The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands. Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they reveal knowledge. They have no speech, they use no words; no sound is heard from them. Yet their voice goes out into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world. In the heavens God has pitched a tent for the sun. It is like a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, like a champion rejoicing to run his course. It rises at one end of the heavens and makes its circuit to the other; nothing is deprived of its warmth. (Psalm 19:1-6)
First, let’s deal with the nonsense some nay-sayers are
likely to raise. No, the sun does not go from one end of the heavens to the
other. It doesn’t even orbit the earth. The earth orbits the sun, which orbits
the center of the Milky Way Galaxy. But, this song wasn’t written by an
astronomer. It was written by a shepherd, soldier, and king. And we still
commonly refer to sunrise and sunset, and the sun being high and low in the sky
even though it’s the earth that has rotated, not the sun that has moved. It’s a
song, a poem. Imagery doesn’t have to represent scientific reality to convey
emotional or ideational reality.
And I’ll point out that scientists don’t always speaking
in scientifically accurate terms either. Now and again, I read a headline about
an “earthlike planet” being found orbiting another star. When I read the story
(the small print, as it were,) I discover that the planet is thought to be a
rocky planet with an iron core. So far so good. Then they say that it’s ten
times the size of Earth, or that it has no atmosphere, or something else that
makes it quite unlike Earth and thus could not support humanoid life. Yeah,
“like Earth.” That word is used with too little definition, for its emotional
effect, not its accuracy. So, the whining about “scientific inaccuracy” can just
stop.
Now, let’s deal with what is said in these first six
verses. If someone hired you to oversee the authentication of a painting
reputed to be a Van Gogh, you could take it to a variety of experts who could
determine whether or not it was a Van Gogh. There would be things about it that
would “speak” and identify it as an original, or as a forgery. The paint and
canvas would be tested, the paint colors and strokes would be examined, and the
overall painting would be considered.
People who really look at the universe tend to marvel at
it. As someone who has had a small interest in astronomy for a long time, I can
tell you that it’s awe-inspiring but that means you don’t have to be an
astrophysicist to feel its soul-deep appeal. All you need are eyes and a soul
that aren’t blind. Some folks would say that differently. They’d say that you
need eyes and a heart that aren’t blind. Other might express it as eyes and imagination.
Since I know someone who has no imagination (that’s not an exaggeration,) I can
agree with that one, too.
Put simply, the universe inspires awe in addition to
meeting needs. The fact that we can see it (remarkably clear atmosphere,
positioned in just the right spot in the solar system, which is in just the
right spot in the galaxy, which is in just the right spot in the local group,
etc.) and that we can appreciate and understand something of it (which I submit
is as rare as the clear atmosphere and right location) should make us thankful,
and stir us to listen and look more carefully, and notice that coincidence
doesn’t explain it – can’t explain it – but that something should. Nothing
explains it so well as God.
Comments
Post a Comment