how manifold are thy works, in wisdom hast thou made them all."

Notwithstanding the length to which this lecture has already extended, I must yet claim your attention to the manner in which the advocates of the atheistic hypothesis have endeavoured to meet this argument, or to evade its force. The author of the System of Nature' assures us that atheists have no need to recur to any such cause as we have assigned, "in order to explain the phenomena of the universe, to develope the operations of nature." * Atheists are “natural philosophers, who are convinced that, without recurring to chimerical causes, they can explain everything, simply by the laws of motion, by the relation subsisting between beings; by their affinities; by their analogies," &c.† Let us hear, then, how the origin of man is explained on these principles. "If again it be asked, what origin we give to beings of the human species? We reply that, like all other beings, man is a production of nature." "If, then, it be demanded, whence came man? We answer our experience on this head does not capacitate us to resolve the question; but that it cannot interest us, as it suffices for us to know that man exists." But he affirms that there is " no contradiction in supposing that the human race, such as it is at the present day, was either produced in the course of time or from all eternity." (!) § Still he is inclined to think that man was formed "in the course of time."§ "However it may be," he continues, "if we are obliged to ation, to the origin of things, to the infancy of the human species, we may say that it is probable man was a necessary consequence of the disentangling of our globe, or one of the results of the qualities, of the properties, of the energies of which it is susceptible in its present position;-that he was born male and female;-that his existence is co-ordinate

recur, by imagin

*Vol. II, p. 503. + Vol. II, p. 519. Vol. I, p. 139. § Vol. I, p. 140.

"The primi

with that of the globe in its present position." * tive man did, perhaps, at first, differ more from the actual man than the quadruped differs from the insect."† Now observe, I entreat you, how anxious this writer appears to get rid altogether of the inquiry into the origin of man; nor is this surprising; it is, we feel assured, an inquiry which must, if rationally pursued, prove fatal to the atheistic scheme. We are dissuaded from the unprofitable and uninteresting pursuit of such a question; "it cannot interest us" to know "whence came man." Cannot interest us! Why this is a point the decision of which will determine the great question at issue between us and atheism. Prove only that such a being as man could be produced, "male and female," by the accidental concourse of material atoms, by any physical properties of matter, and we must admit that the same causes might give existence to all the wonders of the universe. But if we have proved that there are numerous and decisive evidences of the most surpassing wisdom and benevolent intention exhibited in the formation of man, and his relation to external nature, then it undeniably follows that there is a supremely great and intelligent Creator. And shall we be told that it cannot interest man to know whether he is the offspring of chance, or the production of divine power?-whether he owes his being, with all his faculties and capabilities of enjoyment, to the wisdom and beneficence of an Almighty Creator; or whether it be an idle fiction. to suppose the existence of such a being? "Cannot interest us" to know whether the warmest emotions of gratitude should be cherished to a being who has laid us under infinite obligations to love and serve him, and who has unbounded power over us, or whether we should endeavour to repress every feeling of this kind which rises in the bosom, and to efface from the mind every such idea as a debasing and

* Vol. I, p. 146. + Vol. I, p. 147.

injurious superstition! What must be the state of that man's mind, what must be the moral condition of a man, who has brought himself to such a point of hardened indifference, of unnatural, irrational insensibility, as to treat the inquiry how man came into being, and whether or not he has a Maker, as an uninteresting trifle!

Observe farther how ready this philosopher of atheism is to favour any supposition, however extravagant and absurd, provided it only exclude the agency of a Creator. The race of man may be eternal, or of recent date, may have sprung into being as it now is "male and female," "born,' but without parents, his only progenitors being the entangled powers of the primitive globe, whose struggles to get loose were the travailing pangs that gave birth to the human family;—or it may have advanced from no one knows what inferior condition-that of a reptile, an oyster, or an animalcule perhaps to his present high station in the rank of being. Man may have been at his first formation anything, may have come into existence anyhow, this atheistic advocate sees nothing absurd in any one conjecture or its very opposite, he will welcome as a friend and ally any hypothesis, however wild and fantastic, if it only exclude intelligence from the formation of man, and deny the being of a God.

