temerity to say that Christ and science had nothing in common, which statement, to my mind, was intended to mean that science regards our Lord as an impostor. When scientists such as Darwin, Huxley, and Tyndall, studiously avoid all allusion to our Lord's name and word, and write as though they either affected supreme contempt for, or ignorance of, Him, it is high time that Christian men should understand the position of those who deny their Lord and insultingly ignore His existence.

The Apostle Paul and Darwin.-Some of those who seem desirous of claiming Mr. Darwin as a Christian had better carefully weigh the significance of the following testimonies:-It would be difficult to conceive a more startling contrast. The Apostle Paul says, "It is appointed unto men once to die, and after this the judgment; " that "We must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that every one may receive for the things done in the body according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad;" and again, "I am in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to depart, and be with Christ, which is far better;" and once more, “For we know that if this earthly house of our tabernacle were dissolved we have a building of God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the Heavens." Mr. Darwin says: “I do not believe that any revelation has ever been given concerning a future life. Every man must draw his own conclusions from vague and contradictory probabilities." Surely, if one speaks the truth, the other believes and teaches a lie, and yet such is the false charity, I had almost said the muddled mental condition, of some who call themselves ministers and Christians that they would make Paul and Darwin to have fellowship.

The Faith of Darwinism.-Christian teachers are constantly being reminded of the demands which they make upon the faith and confidence, nay, the credulity of their hearers. Seeing that such confidence and trust is not contrary to reason, no one need affect surprise at these demands.

But this appeal to the exercise of faith is cited in order to discredit confidence in God and child-like trust in a divine revelation. Surely it will not be contended that scientific teachers make no such demands. Is there no room for the exercise of faith in the statement, "That millions of years since our progenitors sported as tadpoles in the luxuriant slime of the green pond, or reclined as a monad amongst the primeval atoms"? I have heard many preachers persuade their hearers to exercise confidence in the Almighty Creator, on the strong ground of stupendous evidences of His being, wisdom, and power, but it never occurred to me that the faith of these believers had such a slender ground for confidence as the descendants of Tadpole.

Where did Cain get his Wife from?—There are numbers of thoughtless persons who suppose this question to be unanswerable, and working-men of the Freethought school never tire of putting it. The reply is very simple. We read in Genesis v. 4, "And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years; and he begat sons and daughters." Now Adam's age when he died was 930, so that he was 130 years old when Seth was born. The birth of Seth was shortly after the murder of Abel by Cain. We have no distinct data as to the age of Adam when Eve was formed, neither do we know how long after the Creation the fall took place. There can be no doubt that Adam's adaptation to, and fitness for, the high position of dominion given him by God (Gen. i. 26-30), was the result of many years of study and training, in which God Himself was the great teacher, educator, and counsellor (Gen. iii. 8). Probably we shall not be far wrong in placing the birth of Cain at the time when Adam was from fifty to sixty years of age. Supposing the murder of Abel to have taken place when Cain was forty years old, this will bring us within twenty years of the date of the birth of Seth. That his birth was followed (and may have been preceded) by other sons and daughters we have

already seen. The rational and Scriptural position is this, that Cain, after an interval of twenty years, took to wife one of his father's daughters. The question of incest is under the circumstances altogether beside the mark. God's law in relation to consanguinity had not at that time either room or place. It is interesting to observe that the thought of marriage to one as yet unborn is not unknown to the statements of Scripture. When Naomi endeavoured to persuade Ruth the Moabitess to return to her home on the ground that as a young widow she might find a home and husband in Moab, she uses this argument, "Should I have an husband and bear sons, would ye tarry for them till they are grown? would ye stay for them from having husbands?" (Ruth i. 12, 13). It will be said, But the history of Cain taking his wife is found in Genesis iv. 13, and you are quoting from the fifth chapter, which is subsequent to the events narrated in chapter four! No, not subsequent in its history, but in the order of statement. It is a common thing in Scripture for one chapter and history to overlap or go back into another. The first and second verses of the fifth chapter give proof of this. This arises from the exceeding brevity of the record, and does not in the least invalidate the accuracy of Scripture testimony.

