MODIFICATIONS IN THE IDEA OP GODj ETC. 81 



that the " Judge of all the earth" would " do right."* His pro- 

 longed and fervid pleading for the doomed city seems to me to 

 ditfer very considerably indeed from the calm confidence with 

 which the Christian " makes his requests known unto God." Nor 

 do I think that the Old Testament can be fairly and rationally 

 explained, except on the ground on which the writers of the New 

 Testament, and especially the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, 

 insist, namely, that the revelation of God has been a progressive 

 revelation. 



With regard to the derivation of the word Shaddai, Canon 

 Girdlestone simply expresses a diffei^ent opinion from mine. He 

 gives no evidence for it. He will therefore forgive me if I adhere 

 to my view, especially since, as T have pointed out, the conception 

 of God as an Avenging Deity is introduced in the Second Com- 

 mandment. But if any other view of Shaddai be preferred to my 

 own, it can be substituted for that which I have adopted without 

 materially affecting the argument in the paper. I may say almost 

 the same thing in reference to Canon Girdlestone's view of wevi.ui. 

 I did not base my argument on the Hebrew scriptui'es, but on the 

 declaration of our Lord in St. John's Gospel. The Hebrew word 

 for spirit, I think, is nevertheless connected with the idea of 

 breathing. And adp^ in Greek is more frequently contrasted 

 with the word irvev/.m than in the corresponding words in Hebrew. 

 But Gup^ never signifies matter, so far as I am aware, but the evil 

 tendencies of the body degraded by the fall. 



In regard to evolution, some of my critics seem to have been 

 possessed by a pi'econception that whenever that word is used 

 it must be used in the sense in which it was employed by 

 Mr. Darwin. This seems to me to be the case especially in 

 Professor Orchard's remarks. I had hoped that I had sufficiently 

 explained the sense in which I employ the word in pp. 57, 58. 

 But it appears that I have not done so. 1 certainly did not mean 

 by it the " evolution of new species." In the first place I see iii 

 it a Divine working, not a working apart from God. And next, I 

 apprehend that it can no longer be denied that God is working in- 

 phenomena, not simply outside them. That is also what I mean 

 by immanence. But that it does not, in my mind, exclude 

 transcendence is clear from p. 60. If any one questions the 



* See notes pp. 72 and 77. 