And what explanation of the innumerable instances of wisdom and design which are apparent in the structure of man is it, to say that it resulted from "the present position" of the earth. If this were the case, why are not men and women now produced by the continuance of the earth in that position? How is it that we never find springing up

*

* Attempts have been made sometimes to neutralize the force of such remarks as the above, by asking, on the other hand, why, if there is a Creator, does he not now create new beings? But a moment's consideration will show that such a question cannot restore the balance. An intelligent Creator is one who acts according to his own will and choice;-the "physical causes" to which atheism refers everything have nothing of this kind. An infinitely wise and powerful being may determine what limits he will place to the exercise of his own power on any

on our sunny banks, or green pastures, or by the river's brink, some newly formed man or woman, a child, or at least some rudiments of a human being. Or, if in the climate of our northern isles the earth is not sufficiently prolific, why have not such wonderful productions been known in the tropical regions? Such discoveries, the writer well knew, had never been made, but he seems to console himself with the hope that some such are still in reserve. "What is it," he asks, "that authorises them to believe this sterility in nature? Know they if, in the various combinations which she is every instant forming, nature be not occupied in producing new beings, without the cognizance of these observers? Who has informed them this nature is not actually assembling, in her immense elaboratory, the elements suitable to bring to light generations entirely new."*

What are such fancies as these but "the baseless fabric of a vision;" and what must be the weakness of a system that can lean on such props? What answer is it to all the evidence which we bring, to talk of "the disentangling of our globe," or "the results of the properties, of the energies, of which it is susceptible;" we ask are there any properties or energies, short of infinite wisdom and boundless power, that can satisfactorily account for all the wonders within us and without us?

Another author, anxious to exclude the agency of the Deity from the formation of the world, admits the difficulty of accounting for the existence of man and the larger animals in "the position which the globe at present holds occasion, or in what way and at what period it shall be employed. "Physical causes must go on without any capability of exercising more or less power, or selecting any time, or of limiting for any reason their own acts. If man be the product of "the properties, the energies" of which the earth "is susceptible in its present position," the inquiry is perfectly relevant, why do not the same properties," &c. in the same "position" of the globe, produce men now? If an almighty and intelligent Being is his Maker, the question, why does he not continue to create is quite impertinent; it might as well be asked, why did he create man at all, or create him as he is?

+ System of Nature.-Vol. I. p. 148.

66

in relation to the sun,"* and therefore concludes, with admirable logic, that the true solution of all the difficulties which press on the atheistic scheme may be obtained, by supposing the earth to have been in a different position with regard to the sun. But can any one be imposed on by such fallacies as these? Because the earth does not now produce men and animals, does it follow that it ever did, or ever could produce them, in any position whatever? But what can be expected but bare assumption, when evidence cannot be obtained, and proof is impossible? Does the atheist know that the earth ever was in a position materially different from that which it now occupies? From what astronomical data or geological researches, can he ascertain that the variation in the size or shape of the earth's orbit was ever such as this hypothesis requires? But whatever he may suppose the earth's position to have been, does wisdom of design or benevolence of intention depend on the sun's rays? We ask whether it can be imagined by any man of reason and candour, that any degree of heat or cold is sufficient to account for all the marvellous contrivances and exquisite machinery which the frame of man exhibits? But the very supposition carries with it its own refutation; neither the vegetable productions which now cover the globe, nor the present races of animals which live on it, could have maintained their existence, even if brought into being, if the earth's mean

*"But the question of the greatest difficulty is that which relates to the origin of the first and most powerful kind of animals that exist upon the earth; the position which the globe at present holds in relation to the sun, does not warrant us in the conclusion that either man or the larger kind of animals in brute creation could have resulted from this position. The same power that formerly produced them would be able to produce them still, and in addition to the ordinary process of reproduction, we should have a right to expect new beauties and wonders, equal, at least, to the most excellent which we now behold. This, however, is not the case, and the fair deduction on the ground of philosophy is, that the relative position of the earth and sun must formerly have been very different from what it is at present, and that it is upon a hypothesis of this kind that we are to seek for a solution of the highest difficulties with which we are presented in the animal world." -Palmer's Principles of Nature, p. 54.