Bibliology: Divine Revelation

In the previous lesson, I quickly discussed that there are two major kinds of revelation concerning God. The previous lesson was concerned with General Revelation which consisted of examining the evidence found in nature to show that God exists and is verified by Scripture. I also stated that General Revelation is shown unto all people at all times. Divine Revelation, sometimes called Special Revelation, is defined as the Word of God communicated to specific people through various modes in order to express the nature of God, the will of God, and/or the works of God. “Special Revelation is redemptive revelation. It publishes the good tidings that the holy and merciful God promises salvation as a divine gift to man who cannot save himself and that he has now fulfilled that promise in the gift of His Son in whom all men are called to believe.”1 General Revelation was only able to communicate that God exists and that we are guilty of breaking His laws and therefore deserve His condemnation (Rom. 1:18-20). General Revelation does not explain how is to be rescued from God’s wrath. Divine Revelation picks up where General Revelation left off. Most importantly, but not only, it explains how one is to be reconciled to God.

There are some commonalities that occur every time when God speaks that should be pointed out. All of these commonalities will be examined further in later lessons because they can also be said of Scripture. 1) God’s Word is truth. Every time that God speaks to man, He speaks truth. Every message that He gives is consistent with any and all messages that He has given at any and all times. 2) God’s Word is authoritative. Multiple examples can be shown that when a person failed to be obedient to special instructions consequences soon followed. 3) God’s Word is understood. Examples can be shown of when God gave instructions and the recipient was able to follow through as prescribed. God’s words are not beyond the comprehensibility of man. 

A false understanding of Divine Revelation tries to separate the message from the historical event surrounding the revelation given. “Eighteenth century rationalism revived the notion of pre-Christian Greek idealism that historical facts are necessarily relative and never absolute, and that revelation consequently is to be divorced from historical actualities and identified with ideas alone.”2 Men who are convinced of such rationalism have made statements such as, “In the Bible, God’s self-revelation is personal rather than propositional. That is to say, ultimately revelation is in relationship, ‘confrontation,’ communion, rather than by the communication of facts.”3 Such men would examine an event like Moses parting the Red Sea and claim that the event may not be 100% fact but the point still remains; God was working in the redemption of the Israelites from the Egyptians. The problem that arises from such rationalism is that the message loses its power when it is divorced from historical facts. God was not just with the Israelites but He was supernaturally overseeing Israel’s exodus. God made a promise to Abraham that his children would inherit a land and God made sure that no man would interfere with that plan. God also had Moses part the Red Sea to demonstrate to both Israel and Egypt that He is God and beside Him there is no one else.

Scripture tells of multiple modes of Divine Revelation that God has used to communicate to man. However, it is assumed that not every occurrence of Divine Revelation is recorded in Scripture. For example, Scripture never explains how king Melchizedek had a knowledge of God when he lived before the books of Moses were written (Gen. 14:18). There were even numerous miracles that Christ performed that are not recorded in Scripture (John 21:25). The following are different modes by which God communicated His word unto man.

Prophets and Apostles

God spoke to men known as prophets who were then in turn to speak the message they received from God. Prophets are found in both the Old and New Testaments. They knew that received the Word of God and their carried authority (Deut. 18:18-20; 1 Sam. 10:10-11; 2 Sam. 23:2; Jer. 1:9). Their messages would vary. It is unknown how many of their messages are not recorded. There is mention of a group of prophets but nothing is said about who they are or what their message is (2 Kings 2:5). 

The apostles had a similar function to the prophets but they also were eye-witnesses of the resurrected Jesus Christ (Acts 1:21-22). They were also responsible for building the church (Eph. 2:20). Like the prophets, only a few apostles wrote anything down.

Decrees

“A decree of God is a word of God that causes something to happen.”4 The best example of a decree is when created the heavens and the earth just by simply speaking them into existence (Gen. 1:3; Ps. 33:6). Another example would be when Christ commanded the wind and the waves to be still. He spoke and creation obeyed (Mark 4:39-40).

Visions and Dreams

God used dreams to communicate to men (Num. 12:6). They could be experienced by believers and unbelievers (Dan. 2:1, 28-45). These were sometimes filled with imagery (e.g. Gen. 37:5-10). Other times these dreams contained a message communicated clearly (e.g. Matt. 1:20-24; 2:13). 

Visions are very similar to dreams with the exception that the recipient is awake and able to make some participation (e.g. Ezek. 11:24; Dan. 8:16-17, 26; Acts 11:5-10). 

Angels

God also uses angels to communicate His word unto people (Dan. 9:21-27; Luke 1:11-12, 19, 26-38). The word “angel” actually means messenger.

