HYPOTHETICAL "RESULTS."

443

98,000,000 years for the whole period of the cooling of the earth's crust, from a state of fusion to its present condition; so that, in his judgment, within one hundred millions of years all our speculations regarding the solid earth must be limited. On the other hand, Professor Haughton finds from the data which he adopts, 1,018 millions of years to have elapsed while the earth was cooled from 212 degrees Fahrenheit, to 122 degrees Fahrenheit, at which temperature we may suppose the waters to have become habitable; and 1,280 millions of years more in cooling from 122 degrees to 77 degrees, which is assumed to represent the climate of the later Eocene period in Britain. Computations of this kind cannot be applied, except on the large scale here exemplified, and they lose all their value in the eyes of those who deny the general doctrine of a cooling globe." Is it to be wondered at if they "lose all their value in the eyes of those" also who deny the validity of all doctrines based merely on conjecture? No one attempts to impeach the correctness of these gentlemen's computations; but what is the value of correct computations founded on incorrect data? Conclusions so widely divergent as theseresults, one of which is twenty times as great as the othercannot both be right. And yet these are the results obtained by "philosophers of eminence," "two eminent mathematicians!" Is this the certainty of philosophy? Is this the highest result obtainable by "careful computation" and mathematical accuracy? Well and wisely did Professor Phillips, in adducing these specimens, point out the inevitable uncertainty which must attach to them. Is it improbable that he remembered his own pertinent question addressed to the Geological Society, four years before ?" Is not this abuse of arithmetic likely to lead to a low estimate of the evidence in

12 In these words (―preceding those above quoted—)

“The time required to produce these effects can be calculated, if we know at what rate in time, whether uniform or not, they were produced; if we know, not

12

the true rate, but the limits within which it must have operated, the result of the calculation will have a corresponding uncertainty; if we have no knowledge of the rate, calculations are out of the question. In applying this gen

support of such random conclusions, and of the uncritical judgment which so readily accepts them?"

Referring to other, yet not dissimilar assumptions, the writer of The Times leader on the inaugural address of the President for the year, (Sir Chas. Lyell,) remarks-"Cases of this kind cannot but make us cautious in yielding to the claims of scientific dogmatism. Relative ignorance may be a good reason for expressing no opinion on a disputed point, but it is no reason for receiving and echoing that of the last speaker or writer. Whatever may be the weight of the presumptions, it is vain to deny that many so-called 'results' of geology are hypothetical -hypothetical in that sense in which Newton protested against hypotheses. Few of these have been more generally adopted than that of an original central heat and the igneous fluidity of the earth's nucleus'; yet here we find one of the greatest living geologists guarding himself against the appearance of building on it. The manner in which volcanoes have shifted. their position' is not more remarkable, and is much less certain, than the manner in which professors of geology have shifted their position in these high regions of conjecture; and while we pay them the deference due to their superior knowledge, we may well limit our intellectual homage to a provisional assent."

We repeat these words-we accept this testimony of a witness who will not be suspected of partiality on our side :— "It is vain to deny that many so-called 'results' of geology are hypothetical-hypothetical in that sense in which Newton protested against hypotheses ;" and because they are so, they are as powerless as the speculations of Mr. Darwin, or the paradoxes of Professor Huxley, to shake the foundations of our wellgrounded confidence in the CERTAINTY of those revealed truths wherein we have been instructed.

eral view to the history of the earth, philosophers of eminence in physical science have employed different considerations and obtained a variety of results. The conclusions of two eminent mathematicians which have lately

appeared may be cited with advantage. A careful computation by Professor W. Thompson, on selected data," &c., &c., as above. (Prof. Phillips's Address on opening the proceedings of Section C: Geology. Sep. 15, 1864.)

CHAPTER XVII.

IT IS CERTAIN THAT AGAINST THE EVIDENCE FOR CHRISTIANITY-CUMULATIVE AND CONGRUOUS AS IT IS

OUR OPPONENTS ARE UNABLE TO MAINTAIN

ANY SINGLE ARGUMENT WHATEVER.

"Do you ask me to bring forward irresistible proof that Christianity is from Heaven? I can do this to such an extent as that you will fail, by any fair means to overthrow my argument."-ISAAC Taylor.

"Tell me all that ever you heard against Christianity from its enemies: I am more than able to refute them all. THE EVIDENCES OF OUR RELIGION ARE OVERWHELMING."-Dr. CHALMERS.

