The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1883-01-20
T. DE WITT TALMAGE.
The Evolution Theory and the
Bible.
Sermon Preached in Brooklyn Tabernacle
by Rev. 7. Dewitt Talmage, D. D., on
Sunday, January IA, 1888.


sermon was on the subject: Evolution,
Anti-Bible, Anti-Seience, Anti-COmmOn
SENSE" Text: | Timothy, vi. and part
of the xxth verse: 80 Timothy, keep
that which is committed to thy trust,
avoiding oppOsitions of science falsely,
so-called."
There is no contest between genuine
science and revelation. The same God
who wrote by the hand Of prophets on
parchment wrote by the hand of storms
on the rocks. The best telescopes are
owned by Christian universities. BY
whom was magnetic telegraphy dis
cOvered2 By Prof. Morse, an EVangeli-
cal Christian. By whom was lightning
swung under the sea, coupling together
the cOntinentsp Cyrus w. Field, the
Christian. Who discovered the anaes-
thetical qualities of chOlOrfOrm, more
than any other man that lived, giving
relief to pain and turning back nine
tenths of the horrors of surgery? James
Y. Simpson, as eminent for piety as for
science. saw the Universities of Edin-
burgh dTaped in mourning at his death,
and heard has eulOgy pronounced by the
destitute population of the Cow Gate.
Science and revelation are the bass and
soprano of the same tune, and will yet
be acknowledged a complete harmony.
But between what my text describes as
science falsely sO-called and revelation
tn ere is an uncOmprOmising war, and
one or the other must go under.
At the present time the air is filled
with social and platform and pulpit
talk on the subject of evolution, and it
is high time that the people who have
but little opportunity to investigate for
themselves understand that evolution,
or the theory advocated by Herbert
Spencer and Charles Darwin, is, in the
first place, up and down, out and out in
fidelity; and, secondly, that 1T Is contra
dicted by science and brutal1zlng In It's
effects. 1 do not to-day argue that the
Bible is true, or that it Is in any way to
be relied on as a trustworthy book.
These subjects for other Sabbaths. But
wish you to understand that Thomas
Paine and VOltatre and Hume no more
disbelieVe the Bible than do the leading
scientists who promqlgate evolution.
When L say scientists do not mean lit
erary men who discuss this matter in
essay or sermon, and, without time for
Investigation, look at it from this side
or that; but | mean the men who,
through laboratories and acquariums
and geological gardens and astrOmical
ObserVatOries, give their lives to the
study of the physical earth and its
plants and animals, and to the eXplOra-
tiOn of regions beyond, so far as by Op-
tical inventions they may be explored.
All these eVOlutiOnists, without one eX-
ception, reject the Bible; and L will put
them on the witness stand-the living
and the dead. Ernst Haeckel, John
Stuart Mill, Huxley, Tyndall, Darwin
and Spencer, ye men OF science, stand
there and sOlemnly answer few ques-
tlonsl
"Do you believe in the Holy Scrip
turesP"
''NOP And so they say all.
"DO you believe in the story Of Adam
and Eve in the Garden Of Edenp" "NO."
And so they say all
"Do you believe in the miracles of the
Old and New TestamentP" NO" And so
they say all.
"DO you believe that Christ was the
Savior Of the wOrld?" NO" And 80
they say all.
"DO you believe in the doctrine Of the
AtonementP" mo" And so they say all.
"DO you believe in the regenerating
power of the Holy GhOstp" mo" And
so they say all.
prayerP' NO" And so they say all.
Ernst Haeckel, on the first page of his
three great volumes, sneers at the Bible
as a "sO-called" revelation. Tyndall
defied all ChristendOm by his prayer
test to prove that supplicatiOn to God
would ever be answered. Stuart Mill,
after elabOrately writing against Chris
"
was complete by ordering for his tomb
stone the inscription: "MOst Unhappy"
Huxley says that when he first read
Mr.. Darwin's book, what struck him
most fOrcibly was the conviction that
theology, by which he means Chris
tian theology, as commonly understood,
had received its death-blow at Mr.. Oar
wins hands.
put in opposition the Bible theory
luff o. OF ho,,
human race started. The Bible account
says: Let US make man in our image
for our likeness" So God created man
in His image. He breathed into him the
breath of life. A perfect man, not per-
feet kangaroo or perfect chimpanZee,
but perfect man. EvOlutiOnists' ac-
count: Infinite ages ago there existed
and these developed all the living crea-
lures of the ages. First, there was a
vegetable stuff, perhaps a mushroom.
That mushroom developed its innate
force into something like jelly-fish, by
innate force, developed into tadpoIe.
The tadpOle developed into a snail. The
snail, by innate force, developed into a
turtle. The turtle, by innate force, de-
VelOped into wolf, and the wolf into a
dog, and the dog developed into ba-
boon, and the babOOn developed into
man. Darwin says our lungs are swim
bladder, showing that we once fioated
and were amphibious, and the ears
were once movable as easily as that of a
horse when he lifts them at some fright
full object nFrOm plant to pOlywog, from
pOlywOg to insect, from insect to fish,
from fish to reptile, from reptile into
monkey, from monkey into man. Now,
any one who says that this eVOlutiOnist
account of the creation of man is not
different from the Bible account makes
appalling misrepresentation. Prefer
which account you please. Take Dar-
wins origin of species in preference to
the book of Genesis; If so, you will but
understand that you are an infidel. As
for myself, since Herbert Spencer was
not present at the creation Of the world
and the Lord God was, shall take the
divine account Of what really happened
on that occasion.
Let me see how honest these evolu-
tiOntsts are, and see whether it is not q
"a hwrw f0h 90 - ~ nwor ka,.