"What does not fade? The tower that long had stood

The crush of thunder, and the warring winds,

Shook by the slow but sure destroyer Time,

Now hangs in doubtful ruins o'er its base;

And flinty pyramids and walls of brass

Descend; the Babylonian spires are sunk;

Achaia, Rome, and Egypt moulder down.

Time shakes the stable tyranny of thrones;

And tottering empires rush by their own weight.

This huge rotundity we tread grows old,

And all those worlds that roll around the sun.

The sun himself shall die, and ancient night

Again involve the desolate abyss."--_Akenside._

If we turn now our thoughts away from man's dissolution, and think how

speedily chemical power will raise nature out of her grave, in renovated

and increased beauty, this universal tendency to decay puts on the aspect

of a glorious transformation. We connect the changes around us with those

which have taken place in the great bodies of the universe; we see them

all to be but parts of a far-reaching plan of the Deity, by which the

stability of the world is maintained, and its progressive improvement

secured. When we look forward, fancy kindles at the developments of divine

power, wisdom, and benevolence which will in this manner be made in the

round of eternal ages. We see that what our ignorance had mistaken for a

defect in nature is, in fact, a great conservative principle of the

universe, which Newton did not discover because geology had not yet

unfolded her record.

Such are the developments of the divine character and plans unfolded to us

by geology. Compare them now with the views which have hitherto

prevailed. The common opinion has been, and still, indeed, is, that about

six thousand years ago this earth, and, in fact, the whole material

universe, were spoken into existence in a moment of time; and that, in a

few thousand more, they will, by a similar fiat, be swept from existence,

and be no more. On the other hand, geology places the time when the matter

of the universe was created out of nothing at an epoch indefinitely but

immensely remote. Since that epoch, this matter has passed through a

multitude of changes, and been the seat of numerous systems of organic

life, unlike one another, yet all linked together into one great system by

a most perfect unity; each minor system being most beautifully adapted to

its place in the great chain, and yet each successive link becoming more

and more perfect. Nor does geology admit that any evidence exists of the

future annihilation of the material universe; but rather of other changes,

by which new and brighter displays of divine wisdom and benevolence shall

be brought out, it may be in endless succession. Geology is not, indeed,

insensible to the displays of the divine character which are exhibited on

the present theatre of the world. Indeed, she distinctly recognizes the

act which is now passing as the most perfect of all. Yet this scene of the

great drama she regards as only one of the units of a similar series of

changes that have gone by or will hereafter come; the chain stretching so

far into the eternity that is past and the eternity that is to come, that

the extremities are lost to mortal vision.

Do any shrink back from these immense conclusions, because they so much

surpass the views they have been accustomed to entertain respecting the

beginning and the end of the material universe? But why should they be

unwilling to have geology liberalize their minds as much in respect to

duration as astronomy has done in respect to space? Perhaps it is a

lingering fear that the geological views conflict with revelation. Such

fears formerly kept back many from giving up their souls to the noble

truths of astronomy. But they learnt, at length, that astronomy merely

illustrates, and does not oppose, revelation. It showed men how to

understand certain passages of sacred writ respecting the earth and

heavenly bodies which they had before misinterpreted. Just so is it with

geology. There is no collision between its statements and revelation. It

only enables us more correctly to interpret some portions of the Bible;

and then, when we have admitted the new interpretation, it brings a flood

of light upon the plans and attributes of Jehovah. Geology, therefore,

should be viewed, as it really is, the auxiliary both of natural and

revealed religion. And when its religious relations are fully understood,

theology, I doubt not, will be as anxious to cultivate its alliance as she

has been fearful of it in days past.

"Shall it any longer be said," remarks Dr. Buckland, "that a science which

unfolds such abundant evidence of the being and attributes of God, can

reasonably be viewed in any other light than as the efficient auxiliary

and handmaid of religion? Some few there still may be whom timidity, or

prejudice, or want of opportunity, allow not to examine its evidence; who

are alarmed by the novelty, or surprised by the magnitude and extent, of

the views which geology forces on their attention; and who would rather

have kept closed the volume of witness which has been sealed up for ages

beneath the surface of the earth than to impose on the student in natural

theology the duty of studying its contents--a duty in which, for lack of

experience, they may anticipate a hazardous or laborious task, but which,

by those engaged in it, is found to be a rational, and righteous, and

delightful exercise of the highest faculties in multiplying the evidence

of the existence, and attributes, and providence of God. The alarm,

however, which was excited by the novelty of its first discoveries, has

well nigh passed away; and those to whom it has been permitted to be the

humble instruments of their promulgation, and who have steadily

persevered, under the firm conviction that 'truth can never be opposed to

truth,' and that the works of God, when rightly understood, and viewed in

their true relations, and from a right position, would at length be found

to be in perfect accordance with his word, are now receiving their high

reward in finding difficulties vanish, objections gradually withdrawn, and

in seeing the evidences of geology admitted into the list of witnesses to

the truth of the great fundamental doctrines of theology."--_Bridgewater

Treatise_, vol. i. p. 593.