Audible Voice

There are times when God speaks to people directly without the use of any vehicle of communication (e.g. dreams, prophets). This was the case when God gave the Law to Moses (Exod. 20:1-2; cf. Num. 12:6-8). God also spoke directly when He called Samuel (1 Sam. 3:4-14). This also occurred three times during Christ’s earthly ministry (Matt. 3:16-17; 17:5; John 12:28). 

Urim and Thummim

This mode of communication may see odd to us today but God used two stones called Urim and Thummin by the hand of a high priest. They were placed inside of the breastplate worn by the high priest. Most speculate that they were used to determine God’s will in the form of an answer to a yes or no question. For example, Joshua would inquire by the priest if he should overthrow such-and-such a place. The priest would then reach inside the pouch pull out one of stones which would then correspond with a negative or positive answer; something akin to casting lots. However, the Bible never gives instructions on how they are to be used. We only see references to the stones that show an understanding that they were used to determine the will of God (Exod. 28:30; Num. 27:21; Deut. 33:8; 1 Sam. 28:6; Ezra 2:63). 

Jesus Christ and Theophanies

Jesus Christ is the Word of God made flesh (John 1:1, 14, 18; cf. 1 John 1:1; Rev. 19:13). Jesus made it clear that His words and the words of God are of equal value and that Jesus displayed an exact representation of the Father (John 14:9-11).

A theophany is a visible manifestation of God (Isa. 6:1-4; cf. Rev. 5:5-13). In the Old Testament, there appearances of the angel of the Lord. These appearance are really Jesus Christ before His incarnation. “Clearly the Angle of Yahweh is a self-manifestation of Yahweh, for He speaks as God, identifies Himself with God, and claims to exercise the prerogatives of God (Gen. 16:7-14; 21:17-18; 22:11-18; 31:11-13; Exod. 3:2; Judg. 2:1-4; 5:23; 6:11-22; 13:3-22; 2 Sam. 24:16; Zech. 1:12; 3:1; 12:8).”5

Scripture

The last mode of Divine Revelation is Scripture. I have mentioned how all of these modes of revelation are communicating the Word of God. Scripture is the Word of God put down in written form (Exod. 17:14; Jer. 30:2). The Bible contains records of the other methods of revelation, but Scripture itself is a mode of Divine Revelation. The commonalities that were mentioned earlier can be said of Scripture. 

The rest of the unit will focus on what the Bible says about itself.

________________

1. Walter A. Elwell, ed., Evangelical Dictionary of Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1984), 945-8. 

2. Ibid.

3. C.F.D. Moule, “Revelation,” in The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible (New York: Abingdon, 1976), 4:55; quoted in Charles C. Ryrie, Basic Theology: A Popular Systematic Guide to Understanding Biblical Truth (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1999), 74. 

4. Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994), 48. 

5. Ryrie, Basic Theology, 275-6.

Bibliology: General Revelation

Introduction 

A rough definition of revelation is content that explains something that was unknown. The word is usually used within the context of theology signifying something being made known about God’s character, works, or decrees. General Revelation is the first of two major categories of revelation. The second category of revelation is Divine Revelation. General Revelation is defined as “That disclosure to all persons at all times and places by which one comes to know that God is, and what He is like. General revelation mediates the conviction that God exists and that He is self-sufficient, transcendent, imminent, eternal, powerful, wise, good, and righteous. General, or natural, revelation maybe divided into two categories: (1) internal, the innate sense of beauty and consciousness, and (2) external, nature and providential history.”1

These two forms of General Revelation can be used to form a branch of theology known as Natural Theology. Natural Theology is a set of proofs used to demonstrate the existence of God using evidence from General Revelation. “The traditional proofs for the existence of God that have been constructed by Christian philosophers at various points in history are in fact attempts to analyze the evidence, especially the evidence from nature, in extremely carefully and logically precise ways, in order to persuade people that it is not rational to reject the idea of God’s existence. If it is true that sin causes people to think irrationally, then these proofs are attempts to cause people to think rationally or correctly about the evidence for God's existence, in spite of the irrational tendency caused by sin.”2

A lot of criticism falls on these proofs that try to demonstrate the existence of God. The main reason people argue is that these proofs are not expressly given in Scripture. Another is that the Bible never tries to demonstrate that God exists. The Bible starts with the assumption that God exists from the beginning, “In the beginning God created” (Gen. 1:1). While these criticisms make a good point it should be noted that the Bible does verify these proofs that are used by alluding to them. Of course the Bible will not give these arguments the same name as we would today. One should also notice that these arguments were even used by the Apostle Paul on three separate occasions. Lastly, God gave us a mind so that we could use to glorify God. Man is not an animal with only brutish needs. Man was created in the Image of God and is meant to use his faculties that God has given him through the Image of God (i.e. reason). 

