The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1888-07-02
GOD OR DARWIN 2
A REPLY TO THE REV. DIR. LONGS
SERMON ON EVOLUTION.
inception Taken to the Theory that
THO Bible and Darwinism May be
Reconoiled--To Believe the Latter Is
to Reject the Former.


extraordinary discourse upon the subject
Of Evolution in its Relation to Religion, y
delivered by the Rev. N. M. Long TO {
large audience in this city.
lie begins by stating that sermon had
been preached in this city, in which the
impression was made that evolution and
tho Bible are irreconciable. This he say,
presents 'an alternative inconceiyably
ghastly and ruinous."
lie proceeds to announce his belief IN
evolution and its acceptance by nine ouI
Of ten thinking men. He argues TO show
its compatibility with the teachings Of the
Bible, and concludes his argument by
stating flour truths that cannot be as
sailed by evolution or Darwinisin."
Without discussing the first proposition,
to-wit That evolution Is an established
science, accepted by the scientific world,
must be content 10 state that according
70 my reading Darwin himself, tho author
OF the so-callcd science OF evolution, never
did claim 40 much for evolution. lie
only announced his belief In the theory
As an hypothesis, probably true, while
Tyndall, his cotemporary supporter in
this theory, stated In 30 many words that
Evolution Is an improved hypothesis.
30 l may answer very safely that the
grave questions involved in evolution
have not yet reached that awful verge
when, 10 question its conclusions and ex-
press grave doubts OF its compatibility
with Holy Writ Is 10 present an ''altena-
Tive inconcicyeably CHASTITY and runous. ["
j believe, rather, TINT for man like the
Rev. N. Nj. Long 10 open tho discussion
by such AN announcement, and announce
his acceptance OF doctrine originated by
m avowed infidel, accepted by the inAdol
world and regarded by tho Christian min
istry generally ms form Of inddolity the
most Formidable that has ever assailod tho
Christian religion--for such man as DIR.
Long. distinguished for his great intellect,
his unmatched cloquencc, his courage and
honor, 10 accept and preach evolution, Ia
. bold departure In the Christian minis
try, "ghastly and ruinous" In its conse-
quenceA
II Is with this view Of the subject, that
since no minister has yet made any reply
20 that sermon, deem II almost duty 10
lnterpose some counter views Of the sub
jcct based upon belief in the Christian
religion and disbelief In evolution, m
also It's compatibility with the teachings OF
the Bible.
We suppose that DIR. Long accepts bar.
winian evolution. This we infer from ono
sentence In which he say- that the four
fundamentals OF Christianity ''am not
touched by evolution or Darwinanism."
He did not attempt to define evolution.
This must be preliminary 10 any inquiry
as 10 liz consonancc with Bible teachings
This done, any man Of ordinary intolli.
gence may easily decide the question for
himself.
Tyndall concentrates In n few words a
fairly accurate and comprehensive state
ment al the theory of evolution when he
says There Is poionhality 10 The atoms
that gives promise Of every form OF liie."
Dcmocritus long ago anticipated modern
evolution, and stated the doctrine In these
wordE GAN existence Is the result Of two
necessary and self existent principles,
namely space infinite in extent and atoms
Infinite IN number Their collisions have
produced the various forms Of liic." The
40 called science Of evolution, a. taught by
Darwin and accepted by the standard
school OF modern evolution, Tundall
Spencer and others, teaches the following
That The universe In Its ampliiudcs, In.
GLIDING man In his entirety. body, con.
science, mind and soul, II You please, may
be traced by consecutive Steps called
development back 10 primorlial monads
and proiople-ms 10 the atoms That then
the simplest aud most minute forms Of
matter conceivable have by spontan.
iety or some process or iorce yet
undiscovered, received vitality--and then
by process purely natural and utterly In.
dependent OF any concurrent outside or
Independent aid, or control, have pro-
ceedcd on under natural innate and sclf
evolved forces 10 evolve the universe In NIL
Its wondrous varieties. Thus evolution,
beginning with the atoms, and as Dr.
Long seems 10 think evolving life by spon.
faneous generation monopolizcs the whole
domain 81 creation, aud back TO the atoms
certainly wcavcs the wondrous woof OF
creation without the personal presence Of
the add, or dircciion OF any force OF power
known In the universe and outside Of that
law, called evolution Now 10 make this
theory strictly scientific u must start with
q premise, NJ indeed i dill start, TINT there
Il no God, or II this reasonable charge be
doubted, Il must be admitted that what.
CttI " mhl w 'hat ahhhhNe WV htVuiA
that something has left evolution,
or natural law, undisturhcd 20 work
out oil the wonders of the animal, tho
vegetable, the mineral, tho intellectual
aud moral worldly Processes or powers,
innate. self.suiiicieni, and independent oil
osncurrrnt control from any source what.
ever. To admit single Intervention by
God himself or any conceivable ione or
power not natural, or 10 admit any iorco
above or outside and independent OF ma.
turc. or evolution ~ having disturbed or
suspended, OF by independent forccs con.
trollcd the memorable aud all prevailing
authority and power OF nature, would lie a
surrender OF the basis theory Of evolution.
Alas for The cause Of Christian evolution,
the so-caliod science, runs smoothly on 10
logical negative Of a God. There II no
God In Il. and the theory Is crippled by
the mere suspicion 81 a God. II, by the
Nav. DR. Longs theory of spontaneous gen
Grafton b- accepted, the triumph Of o,olu.
ton NJ established and imprcgnablc,
atheism II complete, for the only admitted
obstacle ~ the athcistic cyolutionist IL that
spontaneous evolution of life or spon.
tancous generation Is not yet an accepted
theory.
Nov, TO this fair and faithful statement
Of the doctrine Of evolution. M taught 10.
day. We must add, with a view 10 com.
parison with Biblo tcaching-one ospe.
cially --to-wit, the Darwinian theory Of the
descent Of man. II Il stated In his own
words NJ follows MAN Il descended from
hairy animal furnished with tail. these
from AN ancient marsapial animal like an
opo~um; these from reptile like an am.
yhibian animal; these from fish, and these