God Is
"But without faith it is impossible to please him; for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him" (Hebrews 11:6).
The writer of the letter to the Hebrews devotes that section of his epistle which comprises chapter eleven to a roll-call of the faithful who lived in the ages preceding the advent of Jesus. Among these was Enoch, the father of Methuselah. Of him it is affirmed, "By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death: and was not found because God translated him; for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God" (verse 6).
The original Greek term rendered by our English word "translate" simply means "to transport to another locality or place." During his lifetime Enoch pleased God to such an extent that God allowed him to escape the pangs of death. He was transported directly from this world to the next without experiencing the separation of the spirit from his body. And this was the result of his faith in God.
The example of Enoch provides an opportunity for the author to point out the impossibility of pleasing God without faith, and to show the minimum requirements of faith demanded of those who come to God. The entire context demonstrates that faith involves a firm trust or confidence in God, and this must begin with the acceptance of God's existence, that is, the fact of his being. However, the faith that pleases God cannot stop with a mere intellectual assent to his existence. It must recognize the personal concern of God for those who are concerned with him and who demonstrate that concern by seeking after him.
In spite of the fact that rewarding faith must begin with an acknowledgment of the existence of God the sacred scriptures nowhere devote time or space to presenting direct proof of it. The Bible starts with the simple declaration, "In the beginning God," and speaks of him as a functioning being performing the majestic act of universal creation. We believe that the absence of such proof from the Bible is attributable to at least two factors.
1. The nature of its content. The Bible purports to contain a divine message addressed to man in that form of communication best adapted to his understanding. To find much of it devoted to proving that the author really existed would be like receiving a letter from an earthly parent who spent half of his epistle in affirming his existence and identity. Such a course would create more doubt and suspicion than faith.
It is obvious that the character of the author will be revealed in his writing. One who is human cannot write a divine narrative and one who is divine would avoid those pitfalls which would identify a narrative as human. If we have a document which attests that it is from a divine source, and if internal evidence indicates it could not have been produced by human power or ability, we must assume the prior existence of God as its author. This is exactly the basis upon which the Bible begins. It is the logical manner in which a revelation from God should begin.
2. The nature of revelation. Our word "revelation" is a translation of the Greek apokalupsis. This word signifies to unveil, uncover, lay bare, or make naked. When that which has previously been hidden is uncovered it is said to be revealed. If it is tangible it is perceived by the senses, if it is intangible it is comprehended by the mental faculties. The thoughts and purposes of God are uncovered for us by the words of holy scripture. Thus these scriptures are a revelation of the mind of God.
Man is a rational being and God will not deal with him in such a manner as to offset, stifle or discourage his reasoning powers. To do so would be to treat him otherwise than as a man for it is his rationality which distinguishes him as a human being. For his own mental development and stability man must exercise the domain or faculty of reason. This requires taking cognizance of those things which can be perceived by the senses and properly analyzing them in their relationship to the rest of the universe.
Simple reasoning involves the combination of two known or accepted facts in such a manner as to arrive at a third or new fact, called a conclusion. This enables one to arrive at concepts of those things that are intangible, from observation of those that are tangible. The unseen can be concluded from the things that are seen. The revelation of God only uncovers for man what he cannot discover for himself.
Man can arrive at a satisfactory conclusion concerning the existence of God without access to direct verbal revelation. From personal experience as well as from the testimony of history man has been made aware that there are definite limitations upon his own power of creativity. There are bounds beyond which he cannot proceed either individually or collectively. Results achieved and established above and beyond these bounds are, therefore, attributable to super-human power. Now that which is superhuman we regard as divine. The word "divine" is the term we use which indicates that which belongs to, or proceeds from deity. By observation of the phenomena related to the created universe it will be seen that certain characteristics manifested are superhuman in nature and can belong only to a divine being. It is this fact to which Paul alludes in Romans 1:18-20.
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 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 Godhood: so that they are without excuse.
It will be a worthwhile project to analyze this remarkable statement and determine what is implied in its content.
1. Heaven is interested in and concerned about the affairs of men on earth.
2. Man is a responsible being and accountable to a power outside of, and greater than himself.
3. God is not neutral as relates to the behavior of men but actually expresses his displeasure with their irreligious and unjust actions.
