Determining the Source of Knowledge of God and the Concept of Revelation - Essay Example

Determining the Source of Knowledge of God and the Concept of Revelation Revelationexactly implies ‘confession’ or ‘exposure’ of something unknown or kept as a secret in the past. Obviously, the term is applied to numerous different settings, some insignificant, just like when new discoveries or knowledge all of sudden surface in scientific research or in personal lives. A revelation like this could make people humble or uplifted, worried or even shocked (Edwards 63). The impact of these revelatory experiences could be dramatic, perhaps altering how people see their lives or the world. Christian theology provides some explanation of the sources of the Church’s assertions of God’s existence. It has to explain and give credibility to the basis of the believers’ claims about the existence of God. Answers to questions related to this are not usually mentioned in the doctrines, prayers, and songs of the church. These main declarations of faith do not try to provide rational explanation of the truth arguments that they hold. The most popular Christian statement of belief, “I (or We) believe…” (Migliore 26) Yet, theological analysis of these declarations is bound to ask how faithful believers have arrived to such knowledge, or the source of it. This paper will try to answer these two questions: first, what is the source of the claims about God; and, second, what is the role of human reason in the knowledge of God? These questions have commonly been talked about in theology, particularly in the contemporary period, under the subject of revelation. Source of Christian Faith Christianity and Eastern faiths do not accept the idea that God can be known or studied through scientific methods. God can only be known through how he created the universe, the world, and living things. Intuition tells people that there must be a maker who created the world. This is the accepted idea of the design theory to confirm God’s existence. Simply, the design theory says that the universe cannot be because of accident, but a planned work by a creator. Yet there is a better method to know God than using scientific methods. God made ways to reveal himself to people, which is known as ‘revelation’. It does not reduce or ignore human reason, but exposes realities that are outside the human mind. Christianity says that humans can have knowledge of God only through revelation. God’s effort to reveal himself is shown in the Bible, where he uses different languages of the world so that people can understand him. Revelation is personal and enlightening. Its main goal is to save human beings from their weaknesses and make them closer to God. As written by David Kelsey (1975) (as cited in Wahlberg 20): There has been a widespread consensus in Protestant theology in the past four decades that the ‘revelation’ to which Scripture attests is a self-manifestation by God in historical events, and not information about God stated in divinely communicated doctrines or concepts. Also, and in the same way, Ray Hart says: “No proposition would gain wider acceptance than the following one: the content of revelation is not a body of propositions to be accepted as a condition of faith” (Wahlberg 20-21). The belief that revelation is made up of “information about God stated in divinely communicated doctrines or concepts”, or that what the revelations says is “a body of propositions” is usually called propositional revelation (Huffman 59). Propositional revelation explains not just the belief that God makes himself known by talking or speaking in human languages, but also other likely ways of revelation, like that described by John Locke. Locke says that God reveals through passing on real or actual beliefs to specific people. This manner of revelation is considered propositional, but not a form of speaking. The belief that God’s existence “can be known with certainty from the consideration of created things, by the natural power of human reason” (Hitchcock 376) is called ‘natural theology’. Yet, people should know the difference between the moderate accounts of natural theology that are becoming important nowadays and the strong natural theology that is described by the Vatican I. The moderate accounts of natural theology do not say that it show or even explain faith in God’s existence (Rashkover 83). God, as Christianity understands it, means a timeless, all-powerful, and always good personal figure whose presence is needed. A being that does not have any of these features does not meet the criteria of being God. Moderate accounts of natural theology usually believe in the presence of some type of designer, maker, or creator without saying that the maker is God. At times moderate natural theologians simply claim that scientific realities about the natural world or nature reflect greatly with, or match, the Christian belief, hence providing it evidence (Wahlberg 21). Both the concept of propositional revelation and the argument that there is a strong natural theology are quite not accepted. Modern theologians appear not bothered by declining both. It seems that they believe that God could be revealed through other methods or ways. Knowing is a propositional method. Propositions are usually seen as the main bringers of truth-values, or, propositions can be real or unreal. Some philosophers see propositions as abstract, theoretical, or nonconcrete aspects, such as numbers (Wahlberg 21-22). For those who do not know the philosophical idea of a proposition, it could be helpful to view real propositions as similar to facts, or situations, whereas untrue or made-up propositions are only likely situations. Such is, according to numerous philosophers, an appealing knowledge. Yet, people do not have to believe that this knowledge is right; they only have to think that propositions are there. To have knowledge of something requires being linked to a proposition. As argued by John Lamont, “Many theologians seem to feel that propositional knowledge is something different from direct knowledge of realities, and that there are forms of knowledge of reality that are non-propositional or non-conceptual, and even superior in some respects to propositional knowledge” (Wahlberg 27). Yet, as Lamont explained, this belief is wrong. The target of knowledge normally involves several proposition—it is not only, for instance, a physical thing. For instance, to know a specific house means to know it as a house, or, to know that it is a house. As argued by Lamont, “It is not as if propositions, instead of realities, are the objects of propositional attitudes like knowing, believing, hoping, fearing, and so on: rather, it is in having propositional attitudes that we know realities, fear realities, and so on” (Wahlberg 27-28). Therefore, people know a specific house by being aware of propositions about it. If God desires private communication with the people, he should ensure that they are aware of certain propositions about him. The ‘should’ at this point is the ‘should’ of theoretical/rational requirement. It is theoretically unlikely for someone to have a personal connection to certain reality without knowledge of, or rationally