240 
they were not intangible, imperceptible, and invisible, and if they could be 
seen to be imbued with life, I should reverently believe, but with as 
sincere astonishment as if I saw an image of plaster of Paris suddenly 
endued with living breath ; and I should then at last think I saw Genesis 
enacted afresh before my eyes ! 
The Scripture informs us, in accordance with all modern discoveries, 
that everything was created very good in the sight of God. The Creator 
did not form imperfect essays of things to be afterwards evolved and their 
defect remedied by natural selection. Each creature is made after its kind, 
rU’O/,* and apparently after a pre-existing idea in the mind of the Creator, 
every plant in the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field 
before it grew. There is order, fixedness, and design from the first, and this 
is essentially the opposite to all that is involved in the doctrine of evolution, 
however modified. The Creation, as seen in Scripture and as studied in the 
records of geology, is perfect in each era from the beginning. The universe, 
as seen by the consistent evolutionist, is continually self-evolving, but still 
imperfect, and having its blunders rectified and its imperfections remedied, by 
a pseudo-divine power. The latter, or Pantheistic view, cannot be made 
consistently to agree with any one portion of Christian revelation. 
All Christians believe in the watchful care and superintending hand of 
God extended over all His creatures, and many identify this with the 
Darwinian doctrine of “ Natural Selection,” or the improved phrase “sur- 
vival of the fittest.” I shall endeavour to show the difference as far as my 
space will allow. Both these evolutionist expressions are designed to 
convey the idea of continual improvement, of advantageous change resulting 
in development from one form into another, higher, more advantageous, or in 
some sense fitter, according to our views of creation. 
Now, I am bold to assert that whatever may be the occupation of the 
imaginary power of Darwin, such is not the occupation of Divine Provi- 
dence. The ways of Providence arc confessedly mysterious ; but as regards 
the best field of observation we possess, they do not result in what would be, 
to our apprehension, the survival of the fittest. I care not what standard of 
fitness is adopted, it will be found that “ the race is not always to the 
swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet 
riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill ; but time and 
chance happeneth to all.” 
Has it not been said with some show of truth that — 
“ The good die first, 
And they whose hearts are dry as summer dust 
Burn to the socket ” ? 
It may be said that all this is explained by a future life. Let us turn 
then to the physical organization of man. Has this improved by the survival 
of the fittest ? All history, and I believe all geological research, shows the 
contrary. Whatever interposition of Divine power may have been put 
# Gr. Mia, See Ges. Lex. 