Such, then, in conclusion of the subject, is the religion of geology. It

has been described as a region divided between the barren mountains of

scepticism and the putrid fens and quagmires of infidelity and atheism;

producing only a gloomy and a poisonous vegetation; covered with fogs, and

swept over by pestilential blasts. But this report was made by those who

saw it at a distance. We have found it to be a land abounding in rich

landscapes, warmed by a bright sun, blest with a balmy atmosphere, covered

by noble forests and sweet flowers, with fruits savory and healthful. We

have ascended its lofty mountains, and there have we been greeted with

prospects of surpassing loveliness and overwhelming sublimity. In short,

nowhere in the whole world of science do we find regions where more of the

Deity is seen in his works. To him whose heart is warmed by true piety,

and whose mind has broken the narrow shell of prejudice, and can grasp

noble thoughts, these are delightful fields through which to wander. More

and more they must become the favorite haunts of such hearts and such

minds. For there do views open upon the soul, respecting the character and

plans of the Deity, as large and refreshing as those which astronomy

presents. Nay, in their practical bearing, these views are far more

important. Mechanical philosophy introduces an unbending and unvarying law

between the Creator and his works; but geology unveils his providential

hand, cutting asunder that law at intervals, and planting the seeds of a

new economy upon a renovated world. We thus seem to be brought into near

communion with the infinite mind. We are prepared to listen to his voice

when it speaks in revelation. We recognize his guiding and sustaining

agency at every step of our pilgrimage. And we await in confident hope and

joyful anticipation those sublime manifestations of his character and

plans, and those higher enjoyments which will greet the pure soul in the

round of eternal ages.

LECTURE XIV.

SCIENTIFIC TRUTH, RIGHTLY UNDERSTOOD, IS RELIGIOUS TRUTH.

The connection between science and religion has ever been a subject of

deep interest to enlightened and reflecting minds. Too often, however, up

to the present time, has the theologian, on the one hand, looked with

jealousy upon science, fearful that its influence was hurtful to the cause

of true religion; while, on the other hand, the philosopher, in the pride

of a sceptical spirit, has scorned an alliance between science and

theology, and even fancied many a discrepancy. Both these opinions are

erroneous; and disastrously have they operated, as well upon science as

upon religion. The position which I take, and which I shall endeavor to

maintain, is, that _scientific truth, rightly understood, is religious

truth_.

The proposition may be misunderstood at its first announcement, but I

hope, ere its examination be finished, to satisfy you that it is true; and

if so, that it ought to reconcile religion to science, and science to

religion.

In arriving at correct conclusions concerning this statement, much will

depend on the meaning which we attach to the phrase _religious truth_.

Religion is properly defined to be piety towards God. This piety implies

two things: first, a correct knowledge of God; and secondly, the exercise

of proper affections in view of that knowledge. The former constitutes the

theoretic part of religion, and is investigated solely by the

understanding. The latter constitutes the practical part of religion, and

depends much upon the will, the heart, or the moral powers of man. All

truth, therefore, which illustrates the divine character or government, or

which tends to produce right affections towards God, is properly

denominated religious truth. If, then, I can show that all scientific

truth, rightly understood, has one or both of these effects, it will

follow that it is strictly religious truth.

Scientific truth is but another name for the laws of nature. And a law of

nature is merely the uniform mode in which the Deity operates in the

created universe. It follows, then, that science is only a history of the

divine operations in matter and mind.

In order to avoid mistake, we must make a distinction between the

principles of science, and the application of those principles to the

useful arts of life. The principles themselves are an illustration of the

divine wisdom and benevolence, but their application to the arts

illustrates the ingenuity and wisdom of man. At the most, therefore, the

latter only indirectly and remotely exhibits the character of the Deity,

while the former directly shows forth his perfections.

I now proceed to establish my general proposition, by showing, in the

first place, that _all scientific truth is adapted to prove the existence

or to illustrate the perfections of the Deity_.

After all that has been written on the subject of natural theology, by

such men as Newintyt, Ray, Derham, Wollaston, Clarke, Butler, Tucker,

Paley, Chalmers, Crombie, Brown, Brougham, Harris, M'Cosh, and the authors

of the Bridgewater Treatises, I need not surely go into details to prove

that science in general is a great storehouse of facts to illustrate the

divine perfections and government. It is, indeed, a vast repository, from

which materials have been drawn on which to build the argument for the

divine existence and character. Efforts have been made, it is true, in

modern times, to show that the whole argument from design is inconclusive.