What does Philosophy say?—I am told that philosophy is prepared to deal truthfully with facts and explain them. I ask, therefore, what explanation can be given to the following facts, which are attested by the experience of thousands of Christian men :—

A man is painfully sensible of his own weakness; e.g., he is the subject of fierce temptation. Tendencies toward evil impel him until he stands bordering upon some terrible fall. In his extremity he falls upon his knees or in upright attitude cries to God. You may see such an one in his chamber with moving lips and suppressed voice in an agony of appeal to that which appears to the sceptic mere empty space. But mark.

the issue. The fierce gusts of passion have subsided, the fires of an inner hell have been subdued; the man stands trembling, but victorious; the marks of the stress of battle are upon him, but he is more than conqueror, for he is becalmed now, and the peace of God which passeth all understanding begins to keep his heart and mind. Will philosophy say, "Oh, this is easily explained. It is simply the reflex influence of the man's action upon his mental organization in regard to what you call prayer"? This is what is said, therefore I quote it, not as a solution of the question, but as an illustration of the superficial reasoning of this so-called philosophy. Applied to circumstances where God is not recognized, human experience has no such testimony to offer, therefore, the pretended explanation fails. As well might modern philosophy affirm that thirtyfour inches is a yard as attempt to explain away the repeated experiences of hundreds of thousands of men of prayer. These have made proof of the fact that "they that wait upon the Lord shall renew (change) their strength, they shall mount up as on the wings of eagles, they shall run and not be weary, they shall walk and not faint." In the words of the quaint Scotch proverb, "Facts are chiels that winna ding."

Counsel to Young Men.-I have often been asked by young Christian men for advice concerning the ministry. It is my deep conviction that the great majority of these should not forsake trade or business to "enter the ministry," as it is usually termed, but that they should abide in the calling they occupy, provided it is what Paul calls "An honest trade for necessary uses" (Titus iii. 14). The world needs a large increase of men who preach intelligently and with power, and who are able to be independent of fee or reward. I know that "the labourer is worthy of his hire," but in the great harvest-field, and especially in these days of abounding wickedness, men are required everywhere who, like the great Apostle, can "labour with their own hands" and earn their own bread. The moral

power of such a ministry is very great. Large numbers of men argue concerning what is termed the "ordinary ministry," "that these men preach because they are paid." I know how untrue in many cases this is. "Successful ministers would as a rule prosper in anything, and probably make large fortunes if they were in business." Their calling is not followed for pay, but for Christ, and truth, and souls. Nevertheless, the most effective way of dealing with such objectors as those I have named is to have a great volunteer army of able, practical, and intelligent preachers.

Can Anything be Done?-I am constantly meeting with devoted men of God burdened in spirit and hindered in their work by financial pressure. They are earnest and devoted servants of Christ, willing to spend and be spent in His service. In some cases, the churches in which they serve are as niggardly as they well can be. How little can our pastor do with, and how little can we "get off" with giving him? appears to be the handwriting found on the 1s. or 2s. 6d. per quarter which the members contribute, not to mention the mongrel threepennypieces which associate with Alexander the coppersmith at the time of the anniversary collections. I wonder whether some of the people who come to hear Christ's servants ever ask themselves the question, "How do these ministers live and pay their way?" "I thought they preached for souls,” said one of these spiritual mendicants to Mr. Spurgeon, who required an able and intelligent preacher for the munificent sum of £60 a year. "So they do,” replied the famous preacher, "but they would need some thousands of souls of your size to keep them from starving." I have been thinking whether it is possible for some of the young ministers to give themselves, partially at least, to business. This would be infinitely preferable to the genteel beggary that demoralizes men, and which saps the independence and manliness of large numbers of those who preach the Gospel.