219 
between the Book of Genesis and the Book of Revelation, 
‘‘from the primitive traditions,’ which describe God as 
“‘manlike in appearance, appetites, and emotions.” The 
Christian’s God in Christ is, in one sense, still more anthropo- 
morphic—he is ‘‘very man” as well as “very God”; but 
the Deity is ever the same, with Moses, David, Isaiah, St. 
Paul, St. John, though pictured in human thoughts, the 
almighty, omniscient, omnipotent Creator. And how other- 
wise could the attributes of the Deity be expressed to man, 
except by human pen? And how otherwise than by human 
thoughts, even be those thoughts inspired? Nor do the 
words of Moses as to the “ hardening of Pharaoh’s heart,” nor 
those as to the permitting of a “lying spirit”—or, as it 
really is, ‘‘ the spirit’’—to influence Ahab, fasten upon those 
early times a less exalted idea of the “‘ transcendent virtues ” 
of the God of the Hebrews: they touch, indeed, upon the 
mystery of mysteries, the existence and power of evil; but 
they do but tell us. that, m the words of the late Bishop 
Wordsworth, God at last ‘“‘ deals with wilful sinners according 
to their own devices.” Pharaoh is recorded to have hardened 
his own heart seven times against God before it is said that 
God “hardened his heart,” or, rather, “‘ left his heart bound 
in its own already existing hardness ; ”? Ahab had persistently 
hardened his heart also against the most evident and repeated 
warnings from God; and who shall say that it is not the very 
perfection of an all-wise government, or, it may be, the very 
necessity of perfect justice, thus ultimately to ‘‘ deal with 
wilful sinners after their own devices ? ” 
The special object of inquiry here, however, is as to the 
“fact recognised 7”? by Mr. Herbert Spencer that, ‘“‘in the 
primitive human mind there exists neither religious idea nor 
sentiment.” Is it a “fact” really forcing itself upon our 
recognition? And, then, there is the .further question, as to 
whether it is really a “ fact”? that both the ideas and senti- 
ments, which we distinguish as religious, are generated as 
a result of ‘ social evolution, and the evolution of intelligence 
accompanying it.” 
What are we to understand by “primitive man?” If he 
be the near descendant of the anthropoid ape, the “ pithecoid 
man,” who is just developing a few shreds of intelligence, just 
dropping his hair, just widening his brow, just improving his 
features, just lengthening his thumbs, just shortening his tail, 
we can scarcely canvass his religious ideas and sentiments ; 
probably they are non-existent, though he may, perhaps, 
dream dreams, and those even of “doubles” and “ ghosts.” 