4. This characteristic of God may be ascertained by observation and study of his created universe.
5. Intangible and invisible things may be reasoned out clearly from things that are made.
6. Since men have access to source material from which they have opportunity to learn about the nature and attributes of God they are without excuse for ungodly conduct in the divine presence.
The wrath of God is the divine displeasure with or indignation against the behavior described. Such behavior is an offence against the majesty of God and destructive of the spiritual, moral and ethical ideas incumbent upon those who are his creatures. It is designed to convince those who deny the existence of God of his personal being. For rational beings to engage in the kind of life here described indicates a doubt of the existence of God or of the divine nature which cannot tolerate that which is ungodly or unjust. If they cannot be convinced otherwise punishment must be meted out which will leave no question.
The word "ungodliness" is from a term which implies impiety, irreverence, or lack of respect for deity. Such an attitude may manifest itself in neglect of worship and homage as well as in overt acts and declarations. One need not blaspheme the name of God in order to be ungodly. To withhold from God the honor that is due him will place one in this class.
"Unrighteousness" relates to iniquity toward men. It means unfairness, inequity, or injustice. These two cover the whole scope of our responsibility. Jesus declared that the first and greatest commandment was to love God, and the second was to love one's fellowmen. He affirmed that all the law and the prophets were suspended from these and were thus dependent upon them. Just as love for God and man embraces all of God's commands, so ungodliness and injustice comprehend the full gamut of human wickedness.
The expression "hold the truth in unrighteousness" is misleading. To the extent men hold the truth they are righteous, and unrighteousness exists in proportion to their refusal to hold and be governed by the truth. The correct idea will be ascertained when it is remembered that the word translated "hold" had two meanings. It literally means to hold down and men hold things to maintain or keep them in possession, or to hinder or restrain them. This last is the clue to the meaning in this instance. The truth is held back or hindered by the impiety and injustice of men.
There is no excuse for conduct which deters or hinders the advancement and dissemination of truth. Those who are guilty of such behavior cannot plead ignorance of God. "That which may be known of God is manifest to them." The apostle speaks primarily of those in the pagan world. The Jews had an advantage in the fact that the oracles of God were committed unto them (Romans 3:2). They were entrusted with the sacred writings. God revealed himself unto them through the word, but he manifested himself to all men through the world.
Not everything can be known concerning God. There are some things beyond the horizon of human perception. The apostle does not imply that those without a special revelation can know as much about God as those who have such revelation, but there are many things that can be known. The existence of God, the power of God, the nature of that power, the attributes of God, the divine wisdom and mercy and justice--all of these can be deduced from application of the rational powers to the created universe. What one can learn he is obligated to learn. The purpose of the apostle is to demonstrate that enough may be known concerning God as to leave men without an excuse for impiety and iniquity. It is not essential that one have a knowledge of the specific requirements of God in a verbal revelation in order to know the nature of God. All nature bears testimony to the divine existence.
It is asserted that "the invisible things of God from the creation are clearly seen." The "things" here mentioned are the traits or characteristics of God. No one can perceive God by the senses. The attributes of God are not discernible to the eye and cannot be discovered by physical sight. But the creative activity of God made available to man a great storehouse of investigative material. This can be seen. It is visible and as man reasons upon it the invisible factors in the character of God are made manifest. These are specified by Paul as eternal power and Godhood. They are uncreated but are understood by what was created; they are intangible but are understood by the tangible. One reasons from the known to the unknown; from the seen to the unseen. All acquisition of knowledge is conditioned upon proper usage of the knowledge already possessed. One must have a foundation upon which to build.
In view of the fact that the invisible traits of God are understood by the things that are made, we need to determine the rational processes by which we arrive at justifiable conclusions concerning the nature of God. It must be noted that there are three different things involved: power, eternal existence and deity. All of these it is affirmed can be reasoned from the visible manifestations in creation.
1. Creation is obviously an effect and for every effect there must be a cause and this cause must be adequate to produce the effect.
2. The effect which we call creation is so intricate and complex and interdependent in its various relations as to preclude its having come into existence by a mere fortuitous concourse of atoms.
