I cannot regard these religions as mere combinations of superstitions. Doubtless there is in them much superstition, but to the superstition are joined many elements which are truly religious. * * * But, as far as I know, there is not in any one of these heathen religions a conception of divine love as moral."

It seems to me that man can be evolved only so high in nature without taking on Christ. The kingdom of Christ is not of this world, it is something outside of nature,

THE OBJECT OF EVOLUTION.

We come now to consider the problem of evolution and its object. I do not remember that I ever read of what the general opinion is on this great problem. Neither do I remember of having read that anyone else has ever expressed their opinion as to what the divine object is with anything like definiteness. These questions, however, must have often arisen in the minds of many earnest inquirers, and I think it well to give my opinion here, even though that opinion may be rather wide of the mark, or even if my theory should conflict with what may have been expressed by some one else.

What is the divine object in evolution, if we admit that the theory of evolution is a reality as it seems to be? What were we all created for? What object could there be in our first descending from God into Nature, and then growing back to God again? and What is our destiny and the uses of our life?

We cannot consider for a moment that the evolution of life in all its variations, as we find it all over the world and throughout all nature, is for no purpose. We cannot consider that God has made the universe and all that it contains for the purpose of mere pleasure or pastime. Neither. can we accept the atheistic theory that all the life, and beauty, the power, and the sublime harmony of the universe is the result of mere blind chance, having no intelligent design behind it all and working toward some definite end.

Mr. Spencer says: "And then the consciousness itself-what is it during the time it continues? And what becomes of it when it ends? We can only infer that it is a specialized and individualized form of the Infinite and Eternal Energy which transcends both our knowledge and our imagination; and that at death its elements lapse into the Infinite and Eternal Energy whence they were derived."

This pantheistic idea of Mr. Spencer's is also entertained by a great many people, but it must be given up. The very idea argues that there is no God; and we cannot well imagine an orderly universe in which there is no God. If the seven spirits of God were merely the elements of blind force, if the phenomena of nature were the result of mere chance, then we might agree that "Life is the sum total of the functions which resist death."

No, there seems to be design on every hand. Life is all around us, and blind force cannot produce life. Blind force could not produce a universe, fill it with luxurious life, power, and then keep that universe in harmonious working order throughout all the ages. Man is an intelligent being, and there must be an intelligent source in nature from which he may draw his wisdom and thus make it an attribute of himself. Man is an epitome of the universe; and, therefore, those things which are inherent in man are also inherent in the universe; if not, then man would be superior to his Maker, which is impossible. In other words, the thing created cannot be superior to its creator. Man was made in the image of God; and, therefore, the attributes of man are also the attributes of God. Man has not yet evolved high enough to become the exact image of God; he must become perfect in every particular, even as Christ was perfect, before he can become "The express image of His Person."

Mr. O. A. Curtis has this to say: "Again we come to that great principle of personal expression. When we urge this principle as a law inherent in the divine personal life it may look at first as if we yere yielding a tribute, if not a full assent, to the pantheistic idea of the necessary development of Deity. But we are yielding no tribute whatever. According to our view, no manifestation unfolds in any way the individuality of God. Nor is any expression necessary to achieve, or to develope, the personality of God. Already, God is a Being absolutely perfect in both individuality and personality. The expression is purely personal. It is the normal activity, you might almost say the vocation, of personality. Personality cannot be idle, it must be doing something, it wants 'to get out under the sky.' This is a totally different notion from that involved in pantheism, different practically as well as theoretically. I will, however, admit this much: Were there only one person in the God-head, this principle of expression would be entangled with a need of personal

fellowship; and the solitary God would, in his awful loneliness, be driven to create persons to satisfy this social need; for it is simply inconceivable that any self-conscious being could live eternally alone. Even this would not lead (necessarily) to pantheism, but it would make the universe of created persons so fundamentally necessary to complete God's life that a most unwholesome sentimentalism would be the outcome in theology. But the doctrine of the Trinity saves us from the sentimental entanglement. .Moral persons are created by the triune God of the Christian faith under the motive of beneficence united with the principle of personal self-expression.

