IV

A supposed objection has been raised to this view, based on the vastness

of the universe as we now know it. Whether or not the universe is really

infinite in extent, it is certainly of an extent that is practically

infinite, so far as our powers of observation or of reasoning are

concerned. But this practically infinite universe is not a bit harder to

account for than would be a definitely limited universe, say of the size

of our solar system. If the spectroscope shows that the far distant

parts of the universe contain many of the same elements as are found in

our solar system, we need not be surprised, since all are alike the

work of the same Creator. Nor would this fact that the universe seems to

be composed of similar materials throughout tend in any way to prove

that all these parts of the universe were brought into existence at the

same time, nor yet that our solar system was refashioned out of some of

the common stock of the universe already on hand, as the nebular

hypothesis supposes. For all that we can tell to the contrary, it would

seem probable that the materials of our solar system were called into

existence expressly for the position they are now occupying; and this

seems to be the plain import of the record in Genesis. Of one thing,

however, we can be certain,--these materials must at some time have been

called into existence by methods or ways that are no longer in operation

around us. "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth."

V

Some remarks are necessary here regarding the homogeneousness of matter,

or the idea that the various elements are composed of primordial units

which are themselves alike, mere duplicates of each other. If this

should prove to be really the case, as seems to be quite likely in the

light of the facts given above, would it not be a veritable triumph for

materialism? By no means. On the contrary, I think I can show in a very

few words not only that this homogeneousness of matter is the only

rational view of the composition of the material universe, but also

that it is the only view consistent with Christian Theism and with the

doctrine of Creation.

The theory of the atoms with their inherent and unchangeable properties,

which prevailed during the greater part of the nineteenth century,

naturally led us to look upon these properties as inherent in the things

themselves. This was indeed materialism. This view, however, constantly

impelled us to find out the essential differences between the various

kinds of atoms, so as to "account for" their varying behaviors. And no

matter how far we push such inquiries, this materialistic attitude of

mind will control us so long as we think we are dealing with substances

which are intrinsically different. If the differences are innate or

inherent in the things themselves, we must naturally endeavor to find

out why and how they are different; and no matter how far we go along

this road we are always headed in the direction of stark materialism. On

the other hand, to say that the "properties" of the atoms are not

inherent in themselves, but are imposed on them by an external

ceaselessly acting power, the will of the Creator, would be in full

accord with Biblical theism; and then we might naturally say that the

ultimate particles of which matter is composed may well be regarded as

alike and mere duplicates of one another. And this, as we have seen, is

just what modern discoveries in radioactivity are teaching us regarding

the make-up of the substances that we call matter.

But an objection at once arises. How can these primordial units of which

matter is composed behave so differently, if they are really alike, mere

duplicates of one another?

We may not as yet be able to tell just why and how; but we have in the

cells of which all plants and animals are composed an analogy which is

almost perfect, if not quite.

These component units of organic matter, the individual cells, as will

be explained later, seem physically and even chemically mere duplicates

of one another. They may not all be of the same size; but they are all

composed of protoplasm, and the protoplasm of plants cannot be

distinguished from that of animals by any physical or chemical tests

known to modern science. The protoplasm in the brain of a bird is the

same as that in its toes; and no metaphysical subtilties about heredity

have ever explained why the one does a different work from the other.

The plain fact is that different cells, composed of identical protoplasm

and structurally alike, _act very differently_; and there is no

scientific reason based on innate properties that gives us even a

glimmer of a reason why. We have searched a long time along this road;

but there is no prospect of finding an explanation; we are merely

running up a _cul-de-sac_ with no view beyond. From the materialistic

point of view, nobody knows why protoplasm acts as it does, _least_ _of

all, why some masses of protoplasm act one way, and exact duplicates act

differently_. But if, on the other hand, we look beyond the facts and

methods of physics and chemistry, and even beyond the most plausible

theories of genetics, we can readily explain this remarkable action of

the cells as the result of the will of an ever acting, omniscient,

almighty God. Certainly nothing else is adequate to explain the behavior

of living cells.

In a very similar way we must reason regarding the ultimate units of

matter, call them what we will, electrons, corpuscles, or units of

electricity. If these are mere duplicates of each other, as science now

teaches, they not only indicate by this identity that they are

"manufactured articles," as was long ago pointed out of the atoms and

molecules, but they also indicate with all the force of a demonstration

that nothing but an ever present omniscient Intelligence _could keep

these duplicates from always acting the same_ under similar external

forces. If gold and carbon, iron and oxygen are at bottom composed of

particles that are mere duplicates of each other, as seems to be the

case, how can these elements and the six dozen or more others maintain

their individuality throughout nature as we know they do, even in the

far distant stars, except by the sleepless care of an Intelligence whose

Word is as effective in one part of the universe as in another, and to

whose Word these particles of matter can show no inertia and no

disobedience, because they have no powers or properties except what He

has imparted? This doctrine of the homogeneousness of matter is the

antithesis of materialism. It is consistent only with the doctrine of an

almighty and ever present God, and like many other facts which have been

developed by modern scientific discoveries, it confirms the other primal

doctrine of a literal Creation "_in the beginning_."