thinking, several propositions about such reality. But there are theologians who reject this, and who hence can view revelation as a non-logical idea. They think that revelation could act as a mediator between God and human beings without giving people access to God’s knowledge. But there are those who argue that revelation is a logical idea. There could be many real propositions about God that God will not allow people to know because humans are not able to understand them. God could be impossible to understand or grasp. Yet if God is never understandable, or, if there are not real propositions about God that people can understand, then God cannot create or begin a personal communication with humanity. Also, Christianity says that a correct personal communication between human beings and God needs people to see or believe God as God. But faith in God does not only have to see him as an all-powerful and merciful being. Being all-powerful and merciful is not enough for being God. According to the Christian faith, God should be seen as the only ‘creator of heaven and earth,’ (Edwards 65) or, a truth on which all things fixed, mortal, or limited depends for its presence. Role of Human Reason in the Knowledge of God Some scholars believe that the uniqueness of God is not drained by its connection with the creation and evolution of the natural world but also connects with God’s making of rational people. Although as natural creations human beings have their beginnings in God as maker of the universe, humans are also rational or reasonable and their connection with God as rational beings adds to the uniqueness of God. For scholars, the issue of God’s specific connection with human rationality starts a dialogue or debate about the role of God not just as the creator or beginning of the physical world but also as the creator of the goal or purpose of his creations for the main goal of human rationality is to try to understand God’s love and sacredness in the world (Smith 348). God is the divine beginning of the ethical and scientific areas of life. Both areas are based on reason and based on God (Rashkover 17-18). Some theologians make use of the word ‘revelation’ to talk about the specific creation of human rationality by God—the link between the being of God and the evolution of humans as rational beings. Yet if revelation comprises another form of creation, such as the world’s creation, it can imply none other than a rational relationship with God as creator. In particular, revelation is the main basis or root of the moral and theoretical rationality of humans. It is not a historical or physical relationship between humans and God (Rashkover 18): Just as being is the necessary presupposition for becoming, so is it also… for the becoming [of] a man. It is only by virtue of revelation that the rational creature, man, comes to be. This statement is of the same logical power as the one about the uniqueness of being as substance namely, it has to be the presupposition for becoming. In other words revelation means none other than the rational state of the likelihood of useful or practical human moral and theoretical rationality, even though to believe that God is the core root of theoretical rationality is different quite from what it means to believe that God is the core root of moral reason. God is the maker of theoretical rationality, or God is the rational first principle or the perfect creation of the universe from reason (Smith 348-9). The creed of revelation does not make a false attempt to offer a complete theory of knowledge. Every time the creed is viewed in this manner, it is not startling that the question of whether or not it is reasonable or even possible to have knowledge of God becomes more essential than genuinely knowing God. The accusation that revelation is an exaggerated notion in present-day theology also acquires credibility if revelation is compared with a group of doctrines demanding wholehearted acceptance (Smith 346). As stated in the Scripture, faith is mainly an issue of respect and belief in God rather than sheer scholarly acceptance of a group of influential doctrines. Yet, an understanding of God in the biblical practice does not imply only information on a single topic whose presence people may more or less coldly admit. In reality, revelation provides ‘saving knowledge’ (Migliore 26-27), an understanding that focuses on the fulfillment, unity, and meaning of human life in connection to other people and God. In other words, God is known merely through faith. Yet, if it is an error to compare understanding of God with mere knowledge or information, it is also an error to view faith as a hopeless alternative. Religious people say that what they insist about God is real. Christian life and faith are attached to credible knowledge of the plan and nature of God (Edwards 65). Several doctrines of revelation stress the objective or reasonable and others the subjective or personal sides of revelation. Certainly both objective and subjective views of the concept of revelation are vital and should be kept together. Revelation is the open and civil self-revelation of God through specific happenings that are confirmed and interpreted by believers. As explained by Paul Tillich, “Revelation is always a subjective and an objective event in strict interdependence” (Migliore 27). Revelation points to God’s living word acting and communication through certain individuals and happenings and to the unseen working of the Spirit of God allowing people to witness, interpret, and confirm this presence. Conclusions For a lot of people, faith and doctrine are two words that are useless, impossible, and uninteresting. But the Bible, especially explaining and understanding the Bible as the supernatural revelation of God to human beings, is the important way to know and understand God, his plan for humankind, and his creations. Human beings, whether they understand or not, have certain beliefs which make up their theological view of God, other people, and the world; and such belief, whether learned in school or merely through the passing on of knowledge, has important effects on how people behave and think. Works Cited Edwards, L. Clifton. “Artful Creation and Aesthetic Rationality: Toward a Creational Theology of Revelatory Beauty.” Theology Today 69.1 (2012): 56-72. Print. Hitchcock, Christina. “A living god, a living word: Christian and Muslim revelation in perspective.” Missiology: An International Review 42.4 (2014): 375-385. Print. Huffman, Douglas. Christian Contours: How a Biblical Worldview Shapes the Mind and Heart. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Academic, 2012. Print. Migliore, Daniel. Faith Seeking Understanding: An Introduction to Christian Theology. UK: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2004. Print. Rashkover, Randi. Revelation and Theopolitics: Barth, Rosenzweig and the Politics of Praise. New York: A&C Black, 2005. Print. Smith, Joseph. “Primal Revelation and the Natural Knowledge of God: Brunner and Catholic Theology.” Theological Studies 27.3 (1966): 339-357. Print. Wahlberg, Mats. Revelation as Testimony. New York: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2014. Print. Read More