New Britain herald., 1917-10-15

sally given up.'
 ''But at this point, when evolution is silent before the mystery of life, when scientists frankly admit that there must have been an 'antecedent life before any living thing existed, the majestic utterance which opens the Bible startles with its clearness and calm dignity, like the roll of thunder behind the hills: Tn the be- ginning, God created the heaven and the earth' Oh the folly and the pride of unbelief! The 'antecedent life is the uncreated God! He spake, and it was done! That is sufficient. That satisfies all the demands of reason and of a devout science. And, listen: That is the only scientific theory possible! Unbelieving science so-called< has pointed its finger at the old book, and assumed to blot out its testimony with evolution. It now confesses it's failure, and hides it's diminished head in face of the ab- solutely scientific account, and the only scientific account possible, con- tained in the opening sentences of the Bible
 The Answer.
 with such a failure on the part
 
 pompous and harmful attacks upon the Bible, with which it hypnotized nearly the whole world for many de- cades and which some 'belated' ones still cling to, how can its power for so long a time be accounted for what is the answer?'
 First, it's origin accounts for it.. Nothing is more clearly taught in the scriptures than the inveterate hatred of Satan toward 'all that is called God, or that is worshipped.' That I leave as a dogmatic statement If any doubt it, the burden of proof is upon them, after all that I have shown about evolution: Satan or- iginated evolution, to destroy the Bible witness, and ruin souls.
 Second, on the human side 1t sprang from unbelief. and appealed to unbelief. Because of the unbelief in it's human fathers, it came into the learned of the earth, it became great. There can be no question that among the so-called scholars and scientists of the world, there had long been growing resentment against taking anything from mere 'authority'; and the Bible laid it's de- mands upon their allegiance as we'll as upon the allegiance of the ignor- ant and the lowly. Into that tinder- box Satan dropped the lighted match of evolution, with the gleeful an- nouncement that science need no longer believe the Bible nor bow to it's authority: God did not create the universe; it simply evolved from noth- ing And the notion that there Is God anyway, is more or less of a myth.
 "So much for the motive and the manner, far as the learned' world is concerned. As to tho uneducated and half educated and the would-5e- thought educated, everyone knows the metr od adopted there. E\ olution put out its theories and guesses in the name of science and the latest scholarship varying that attack with m assumption of pityir,y :1orn for any [. DOT belated and ignorant crea- ture who has not heard that Genesis is a back number, and tho Bible is no longer to be accepted when 1t dab- bles in the mighty themes of sci ence.' Haven't you heard it? And do you not know. who have read any in this field, how frequently evo- lutionary science and evolutionary
 
 of modern scholarship declares so and so?
 But this will not do any longer, with those who know how completely modern scholarship and real sci ence' have discredited this proud piece of Satanic humbug. And the reluct- ance with which some give, 1t up after it is discredited, is proof of the unbe- iof in +hQf is in the hearts of some: they cling to 1t, because they have left but one alternative, the hated Bible. LilSe poor King Lear, they look into the face of that awful alternative and cry, Let me shun that! No moro of that" And hug their poor col lapsed life-preserver to their hearts and wait for the submerged wave yon- der.
 Third, the shrewd method Of manipulating the supposed proofs for the truth of evolution opens up one of the strangest events in all tie realms of philosophy and science; they stated their theory in the name of science, without fact of science to offer in proof; then summoned as proofs a mass of most attractive and convincing illustrations of evolution from a field where evolution does really exist. Please note this here: | I shall elaborate it in my next ser mon under Evolution and Depravity,' SO I omit here. I will state it again: , They stated their theory of evolution | in nature, where it does not exist, and 1 where there are no proofs to offer l because none exists: then proceeded l to offer as proofs illustrations from O