48 
Royal Institution, by Sir Samuel Baker, giving an account of his discoveries 
of the sources of the Nile. Now, suppose that by some giant force that river 
was severed from its Nyanza source, and that a telegram was sent down to 
Egypt stating that the Nile was no more — was dead. The Egyptian would 
rush to ascertain if it were so, and he would, of course, disbelieve the report, 
for he would see those mighty waters flowing on, giving beauty, fertility, and 
prosperity to his country ; the ships would be still sailing on its bosom, and 
the crocodile basking on its sunny banks ; in short, all would appear 
as usual, till its empty bed should declare that its existence had ceased, — 
that it was no more. And so it is with us in our unregenerate state. We 
have the principle of life, but it is cut off from its eternal source ; and it is 
only by regeneration that we can be reunited to that source again, and be at 
one with Him “ whom to know is life eternal.” (Cheers.) 
Rev. S. Wain wright. — I agree very much with what has fallen from the 
last speaker ; and I should not have risen were it not that I decidedly dis- 
agree with one thing he said. I understood him to say he did not think 
man, as originally formed, was perfect ; and that if we were prepared to 
allow that the Almighty made man perfect, we must admit that he had 
created not men, but gods. But we are told expressly on the authority of 
the Bible that the first human being was absolutely created in God’s own 
image, and that it was man’s own fault that the race did not afterwards 
retain that image. We have a sort of general dictum laid down in Genesis 
as to all the works of God. After every act of creation it is said that “ God 
saw that it was good : ” and His work could not have been so described unless 
it were without flaw. I think it is important in these days that we should, 
in discussing these subjects, endeavour to show how irrefragable are our 
arguments drawn from other sources than scriptural authority and inspira- 
tion, though at the same time we affect no such independence of these as is 
maintained by some men, and are not above referring to that book which we 
believe to be an inspired record. Dr. Smith has asked, What is life ? We 
might, indeed, ask, What is anything ? What do we know of anything but 
by its effects ? Now, just think of that for a moment. Take a handful of 
coarse blasting-powder. A rustic might say it was merely a handful of onion 
seed ; and how are you to know the difference ? But scatter it upon the fire, 
and then you will be able to tell what it is in a moment. Professor Huxley 
has told us that historically we know nothing of the origin of life. Now, I am 
ready to aflirm that Professor Huxley is fundamentally wrong, and to maintain 
that historically we do know something of the origin of life. The Immutable 
and Eternal is unseen and unknown : He is surrounded by clouds and 
darkness ; but it is the darkness which proceeds from excess of light. That 
light is so dazzling and blinding that, as Bishop Hall well says, those who 
gaze long at the sun will have specks in their eyes. Men neglect to search 
out what may be known of the invisible nature and character of God, so far 
as it may be furnished by the things that are seen. The heavens declare 
His glory ; the vast firmament, the mighty ocean, and even every tiny flower 
and blade of grass, all declare His wisdom, His goodness, and His power. 
