« PreviousContinue »
tions of the problem of salvation, together with the demands of reason with regard to the means and method by which it may be wronght. Turning now to the Bible, we find that all the inductions of reason are anticipated, and that its demands are fully and transcendently supplied. The nature of the problem is clearly stated, and the history of the work recorded from its inception in the promise at the fall, through the discipline of chosen agents, to the establishment of the ceremonial worship of God on the part of an entire nation, and then through the inission of Christ and the foundation of a spiritual Church on through ages yet to come, to the final salvation of the race—for what is prophecy to man is history to God.
Throughout this history the conditions of the problem, as understood by reason, are strictly satisfied. The plan of salvation comes from God. It is no human speculation. From first to last it is seen to be not so much evolved from the mind of man as forced into that mind by repeated miracles and long-continued discipline. In conforming with its requisitions, therefore, in order to secure its end, the soul has no fear of deception or of failure, but in the darkest hour is comforted with the promises of God, and with brave hope sings: "Truly my soul waiteth upon God; from him cometh my salvation."
But though salvation is of God, it does not violate the free will of man. There is no compulsion. The Bible clearly reveals the way of life, and presents to the soul all possible motives and encouragements to walk therein. It is full of invitations, entreaties, arguments, expostulations, warnings, and threatenings; bnt to those who spurn its gracious offers the Saviour says with pleading, sorrowful reproach, "ye will not come unto me that ye might have life.” God will not force men into Heaven; and so for those who will not enter there, Hell is reserved, and everlasting punishment.
Reason clearly discerns that the plan of salvation must involve the pardon of man's sin, or some provision by which he may escape that righteous penalty which is necessary to the enforcement of God's law; bnt reason is helpless to devise such provision, involving, as it does, not merely the relation of man to God, but the relation of God to all his moral creatures. How necessary then is revelation to assure the soul that such provision is actually made, and that forgiveness is free to all who will accept of it! Such is the atonement of Christ, by which God's just and holy law is satisfied before all the hosts of Heaven, while this earth is made the theatre of mercy to a rebellious race. Ilow rational, yet how transcending reason ! It is the plan of God in its relation to the unknown world of spirits brought down to the apprehension of the human mind.
Again, reason perceives that in order to restore the soul to godlikeness the moral attributes of God must be set before the soul as objects of imitation, and that to this end they must be revealed as applicable to human life and conduct. But the boldest induction would hardly presume that God would take upon himself our nature and appear upon the earth in bodily form, in humble life, that he might reveal the godlikeness of man, and by the power of his example raise the fallen race. Yet God's plan of salvation involved all this; and, once revealed, how rational it is! So that we half believe we could have reached the thought of the divinity of Christ by our induction. Finally, it may be asked: Have we not here in the unity
: of the Bible the strongest evidence of its inspiration ?
On what must any doctrine of inspiration ultimately rest? Not upon theory. Not upon the testimony of “the Fathers," or the Jews, or even an apostle. We may put ourselves where they stood and see with them the evidence of inspiration, but we cannot take their word for it. The evidence of inspiration, if any there be, must lie in the character of the work which is said to be inspired. And that feature in the character of the Bible which lifts it above the productions of human genius is its unity. It is in the unity of any work of art that the critic seeks for the highest evidence of genins, and here we must look for that distinctive evidence that lifts the Bible above the plane of human genius. To the unity of any work it is necessary that the designing mind should see the end from the beginning, so that all parts may be made to conduce toward it. In the Bible the unity of the different parts is so complete that its development from the promise at the fall to the revela
tion of the final restoration of the race is as natural as the growth of a tree from the germ. Everything essential to the complete unfolding of the plan of salvation is taken up and assimilated, while all else is rejected. The whole range of literature, even including that which has been opened by revelation, does not present the materials for a book like the Bible. But it is manifest that no human mind could have created this marvelous unity. The styles of the different parts, together with other points of internal evidence, not to speak of the conclusive testimony from external sources, all prove that these parts were the productions of different minds, under different circumstances, at widely different periods, and with no possible complicity. Is it not, therefore, manifest that this book has been written, and its various parts compacted, under the directing providence of God? It is by the unity and harmonies of nature that we recognize the hand of God in his works. So long as the universe is regarded as the scene of diverse and conflicting agencies, so long polytheism is inevitable. It is only when the order of nature is perceived that science apprehends the notion of the one true God. And, as in the works of God, so in his written word, by its unity to express the divine plan of salvation we recognize the spirit of its divine Author. Was not this the idea of the apostle? It was when his mind was filled with the thought that the Holy Scriptures are able to make the soul wise unto Salvation, that he said "all scripture is given by inspiration of God.”