External Proofs

The following three arguments or proofs are broader categories of arguments that are used to demonstrate the existence of God using evidence from nature. Both the believer and the unbeliever observe the same facts of nature (e.g., gravity, motion, complexity of life, etc.) but yet come to different conclusions. The point of all of these arguments is that if one were to observe and deduce correctly from these facts of nature, then the denial of God’s existence becomes absurd. 

The verification for these arguments comes from Psalm 19:1-6. All of nature shows forth His handiwork (v. 1). Every man upon the earth has seen His handiwork (vv. 2-4). There is beauty in His handiwork (vv. 5-6).

Cosmological Argument

“The cosmological argument is a family of arguments that seek to demonstrate the existence of a Sufficient Reason or a First Cause of the the existence of the cosmos.”3 In short, something or Someone must have caused the universe to come in to existence. You can not get something from nothing.

The cosmological argument has been broken down further into three basic types. 1) The kalam cosmological argument which, “Aims to show that universe had a beginning at some finite past and, since something cannot come out of nothing, must therefore have transcendent cause, which brought the universe into being.”4 2) The Thomist cosmological argument “named for the medieval philosophical theologian Thomas Aquinas, seeks a cause that is first, not in the temporal sense, but in the sense of rank.”5 Thomas did this in his “five ways:” motion, efficient cause, contingency, gradation of value, and unintelligent object move in ways that have a purpose.6 And finally, 3) Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz used an argument based upon contingency, like one Thomas Aquinas’ five ways but Leibniz did it without Aristotelian metaphysics. Leibniz wrote, “The first question which should rightly be asked is this: why is there something rather than nothing?”7

Teleological Argument

The teleological argument is the most popular of the three. The teleological argument states that because there is an design in the universe, there must have been an ultimate Designer. Its popularity has increased over the recent years to due advances from Christian scientists being outspoken in their field. These Christian Scientists have paved the way for the Intelligent Design movement which is an alternative theory for the origin of species as opposed to Darwin’s theory of evolution. 

The teleological argument was first made popular by William Paley in his book titled, Natural Theology, which he presented the example of a watch that was found in the middle of the field. A watch has parts that move and parts that signify something. The purpose of a watch is to keep track of time. By examining a watch, one would agree that a watch was designed for that purpose. Therefore because the watch was designed, there must have been a designer of the watch. It is absurd to think that the watch came into existence in the middle of field for the express purpose that it should keep track of time by mere chance.

Today, many scientists in the field of biology are helping to further demonstrate the point of the teleological argument. Michael Behe, an associate professor of biochemistry at Lehigh University, helped with his discussion on irreducibly complex systems. 

By irreducibly complex I mean a single system composed of several well-matched, interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, wherein the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning. An irreducibly complex system cannot be produced directly (that is, by continuously improving the initial function, which continues to work by the same mechanism) by slight, successive modifications of a precursor system, because any precursor to an irreducibly complex system that is missing a part is by definition nonfunctional. An irreducibly complex system, if there is such a thing, would be a powerful challenge to Darwinian evolution.8

Behe then goes to give multiply examples. The most intriguing is the body’s ability to have blood clot when in need. 

The thought of the teleological argument can be seen in Scripture. There is the allusion to it in Psalm 94:9-10. The ear was designed to hear, therefore the designer had that end in mind when He made the ear. Paul told the people of Lystra that, “He left not himself without witness, in that He did good, and gave us rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness” (Acts 14:17). God designed the earth to support life. All of the systems on earth depend each other. Man depends on his crops for food. The crops depend on the rain to grow. 

Ontological Argument

Of the three external proofs, this is the most ill received and the most philosophical. The ontological argument is based upon the study of ontology, that is the study of the nature of being. The ontological argument was originally conceived by Anselm. The point of his argument is that one can prove God exists because the nature of God’s being–self evident and necessary. “Anselm argued that once a person truly understands the notion of a greatest conceivable being, then he will see that such being must exist, since if it did not, it would not be the greatest conceivable being.”9

The criticism for the this argument has been that just because one can conceive of the greatest possible being, does not mean that greatest possible being actually exists. There is a difference between conception and the real world. We can think of many things, but those do not necessarily exist. 

The response to the above criticism is that part of the definition of the greatest possible being is that his existence is necessary in all possible worlds. If there were a possibility that the greatest possible being could not exist, then he would not be the greatest possible being. His existence is necessary in every possible world and therefore is necessary in the real world and really does exist.10

There is a different argument for the existence that I would label as an ontological argument because it argues from the uniqueness of the being of mankind. It is also known as the anthropological argument. Man is very different from the rest of creation on earth. Only man philosophizes. Only man creates and appreciates different mediums of art (e.g. music, paintings, etc.). You will never see cheetah sit down argue about different theories of justice. There is something that is truly unique the being of man. This is of course due to the Image of God that man bares. The question then becomes, “How can man, a moral, intelligent, and living being, be explained apart from a moral, intelligent, and living God?”11 The creation of man therefore necessitates a Creator that had all of these same qualities at the very least.

