272 
gentlemen who write on scientific subjects are themselves very ignorant of 
our side ; in fact, that they know nothing about it. (Hear, hear.) What, I 
ask, would be said of any one who should attempt to give a lecture on a 
language he had never studied ? I once knew, as a matter of fact, of a 
gentleman who, in mere exuberance of spirits, and, I suppose, because he 
was in reality very clever, and had a good deal of address, attended a meeting, 
and passed a whole evening among its friends, to whom he was given out 
as Professor of Arabic in a celebrated university, without his knowing a 
word of the language. (Laughter.) He made a few unintelligible remarks, and, 
although he was among university men and others, he passed off as an Arabic 
professor. How easy it is for people to acquire character without knowledge. 
He was that sort of man who could handle a few facts in a most adroit way, 
and produce an effect upon those who knew nothing, because he knew a little, 
or pretended to it. It is just in the same way that people of little know- 
ledge talk against the Bible, and we take up their views and objections, 
and find many of them are of the most childish kind. When we treat them 
with respect, and place them in antagonism with some solemn scientific 
theories, we are doing deep injustice to the Bible, and we are also doing an 
unfair thing to the poor fellows who know nothing about the matter, and 
whom we treat as if they did. We should try to make them understand 
that theology is not only a science, but, as we believe it to be, the queen 
of sciences ; that we are anxious to teach them what is true on our side, and 
are willing to be taught ourselves what is true on their side, if they will only 
teach us. Do not, however, let us mix up crudities with the science of 
theology. There seems to me a little of this in the paper to-night, and with- 
out the slightest wish to offend the learned writer, I would so far object to 
it on the ground I have stated, much as I admire the paper on other 
grounds. (Hear, hear.) 
Admiral Halstead.— I have been much pained by Dr. Irons’ remarks, 
and wish to ask what is to be the effect of infidel teaching — not upon those 
who are grown up, but on the thinking youth of the country — if those whose 
duty it is to do so do not endeavour to counteract it in every possible way ? 
(Hear.) I maintain that the danger lies with our youth, and therefore 
I say it is necessary for us to distinguish between truth and imposture. 
(Hear.) 
Rev. J. H. Titcomb. — Although I concur with the meeting in thank- 
ing the author for having given us much that is very interesting and 
valuable, and in perfect harmony with our own thoughts as religious 
men, yet I think that some of the points he has set himself to prove have 
not been proven ; and that the points which have been proved in the 
paper lead us to an issue on which there is an inconclusive sequence 
raised. First of all, in section 12, the author says : “ I undertake to 
prove that a belief in Darwinism and Revelation is incompatible and irre- 
concilable.” Now, I wish it to be understood that I do not in the slightest 
degree believe in Darwinism, nor do I think it has been at all proved, 
and many scientific men of the day concur in this judgment. We are not 
