THEISTIC AND ATHEISTIC EVOLUTION 27 



the work I will not say of all the representatives 

 of monism but of many of them, and especially 

 of Haeckel. We might almost say that Haeckel 

 derived his conception of personality from the 

 siphonophores or other cormi (animals fixed on 

 one stock) of which the part-individuals are 

 specially adapted to perform particular tasks ; some 

 serve to devour food, others swim, others afford 

 protection, etc. Haeckel describes these individuals 

 forming parts of one whole as swimmers, feeders, 

 etc. This zoological conception of personality is 

 certainly not applicable to God, for God cannot 

 be a finite, corporeal being. 1 



Haeckel had not far to go to find his conclusion, 

 which is, there can be no personal God, for if 

 there were one, he would be a gaseous vertebrate ! 

 This is indeed philosophically untenable. Christian 

 philosophy and theology have always formed a 

 totally different conception of the personality of 

 God. God is the absolutely perfect entity, absolute 

 intelligence and absolute perfection with all its 

 properties and without any separation of these 

 properties from one another. The personal God 

 is fulness of being existing in itself and of itself. 

 And just because God is fulness of being, He can 

 by His will (which is not, however, anything apart 



1 However, Haeckel and his followers are well known to have applied 

 the zoological conception to God, as did also Dr. Plotz, in the course of 

 the evening discussion, when he referred to God as an organism, and then 

 asked for a Creator of the Creator. Cf. my remarks on the speeches 

 made by Dr. Plotz and Mr. Thesing (Part n.). 



