it can have ever hitherto been. He, for example, says that man
has been made in the image of God, but he cannot mean what he
says, unless his God has a material body; we, on the other hand,
do not indeed believe that the body of God-the incorporation of
all life-is like the body of a man, more than we believe each one
of our own cells or subordinate personalities to be like a man in
miniature; but we nevertheless hold that each of our tributary
selves is so far made after the likeness of the body corporate
that it possesses all our main and essential characteristics-that
is to say, that it can waste and repair itself; can feel, move,
and remember. To this extent, also, we-who stand in mean
proportional between our tributary personalities and God-are made
in the likeness of God; for we, and God, and our subordinate
cells alike possess the essential characteristics of life which
have been above recited. It is more true, therefore, for us to
say that we are made in the likeness of God than for the orthodox
Theologian to do so.

Nor, again, do we find difficulty in adopting such an expression
as that "God has taken our nature upon Him." We hold this as
firmly, and much more so, than Christians can do, but we say that
this is no new thing for Him to do, for that He has taken flesh
and dwelt among us from the day that He first assumed our shape,
some millions of years ago, until now. God cannot become man more
especially than He can become other living forms, any more than
we can be our eyes more especially than any other of our
organs. We may develop larger eyes, so that our eyes may come to
occupy a still more important place in our economy than they do
at present; and in a similar way the human race may become a more
predominant part of God than it now is-but we cannot admit that