United States or Central African Republic ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
If God had not meant man to know something of his origin differing from the account in Genesis, he would not have given us Darwin and his successors.
Genesis xxvii. 1-29. And while he yet spake with them, Rachel came with her father's sheep: for she kept them. And it came to pass, when Jacob saw Rachel the daughter of Laban his mother's brother, and the sheep of Laban his mother's brother, that Jacob went near, and rolled the stone from the well's mouth, and watered the flock of Laban his mother's brother.
"What young ones?" asked Miss Vilda, exchanging astonished glances with Samantha. "And don't begin at the book o' Genesis 'n' go clean through the Bible, 's you gen'ally do.
He felt his teachers hypocrites; he raised no alarm, "for he was hardly conscious that his anchor had dragged or that he had lost hold" of it forever. At eighteen, he read Darwin and found that if he were right, Genesis was wrong; man had risen, not fallen; if a part was wrong, the whole was.
If so, is it in the direction of greater rudeness or of more ceremonious respect? And again, if so, has not the change, in point of time, been coincident with the genesis and development of woman's "emancipation" and her triumphal entry into the field of "affairs"? Are you really desirous that the change go further?
While the former sets up a natural genesis of the human mind from animal mind as being indisputable and as not being thinkable in any other way, the latter, his greatest admirer, says, “Believing, as I do, that conception is beyond the power of my favourite and clever dog, I am forced to believe that his mind differs generically from my own.” Undoubtedly by “generically” is meant, according to his genus or his genesis.
Such genesis is impossible; whoever dreams of it is a fool, nay, worse than a fool; things of the highest value must have a different origin, an origin of THEIR own in this transitory, seductive, illusory, paltry world, in this turmoil of delusion and cupidity, they cannot have their source.
Aristotle's repeated criticism of his master's theory of ideas is not merely destructive. It formed the starting-point for his own metaphysic. The ideas, he says, simply duplicate the world of existent things. They do not create things or move them; they do not explain genesis or process; they merely co-exist with the ideates. The participation which Plato's later theory postulated is inadequate.
Another objection which is sometimes brought against the use of the Bible is, that considerable portions of it though all true, and important as a part of our great religious charter are not suitable for common and promiscuous reading. My answer is, we do not suppose that any instructor would take all his classes through the whole Bible, from Genesis to Revelation.
One of the most interesting things in the world would be to hear a Protestant Christian, on Protestant grounds, justify his observance of the Sunday instead of the Sabbath, and give reasons for his conduct. "Search the Scriptures." Aye, search from Genesis to Revelations, the Mosaic prescriptions will hold good in spite of all your researches. Instead of justification you will find condemnation.
Word Of The Day