It is said, that though the operations of nature seem to show design and

contrivance, they need no higher powers than those that exist in nature

itself. They do not prove the existence of an independent personal agent,

separate from the material world. Animals, and even plants, possess an

inherent power of adapting themselves to circumstances; and may not a

higher exercise of this same power explain all the operations of nature

without any other Deity?

This argument appears to me to be utterly set aside by the following

considerations: In the first place, there is no power inherent in

vegetable or animal natures which can properly be called the power of

contrivance and design, except so far as it exists in their minds. All

other examples show merely the operation of impulse, or instinct, and will

not at all explain that wide-reaching contrivance and design which cause

all the operations of nature to conspire to certain great results, and to

constitute one, and only one, great system. In the second place, the

operations of intellect furnish us with the only examples in nature of

that kind of contrivance and design which must have arranged and adapted

the parts of the universe. But in the third place, no intellect, within

our knowledge, is capacious enough to have contrived and arranged the

universe. Indeed, to the capacity of that mind which could have done this

we can assign no limits, and, therefore, infer it to be infinite. In other

words, we infer the existence of the Deity. In the fourth place, the whole

force of this argument rests upon the supposed uniformity of nature. For

no one imagines that there exists at present, in nature, any power of

contrivance and design sufficient to work a miracle; in other words, to

introduce new races of animals and plants. "Could this uniformity once be

broken up," says an ingenious expositor of this atheistic argument, "could

this rigid order be once infringed for a good and manifest reason, it

would change the whole face of the argument. Could we see the sun stand

still in heaven, that the wicked might be overthrown, then should we be

assured of a personal power with a distinct will, whose agents and

ministers these laws were. Such an event would be a miracle. But if such

events have happened, they are not a part of nature; it is not nature that

tells us of them, and it is only with her that we are at present

concerned."--_President Hopkins, Quarterly Observer_, Oct. 1833, p. 309.

Geology, however, does reveal to us miracles of stupendous, import,

miracles of creation, which infinite power and wisdom alone could have

produced. Hence, if the testimony of that science be admitted, this

reasoning can no longer stand the test of examination, and it must be

acknowledged that the argument for God's existence from design, which has

ever been so satisfactory to every mind not clouded by metaphysics, is

left standing on an immovable foundation.

To return to the point from which we started: it is not necessary, I say,

to go into a detailed examination of each particular science, and show how

its principles prove and illustrate the being and attributes of the Deity,

for the work has already been done more ably and thoroughly than I can do

it, and admitted by all, save the few who reject the argument from design

altogether. There are a few sciences, however, which have been hitherto

chiefly passed by, because they were not supposed capable of throwing any

light of consequence upon theology. Let us see whether these sciences are

as barren of religious interest as has been supposed.

Geology is a branch of knowledge, which, a few years ago, would have been

at once selected as not only destitute of any important religious

applications, but as of a positively injurious tendency; and even now,

such is the feeling probably of a majority of the religious world. True,

it touches religion, natural and revealed, at many points; but so novel

and startling are its conclusions, that they are thought to unsettle more

minds than they confirm. They fall in with many of the views of

scepticism, and especially confirm its doubts concerning the age of the

world, and compel the religious man to give up long-cherished opinions

upon this point, and on other collateral subjects. But we have gone into a

careful examination of the religious applications of this science, and

have we not found it most fertile in its illustrations both of natural and

revealed religion? Let us just recapitulate the conclusions at which we

have arrived.

In the first place, geology furnishes important illustrations of revealed

religion. It confirms the statement that the present continents of our

globe were once, and for an indefinite time, beneath the ocean, and that

they were subsequently lifted above the waters by internal agencies. It

agrees with revelation in making water and heat the two great agents of

geological change upon and within the earth, and that the work of

creation, after the production of matter, was progressive. It shows us

equally with revelation, that the existing races of animals and plants on

the globe were created at a comparatively recent epoch, and that man

commenced his existence not more than six thousand years ago. It shows us,

also, that the earth contains within itself the volcanic agency necessary

for its future destruction by combustion, as described in the Bible.

But, perhaps, the most important illustration of revealed truth, which

geology affords, is the light which it casts upon certain passages of the

Bible relating to the creation. As those texts which represent the earth

as immovable, and the heavenly bodies as moving diurnally around it, were

not rightly understood, until astronomy had discovered the true theory of

the solar system, so those passages which relate to the period of the

creation of the universe, the introduction of death into the world, and

the extent and operation of the deluge, were misinterpreted till geology

disclosed their true meaning. It is still customary, indeed, to speak of

geology and revelation as in collision with each other on these subjects;

but this is a false view of the case. Revelation is illustrated, not

opposed, by geology. Who thinks, at this day, of any discrepancy between

astronomy and revelation? And yet, two hundred years ago, the evidence of

such discrepancy was far more striking than any which can now be offered

to show geology at variance with the Scriptures. We ought, therefore, to

look upon that science as illustrating, instead of opposing, the

Scriptures.

