boldly asserted by the advocates of this theory, that reason is carnal-utterly unsafe and unreliable as a guide to truth; and it should not, therefore, be esteemed a matter of wonder that, by the force of such a conviction, many irrational and even absurd conclusions have been entertained.

The principle of Divine Action as represented in the popular teachings, is apparently analogous to that on which an earthly mechanic would proceed to erect a building of wood or stone. It is supposed that Deity, in the construction of the Universe, acted as a personal and sentient being, possessed of a free and uncontrolled will; and that, in the beginning, by a special application of omnipotent power, He called forth the glorious forms of light and life from the dark bosom of Chaos. But there are some difficulties that arise in taking this view of the subject, which are worthy of a candid consideration. If God be, strictly and literally, a personal being, corresponding in figure and outline with the human form, and if He created the fabric of material Nature as a special act and by the exercise of his own free will, then the inquiry arises, what special incitement could have produced the desire at any particular point of time more than another, to create the revolving worlds and people them with living forms? It should be noticed that Deity had already lived an eternity before the act of creation is supposed to have commenced. During this inconceivable period, was there no action on the part of God?-did He slumber in the depths of surrounding darkness ?-did He then have no desire to create and fashion the beautiful forms that were subsequently ushered into being ?—and was He contented to remain in solitude and inaction while ages on ages rolled away?

These inquiries must be answered in the negative. The truth evidently is, that the same power, will, and design, which are manifested in the work of creation, must have existed eternally in the bosom of the Divine Mind, being interwoven as inherent qualities in his unchangeable nature; and hence there could be no particular time selected in the whole course of eternity, at which any special desire could have been incited in the mind of Deity that did not forever exist. Then if the desire to create the Universe was, as it must have been, ever existent in the mind of the Divine Being-to Him eternity being only one continual present the act of creation itself must have proceeded eternally from the force of this inherent desire. To suppose that the desire or will to create was incited at some special and appointed time which might be termed the beginning, would be to suppose that the real, indwelling tendencies of the Supreme Mind were undeveloped in all previous ages; or to suppose that this desire eternally existed, but that the work of creation did not proceed from its action, is to admit that the desire itself was without a result, and therefore aimless and vain,—in either of which cases the supposition would be contrary to the clear and obvious deductions of reason.

But it will be said that the Deity is possessed of a free will, and He could therefore commence the act of creation at precisely that time which He should voluntarily choose for this purpose. If this be true then the query arises, how came the will to act at the time chosen? Even on the supposition that the Divine will is perfectly free, so far as it can be conceived to be so, it would still need the presence of some motive in order to be put in exercise. No intelligent and rational being will act without a motive to act; and there is accordingly no rea

son to suppose that the will of God could have been put in operation, except there was some impelling power by which it was moved, or some attractive end toward which it was drawn forth. It may be answered that the motive by which the will to create was produced, was the object to be attained in creation; and this statement is true,—for if the Deity as an intelligent Being is supposed to act at all, the action can only be induced by the view of producing a certain result. But here arises the real difficulty in the case. As we have seen, no will can be so free in an intelligent being as to act without an object; and if this object in the view of the Divine Mind was the result to be accomplished in creation, as it appears reasonable to suppose, then this object being continually pres-ent within the range of the Divine perceptions, must have existed both as a motive power and as an end to be attained, throughout all past eternity; so that in this case the will of God to create, in order to correspond with the object toward which it was directed, could not have been put in operation at any particular period, but must have been exercised alike in all time. In order to maintain an opposite opinion, it would be necessary to assume that the grand object to be secured in creation, was not presented as a motive to the mind of Deity until an inconceivable number of ages had passed away, which assumption would amount to the irrational hypothesis that the great, and, as far as can be known, the only labor of God was not comprehended in the primitive and eternal design.

The real principle of Divine Action as manifested in the process of creation, seems to turn chiefly on this point of inquiry whether Deity is really a personal, sentient, and self

willing being in the same sense that man is such, only infinitized to all human conception. If this inquiry be answered in the affirmative, then it might be made to appear that God has been eternally engaged as a mechanic in molding the elements of Chaos into a harmonious and perfect structure; but if a negative answer is to be returned, then it is evident that some different principle must be involved in the creation of material forms. It is well known that the mass of theological teachers will be moved to defend the affirmative side of this question. The prevailing opinion among this class has been that God is simply a man made infinite, possessing the same general form, endowed with the attribute of free-will, and exercising his power in any manner, or toward any end, which may be in accordance with his desire; and indeed so far has this conception been carried in the minds of some philosophers, that Deity has been mentally endowed with all the parts and organs that belong to the human structure, including hands, feet, lungs, heart, &c. While, according to the catechism of some sects, God is a spirit possessed of neither body nor parts, He is at the same time addressed and conceived of as a personal being, who is capable of acting by the same impulses and desires that move the human heart, and so omnipotent has he appeared in the exercise of his individual sovereignty, that he has been quite commonly represented as creating the universe out of absolute nothing.

In sustaining the hypothesis that God is possessed of a distinct personality corresponding with the human body, the prominent argument employed is that man, as an ultimate production, must have been formed in the likeness of the Creator-that the chief design of God in creation was to reproduce Himself

in a finite form, in accordance with the expression of the Primitive Record, "Let us make man in our own image," and that, therefore, it should be inferred that a true representative of the Divine structure may be seen in the human constitution. It must be conceded that there is much external plausibility in this reasoning; and to minds revolving in the sphere of signs and symbols, the conception herein presented will naturally appear to be the true reality. If Deity be regarded as a Creator in correspondence with the prevailing philosophy, who, from an impulse of love and wisdom, molds the plastic elements of chaos to suit his will, it might be supposed that he would form the highest and most perfect work of his Universe in the express image of his own person; or, again, if He be regarded as a Father, according to the prevalent theological conception, then it might be imagined that, by virtue of the established laws of reproduction, the divine likeness would be im-. pressed upon the child; and in either case it would scem evident that Deity is an infinite Man, presenting the same general outlines as those of 'the human form, and carrying on the process of creation on a similar principle to that on which an earthly architect or mechanic would construct a building.

There are, however, some difficulties that seem to oppose this view of the subject; and these relate chiefly to the special or personal acts and movements which, by inference, are herein attributed to the Divine Being. If, for instance, the Deity is to be considered as a person possessed of the power of volition, and having a body corresponding with the human form, then we are justified in presuming that he would manifest the power of voluntary motion, making use of the several members of his vast organism in molding and governing external forms, and