2o5 
I have set before myself as a binding canon that in such 
studies we cannot accept facts too thankfully, test theories 
too rigorously, and arrive at conclusions too cautiously. 
At the outset let me remark, on the one hand, that the 
subject cannot be overrated in its importance, and, on the 
other hand, that, as our ignorance transcends our knowledge, 
so we must patiently yet confidently wait for the solution of 
some seeming difficulties. Its importance arises from the 
fact that the natural cosmogony of Genesis and the spiritual 
cosmogony of the Gospel are bound together by countless 
analogies. To cast aside the creation of Genesis would be to 
remove the foundation from our Creeds, and to tear down the 
doctrinal structure of our holy faith, besides destroying one 
of the greatest arguments for the observance of moral duties 
and of religious worship. The grounds for confidence in the 
future manifestation of perfect harmony between the teachings 
of science and the revelations of Scripture rest in the fact, 
that in the past their exquisite adjustments have been made 
more and more apparent as time has passed and light has been 
given. Sceptics, for example, have often made merry con- 
cerning the fancied inaccuracies by which Moses gave grapes 
to Egypt ; Daniel, a Belshazzar, to be ruler of Babylon when 
the city was taken ; St. Luke, a Proconsul instead of Pro- 
prastor to Cyprus ; and the prophet an abundance of water to 
pour over the altar when the drought was great in the land ; 
but the tombs of Egypt, the cylinders of Babylon, the coins 
of Cyprus, and the shells of the fount on Carmel have all 
risen from the ground to proclaim the sceptics wrong, the 
Scriptures right. From the experience of the past let us 
learn to tarry the Lord's leisure, for, though the expla- 
nation may be deferred, we may rest assured it will not ulti- 
mately fail. There are three topics in connexion with our 
subject on which errors prevail, in reference to which we shall 
do well to contrast the statements of the Word of Truth as 
affirming that the origin of man is a common origin, that the 
origin of man is comparatively modern, and that the origin 
of man is divine. 
1. The Common Origin of Man. — Do the races of men, 
however distant and however diverse, possess one common 
nature, and own one common Father ? If we appeal to the 
Scriptures, there is but one answer, and this openly declared 
and tacitly assumed : “ And Adam called his wife's name Eve, 
because she was the mother of all living" (Gen. iii. 20) ; whilst, 
after the Deluge, the record of the generations of Noah con- 
cludes (Gen. x. 32) : “ These are the families of the sons of 
Noah after their generations in their nations, and by these 
t 2 
