he affairs of men are fixed by
Destiny, in what by free-will; that it should teach us whence we came,
what is the object of our continuing here, what is to become of us
hereafter. And since a written work claiming a divine origin must
necessarily accredit itself even to those most reluctant to receive
it, its internal evidences becoming stronger and not weaker with the
strictness of the examination to which they are submitted, it ought to
deal with those things that may be demonstrated by the increasing
knowledge and genius of man; anticipating therein his conclusions.

Such a work, noble as may be its origin, must not refuse but court the
test of natural philosophy, regarding it not as an antagonist but as
its best support. As years pass on, and human science becomes more
exact and more comprehensive, its conclusions must be found in unison
therewith. When occasion arises, it should furnish us at least the
foreshadowings of the great truths discovered by astronomy and
geology, not offering for them the wild fictions of earlier ages,
inventions of the infancy of man. It should tell us how suns and
worlds are distributed in infinite space, and how in their successions
they come forth in limitless time. It should say how far the dominion
of God is carried out by law, and what is the point at which it is his
pleasure to resort to his own good providence or his arbitrary will.
How grand the description of this magnificent universe, written by the
Omnipotent hand! Of man it should set forth his relations to other
living beings, his place among them, his privileges and
responsibilities. It should not leave him to grope his way through the
vestiges of Greek philosophy, and to miss the truth at last; but it
should teach him wherein true knowledge consists, anticipating the
physical science, physical power, and physical well-being of our own
times, nay, even unfolding for our benefit things that we are still
ignorant of. The discussion of subjects so many and so high is not
outside the scope of a work of such pretensions. Its manner of dealing
with them is the only criterion it can offer of its authenticity to
succeeding times.

Tried by such a standard, the Koran altogether fails. In its
philosophy it is incomparably inferior to the writings of Chakia
Mouni, the founder of Buddhism; in its science it is absolutely
worthless. On speculative or doubtful things it is copious enough; but
in the exact, where a test can be applied