I PROLOGUE 55 



anthropology, and theodicy is obvious; but they 

 are no less inconsistent with the sentimental 

 Deism of the "Vicaire Savoyard" and his 

 numerous modern progeny. It is as impossible, 

 to my mind, to suppose that the evolutionary 

 process was set going with full foreknowledge of 

 the result and yet with what we should under- 

 stand by a purely benevolent intention, as it is 

 to imagine that the intention was purely malevo- 

 lent. And the prevalence of dualistic theories 

 from the earliest times to the present day 

 whether in the shape of the doctrine of the 

 inherently evil nature of matter ; of an Ahriman ; 

 of a hard and cruel Demiurge ; of a diabolical 

 "prince of this world," show how widely this 

 difficulty has been felt. 



Many seem to think that, when it is admitted 

 that the ancient literature, contained in our 

 Bibles, has no more claim to infallibility than any 

 other ancient literature; when it is proved that 

 the Israelites and their Christian successors 

 accepted a great many supernaturalistic theories 

 and legends which have no better foundation than 

 those of heathenism, nothing remains to be done but 

 to throw the Bible aside as so much waste paper. 



I have always opposed this opinion. It appears 

 to me that if there is anybody more objectionable 

 than the orthodox Bibliolater it is the heterodox 

 Philistine, who can discover in a literature which, 

 in some respects, has no superior, nothing but 



