Foreknowledge by Joel Hayes - Library of Theology
Foreknowledge by Joel Hayes - Library of Theology
Foreknowledge by Joel Hayes - Library of Theology
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
The sun blazes in the firmament; the moon swings through the half-illuminated a<strong>by</strong>sses <strong>of</strong> night; the<br />
stars fleck the sky, hinting the mysteries and the immensities <strong>of</strong> God's domain. The earth is finished,<br />
in contour and in detail; the mountains stand in their places; rivers sweep along their channels;<br />
oceans fill their basins; forests wave their foliage in the light; plains lie spread out in their beauty;<br />
grasses carpet the earth; meteorological phenomena appear, and the processes <strong>of</strong> nature are all<br />
active. Now, suppose the work to stop at this point, and then ask yourself, What has been done?<br />
what object has been accomplished? Is there an end in which you can imagine the Creator to have<br />
satisfaction? I do not hesitate to answer, No! nothing has been accomplished--nothing that you can<br />
accept as a worthy issue <strong>of</strong> the work done. Think <strong>of</strong> it! What has been achieved, upon the<br />
supposition that the work stops upon the plane <strong>of</strong> mere material existence?<br />
Can you suppose that God required it to project into objective relations to himself, this<br />
expression <strong>of</strong> his own wisdom and power, that he might become well aware <strong>of</strong> them? The thought<br />
would be almost a blasphemy. Did he require the universe to be a great plaything for himself, to<br />
amuse the solitude <strong>of</strong> his existence? Preposterous! You cannot think <strong>of</strong> such a thing.<br />
An expression <strong>of</strong> his wisdom and power it is; but there is no witness <strong>of</strong> it except himself, and<br />
he needs it not. The resources <strong>of</strong> his own being suffice for his own blessedness. In the creation <strong>of</strong><br />
mere dead masses <strong>of</strong> matter, and the establishment <strong>of</strong> the order <strong>of</strong> nature, I repeat it, nothing has<br />
been done--absolutely nothing.<br />
But now man appears upon the scene. He looks abroad, sees the magnificent display, and<br />
enjoys it; he looks up through nature, and begins to be conscious <strong>of</strong> God. Here the Creator's work<br />
stands face to face with him; he enters into conscious communication with him, hears his voice,<br />
receives his word, and gives him back responses <strong>of</strong> love and worship. The work <strong>of</strong> creation has a<br />
witness, now, who can be recipient <strong>of</strong> its divinest meaning; here in man nature reaches<br />
consciousness, and comes to know its Author. This is the result--the crowning fact <strong>of</strong> all the work.<br />
We can account for the universe now, and understand it. It was worth while to do all this<br />
work; it was worth while to make the worlds, since they were to be the abode <strong>of</strong> man." 4<br />
One question may here be asked; Could not God have created beings possessed <strong>of</strong> all the<br />
intelligence which man now possesses--with eyes to perceive, appreciate, and admire all his work; and with<br />
hearts to enjoy all the magnificent display <strong>of</strong> God's goodness, and to love him with a full and overflowing<br />
love, seeing that all these things were created for their enjoyment--without creating them moral agents, and<br />
thus liable to introduce the deformity <strong>of</strong> sin into his universe? To this there are two answers, First, they would<br />
have been destitute <strong>of</strong> the beauty <strong>of</strong> holiness, the noblest attribute <strong>of</strong> God and man; for, as has been seen,<br />
the power to be holy necessarily carries with it the power to sin. The highest type <strong>of</strong> created intelligences<br />
would not thus be reached, viz., beings created in the image and likeness <strong>of</strong> God. The moral universe, the<br />
crowning fact <strong>of</strong> creation as it now exists and the end for which the physical universe was made, would thus<br />
be blotted out <strong>of</strong> existence, and that, too, without the provision <strong>of</strong> an adequate substitute to supply its place.<br />
Secondly, God's goodness is a moral goodness; his love practically exhibited is a moral love, resulting from<br />
his freedom, that is, having their origin with him and put forth through the exercise <strong>of</strong> his will. Could a being,<br />
then, not possessing moral agency--in other words, without the power to originate and put forth actions<br />
through the exercise <strong>of</strong> a free will- appreciate these things? An idea <strong>of</strong> what is right seems to carry with it<br />
the possibility <strong>of</strong> doing right; an idea <strong>of</strong> virtue and goodness, which are the product <strong>of</strong> right-doing, the<br />
possibility <strong>of</strong> being virtuous and good. Could the virtue and the goodness <strong>of</strong> God, then, be perceived <strong>by</strong> one<br />
who is himself incapable <strong>of</strong> virtue and goodness? Could a being destitute <strong>of</strong> moral agency have even a<br />
thought <strong>of</strong> the excellence <strong>of</strong> moral qualities? As well might we suppose that a man born blind could<br />
understand and appreciate the beauty <strong>of</strong> colors, or that a man born deaf could be charmed with the<br />
4<br />
Marvin's Sermons, p. 138.<br />
10