162 
some degree of inaccuracy in coupling the word “ infinite ” with God’s moral 
perfections. I apprehend that God’s power and wisdom are infinite, hut I 
cannot understand how the word infinite can he used with regard to His good- 
ness. That attribute is a perfect attribute, and there is a difference between 
the perfect attributes and the infinite attributes of the Deity. That in- 
distinctness which I mention on the part of Mr. De La Mare has led to great 
confusion, of a very serious character in theology. There is another passage to 
which I must take very great exception. Mr. De La Mare says : “ Were we 
to sit down to write a life of the Saviour, with no other available authorities 
than the prophetical writings, we might, from the several authors, and at 
various dates, so fully delineate every important feature, as almost to leave 
nothing for the historian, in the actual portraiture, to supply.” That passage 
does certainly seem to give to the rationalist of modern times a vantage- 
ground, the importance of which I can hardly express. It is a very strong 
assertion to say that from the prophetical writings of the Old Testament 
alone the life of the Saviour, delineating almost every important feature of 
that life, could be written. Prophecy is one thing after it has been fulfilled, 
but it is quite a different thing before it has been fulfilled. It will illustrate 
better what I mean if I say that possibly, hereafter, the Book of Revelation 
may be tolerably clear to our descendants, but certainly now it is all a mass 
of darkness. A stronger weapon than that furnished by Mr. De La Mare 
could hardly be placed in the hands of the modern rationalist who declines 
to pin his faith to the New Testament. With regard to another point, I 
cannot help thinking that that portion of the paper which deals with the 
analogical part of the subject has not been treated upon a scientific principle. 
I could heap up ten thousand similar instances to those which Mr. De La 
Mare has quoted. It is easy to say the world consists of earth, air, and sea, 
and so on. There is really no end of such speculations, and instead of its 
being founded on a Scriptural basis, it is really founded on nothing of 
the kind. 
Mr. Wartngton. — I feel so very much with Mr. Row upon this subject, 
that if I were to attempt to go into it at any length to-night, I should have 
to raise such a long series of objections, that i would be necessary to create 
a new superstructure altogether upon the paper which has been read. I 
may say I agree here and there with Mr. De La Mare’s views, but my 
reasons for doing so would be totally different from the reasons he has 
assigned. Under those circumstances I will confine my remarks to the 
analogies of the Trinity which have been instanced by Mr. De La Mare. 
He tells us, in the first place, that there is a threefold law of attraction — the 
attraction of gravitation, the attraction of cohesion, and chemical attrac- 
tion, or the combination of particles having mutual affinity. Now it is an 
extremely disputed point whether there is any such thing at all as the 
attraction of cohesion, whether it is not a mere name for the absence of 
repelling force. The view held by many authorities is, that what we call 
the attraction of cohesion simply arises from the fact that there is no force 
to drive the particles away from one another. If that is so, we reduce our 
