In the first chapter of A Complete Body of Doctrinal and Practical Divinity1, John Gill offers eight arguments for the Being of God.2 He maintains that God's existence is "a first principle, which is not to be disputed; and because that there is one is a self-evident proposition, not to be disproved." However,

such is the malice of Satan, as to suggest the contrary to the minds of men; and such the badness of some wicked men as to listen to it, and imbibe it; and such the weakness of some good men as to be harassed and distressed with doubts about it at times; it cannot be improper to endeavor to fortify our minds with reasons and arguments against such suggestions and insinuations.3

I would like to focus here on the third argument regarding the Being of God, which is the argument from the works of creation. In the lengthy quote below, Gill tells a story of a Greenlander, which demonstrates the possibility of the true knowledge of God even among pagans.4

Most admirable was the reasoning of a wild Greenlander, which he declared to a missionary to be the reasoning of his mind before his conversion; "It is true, said he to him, we were ignorant heathens, and knew nothing of God, or a Saviour; and, indeed, who should tell us of him till you came? but thou must not imagine that no Greenlander thinks about these things. I myself have often thought: a kajak (a boat) with all its tackle and implements, does not grow into existence of itself, but must be made by the labour and ingenuity of man; and one that does not understand it, would directly spoil it. Now, the meanest bird has far more skill displayed in its structure, than the best kajak; and no man can make a bird: But there is still a far greater art shewn in the formation of a man, than of any other creature. Who was it that made him? I bethought me that he proceeded from his parents, and they from their parents; but some must have been the first parents; whence did they come? common report informs me, they grew out of the earth: but if so, why does it not still happen that men grow out of the earth? and from whence did this same earth itself, the sea, the sun, the moon, and stars, arise into existence? Certainly there must be some Being who made all these things; a Being that always was, and can never cease to be.

He must be inexpressibly more mighty, knowing, and wise, than the wisest man. He must be very good too, because that every thing that he has made is good, useful, and necessary for us. Ah, did I but know him, how would I love him and honour him! But who has seen him? who has ever conversed with him? None of us poor men. Yet there may be men too that know something of him. O that I could but speak with such! therefore, said he, as soon as ever I heard you speak of this great Being, I believed it directly, with all my heart; because I had so long desired to hear it." A glaring proof this, that a supreme Being, the first cause of all things, is to be concluded from the works of creation. The notion of the eternity of the world has been imbibed by some heathens, but sufficiently confuted by others. And even Aristotle, to whom it is ascribed, asserts, that "it was an ancient doctrine, and what all men received from their ancestors; that all things are of God, and consist by him."

There is nothing in the whole creation the mind can contemplate, the eye look upon, or the hand lay hold on, but what proclaims the Being of God. When we look up to the heavens above us; the surrounding atmosphere; the air in which we breathe, which compresses our earth, and keeps it together; the stellar space, and spreading sky, bespangled with stars of light, and adorned with the two great luminaries, the sun and moon, especially the former, that inexhaustible fountain of light and heat; and under whose benign influences, so many things are brought forth on earth; whose circuit is from one end of the Heaven to the other; and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof: when we consider its form, magnitude, and virtue; its proper distance from us, being not so near us as to scorch us; nor so remote as to be of no use to us; the motion given it at first, in which it has proceeded without stopping, but once as is supposed, in the days of Joshua; a motion it has had now almost six thousand years; the course it has steered, and steers, so that all parts of the earth, at one season or another, receive benefit by it; and the way it has been guided in, without varying or erring from it all this while. Whoever reflects on these things, must acknowledge it to be the work of an all wise and almighty agent, we call God; and that it must be upheld, guided, and directed by his hand alone.5

The reflection begins with a clear argument from design. The Greenlander reasons that a kajak—with its structure and functionality—requires intelligent craftsmanship. Then he moves to:

"Now, the meanest bird has far more skill displayed in its structure, than the best kajak; and no man can make a bird."

This is a teleological inference: if human-made objects require a designer, then natural objects with greater complexity must also have one. It parallels Paley's watchmaker analogy but arises organically from experience, showing how intuitively this reasoning occurs.

