Year: 1859

NOtn1nS.

 I raise an axe, and at single blow cut in two piece of wood one inch in diameter. Now it is certain that this wood was not severed instantly in all its parts. If it were, then the lower part would have been cut at the same instant that the upper part was, which is perfectly absurd, and there fore impossible. The axe certainly passed gradually through that wood, and separated one grain after another.

 By instantly, am to be understood that no time shall elapse between the accom- plishment of any two objects. It may, however, be said that there are bodies that move with greater velocity than this axe. 1 will then take another.

 There Is nothing with which we are ac- quainted that moves with greater velocity than light, its motion being about twelve million miles in minute. Hence, the passage of ray of light from the sun to the earth, would be eight minutes It is therefore absurd to say that ray of light could be at the sun and at the earth at the same time or instant, as 1t would al- | low no time for its passage. 1 will now | apply the above argument to the subject Tn question: If something were created out of nothing, it could not, in the nature of things, have been done progressirety or gradually; because the instant it became the least possibly removed from nothing, it would be something. It must, in the very nature of things, remain nothing till 1t be- came something; because there is no possi- ble process by which it can be gradually brought forward into something, for there is no existing medium between something and nothing Now if nothing were created into something it must have been done in stantly, and if instantly then 1t must have been something and nothing at the same instant, which is the climax of absurdity It is just as absurd as to contend that the piece of wood before mentioned was sever- ed at the bottom at the same time that it was at the top, or that a ray of light could he at the sun and the earth ct the eAno in stant. I shall hold this argument sound until some one is able to refute 1t.

 By the above 1t will clearly be seen that deny the assertion that God created " all things out of nothing" and challenge the proof. The scriptures do not inform us that God created all things out of nothing and surely philosophy cannot inform us how many nothings 1t will take to make the least conceivable something. The in. spired book does not say or even hint that all things were created out of nothing. Il simply says: '' In the beginning God crea ted the heavens and the earth,' but doet not add the words " out of nothing

 Paul says-'' the things that are seer were not made of the things that do ap pear" Here he plainly states that thu substances seen were made of the invisible substances or such as did not appear, fo by things he only means substances. Ii however, it be said to create, means t , bring forth something from nothing, tha is, to bring something that never did exis r into existence, have only to say that not so, for it says (the Bible) that " Go

 created manout of the dust of the earth. . Here you (the reader) may plainly see h Il created him-man out of the dust of tn # earth, not out of nothing, but something e dust; yet it was an act of creation, as muc J so as the first creation was.

 The Hebrew word rendered create, mean

 to gather together by concretion, or to forl

 bv consolidation-bu never can 1t mea

 to bring something into existence from al

 solutely and positively nothing.

 More anon, D. F. H.

 Cor;nofo1d 4rk ,Tune 7th 1S5Q