Paul makes reference to the anthropological argument in his sermon to those at Athens. “For in Him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of you own poets have said, ‘For we are also his offspring.’ Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver, or stone, graven by man’s device” (Acts 17:28-29). Because man has the qualities of love, reason, etc., God, who created man, must also possess these qualities as well or even better. 

Internal Proofs

Paul wrote, “Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them” (Rom. 1:19). Many have taken this to mean that there is an innate sense of God within man. “That there exists in the human minds and indeed by natural instinct, some sense of Deity, we hold to be beyond dispute, since God himself, to prevent any man from pretending ignorance, has endued all men with some idea of his Godhead.”12 This may be the case. I understand what Paul wrote to mean that man knows that God exists but is willing to deny God’s existence so man can keep his immorality (Rom. 1:32).

C.S. Lewis talked of another internal proof for God using the “Law of Nature.” “This law was called the Law of Nature because people thought that every one knew it by nature and did not need to be taught it.”13 The idea is that all mankind has a sense of morality that is built into him. His secondary point was that we choose to not obey the Law of Nature. This lead him to the proposition that, “In the Moral Law somebody or something from beyond the material universe was actually getting at us.” He concludes with, “It is after you have realized that there is a real Moral Law, and a Power behind the law, and that you have broken that law and put yourself wrong with that Power–it is after all this, and not a moment sooner, that Christianity begins to talk. When you know are sick, you will listen to the doctor.”14

This is parallel to what Paul writes in Romans talking about the gentiles, “Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things. But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things” (Rom. 2:1-2). Man knows the law of God and continues to disobey them. 

Effects of General Revelation

Paul states it clearly, “For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened” (Rom. 1:20-21). Every man, in every place, at every time has seen the invisible things of God. But the vast majority of mankind has rejected God. This rejection of God condemns man. 

As for these proofs that are made from the evidence of God’s existence in nature and in ourselves, they are useful. To what degree of use is subject to debate. Some state that the arguments are solid enough to show that unbelief in God is logically unsound. Others say that these arguments are only enough to show that theism has a high probability of being correct. Most are not willing to say that they demonstrate with absolute certainty that God exists.

Limitations of General Revelation

One of the limitations of these arguments is that they can only convince a person that monotheism is a correct worldview. There are still multiple religions that prescribe faith in only one God/god. Islam is a monotheistic faith. The kalām cosmological argument was originally used by muslims. Even though the arguments are convincing, they do not completely give us the God described in the Bible. 

Another limitation is that a man will never be argued into believing the Christian faith. The Bible clearly states that a man coming to know salvation through Jesus Christ is a work of God (John 1:12-13). A person repenting of their sins requires the regeneration of the Holy Spirit (Tit. 3:5).

The last limitation with general revelation is that it is not enough. In order for a person to know the God of the Bible, the Trinity, the incarnation of Christ, the death, burial and resurrection of Christ, he must have the Bible. There is so much that general revelation does not explain about God. General revelation may show there is a God has written the “Law of Nature” that we have broken, but it does not explain how can be saved from the wrath of God for breaking His laws.

___________________

1. Walter A. Elwell, ed., Evangelical Dictionary of Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1984), 944. 

2. Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994), 143. 

3. J. P. Moreland and William Lane Craig, Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2003), 465. 

4. Ibid. The kalam cosmological argument was originally used by Muslims and then adopted for the Christian faith. This argument has been popularized by William Lane Craig in his book, The Kalām Cosmological Argument. Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1979.   

5. Ibid. Thomas Aquinas summarized the “five ways” in his book Summa Theologica.

6. Peter Kreeft, ed., Summa of the Summa: The Essential Philosophical Passages of St. Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologica Edited and Explained for Beginners (San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 1990), 61-9.

7. Moreland and Craig, 466. 

8. Michael J. Behe, Darwin’s Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution (New York, NY: The Free Press, 1996), 39.

9. Moreland and Craig, 496. 

10. This demonstration of God being necessary in every possible world comes from Alvin Plantinga. 

11. Charles Ryrie, Basic Theology: A Popular Systematic Guide to Understanding Biblical Truth (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1999), 35. 

12. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 1:3:1.

13. C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, in The Complete C.S. Lewis Signature Classics (New York, NY: Harper Collins, 2002), 15.

14. Ibid, 33-5.