As the reflection continues, it shifts toward causal reasoning about the origin of human beings and the universe:

"I bethought me that he proceeded from his parents… but some must have been the first parents…" "From whence did this same earth itself, the sea, the sun, the moon, and stars, arise into existence?"

This moves from design to cause. The Greenlander is asking: What is the first cause of all things? This is the heart of the cosmological argument, classically framed by thinkers like Aquinas and Leibniz—everything that begins to exist must have a cause.

The Greenlander understood that "there must be some Being who made all these things—a Being that always was, and can never cease to be." As he contemplated the beauty of creation, he expressed adoration: "Ah, did I but know him, how would I love him and honour him!"

Was he a Christian? No. Did he know the true God through creation? Yes. Was that knowledge sufficient to save him? No. Was it true knowledge of God? Yes. Was it saving knowledge? No.

Yet this true, though insufficient, knowledge prepared him for his encounter with the missionary—an encounter that led to his conversion. What a providence! It's a profound example of how general revelation can stir deep theological reflection, even apart from Scripture, preparing the ground for the gospel.6

Thus, we agree with Herman Bavinck when he writes,

No one escapes the power of general revelation... General revelation preserves humankind in order that it can be found and healed by Christ and until it is. To that extent, natural theology used to be correctly denominated a "preamble of faith," a divine preparation and education for Christianity. General revelation is the foundation on which special revelation builds itself up.7

How privileged are we to have God's revealed word that we may render acceptable praises and honor to Him in the Name of His Son? But in praising God through His word, let us not forget the overwhelming testimony of His creation. The God that we worship in nature and Scripture is the God of classical Theism. This is God's handiwork, and there is no speech, nor are there words, whose voice is not heard (Psalm 19:1-3). Truly, "there is nothing in the whole creation the mind can contemplate, the eye look upon, or the hand lay hold on, but what proclaims the Being of God."

To the Triune God alone the glory!

Footnotes

  1. The specific book reference can be found here: https://archive.org/details/completebodyofdo01gill/page/n7/mode/2up?view=theater ↩

  2. The eight arguments are as follows: (1) the general consent of men of all nations, (2) the law and light of nature; or from the general instinct in men, or impress of Deity on the mind of every man, (3) the works of creation, (4) the sustaining and government of the world, (5) the uncommon heroic actions, prodigies, wonders, and miraculous things done in the world, (6) the prophesies of contingent future events, and the exact fulfillment of them, (7) the fears of men, and the tortures of a guilty conscience, and the dread of a future state, and (8) the judgments in the world. ↩

  3. Gill, John. A Complete Body of Doctrinal and Practical Divinity. In Two Volumes. Vol. 1. London: Printed for Thomas Tegg, 1839. 1. ↩

  4. This part of John Gill's argument was brought to my attention by a friend who told me that "there is no other Baptist as classical as John Gill." ↩

  5. Gill, A Complete Body of Doctrinal and Practical Divinity, Vol. 1, 7–9. (emphasis mine) ↩

  6. According to Wallace Williams, "Puritans often spoke of natural theology as foundational to or at least as a preparation for the supernatural revelation of God in the Scriptures. We have already seen this in Preston's comment that the existence of God was 'that which must bear all the weight of the building.' Perkins wrote that 'the light of nature serveth to give a beginning and preparation' to the 'light of grace.' 'Indeed there are many uses of reason,' wrote Manton, 'partly to prepare and induce us to hearken to the word of God; this is the mind God hath given us to know him, the stock left in nature, upon which he would implant faith.' Barker considered natural theology an excellent preparation for the gospel on the grounds that the widespread lack of a firm belief in the reality of God's existence was 'one great Reason why Christ is preached so much in vain.' Natural theology could serve as a doorway to repentance for the unregenerate and it could deepen the repentance of real Christians, as was the case with Job." Williams, Wallace. "The Role of Natural Theology." Puritanism and Natural Theology. Wipf and Stock Publishers, 10 Nov. 2016. ↩

  7. Bavinck, Herman. "General Revelation." Reformed Dogmatics Volume 1: Prolegomena. Baker Academic, 2003. ↩