Having once admitted the conclusions of geology as to the great age of the

world, and a flood of light is shed upon some of the most difficult points

both of natural and revealed religion. It shows the occurrence of numerous

changes on the globe which nothing but the power of God could have

produced, and which in fact were most striking and stupendous miracles.

Hence the arguments which have so long been employed to show that the

world is eternal are rendered nugatory; for if we can point to epochs when

entire races of animals and plants began to exist on the globe, we prove

the agency of a Deity quite as strikingly as if we could show the moment

when the matter of the world was summoned into existence out of nothing.

In the same manner, also, we silence the argument against the giving of a

revelation from heaven, as well as the miracles by which it is

substantiated, on the ground that we have no example of a special

interference with the established course of nature. Here we have

interpositions long anterior to man's existence, as well as by his

creation, which take away all improbability from those which are implied

in a revelation. We hence likewise establish the doctrine of a special

providence over the world--a doctrine proved with great difficulty by any

other reasoning of natural theology.

Still more abundant is the evidence derived from geology of the divine

benevolence. And this evidence comes mostly from the operations and final

effect of the most desolating agencies, heretofore regarded as a proof of

malevolence, or, at least, of vindictive justice; and we may reasonably

infer, that could we look through the whole system of divine government,

we should find that all evil is only a necessary means of the greatest

good.

No one can examine existing nature without being convinced that all its

parts and operations belong to one great system. Geology makes other

economies of wide extent to pass before us, opening a vista indefinitely

backward into the hoary past; and it is gratifying to witness that same

unity of design pervading all preceding periods of the world's history,

linking the whole into one mighty scheme, worthy its infinite Contriver.

How much, also, does this science enlarge our conceptions of the plans and

operations of Jehovah! We had been accustomed to limit our views of the

creative agency of God to the few thousand years of man's existence, and

to anticipate the destruction of the material universe in a few thousand

years more. But geology makes the period of man's existence on the globe

only one short link of a chain of revolutions which preceded his

existence, and which reaches forward immeasurably far into the future. We

see the same matter in the hands of infinite wisdom, and by means of the

great conservative principle of chemical change, passing through a

multitude of stupendous revolutions, sustaining countless and varied forms

of organic life, and presenting an almost illimitable panorama of the

plans of an infinite God.

If such is the fruit which geology pours into the lap of religion, how

misunderstood have been its principles! In many a mind there is still an

anxious fear lest its discoveries should prove unfavorable to religion;

and they would feel greatly relieved could they only be assured that no

influence injurious to piety would emanate from that science. But we can

give them far more than this assurance. We can draw from this science more

to illustrate and confirm religion than from any other; and we believe

that the history of the past justifies the general conclusion, that those

sciences whose early developments excited most apprehensions of a

collision with religion, have ultimately furnished the most abundant

illustrations of its principles.

Another science regarded as barren of religious applications, and even as

sometimes positively injurious, is mathematics. Its principles are,

indeed, of so abstruse a nature, that it is not easy to frame out of them

a religious argument that is capable of popular illustration. But, in

fact, mathematical laws form the basis of nearly all the operations of

nature. They constitute, as it were, the very framework of the material

world. When we look up to the heavenly bodies, we see them directed and

controlled, along with the earth, by those laws, which vary not, by an

iota, from century to century. The infinity of changes, which are going on

in the constitution of bodies upon and within the earth, chemistry

reduces to mathematical laws. So far as organic operations depend upon

chemical changes,--and this is very far,--mathematics is the controlling

power. I will not say, that life and intellect are in a strict sense under

the guidance of mathematics; and yet I doubt not that their operations are

limited and controlled by its principles. Confident am I that atmospheric

changes, apparently quite as anomalous and irregular as the movements of

the vital and intellectual principles, rest on mathematics as certainly as

do the revolutions of the heavenly bodies.

It seems, then, that this science forms the very foundation of all

arguments for Theism, from the arrangements and operations of the material

universe. We do, indeed, neglect the foundation, and point only to the

superstructure, when we state these arguments. But suppose mathematical

laws to be at once struck from existence, and what a hideous chaos would

the universe present! What then would become of the marks of design and

unity in nature, and of the Theist's argument for the being of a God?

The Religion of Geology and Its Connected Sciences · 第 36 / 39 段