I offer the following as a parable to show how to view the relationship between general and special revelation. Sometimes a parable can give clearer understanding than normal discourse. This parable parallels the claim of Biologos that DNA proves we descended from 10,000 monkeys, (or hominids) not from 2, Adam & Eve.
National Geographic reported on Sept 25, 2017 the astounding discovery in Jerusalem of the bones of Mary, the mother of Jesus. There is no question it was the Mary of the Bible because a small clay tablet over her bones says she was the mother of Jesus and of James, Joses, Jude and Simon, brothers precisely so named in Mark 6:3 and Matt 13:55. A week later bones were discovered in a tomb in Jerusalem showing scars of nails on the ankles and wrists. And yesterday, a DNA test of Mary and this crucified person showed they had the exact same DNA. Therefore we can confidently say that Jesus never rose and Christianity is a fraud.
The following are several responses I’ve heard to this new discovery in Jerusalem that parallel the responses to the latest discoveries of science that prove that there was no Adam and Eve, and no literal Genesis one.
- We have to give careful attention to these scientific discoveries, because science is God’s general revelation.
- We just can’t decide which one is right, because God has two books : general revelation and special revelation, and they sometimes appear to contradict. To help us fit them together, we have to limit the Bible to salvation issues, and be skeptical of some of its historical claims. Often science is a better source of past history.
- We can’t reject this new science with claims that the Bible denies it, because the Bible is always an interpreted Bible. And we may have the wrong interpretation.
- Maybe the church believed the resurrection, for 20 centuries (18 centuries in the case of Gen 1-3), but we have such sophisticated scientists today, some with several doctor’s degrees from the most prestigious universities, that we must give them a lot of weight for what they say. Those discoveries in Jerusalem were made by the finest geologists trained at Harvard and Yale. Besides some famous Reformed theologians studied this science and believe it is correct.
- I believe the Bible because God never lies, because the resurrection of Christ is prophesied in the Old Testament and God always keeps his promises, and because I believe the infallible witness of the Holy Spirit and the more than 500 witnesses of the risen Christ, rather than scientists living millennia after the events, men who were not there and are fallible.
- Without doubt this “scientific discovery” is just another case of the Piltdown hoax. (Bones were planted in 1912 in gravel in Piltdown, England to prove the missing link, using the skull of a man and the jaw of an ape, with acid and files to make the two match. 500 people wrote papers on it, before the hoax was discovered in 1953). Similarly, the clay tablet in Mary’s grave was also probably forged. Much origin science is put together by people who have a vested interest in doing the devil’s work to deceive and make us doubt the truth of the Bible. The Jerusalem “discovery” is no doubt the same because the hammer (man’s scientific ideas) breaks, the anvil (the Bible) stands.
The first four answers are based on a false idea of how we must define general revelation. Our definition must come from the Bible itself. According the the Bible, general revelation teaches two things: 1) the nature of God: Romans 1: 20 “For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, his eternal power and divine nature, have been seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.” “The heavens declare the glory of God.” And 2) general revelation teaches the law of God: Romans 2:14-15 “The Gentiles… show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness….” These two things: God’s nature and his law are revealed to everyone, that’s why it is called general. But the age of the earth, how Adam was made, and the resurrection of Christ, are are not part of general revelation. They can be known infallibly only by special revelation. Special revelation is called special because it is known only by some people, not all people, by people to whom God reveals it in His Word.
General revelation does not come through the minds of men: it is directly from God through what he has made and by the law in the heart. It is our direct view of the sunrise, the growth of plants from seed, the steadiness of the constellations, the regularity of our heartbeat, the giving of fruitful seasons (Acts 14). It is so direct that we are “without excuse” for not seeing God in it.
Science, however, comes through the mind of man, and in the area of origins science, (which analyzes events where no man was present), man’s heart affects what he sees or wants to see. Because man is a sinner he is going to willfully ignore the creation and the flood according to II Peter 3:5-7 – “They willfully ignore that by the word of God the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of water and by water, through which the world at that time was destroyed being flooded with water.” Because it is filtered through the mind of man, we are not “without excuse” if we don’t agree with the scientific theory of the big bang, or the extinction of dinosaurs 66 million years ago, or the goo-to-you-via-the-zoo theory. Such things may not be considered “the second book”, for they are not general revelation.
The problem with answer 3 is that it casts doubts on all Bible interpretation. But correct interpretations are possible if they 1) take account of the type of literature, whether it is history or poetry ( and Genesis one is absolutely clear that it is history), 2)take the meaning of words according to near context . So day has to mean “day” a) because of “evening and morning” and because of the numbers given to each day; and b) because of the use of the word elsewhere as in Exodus 20 , “for in 6 days…” For if God wanted to say a day was a million years, there is a Hebrew word for it called “age” , eon. But he did not say “6 days you shall labor, for in 6 eons I made heaven and earth.” If the days were eons, but God said days, he is lying to us.
Answer 4 is based on a logical fallacy called argumentum ad authoritatem. If Luther had accepted this kind of argument, there would have been no Reformation, because the majority of theologians accepted transubstantiation, indulgences, the immaculate conception of Mary, and infused rather than imputed righteousness as the basis of justification.
Only answers 5 and 6 are correct.
Musings of Gary from the heart