Evolution of Theology. 25.') 



royal word. I cannot agree, however, with his account of the 

 origin of morality. lieligion and morality had separate sources — 

 they are often separate in the lives of men. Colonel Ingersoll 

 holds some rational views in an illiberal way, but he spoke well 

 when he inverted the popular epigram, and made it read, "An 

 honest God's the noblest work of man." I must disagree with 

 Dr. Gottheil, and affirm that the ascription of morality to the 

 Jewish God followed, and did not precede, the development of a 

 higher morality among the Jewish people. It is equally foolish 

 and irrational to be too familiar with God, and to take the position 

 that we have gotten through with him. The trouble with Pos- 

 itivism, notwithstanding its many grand and noble ideas, which 

 have been an inspiration to me throughout my ministry, is that it 

 rested in the metaphysical stage of development, giving to the ab- 

 straction " Humanity," the guise of personality. 



" Unless above himself he can ergot himself, 

 How poor a thing is man ! " 



Not only above the humble ones but above all, including the 

 greatest of human kind. Where did humanity come from? Back 

 of man, of "humanity," is the earth; back of the earth there must 

 be " an Infinite and Eternal Energy whence all things proceed." 

 To that I bow my heart; that I worship, not altogether ignorantly 

 and foolishly, I believe. 



Dr. Lew'is G. J axes: — 



It seems to me that this question of the consciousness and per- 

 sonality of the Absolute may well be left where Mr. Spencer has 

 left it. He affirms, in substance, that if we may not assert person- 

 ality and consciousness of the "Infinite and Eternal Energy 

 whence alt things proceed," we may be assured that its state is 

 not lower, but infinitely higher than that which we denote by 

 these terms. As evolutionists, we seem justified in affirming this; 

 otherwise we assert inferentially that these traits have been created, 

 not evolved. Logically, the lower cannot produce the highei*. 

 That must be involved in the totality of things which is evolved in 

 the differentiated individual. As evolutionists, let us not be en- 

 trapped by the faulty logic of the siiecial-creationist. 