3. The only alternative is to conclude that the effect is the product of an intelligent designer who possessed the ability to conceive the universal plan and execute it, as well as maintain it. This involves both originating and perpetuating power.
4. While it is justifiable to speak of the "great first Cause" as a designation for an intelligent being, it is not justifiable to use the expression if it is implied that creation proceeded from, or is maintained by, a non-intellectual source, for such source is not adequate as a cause to produce the known effect.
5. Since matter does not, and cannot, possess intelligence, the cause which produced the universe must be personal and the power exerted in the creative process must be personal force or energy properly guided and directed to achieve the desired end.
To this rational process various objections are filed by those who will to believe that the universe of which they are a part is not a product of personal might or power intelligently applied to achieve a previously designed purpose. We are obligated to notice some of these and to file a reply to them.
1. The objection is made that it is a purely arbitrary conclusion that the universe is an effect, and that if it were it cannot be proven with such certitude as to be made a basis for further rationalization.
This objection, if sustained, would render all human experience invalid as a criterion and make a mockery of all human rationalization. All of our actions in the present, our predictions as to the future, as well as our interpretations of the past, are predicated upon the basis of causation of which mankind universally has an intuition. Upon this basis men have sought to account for the universe in all ages and places. It has universally been regarded as an effect by philosophers and peasants, by savants and savages. The fact that some have regarded it as a supernatural production and others with a superstitious premonition only serves to accentuate our contention that all alike agree that it is an effect, and what they have tried to do is to isolate and understand the cause.
There are two groups of modern thinkers who are specifically concerned with denial of the postulate of an intelligent and personal prime cause--evolutionists and atheists. Yet the universe is here and they are a part of it. They must either ignore it or seek to explain it. Man cannot consistently ignore that of which he is a constituent part, and these groups are compelled to try and account for the present constitution of the universe. In doing so, both have been forced to join the mainstream of human thought and regard the universe in its current state as an effect, for evolution is simply the theory of a cause leading to the effect which we observe and experience. That which is universally admitted should not require proof seeing there is no one to whom it needs to be proven.
There devolves upon one who presents a chain of reasoning from which he draws a conclusion, the obligation to substantiate and validate each link as he proceeds. For that reason one may justifiably take the time and make the effort required to establish that the universe is an effect. This may be done by application of the following truth.
Any result which is observable or acknowledged, and which was achieved by an obvious relation and connection between those forces or principles operating in such a manner as to bring into being the said result, implies cause and effect. The acknowledged result is proof of the power of such forces or principles to produce it.
Our entire universe has been demonstrated to be one great system of causes and effects. On this basis we make application of all the discoveries of science. Our welfare, happiness, and even our very existence are contingent upon our conclusion that like causes produce like results, when there is no interference of secondary causes. This one great system operates as a unit, so that the multiplicity of causes producing a multiplicity of effects, constitute, in the aggregate, one great effect, interrelated, co-ordinated and harmonious. We must conclude that, if the whole universe is a system of causes and effects, and if these, in combination, form the universe into one great effect, there must be a cause possessed of the potency to produce the universe, and this one cause is responsible for this one effect.
It seems that there are but two ways by which the force of this can be evaded. One might deny the whole concept of causation and attempt to throw out of the court of human opinion all reasoning conditioned upon it. But to do this would make all history invalid, render all scientific application impossible, and bring utter chaos to the whole realm of thought. Such irrationality need not be noted except to point out its ridiculous aspects.
The only other alternative would be to deny the unity of the universe and to argue that the functions of the powers producing the effects are not harmonious and sustain no relationship to each other in such a manner as to make one great unified whole. To this we reply that the scientific approach is based upon the postulate that there is a regular and invariable connection between the forces and their results, and between all of the forces as a coordinated system and all of the results as a coordinated system. Each cause is related to every other cause and each result to every other result and all are related to the whole. The conclusion must be that all power has a common source, and this common source of power is adequate to produce the universe as a whole, and is the very basis for every secondary cause and result in the universe.
