317 
scientific, exclaimed, “ This shifts the difficulty without removing it, for the 
existence of these extra-mundane seeds is still to be accounted for.” The 
circumstance that so eminent a scientific investigator should have had recourse 
to such an hypothesis to give a helping hand to Darwinian views is not only 
evidence of their weakness, but shows also wherein they are weak. It was, 
in fact, an admission that natural development will not account for the origi- 
nation of seeds of plants. Now, if the generation of the different species of 
plants and trees cannot be ascribed to that process, it would seem to be 
wholly unreasonable to say that natural development, or natural selection, 
might effect the generation of different species of animals. It can by no 
means be conceded that the process in one case had no analogy to that in 
the other. 
13. If, then, it should be asserted that the existence at any time of seed 
of any kind can only be due to the anterior or simultaneous origination, by 
creation, of the complete form of the plant or animal of which it is the seed, 
I maintain that, for the reasons above given, the principles of Darwinism 
cannot be legitimately adduced to controvert this assertion. Notwithstanding 
all that the advocates of that system may say, we shall be at liberty to 
attribute the origination of seed to the creation of perfect specimens of each 
species. This inference, which so far has been drawn from physical consider- 
ations, accords with the account of the creations of plants and animals given 
in the first chapter of Genesis. It is particularly to be noticed that in what 
is said in verses 1 1 and 1 2 respecting the creation of herbs and trees, the 
assertion is expressly made that “ the seed of each is in itself after its kind.” 
The way in which seed is thus spoken of in connexion with the creation of 
herbs and plants, is plainly consistent with the hypothesis that the seeds of 
different species have come into existence, not by development of one species 
from another, but by original creation of examples of each species. Although 
the above citation refers only to the vegetable kingdom, it may by analogy 
be taken to embrace the animal kingdom. 
14. The Scriptural accounts of the creation of Adam from the dust of the 
ground, and of Eve from a rib of Adam, are quite consistent with the fore- 
going argument, according to which a single pair, at least, of the human race 
must have been created. It would be altogether unphilosophic to cavil at 
the specified modes of the creation, because, as already urged in Article 8, 
it is not possible to assign limits, whether as regards mode or extent, to the 
creative operations of the Framer of the Universe. It is worthy of notice 
that the possibility of such creations as those recorded respecting Adam and 
Eve was asserted by John the Baptist when he said, — “ God is able of these 
stones to raise up children to Abraham.” If the power of the Creator could 
be conceived of as having limits, there would cease to be meaning in the 
words, “ Almighty,” “ Omnipotent.” The particular modes of the miraculous 
creations of Adam and Eve have special significations, as indeed the miracles 
of Scripture always have. Adam, we are told, was made of the dust 
of the ground to indicate the terrestrial and unabiding character of the 
outward man ; and Eve was made of a bone of Adam to signify the intimate 