"The case as to the expression is, however, still clearer when we begin to consider the moral government; for the moral government deals with finite persons after they have been created; and there can be no question but that God must deal with them according to the law of his own inner life, and not according to an arbitrary plan prepared for the occasion. God must so act toward moral creatures as to express truly what he is in himself. God could not create even a wake-robin as a mere whim, much less could he be arbitrary in matters of moral destiny. There are to-day writers who hold (if I understand them) that the moral law was made by the will of God on purpose to govern moral persons. Such a view is entirely beyond my credence. The moral law is eternal from its base to its summit, from the basal plan of holiness to the crowning experience of moral love. There would have been the moral law, precisely the same, too, had the universe of things and persons never been willed into existence. But this eternal, this unchangeable law does find a new expression in the moral government of God. Indeed, the moral government is nothing other than the moral law itself now related, in a scheme of perfect economy, to all created moral persons. It is the holiness of God made active in actual administration."

If we accept the doctrine of reincarnation as being true; if we believe that man must come back to earth and be born again and again until he has become perfected; then if man is made in the image of God, then this faculty or quality of reincarnating must be an attribute of God (especially is this true of Christ), as well as of man.

In this work I have advanced the theory that Christ is the Lord

of this solar system; that "the worlds (the planets) were made for Him and by Him." He is the Universal Spirit, so far as our solar system is concerned. And while on earth he was the personification of the "Incarnating Ego," which is in all men; so that in Him we are all gathered together in one, "till we all come in the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ." "For by Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible," "Whom He (God) hath appointed heir of all things, by whom, also He made the worlds."

It is claimed by scientific men that at some remote period our sun will be burned out, and become dead, and that our solar system will then go to decay and resolve again into chaos. It will thus be seen that all things material must have an end, whether it be vegetable, or animals, or men, or worlds, or suns, or systems, or whatever may be.

Now it seems very clear to me that the great Apostle Paul looked forward to the time when our system would become old and go to decay, as we have already seen in the first chapter of Hebrews wherein he says:

"But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever, a scepter of righteousness, is the scepter of they kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore, God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. And, thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thy hands. They shall perish, but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment; and as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed; but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail."

It is clearly seen here that the universe is considered as a vesture, and that when it becomes "old as doth a garment," or when the sun has become burned out and the system is practically dead, then the spirit will forsake the old worn out system, and reincarnate in another, or as he says, "they shall be changed." This seems to me to be much the same as when our body becomes old and worn out, we "shuffle off this mortal coil" and after a time we take another body through reincarnation just the same as the spirit of the Universal Christ shall reincarnate in a new

solar system. It must be understood here that the body is considered as the raiment of the man, just the same as the solar system is considered as the raiment of the Universal Christ.

Perhaps some one will ask, What has this got to do with evolution? To which I reply, Everything. For as the man must grow up from the infant, so, too, the solar system must be evolved out of chaos, and pass through all the geological and other processes of development, just as our solar system has passed, and must pass through before it can come to perfection. There are a great many persons, some of them theologians, who insist that man is a free moral agent, and yet they admit that if there was no such thing as predestination, then God could have no foreknowledge of contingent events. In this work I have held that our destiny is much a matter of fate, or the working of a natural law. Still, I will admit that man is apparently free to act in many things and in many ways. Some will ask, What is the use for us to try, then, if it is all a matter of fate? To this I reply, A faculty is cultivated only by use; and if we do not try, if we do not use our faculties, then we cannot cultivate them. There seems to be a great deal of ambiguity on this important subject, but in addition to what has been stated in former chapters we have space here for only a few short notes.

Mr. Curtis says: "Along the line of prophesy a Scripture argument of great force can be formulated; but the argument which to me is unanswerably convincing is this: If God has no foreknowledge of contingent events, then he not only arranged a vast and complex plan of redemption without knowing that even one moral person would ever be saved; but in carrying out this plan of redemption he actually sent his only Son as Redeemer into the reality of human temptation without knowing that this Son, Jesus Christ, would resist the temptation. To accept this strange, strange doctrine of divine nescience I would need to become a necessitarian, and once a necessitarian, I would not have any need for the doctrine at all. * * I cannot close this discussion without lifting into notice another point, a point which I am anxious to lodge in your hearts and to leave it there. These lost men are outside the new race. Their service of fear belongs to the final universe; but it belongs to the cosmic sweep of the kingdom, and has no place in the kingdom of Christ. They have lost their race. In the most wholesomely rigid thinking, they are

*