2. The objection is made that one cannot possibly deduce an intelligent cause from a study of natural creation. It is urged that research can only disclose a relation between physical causes and results, all directly related to and concerned with matter, its properties and characteristics, and there is no logical connection by which an intelligent Cause can be apprehended or predicated.
This objection might have some validity (although we question it) if everything of a material nature was isolated and separated from all else, but it breaks down when it is observed that there is a correlation of the forces of nature into a harmonious and functioning whole, and that such a systematic or methodical process is essential to the preservation of nature itself and without it nature in all of its forms would be extinguished and perish. Even the most ignorant observer of nature sees evidence of adjustment and adaptation which proceeds according to law and gives indication of having resulted from plan and forethought.
The eye would be useless without light and the highest function of light would be abrogated without the eye. The eye is adapted to light and light is adapted to the eye. It is quite impossible for one to create the other. The eye could not make a single tallow candle yet it can penetrate what otherwise would be darkness and envision what otherwise would be hidden when a candle is lighted. It is evident that the light was made for the eye and the eye was made for the light, and the purpose of both must have been known before either came into existence.
The element in which an object, an organ, or an organism must exist and function must always be present before the organ or organism which depends upon it for being can exist. Thus the earth was made before plants, water was made before fish, and atmosphere before animals or man. So light also preceded the eye. And all of this indicates design--rational design.
The close inter-relationship between animal and plant life is so striking as to cause even the most skeptical to think in terms of design. In some instances the plant depends upon an insect for its continued existence through pollenization while the insect depends upon the plant for its food supply. In such cases the plant is peculiarly designed so that as the insect secures his nourishment he automatically becomes laden with pollen. Moreover, the plant is particularly adapted to a specific species and this species is so shaped as to fit the plant. The bumblebee has a hairy body which is so rounded that it fits the bell of the foxglove flower almost perfectly, and the honey can only be obtained by contact with the arched stamens and the style which are placed ideally to insure maximum coverage.
Some flowers have traps which automatically close when an insect is within. The struggle of the prisoner to escape causes him to become coated with the pollen before the gently relaxing petals open to allow him to escape. In other plants the insect upon entering must cross a barrier of sticky material which assures that he will secure a good share of the pollen. One type of orchid deposits its insect visitors in a bath of water so that as they crawl out the precious substance clings to them. In another flower there is a sensitive spot on the stamen. When the insect touches it a spring release causes the stamen to react in such a manner as to release a shower of golden dust. I have long thought that anyone who considers the remarkable fig-wasp would be forced to acknowledge the presence of intelligence and design in creation.
In the mineral field science has broken down various compounds and identified more than a hundred elements. These combine in various proportions according to certain laws to produce various substances. In many instances one of the elements has a greater affinity for another than the one with which it combines, but a combination with the affinity partner would create a destructive substance. For example, let us consider water, a substance which is absolutely essential to plant and animal life. It is composed of two gases, hydrogen and oxygen, in mathematical proportion of two parts of the former to one part of the latter. Hydrogen manifests a greater affinity for chlorine than it does for oxygen, but the governing principle affecting the universe sublimates this and compounds it with oxygen.
If the balance were disturbed to the extent that a union was formed of two parts of hydrogen and two parts of oxygen the result would be hydrogen peroxide and life for all breathing creatures would cease. Nitrogen is a gas which constitutes almost four-fifths of the atmosphere by volume. Water and atmosphere come in contact with each other constantly, but if hydrogen, nitrogen and three parts of oxygen were to combine the resultant compound would be nitric acid and again all life would end on earth.
Yet, nitrogen in the form of protein, is important to the proper constituency of animal tissue. Accordingly, bacteria in the soil act upon it to convert nitrogen taken from the atmosphere into nitrate, which is a form adaptable to the need of plants and fitted for their absorption of it. Animals eat the plants and man eats both plants and animals, and thus obtains the protein. Nitrogen is taken from the atmosphere and converted for use as plant food; man takes the plants and converts them to human diet, and thus the protein is derived. Such synchronization is not the result of mere chance nor can it be.
The postulate that there is an intelligent cause
responsible for the universe is seen to be valid because it is not based
upon mere matter, but upon the manipulation, arrangement and function of
an intricate and inter-related system of physical entities. It would seem
ridiculous to assume that such organization could result without an organizer.
