cynicism, else he certainly would have assigned mankind a task less arduous—a task compared to which the twelve labors of Hercules were mere child's play. Now, although this feat may never have been accomplished, still it lies within the range of the possibilities; and in declaring that a man may, by study, find out both himself and God, I fly in the face of current philosophy, and deny the truth of the noted dogma of modern sophists, that "It is impossible for a man to explore the labyrinths of his own nature:—a principle cannot comprehend itself." Why is the logic of this doctrine faulty? Because, first, God can certainly comprehend man. All there is of man is mind; all there is of Deity is the same. A principle thus comprehends itself.
Man is God's image, and can do on a small what He does on an infinite scale; and the only difference between Deity and a full man simply is, that the former can comprehend the parts of the Realm separately and together, while the latter can only grasp each truth as it swims to him on the rolling waves of Time's great sea; yet, so far as he goes, he comprehends himself. The day will dawn when, looking back at what he was, he shall fully understand the mystery; and as he advances, he will continually read the foregone scrolls, while new accrements of being will ever be his—each one in turn to undergo the scrutiny, each one to be fully understood, and so on forever and for aye. Were it not so, Being would be worthless and our existence a dreadful farce. Secondly: Intuition has already been proved to be the shoot, of which Omniscience is the tree—which fact disposes of the absurd dogma just quoted, and forever.
There are two mighty problems up for solution.
