Today let’s begin by summarizing principles about GR and SR. First, here are some “definitions.”
·
Revelation: The story which God tells
about Himself … that knowledge about God which is from God.
·
General Revelation: God’s story told for
all men. It is general in that it is for
all men and in that the content is less definitive.
·
Special Revelation: God’s word, in
concrete form, to a specific person or group.
Now, more specifically on General Revelation:
·
General Revelation is God’s self-disclosure in
general ways (nature, history, conscience) to all mankind.
·
Distinctions:
o
Creation: God’s revealing and man’s knowing are
not the same.
o
Conscience: God’s revealing and man’s obeying
are not the same.
o In
other words, “revelation” and “illumination” are not the same.
What about “natural theology” and “natural law”? Perhaps you have heard of these, especially
Americans where the latter is often claimed as fundamental to the founding documents
of our nation.
·
Natural Theology is the view that there
is sufficient information in nature and sufficient ability in man whereby man
can know God by reason. If you
are unfamiliar with this, let me share some additional thoughts.
o Baker’s
Dict. of Theology (Everett Harrison) calls it a “theology constructed
irrespective of revelation.” L. S.
Chafer (Dallas Seminary; in his Systematic Theology, Vol. 1, p4) gives a “best
possible definition” of this: “a science which is based only upon those facts
concerning God and His universe which are revealed in nature.” But Harrison adds this: "The basis of
natural theology in the church is a supposed quality in man that enables him to
know God as Creator if not as Redeemer...This rudimentary knowledge will then
form the starting point for a fuller understanding of God and hence of the
divine-human relationship." (P372, Bakers Dict of Theol).
What do you think about this? Is it possible to have such a developed
theology without needing the Bible? More
on this in the next post.
No comments:
Post a Comment