The commonwealth. (Scotland Neck, N.C.) 1882-1884, 1883-02-01

relied on as trustw orthy book.
These su ubjects are for other Sab.
baths. But l wish you to understand
that Thomas Paine and Voltaire and
Hume no more 6isbelieved the Bible
than do the leading scientists who
promulgate evolution. When I say
scientists, l do not mean literary men
who discuss this matter in essay or
sermon and without investigation,
look at it from this side or that. but
mean the men who through labora-
tories and aquariums and geological
gardens and astronomical Observable
ries, give their life to the study of
the physical earth and its plants and
animals, and to the exploration Of
regions beyond, so far as by optical
inventions they may be explored
All these evolutionists, without one
exception, reject the Bible. and / will
put them ON the win ass stand, the
living and the dead. Ernst Haeckel,
John Stuart Mill, Huxley TyndaIl,
Darwin and Spencer, ye, men Of
science, stand there and solemly an
swer few questions Do you believe
in the holy Scriptures !? Mo- And
so they say all. Do YOU believe in
the story of the garden of Eden /?
No" And so they say all. Do you
believe in the miracles Of the Old
and New Testament ? 'sNo.'' Do
you believe that Christ was the Sa-
vior Of the world ? NO" Do you be-
lieve in the doctrine of the atone
ment ? ''No." Do you believe in the
regenerating power of the Holy
Ghost !? mo" Doyou believe that
God answers prayer ? ''No."
Ernst Haeckel ON the first page of
his three great volumes sneers at the
Bible as a $50 called revelation.
Tyndall defies all Christendom by
his prayer test to prove that suppli-
cation to God would ever be answer
ed. Stuart Mill, after elaborately
writing against Christianity, showed
that his rejection of it was complete
by ordering for his tombstone the
inscription: 'Most Unhappy" Hux-
ley says that when he first read Mr..
Darwin's book what struck him most
forcibly was the conviction that tele-
ologv, by which he means Christian
the ology, as commonly understood
had received it's death blow at Mr..
Darwin's hands.
1 put in opposition the Bible theo-
ory and the evolutionists' theory Of
now the human race started. The
pible account says: ''Let US make
man in our image for our likeness.
So God created man in His own
image. He breathed into him the
breath Of life. A perfect man. Not
a perfect kangaroo or aperfe.t CHM
panzee, but a perfect man. Evoln-
zionist account. Infinite ages ago
there existed # ur or five primal
germs or plant pores, and these do
veloped all the living creatures of
the ages. Fist there was a vegeta-
BILE stuff, perhaps mushroom. That
Mushroom developed by its innate
force into something like a jelly-fsh,
and the jelly-fish by innate force de-
veloped into tadpole. The tadpole
developed into snail. The snail by
innate force developed into turtle.
The turtle by innate force developed
into a wolf. and the wolf into dog,
and the dog developed into baboon,
and the baboon developed into a
man. Darwin says our lungs are a
swim-bladder, showing that we ohce
ioated and we're amphibous, and the
ears we're once movable as easily as
those of horse, when he lifts them
at some frightful object. From plant
to pollywog, from pollywog to insect,
from insect to fish. from fish to rep
tile, from reptile into monkey, from
monkey into man. Now any one who
saws that this evolutionist account OF
the creation of man is not different
from the Bible account makes an ap'
l'palling Misrepresentation. Prefer
which account you please. Take
Darwin's oragin of species in prefer
ence tu the book of Genesis, if sc
YOU will, but understand that you are
an infidel. AS for myself, since Her
bert Spencer was not present at the
creation of the world and the Lord
God was, shall take the divine ac-
count of what really happened or
that occasion.
| Let me see how honest these evol
utionists are, and see whether it is
not a strategem by which to reject
the Creator. You tell me that the
monkey made man and the dog the
monkey and the reptile the quadru-
ped and the pollywog the reptile and
the primal germ the pollywog
Please, sir, tell me who MADE the
primal germ They say ''we don't
know" or s'probably it made ITSELF >
or cit was case of spontaneous gen
Grafton" I cannot find one of these
evolutionist scientists who will
squarely. openly, and emphatically
answer-God. Herbert Spencer
comes nearest to a direct answer
when he says it was made by the
great unknowable mystery. Huxley
brings pail of protoplasm which is
the ife.giving material out or which
the race was started. But, Mr.. Hux-
ley, who made the protoplasm?
put in opposition to the evolu-
tionists' account the Bible account o.