Natural Theology. 





not yet perfect, but entirely changing the field of 

 argument for or against natural religion. By its 

 light we can go back into the dark ages of the globe's 

 history, when there was not only no man, but no 

 living thing upon the earth. To this all men of sci- 

 ence are agreed. This is certainly an important 

 point, and makes an important difference in the argu- 

 ment. We can go back to the barren rocks and trace 

 in the successive strata rising above them the intro- 

 duction of all new forms of life. The only question 

 is, how they were introduced, or how they began to 

 be. There is no question about the fact of a begin- 

 ning. As to the mode of their origin, two diverse 

 views are held, one requiring the same creative pow- 

 er as the other, as we have already shown, so that 

 an a priori argument cannot be made out conclu- 

 sively in favor of either. We must rely entirely 

 upon facts observed in nature. We are now leaving 

 out of view the Bible account, relying solely upon 

 nature to tell us of God. And if left entirely to 

 nature, we could not see a particle of difference 

 between the theory of distinct creations and the so- 

 called development theory in proving the existence 

 .and perfections of God. For we have already shown 

 that the creation of a germ that shall develop into 

 \ a perfect being, involves the same creative power as 

 the creation of the being itself. So the creation of 

 a germ that should evolve all created beings in their 

 geologic and living order, would require equal skill 

 power with the distinct creation of every speci- 

 If we look at an oak, we see in it evidence 