"ON a subject like that of the Christian Evidences, a man of powerful and comprehensive mind, after he has once made himself master of the argument, feels on all occasions that the approach of doubt is nothing but a symptom of some momentary torpor of the reasoning faculty; and in alarm, not so much for the question, as for the integrity of his own powers, he rouses a manly strength, and shakes off the debility that had crept upon him. That this sort of vigorous faith does not more often show itself among Christians, is because the two elements whence it should spring are but rarely united for, on the one hand, those whose fervent piety gives them an interior or experimental conviction of the truth of the Scriptures, are not very often, in any good degree, familiar with the documentary argument, or perhaps have not the intellectual power requisite for appreciating its force. And, on the other hand, the few who do possess these advantages, too often labour under coldness at heart, or a secularity of character, which makes Christianity and its principal doctrines distasteful, or unintelligible." But a healthy intellectual energy, enlivened by

the fervour and ingenuousness of a cordial faith, carries the mind forward in full course, clear of frivolous sophisms, to the great facts, whether more or less mysterious, that are distinctly affirmed or indubitably implied in the Scriptures.

To review the principal facts with which our argument is concerned :

It is certain

I. That the "inner principle" is insufficient for human need.1

The Grecian peasants, of whom Mr. Parker tells us, doing homage to Phoebus Apollo, grim-faced Calmucks worshipping the great god of storms, savages with their hands smeared all over with the blood of human sacrifices,-these, though humbling, are instructive exhibitions of the insufficiency of Conscience, or Reason, or the Moral Intuitions, or the "inner principle," to raise mankind from the degradation of a depraved nature. Nor these alone: Mr. Parker himself has shown us that Conscience, in his own case, was unable to restrain him from bearing false witness against his neighbour, by affirming it to be a Protestant doctrine, "That God would slaughter men in hell by the million, for having committed no fault except that of not believing an absurd doctrine they had never heard of."

II. It follows therefore, that an "outer Law" is necessary." When Paley sat down to write his "Evidences," he deemed it unnecessary to prove that mankind stood in need of a revelation, because he had "met with no serious person who thought that even under the Christian Revelation we have too much light, or any degree of assurance which is superfluous." He added that, in judging of Christianity, it should be remembered that "the question lies between this religion and none: for, if the Christian religion be not credible, no one, with whom we have to do, will support the pretensions of any other." Mr. Newman is one of that large class of persons who have an invincible dislike for "evidences"; and no man has done more to exalt the inward light, and the inner principle; yet even he -remembering the many dark phases, and final eclipse of his

1 Vide supra, pp. 357-360.

CHRISTIANITY ESSENTIALLY SUPERNATURAL.

447

own faith-will certainly not venture to say that "we have too much light, or any degree of assurance which is superfluous."

III. But this outer Law, thus indispensably necessary, must be shown to be Divine, or men will not receive it as Authoritative. In what way can its Divine origin be attested (—in the first instance-) but by miracles? In none which we are able to conceive." Consequently, in whatever degree it is probable, or not very improbable, that a revelation should be communicated to mankind at all; in the same degree it is probable, or not very improbable that miracles should be wrought.

IV. It is certain that the Bible is such a Law; and has been so attested.

It is the common language of our opponents-"Christianity is an exceptive instance because it comes to us laden with miracles, which no evidence can avail to authenticate; and in truth we are granting it more indulgence than it can rightly claim, when we concede to it any footing at all upon the ground of rational argumentation. Let Christianity rid itself of the supernatural and then we will think about it." But this language is altogether untenable. Again and again has it been proved that, "in the instance of the canonical documents of Christianity, the connexion of the historic mass with the supernatural, is a case of cohesion, and that it is absolutely indissoluble."*

"Remove from Christianity everything in it which is supernatural and divine, and then the problem which we have to do with is this:-A revolution in human affairs, in the highest degree beneficial in its import, was carried forward upon the arena of the great world, by means of the noble behaviour of men who command our sympathy and admiration, as brave, wise, and good. But this revolution drew the whole of its moral force from a Belief, which-how shall we designate it? -was in part an inexplicable illusion; in part a dream, and in large part a fraud! This, the greatest forward movement

Those who demur to this statement will do well to read that amusing and instructive chapter in "The Eclipse of Faith," which describes "The Paradise of Fools."

See (e.g.,) "The Restoration of Belief," p. 121, et seq. Or Bishop Butler, quoted above, p. 431.