263 
we are told, created distinctly and separately each division of 
organic nature, I need not stop to inquire. Neither need I 
dwell upon a “ a self-regulating universe,” nor the belief that the 
world “ would not come to chaos if left to law alone.”* Such 
opinions are contradicted over and over again in the Bible, 
which teaches that “not a sparrow shall fall to the ground” 
without His knowledge. 
50. Mr. Herbert Spencer tells us that special creation, which 
is the creation of the Bible, is worthless by its “ derivation,” 
which is, of course, the Bible; “worthless in its intrinsic in- 
coherence ; worthless as absolutely without-evidence.” 
51. Surely such language as this is plain enough to be under- 
stood by those who are not included in the mysterious bonds of 
Darwinism. Mr. Herbert Spencer has written two volumes 
upon a Biology founded on Darwinism ; but he has the candour 
to tell us he does not believe in the “ current theology.” 
52. In a recent review in Nature , July 11, 1872, of a work 
called the Martyrdom of Man, we are told that the author, 
after working out the evolution of animal and human faculties, 
goes on to “ urge all enlightened men to take part in the great 
work of demolishing one of those institutions which, once the 
highest attainable, has now become injurious. Christianity 
must be destroyed .” And he concludes his work in these words : 
‘ But a season of mental anguish is at hand, and through this 
we must pass in order that our prosperity may rise. The soul 
must be sacrificed, the hope in immortality must die. A sweet 
and charming illusion must be taken from the human race, as 
youth and beauty vanish never to return.” 
53. As a commentary upon these horrid statements, the 
reviewer, who is the principal writer in the chief organ of 
Darwinism, instead of expressing disgust at the publication of 
such impious trash, contents himself with calling the author’s 
anti-Christianity “ fanatical,” and advising him to “ turn his 
experience and ability as an ethnologist to the doing of more 
solid work in some special department of his science ” / 
54. In a paper read before the British Association at 
Brighton, this year (1872), entitled, “On Aims and Instru- 
ments of Seientific Thought,” by Professor W. K. Clifford, the 
author comes to the conclusion that, “By saying that the order 
of events is reasonable we do not mean _that everything has a 
purpose, or that everything can be explained, or that everything 
has a cause , for neither of these is true.” 
55. Among the arguments by which this “purposeless” 
and “causeless” theory is arrived at, we find the following 
* Wallace. 