To believe such a thing would make one far more credulous than to acknowledge
faith in an intelligent designer and creator. The universe is the result
of a demonstration of personal power both in origin and maintenance.
It is affirmed by the apostle Paul that not only can we determine God's power from what has been made but also that his eternal power is manifested. There are two Greek words which are sometimes translated "eternal." One is aionios, the other aidios. The first applies specifically to duration undefined, the second to permanence and unchangeableness. It is the second of these which the apostle uses in Romans 1:20, with which we are now concerned. Whereas "power" accounts for the origin of the universe, the fact that it is everlasting accounts for the continuance or maintenance of that which has been created.
To one who accepts the universal concept of causation it will at once become apparent that the universe as a whole and as one unified system, must have resulted from one prime cause, and that this cause existed prior to all creation, and the power exerted in producing the universe was, therefore, an uncreated power. To that which is uncreated and which may exist apart from and independent of all secondary causes, we give the designation "eternal." Upon this basis the ancients regarded God as "The Eternal."
The continuity and preservation of the created order requires a demonstration of the same power as was requisite for its origin. It is impossible to account for the uniform and constant operation of the material universe simply by reference to the laws of matter and motion. The primary cause must be something more than mechanical, otherwise we would have to conclude that an endless progression of motions has been communicated from matter to matter without any first mover. Our very reasoning about "laws of motion" must proceed upon the basis that matter is inert. There was a power outside of, and superior to all of the force manifested in the universe, which placed in motion the entire system. The fact that it has continued in constant operation is evidence that the same power sustains it.
Chance can no more govern the world than it could make the world, and to argue that the world was brought into existence by chance, that it is a mere fortuitous concourse of atoms, and that subsequently chance imposed laws upon nature by which it was forced to act with regularity and uniformity, is to argue that chance operated in such fashion as to put an end to chance. That which operates by law cannot operate by chance and while it might be argued by the unlearned that a single and detached law might be discovered or imposed by chance, it would be ridiculous indeed to suppose this with regard to an intricate system of laws requiring meticulous synchronization.
All human experience would lead us rather to conclude that, without an intelligent power to repair the decays of nature and restore it with frequency, chance would be much more likely to destroy the world than to create it. Any machine left to itself deteriorates and any system without intelligent direction tends to distortion and dissolution. If the majestic planetary system simply happened by chance and is maintained by the same chance which produced it, that chance has acted with certainty and design. But that which so acts is not chance at all. If the solar system, by mere chance, were to be disturbed until the sun came but a few degrees nearer the earth all life on our planet would go up in a ball of flame, if it moved a few degrees father from the earth the result would be a shroud of ice many feet thick.
That which is indebted for its very existence to power is wholly dependent upon the power that made it. If it could not have existence originally without application of power, it cannot continue in existence without that power. If it be argued that originally it was conceived and created by power but that subsequently it is controlled by "laws of nature" this simply means that the power which made it now governs it by principles imposed. It matters not whether such laws were announced as specific precepts or whether they proceed from certain ingrained characteristics, their origin and result are the same. There can be no principle of self-subsistence in the world independent of its cause. The permanence of universal functions argues the perpetuity of divine power. The government of the world requires such wisdom and power as no other being besides its Maker could possibly possess. The world is either governed or it is not. If it is governed it must be governed by the Creator. The existence of the world is a testimony of power. Its continuation bears witness that this power is eternal.
To one who accepts the declarations made in the Bible as valid these things present no problem. The writer of the epistle to the Hebrews declares that the Son of God "upholds all things by the word of his power" (1:3). All things were made by the power of his word, all things are maintained by the word of his power. In Colossians 1:16, 17, it is said, "For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: and he is before all things, and by him all things consist." The original word translated "consist" literally means "to stand or hold together." Thus these remarkable verses affirm that the creation and preservation of the universe are invested in the same being. The one who brought all things together in creation holds all things together in perpetual recreation.
