'Those who have given themselves over entirely to the written word of God for a revelation of Himself may fail to realize what a powerful instrument of communication from God to man nature (whose God the Bible declares) is.

No doubt, while Adam and Eve were still in innocency, nature was God's voice in an unmistakable way. They could look to the heavens in the day, and lift their eyes up by night, and see the glory of God. They could study the mighty sun as he majestically ran his course, the moon in her reflected beauty, and the host of twinkling stars set like diamonds in the velvet of heaven, and stand in silent admiration at His handiwork. They could view the beautiful flowers sending back to the eye the sunlight in many and varied colors, the mighty trees of the earth, the feathered songsters, the waving grain of the fields, the crystal waters, and see God in it all, to His glory.

But sin has entered; and while all nature still is a true witness of God, man will not receive her message, be it ever so plain; and when taken by surprise, he will hear, yet deny, what she says. But
she is faithful, and her mute appeal never ceases :

"The heavens declare the glory of God;
And the firmament showeth His handiwork.
Day unto day uttereth speech, and
Night unto night showeth knowledge.
There is no speech nor language
Where their voice is not heard."

So important is this that men will be held accountable for the way they treat this voice of God. This is plainly set forth in Rom. 1:18-23. Here we are told that "the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness." God is jealous of truth, and will hold all men accountable how they hold it:if in righteousness, well; if in unrighteousness, God's anger is aroused. The reason is, that truth reveals Him who is truth:this the next verse explains:"Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath showed it unto them. For the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse." Think of this! Could nature speak more clearly ? The fault is not in nature's voice, but in those who seeing God in nature, yet through pride and love of sin refuse the light, and are without excuse, "because that when they knew God, they glorified Him not as God, neither were thankful, but became vain in their imagination," etc. What a responsibility men of science assume when they come into such close touch with nature, hear her voice, and deliberately turn upon their heel from the face of Him thus revealed, and who would welcome with delight a true confession of Himself by them! No! men will not "retain God in their knowledge" (Rom. 1:28).

I will give here an instance of how an eminent physicist came face to face with God through nature, and absolutely refused the light she had for him. Prof. Tyndall, in one of his lectures on light, summing up the wonders of light in relation to the eye, said:" Meanwhile we may profitably glance back on the web of relation which these experiments reveal to us. We have, in the first place, in solar light, an agent of exceeding complexity, composed of innumerable constituents, refrangible in different degrees. We find, secondly, the atoms and molecules of bodies gifted with the power of sifting solar light in the most various ways, and producing by the sifting the colors observable in nature and art. To do this they must possess a molecular structure commensurate in complexity with light itself. Thirdly, we have the human eye and brain so organized as to be able to take in and distinguish the multitude of impressions thus generated. The light, therefore, at starting, is complex:to sift and select it as they do, natural bodies must be complex; while, to take in the impression thus generated, the human eye and brain, however we may simplify our conception of their action, must be highly complex. Whence this triple complexity ? If what are called material purposes were the only end to be served, a much simpler mechanism would be sufficient. But, instead of simplicity, we have prodigality of relation and adaptation-and this, apparently, for the sole purpose of enabling us to see things robed in the splendor of color. Would it not seem that nature harbored the intention of educating us for other enjoyments than those derivable from meat and drink? At all events, whatever nature meant,-And it would be mere presumption to dogmatize as to what she meant,-we find ourselves here, as the upshot of her operation, endowed with capacities to enjoy not only the materially useful, but endowed with others of indefinite scope and application, which deal alone with the beautiful and the true."

What a testimony! What a blunder, writing Nature instead of God! We can but wish that the great scientist had not done so. Dear brethren, do we realize that God is speaking to us at every turn ? Do we see nothing more than an impersonal nature in it all ? If there are such stupendous responsibilities devolving upon us from the voice and witness of nature, what must it be to have the truth from God by direct revelation-the Scriptures ! May the Lord lay the importance of these things upon our hearts, that we might be found more and more walking softly in the very presence of God! F. H. J.