty and doubt nothing OF the divine
wonders of nature which are unexplained
By revelation ami which alone science can
afford the only proper solution. Amid all the complex
ity OF human affairs it is Interesting to know that the
will of GuizDt the French statesman. whose life
OF tempestuous and unceasDg political strife, con-
tains an mpressing reference TO tue power OF rem
comprehend him" He also expresses q n;m boef la
the transmission OF souls well as in the history OF tue
human race, especially as contained 10 the o ana New
Testameut and IL the regeneration Of the human
race by the sacrifice OF jesus Clrlsl. Ihrso are
sentiments which have been expressed by somo OF tne
nODie,t minds OF the world. and IL seems WOndr0Is 10
the Christian when he reflects upon tle q'anttY or
mschieyous and extraordinary Things whlcn arc put
forth the Of tha the WORKS Or Cue WORD
OF the Creator even fad single supporter.
tho debate this question now agitating all civil
Que and most Trustworthy theoogans
struck po SerfI blow at the encroachments or science
upon a domain held sacred by our old Presbyterian
ancestors. IL not mere random thrust, ana It's
results have been made manifest IN the struggle, aud
encouraged the abOr5 OF theO0gans In other spheros
In the treatment OF this question, however. 1t be-
important to view 1t more IN the gnt In which II
that would make the the board here ,ontng
the blackDoard that there arc certain general rel-
tiOns between tho Bible and nature, certainly re-
latious OF tho most general character possible. /
would dehne TINS IN th's way; IL Is shn,
direct In Scripture either of natural facts
c prnc PIES Nj ural cts arc open 10 oDserYa
ton calculation. and reasOnipg ana uOut need 10 Dc
revealed 10 man; neither would revelation OF them
premlturry, before were abe 10 understand tue,
eamp ce at instead at Of develop the OF man. @
Even II desirable, II Is dIincuit To see now
1t would be practicable. And constantly growing
scientific revelation to suit tho capacities OF successive
ages would be thing quite unworthy or God. because
unnecessary aud unsuitable together To the progress
aud growth of the human Intellect Ine hed obviously
lies these spiritual d0mdns ana perhaps there can DC
no scientific test OF truc revelation from God
than TO ask the question: Does IL refuse 10 commit
itself scientific observation, but TO those things nsO
ube by his unassisted reasOnl While have no right
expect that the Bible snail be revelation Of science.
VET tnrre may be points which 1t Is necessary
Tor the Bible TO speak and which 1t may appear 10
trench upon the domain OF science. There are Incl
dental references tho Bible, and there is history
OF creation the Bible. The incidental references
are made with a OF illustrating spiritual truths Dy
natural things and Scriptural writer's asserting
analogy between the natural aud spiritual WORLDS took
of natural facts to strengthen and enforce
snrltuai trntDs This was ali the moro important
because 1t nard to understand spiritual truths and
and inward truths Now, where the Bible does this, Its
accuracy Is remarkably uneXampied ln believe, any
other literature SO much Is TINS the case, thaG you
from the BIOe, you Will fad errors in one aud nos IN
other. Now we may be content, perhap' TO ascrDe
divine guidance under which THESE writer's wrote,
Out would suggest also these winch follow.
FAMILIARITY WITH NATURE.
Firstly. the habits OF people familiar with nature,
and living constantly the midst OF natural objects We.
in our artificial e trusting too much to literature can
scarcely conceive the condition OF the minds OK the old
writers OF the SCRIPTURES or oven Of the writer's OF
India or Greece, who had no previous literature al
most, to guide them and were Obliged TO 20 to Ia
ture for inspiration which they did not get
from God IL we ourselves little moro disposed
IN look TO nature aud God and less to man, 10 his
writings machines and industrial progress our minds
come nearer with those OF the Scrptnra
writers than they apt do. Young men should not
not much from previous writers as from obserya
uon of their They Will bring themselves more INTO
harmony with nature and God.
secondly that II not 10 have occurred 10 these
Whyi Because it their business attribute them
directly the law of God That the true position OF
the thrologian. It Is the true position Of the Bible
writer's II Is the position Of the tneoogan today the
Tnrdly tine absence Of all that superstition which
converts natural Things INTO u mythology The old
ebrew writers with horror the idea OF any sub
9rainse "a eaed mythooeca in ali the old writer's aud
that undoubtedly for their truthful rep
God, and they had no need TO 80 for tho
Wild dreams of mythology. Then again the
veneralion for natural truth developed among people
rho regarded all nature emanaton from the one
God II you take the point OF view OF the inspired
Wpters OF the Scriptures that all tins nature Is sn ema
paiion from God grows up In the mind that ven
Grafton for nature whion we nnd in tue scriptures.
Wnetber we attribute this cause or to divine
insnlration the fact remains tho same. Ia the
ssIkS chapter OF Job. for instance, We hnd an
accuracy which Is worthy OF the revelation from God
hut Ihere IS another point OF contact have been
sneas1ng Of incidental references. There Is another
npn OF contact OF the Bible with nature to whoh this
statement does not necessarily apply: We may say
Sat in its ordinary references the BiOe may be non
commttal as theories and truthful as TO facts IL
may speak OF phenomena without reference TO causes
p" we cannot say this OF such position as that taken
In the first chapter OF Geness Here We ma an attenpb
70 give statement OF the origin OF toe world Iais
tDesenes on the domain Of method. 10 must
he a revelation or fscA For instance, tue
S,inture tells me that Solomon the OF DAVID.
nj Renoboam the son OF Solomon. and IL should nnd
noonmenta evidence that Solomon was she son OF ke-
hahnaun a nd David the u Solomon then my mopu-
ental evidence II IL contemporary, would be held
~ be a contradiction OF history and would be So But
a Enow that has not been the fact, and that monu-
evidence which has boon found has only proved
IL Wnen the Bible goes into history IL subjects itself
80 monumental evidence. But you Will say, what
Monumental evidence have for the first chapter OF
Genesst Here have it on this table, we nave nero