The ancient psalmist, recognizing that the forces of nature combine to prove the eternal power which brought them into existence, urges them thus, "Praise him, sun and moon: praise him all ye stars of light. Praise him all ye heavens, and ye waters that are above the heavens. Let them praise the name of the Lord; for he spoke the word and they were made; he commanded, and they were created. He hath made them fast for ever and ever; he hath given them a law which shall not be broken" (Psalm 148:3-6).
This one passage expresses the following concepts:
(1) Creation was the act of God and was accomplished by the power inherent
in the divine being; (2) The instrumentality of creation was the word of
God; (3) The creative power is identical with the sustaining power; (4) The
universe is maintained by law and the law of maintenance is also of divine
origin.
The apostle affirms that from nature, that is, the things that are made, one can come to know three traits or characteristics of God, as follows: (1) power; (2) undiminishing or permanent force or energy; (3) divinity. This last is expressed in his word "Godhead," which might better be rendered "Godhood," as embracing all that is generally attributed to divinity. However, without becoming too technical we need to be very careful that we understand exactly what can be learned about the nature of God from reasoning on the things created, and the limitations beyond which, nature cannot go as an instructor.
A good place to start is with the two uses of the word "Godhead" in the scriptures. These occur in Romans 1:20 and Colossians 2:9. The careless student might conclude that they mean the same thing, while the indifferent student, upon ascertaining that they are derived from two divergent terms might argue that this made no difference.
The fact is that the word used in Romans 1:20 is theiotes, while that in Colossians 2:9 is theotes. Neither of these words is found at any other place in the sacred scriptures. Richard Chenevix Trench, Archbishop of Dublin, in his "Synonyms of the New Testament" asserts that these two do not have the same origin, and that, "there is a real distinction between them, and one which grounds itself on their different derivations."
Briefly, the distinction is as follows. In Romans 1:20 the apostle is speaking only of "that which may be known of God" by considering his creative work. Nature can reveal much to us about God and thus we can know about him. We can know enough about him that we are left without excuse. But we cannot know God in a personal sense except as he is revealed in the person of his Son. We can learn of the divinity of God, his majesty, glory and might, from a study of creation, but we cannot know him in the intimacy of personal relationship except through Jesus. Perhaps the distinction between "divinity" and "deity" may express the difference.
The "Godhead" which we can deduce from our observations of and rationalizations about the created universe is related to the majesty exhibited in creation. It is of this the psalmist exclaims in his familiar words, "The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament showeth his handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. There is no speech nor language where their voice is not heard. Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the ends of the world" (Psalm 119:1-4). There are some things in which this passage is very important to our study. An analysis of it will be quite revealing. While we cannot be exhaustive in our treatment of the verses we would like to mention a few salient points.
(1) The planetary system is the result of God's creative power and is a source of glorification for him.
(2) The heavens convey knowledge and proclaim the wonders of God's power.
(3) The declaration is not made in articulate language and no sound is heard.
(4) The glorification of God is universal in scope as the planets can be observed throughout the whole earth.
This brings us to the point where we may summarize our conclusions about God and detail those things we can know by the application of our reasoning faculties to the created things around us.
1. God is the first cause of all things and thus is uncaused and uncreated. He is self-existent as a being and is an intelligent designer as recognized in the intricate synchronization of natural forms.
2. God is personal as evidenced in the creation of man. The capacity to know and to love can only logically be accounted for on the basis that man is a product of a creator who has the same ability. It is obvious that the creator must possess a personality far superior to ours, otherwise he could not commit to others what he does not himself have.
3. God is spiritual, and is unlimited and unconfined by time or space. He suffers no restrictions and is infinite or unlimited.
4. He is immutable. In view of the fact that God possesses all things good and is perfect, he cannot acquire a perfection nor lose one. One who experiences perfection in the absolute can find nothing to adopt, else he would not be perfect, seeing that he lacks something. By the same token he cannot be divested of any attribute or quality that he possesses and remain perfect.
5. He is eternal as we have previously shown.
The minimum of faith essential to coming to God is a belief in his existence coupled with the conviction that he is interested and concerned with us as persons and that he manifests this concern by rewarding those who seek him diligently. "Faith is a firm confidence as to things hoped for, a firm conviction as to things not seen" (Hebrews 11:1).