Today we will be looking at Charnock's second point of evidence (p33-35) concerning the folly of the atheist rejecting that which all nations, in all places and ages have adhered to. Last time we saw that this has been a universal consent. Today we will see that it is constant and uninterrupted. By this Charnock means that there has never been a time since the beginning of the world where a belief in God has not been universally known. To this end Charnock gives three evidences:

1. In all the changes of the world a belief in the existence of God has been maintained. Even when empires have been overturned their gods might have changed but the belief in a god or gods has not. Even when the notion of a multiplicity of gods was rejected the notion of one true God grew stronger. As Charnock says, "the being of one God was more vigorously owned when the unreasonableness of multiplicity of gods was manifest; and grew taller by the detection of counterfeits." It is an absurdity to think that such an imposture could have "walked perpetually in the world without being discovered, and whipped out by some nation or other."
2. Men by nature desire to not have a god--it is not for lack of desire or trying that men have not been able to stamp out this nation. By its very persistence it proves its existence. Or as Charnock said, "The fears and anxieties in the consciences of men have given men sufficient occasion to root it out, had it been possible for them to do it." Since no man in his natural state desires to be controlled by someone or something he naturally tries to reject a god who is in control of him. Charnock gives the evidence of Adam and notes that we too follow after our father. But, "since men under the turmoils and lashes of their own consciences could never bring their hearts to a settled dissent from this truth, it evidenceth, that as it took its birth at the beginning of the world, it cannot expire, no not in the ashes of it, nor in anything but the reduction of the soul to that nothing from whence it sprung". Charnock is simply stating here that this is such a fixed truth that as long as the soul endures (which will be eternal) so will the conception of a belief in the existence of a god.
3. The devil deems it impossible to root out the notion of an existence of god. If you go back to the narrative of the Fall we see that the devil did not try to convince Adam and Eve that God did not exist but rather distorted Him and tried to convince them that they too were gods. The reason? "He knew it impossible to effect it, and therefore in vain to attempt it". Certainly, the Deceiver set himself up in many places as a god but was never able to throw out the notion altogether. To which Charnock comments, "The impressions of a Deity were so strong as not to be struck out by the malice and power of hell".

Here Charnock gives 3 rather decent arguments. They certainly are not the "nail in the coffin" but alongside all other evidences prove formidable. I especially like 1 & 2 put together. If we take it as truth that men would rather deny a god than adhere to one then it shows that men would have been giving much effort to putting out this notion. They would have put much effort into whipping out this imposture--however, because of the continued belief in the existence of God it shows they have not been able. However, this argument is not airtight. Some might argue that it is within man (as an evolutionary tendency) to keep the existence of a god. Therefore, it would bring down Charnock's argument.

The last argument must be established upon the authority of Scripture. For those of us who adhere to the infallible Word of God we stand behind Charnock. It is a great point that Satan, rather than trying to blot out his existence, has masqueraded as a god instead. Put together these 3 arguments serve as sufficeint evidence to show that throughout history the existence of a god has been accepted.

I am back from the Missouri Baptist Convention Annual Meeting. It was an eventful 3 days yet also a little boring. I have taken 3 things from this convention. 1) I felt that there was a great deal of pride at the convention (not the least of which was my own). The Lord convicted me deeply of a desire to make my name great. On Tuesday night I skipped out on the programs and got alone with the Lord. I went back over the gospel and had to be reminded that I was created by God and created for His glory and His glory alone. I know that He will not share His glory with another. I was deeply convicted yet mightily encouraged. I have a new resolve to preach the gospel boldly and a desire to fight pride in my life via the power of the Cross. May God be gracious and give me clarity and passion in driving the vice of pride out of my life. 2) I need to go to seminary. I am not sure when, but I realize that I must go deeper and I cannot do that on my own. I need a further education. I am praying that the Lord might show me His timing--and that I might not pursue that any sooner than I am supposed to nor any later. 3) There is a sharp division in our Missouri Baptist Convention. The younger generation seems to be a very large contrast to the older generation. I fear that because of our hubris ("our" being the younger generation) we will not be heard, and when we are it will be self-honoring and not Christ-honoring. Brothers, we must bow humbly before the Cross. We must realize that God is more concerned with our convention, with being honored, with spreading His name than we are. Therefore, we should boldly stand for the truth yet not create factions and not refuse to love our brothers in Christ. I am humbled by the depth of some of the leaders in my generation. I am thankful to God for them. Hopefully, the MBC stance on alcohol will not be displeasing to God. I say that because by passing a resolution that would not allow Paul, Timothy, or Jesus Himself to be a trustee--i think we have went too far. But enough on that. I am back and happy to be back...now i must draw deeper from the wells of grace and preach the gospel boldly.