ARTICLE VI.-ON CEPHIALIZATION.
In presenting to our readers a new word, and a scientific principle yet unrecognized except in the writings of a single author,* we may reasonably be asked for a fuller exposition of the term and of its bearings than is given in our recent paper on “Man's Zoological Position;"+ and, accordingly, we here offer the following thoughts on the subject.
The importance of the head to an animal all understand. It makes the great difference between an animal and a plant. The former may be correctly described as a fore-and-aft structure; the latter, as an up-and-down structure. The former has more or less of will emanating from its headextremity, producing voluntary action ; and an animal is therefore, typically, a forward-moving, or a "go-ahead” being; while a plant simply stands and grows. An animal is cognizant of existences about him, and, however minute or simple, it knows enough to steer clear of obstacles, in its head-forward progress, or to attempt it at least; but a plant is, utterly, a non-percipient, unknowing thing.
The head of an animal is the seat of power. It contains not merely the principal nervous mass, (the brain, in the higher tribes, and a ganglion or mass corresponding to a brain, in the lower,) but also the various orgáns of the senses, as of sight, hearing, smell, taste, and also the mouth with its parts or appliances.
* Report, by James D. Dana, on Crustacea, (being one of the Reports of the Exploring Expedition under Captain Wilkes), 1853, p. 1395.-American Journal of Science, 2nd series, Vol. XXII, p. 14, 1856; Vol. XXV, p. 213, 1858; Vol. XXXV, p. 65, Jan. 1863; Vol. XXXVI, p. 1, July, 1863.
+ This volume, p. 282.
† Some kinds of animals, as Polyps, are fixed, like plants. But these are not true representations of the animal idea or type. They are animals in having each a mouth and a stomach, muscles and sensation ; but they are given up to a vegetative style of growth. Animal life exists in these species under the forms of the vegetable type, and not that of the animal.
The anterior portion of the structure properly includes all of the body that is devoted to the special service of the head. In a Crab, it comprises not only the organs of the senses and a pair of jaws, but also, following these, five pairs of jointed organs called maxillæ and maxilla-feet, (a little like short feet in structure), that cover the mouth and serve to put into it the food; and in an Insect, it comprises two pairs of such marillæ, besides the pair of jaws.
The posterior portion of the body stands in direct opposition to the anterior. The kind of opposition may be partly understood from the structure of a plant, in which there is an analogous oppositeness in its extremities—the root end tending downward, whatever obstacles it may encounter, the leaf-end as strongly in the opposite direction ; it being remembered that in an animal the opposite extremities are those of a foreand-aft structure.
The functions of the posterior portion are, first, digestion, which is performed by the various viscera contained within this part of the structure, and is the means of supplying the material for flesh and bone, and involves arrangements for the removal of the refuse material of the food, etc.; and secondly, locomotion, the function of the legs in most animals, of legs and wings in birds and insects, of fins in fishes.
Thus the anterior and posterior portions of the system have their diverse duties. It is obvious, that any animal, as an oyster, for example, whose body is almost wholly a visceral or gastric mass, and which, therefore, has its posterior portion very large, and its anterior very small, must be of very low grade. This much of the principle of cephalization requires no depth of philosophy to comprehend or apply.
An important part of this posterior extremity, in many animals, is the tail, which, in Vertebrate species, is not merely a posterior elongation of the body, but also of the bony structure of the body; for the tail, however flexible, has a series of bones running the greater part of its length, and this series of bones is a direct continuation of that which makes up back-bone of the animal. It may be only a switch for switching off insects. But in whales and fishes, this part of the body