“Of His wonderful wisdom, both heaven and earth contain innumerable proofs; not only those more abstruse things, which are the subjects of astronomy, medicine, and the whole science of physics, but those things which force themselves on the view of the most illiterate of mankind, so that they cannot open their eyes without being constrained to witness them…….In disquisitions concerning the motions of the stars, in fixing their situations, measuring their distances, and distinguishing their peculiar properties, there is need of skill, exactness, and industry; and the providence of God being more clearly revealed by these discoveries, the mind ought to rise to a sublimer elevation for the contemplation of His glory.”
“Thus it belongs to a man of preeminent ingenuity to examine, with the critical exactness of Galen, the connection, the symmetry, the beauty, and the use of the various parts of the human body. But the composition of the human body is universally acknowledged to be so ingenious, as to render its Maker the object of deserved admiration.”
“The manifold agility of the soul, which enables it to take a survey of heaven and earth; to join the past and the present; to retain the memory of things heard long ago; to conceive of whatever it chooses by the help of imagination; its ingenuity also in the invention of such admirable arts,--are certain proofs of the divinity in man.”
It is important to keep in mind that Calvin published his Institutes in 1559. Today, in our scientific world, we know so much more about the heavens, the earth, and the human body than men in Calvin’s day did. And yet, even then, Calvin was able to say with the psalmist; “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.” How much more evidence for God is there today? And yet, men still refuse to believe.
Amen!
ReplyDeleteI reciently read a front page article in the NY Times where an evolutionist claimed that the universe was to complex to have been created intelligently--he claimed the intelligence needed to design the universe was impossibly great. Basically, he was saying that he didn't believe in God, so evolution must be true, because that is the best explanation without God.
Though I expected such a retarded argument from the anti-God regiment, the rebuttal was upsetting. His opponent claimed that people can't handle the reality that there is no god, and that the idea of "god" is necessary for society to function properly.
If only the Times would have brought in a real Christian, with real apologetics (like Ken Ham, Doug Philips, or even Pastor Bret!), I would have been happy. But no! The main stream media again presents a "debate" between minor factions from the same demonic stable.
However, I shouldn't be surprised. They do the same with public policy (no one questions that we have troops in 130 countries, just witch 130 countries we should occupy), morality (which prime time TV show is best?) and so called public opinion (ever write a letter to the editor? Anything truly conservative get "edited").
It's time to have real debates once again. It's time for real "change." It's time to break our chains to the sinking ship that is our culture.
Fidem Servate,
Jonathan Potter