Global searching is not enabled.
Skip to main content
Forum

Sources of Truth

Natural Revelation and Special Revelation

Natural Revelation and Special Revelation

by Becky Zuniga - Number of replies: 2

How does God make himself known to us? The doctrine of revelation explores this with a debate betwen general revelation and special revelatioin. Author Beth Felker Jones defines general revelation as refering to God's self-disclosure in creation and the human conscience. She defines spcial revelation as refering to God's specific self-revelation in the history of Israel, the incarnation of Jesus Christ, and Scripture. She goes on to explain the the key difference is is one is available automatically and the other is not.

She seems to reconcile the debate with ongoing continuity; the idea that general revelation remains an important and valid source allowing us to know in general, some things about God, while special revelation is necessary to come to full knowledge of God. Ongoing continuity affirms the benefits of both types of revelation and allows for one to be viewed as a "starting point" and the other to be a continual process of growth and knowledge.

The biggest area of concern for me with general revelation is, as many point out, our sinful nature and the possibilty of our human sinfulness tainting what we share as truth rather than the pure truth of who God is. I find my tendancy to lean more toward special revelation, but agree with the ideas of ongoing continuity between general and special revelation. Using general revelation as a jumping off point when engaging non-believers-"meeting them where they are"-and special revelation as the driving force in growth and discipleship.

Living in the Black Hills, surrounded by the beauty of creation, I find it an easy conversation to point to a heart shaped rock and say, "the God who created that Rock placed it in the shape of a heart so you would be reminded of His love" while at the same time I would look to Scripture and Jesus Christ to further explain that love.

In reply to Becky Zuniga

Re: Natural Revelation and Special Revelation

by Ken Schenck -
Wesleyans would agree with you that, while natural revelation is very possible source of truth, special revelation is the much more reliable source because human nature can skew our mental processes. Of course, this can also happen in our readings of Scripture because, unfortunately, our minds are involved in its interpretation. That's where the church and tradition also come in handy.
In reply to Becky Zuniga

Re: Natural Revelation and Special Revelation

by Rachel Vinson -
I agree with your leaning toward special revelation as a better source of knowledge of God, especially because Scripture is the primary resource that informs us about God. According to the Wesleyan Quadrilateral, none of the other sources of the quadrilateral can operate without it.
I agree, also, with your concerns about our sinfulness that distorts our view and interpretation of general revelation, which is why I feel that Unveiled Continuity as the most valid position of the four that were discussed in the reading. This position addresses the distortion that sin causes by requiring that God, through Scripture, clears up the distortion for us. So, both general and special revelation are useful, but special is required to clear up the misinterpretation of general that our sin causes.