368 
30. Not less incredible, and equally unsupported by facts, is 
the theory of evolution, as propounded by Mr. Darwin, but in 
which he was preceded by Lamarck. A little nomad becomes 
a monkey — a monkey develops into an ape, and the ape into 
a man ! The wonder to my mind is why the principle should 
have failed to operate for so many thousands of years. Was it 
only a limited liability ? If not, why should we not now see 
instances of this progressive development ? 
31. There are at least two facts fatal, in my opinion, to this 
theory. One is the Deluge, of which we have lately received 
proof on testimony irrespective of Scripture. The other is the 
fact that the world will one day be burned up by the agency of 
fire. This, of course, is a matter of faith, resting solely on 
Divine testimony. 
32. The difference between special creation and the theory 
of evolution is just this. A belief in the supernatural is essential 
to the narrative of Scripture ; a belief in the fortuitous con- 
course of atoms operating by inherent power, and will, and 
wisdom, is essential to the acceptance of evolution by natural 
selection. The statements of the Bible are founded on the 
fact that God is the Almighty Sovereign of His creatures — that 
He can alone create, and He alone destroy — that He is the 
present mover as well as the original maker, and that through 
every corner of the universe “ He giveth [that is, is giving'] 
to all life, and breath, and all things/” (Acts xvii. 25.) 
Mr. Darwin and Lamarck withdraw the Creator from the 
constant superintendence of His own laws, the execution 
being vested in the laws themselves. 
33. There can be no doubt that the love and wisdom of God 
are displayed by what we call laws, but to suppose that they 
possess intrinsic powers of action irrespective of the constant 
vigilance of the Lawgiver is a form of materialism unworthy 
even of the dim lights of Pagan philosophy. It has been 
eloquently observed by Professor Balfour, that “we cannot 
but honour the man, who, by his genius and talent, has been 
enabled to develop one of the great laws of Nature, and who 
feels, and acknowledges that he has been the humble instru- 
ment to lift the veil, to a certain extent, which conceals the 
working of the Almighty ; but we have no sympathy with that 
discoverer in science, who, puffed up with intellectual supe- 
riority, puts the laws which he has elucidated in the place of 
the Creator, whose personality nad ever-working Omnipresence 
he ignores.”* 
* Manual of Botany. 
