p. 5 | An Unusual Book

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Apr 16, 1908

An Unusual Book

It is very rarely that we find a book dealing with evolution which we are able to commend to our readers, but one has recently come to hand which is an exception to the rule. While we are unable to agree with the author in all his statements, yet as a whole it is one of the best answers to the evolutionist which we have ever seen. An intelligent idea of the general tenor of the arguments may best be gained from some extracts:—

The man who can give no account of his own existence is a fool; and he who denies a God can give no account of his existence. In the old time men whispered their folly within their own hearts; nowadays they proclaim it on the house-tops, or, to translate the Oriental figure into its Western correlative, they publish it in printed books. But philosophy is not folly, and folly has no right to call itself wisdom. There is a God—that is certain: what then can reason tell us of him? . . . Since reason shuts us up to belief in God, let us have the courage of free thought, and instead of taking refuge in a vague theism, let us acknowledge a real God—not the great “primordial germ,” but the Creator of the heavens and the earth.

In dealing with the evolutionary theory of development from the lower to the higher plane the author says:—

We shall gain nothing by misrepresenting facts, and no fair person will pretend that experience warrants the hypothesis that any race of men, that any individual even, ever advanced in the scale of life save under the constant pressure of favoring circumstances. But while culture will, so far as our experience teaches us, account for an advance, the tendency to degenerate seems universal.

A striking argument, which will appeal to the common mind, is made against the general theory of development which confesses missing links, and appeals to the fossils as a means of bridging over these gaps. This is introduced by a telling paragraph on the “immeasurable epochs”:—

It is significant that naturalists who suppose new species to be originated by evolution “habitually suppose the origination to occur in some region remote from human observation.” These results are supposed to have been produced during “those immeasurable epochs,” “untold millions of years” before “beings endowed with capacity for wide thought” existed on the earth. To which the skeptic [the scientific skeptic, not the theological skeptic] will make answer: First, that there is no proof that this earth has so long existed in a habitable state; it is a mere inference based upon a certain geological theory which is wholly unproved and by no means universally accepted. And, secondly, that as neither the course of nature within known periods, nor the skill of man, has ever produced a species, we may be merely stultifying our minds by dismissing the difficulty to a mythical past about which we may conjecture and romance, but concerning which we know absolutely nothing.

But let us for a moment assume these “untold millions of years,” these “immeasurable epochs” of an “abysmal past,” during which the evolutionary process has been developing. Further, let us concede that the supposed process is so slow that no appreciable change may be looked for within the period of historic time. In fact, let us, for the sake of argument, admit everything assumed by the evolutionist, excepting only the hypothesis of evolution itself, and we can at once subject that hypothesis to a practical test of the simplest kind, which will either establish its truth or demonstrate its falseness.

Suppose our world was visited by a being of intelligence, able to converse with men, but wholly ignorant of an existence like ours, marked by development and decay. Brought face to face with puling infancy, vigorous manhood, and the senile decrepitude of extreme old age, such a being might express incredulous wonder on hearing that these were but successive stages in human life. And he might answer fairly with shrewdness, “If such a statement be true, then there must be individuals in the world of every possible age, from a minute to a hundred years, and manifesting every imaginable degree of growth and decline.” To which the unequivocal reply we should of course be able to offer would put an end to his skepticism.

But suppose we were to make some such answer as this: “True it is that never a moment passes but that some new life enters the world, and some blighted or withered life disappears from it; the processes of ‘generation and growth and decay are all unceasing and constant; but yet we can not satisfy the test you put to us. We can show you large children and small adults, smooth-faced boys and full-bearded men, types of failing manhood and of hale old age, but there are ‘missing links’ which we can not supply. Of some of these we have ‘archeological evidence,’ there are fossil specimens in our museums; and the learned tell us that others no doubt exist and will yet be found; but of living specimens there are none, though all the resources of nature and of science have been appealed to in the effort to produce them.” With such an answer our ephemeral visitor might well return to his celestial home perplexed with grave misgivings respecting our honesty or our intelligence.

And so here. The cases are entirely parallel. If the processes of evolution have been in operation during the infinite aeons of time, and be still at work, “missing links” are out of the question. The naturalist will, of course, be able to point to types of every imaginable stage of development, from the simplest and humblest to the most exquisitely complex and perfect. But the naturalist can do no such thing. . . .

Let us then keep clearly in view, first, that evolution is merely a philosophic theory; second, that it is unproved; third, that it is inadequate; and fourth, that (as will appear more plainly in the sequel) it is unnecessary, except of course with those scientists who cling to any plank that will save them from having to acknowledge God.

These extracts, all taken from one chapter, will indicate the general position held by the author, and will suggest the interesting nature of the contents of the other chapters.

We regret that the author does not accept the days of the first chapter of Genesis in the literal sense of twenty-four hours each, but apart from this we find ourselves in a general way in accord with his views, and believe that his book will be found helpful in meeting many of the arguments of an infidel science. The book can be supplied by this Office.