275 
in revelation ; and now I will just test the theory of development a little by 
the mode of God’s action as manifested in history. I suppose all God’s modes 
of action to be analogous, and therefore He works after a similar manner in 
creation, in the development of history, and in connection with revelation. 
That is the view of Butler in his Analogy ; and, that being so, we expect to 
find Almighty God working alike, or, at any rate, with a considerable degree 
of analogy, in all these instances. I think, therefore, that we may arrive at 
some conclusion — not demonstrative, not certain, but in some degree probable 
— as to the mode He would be likely to adopt in working in creation by ob- 
serving the mode in which He has acted in history. Take the evolutions of 
man in history ; and there is no doubt that the theory of gradual development 
is true to a considerable extent. There are no great leaps. One state of 
civilization slowly evolves itself, stage after stage, out of another ; one system 
of thought slowly evolves itself out of another ; one system of philosophy 
arises from another in the same way ; and the more we notice this the more 
we see that all systems of philosophy are closely related to each other. This 
is very remarkable ; and I think it can be abundantly proved that there is, 
at least in the developments of God in history, a considerable amount of 
what we call development by gradual progression. Having stated that 
generally, I want now to draw your attention to one place where this result 
utterly and entirely fails. We may undoubtedly trace, in the course of 
history, the long, slow, gradual processes by which Almighty God prepared 
the way for Christianity. It is one of the most remarkable things we can 
arrive at by the study of history, to see that great set of causes, operating 
by result after result, by which the human mind was prepared for Chris- 
tianity, or, to use St. Paul’s language, “ when the fulness of time was come.” 
I will not go to Eastern nations, but we can easily see the gradual state 
of preparation for the development of Christianity, and it is marvellous to 
consider what might have been the result had one single link in the chain of 
succession been wanting. Here comes in Mr. Henslow’s view of accident. 
I do not think there is such a thing as accident : I think we have a proof of 
care and intention in the means whereby the world was gradually prepared 
by an immense succession of causes, for the advent of Christianity. Let us 
take an example. Every one must know that one of the greatest events in 
history, in preparing the way for Christianity, was the conquest of Alexander 
the Great. Now, the whole set of events leading to his expedition into Asia 
was brought about by an infinite amount of preceding events, and if any one 
of them had failed, the expedition would not have taken place. What was the 
result ? The adoption of Christianity throughout the heathen world. Here 
was one of the greatest instances of moral and religious development in the 
ancient world entirely in the hands of Providence, and gradually evolved to 
prepare the way for Christianity in its intellectual and moral developments. 
Let us take the Roman empire — what took place there ? There were an 
immense number of preceding causes all culminating in one result, and 
beneficially preparing the way for Christianity. Having pointed out this 
much, now let me state that the chain breaks in one point. I have 
