Now, what a curious picture of a perverse and crooked mind does such a sentence exhibit! Divine Revelation can "_have no influence_" of course, on facts of _any_ kind, (including facts in Physical Science,) when once those facts have been well ascertained. But, _in the entire absence of such facts_, why should we refuse to listen to the _well ascertained Revelation of GOD_? Nothing is more emphatic, for example, than the Divine declaration that the whole Human family is derived from a single pair; and the origin of Man is plainly set down in Genesis. Why then oppose to this, the confessedly _undiscovered_ fact that "mankind spread from many centres;" and the purely speculative possibility that, hereafter, a certain theory "_may lead_ to new conclusions respecting the origin of Man?"--As for "Religion" being "perilled on the possibility" of the truth or untruth of the Sciences of Geology and comparative Philology;--we really would submit that _GOD may be safely left to take care of His own;_ and that "peril," there is,--there _can_ be,--_none!_ And then, the maudlin tenderness of an "Essayist and Reviewer" (of all persons in the world!) for "_the life of Man_,"--meaning thereby his Christian hope, and Faith in the REDEEMER!... As if, (first,) Man's "_Life_" were _in any sense_ endangered, by our upholding the honour and authority of the Bible! And (secondly,) as if the age had shewn itself in the least degree impatient of scientific investigation! And (thirdly,) as if Religion depended, or could be made to depend, on Physical phenomena, or on the progress of Natural Science, _at all!_ ... I scruple not to say that arguments like these impress me with the meanest opinion of Mr. Jowett's intellectual powers: while they prove to demonstration that he does not in the least understand the subject on which he yet writes with such feeble vehemence.