General Revelation

[Michael Wrenn]

I'm reminded of Jesus' words to Thomas, "You have seen me and believed, but blessed are those who don't see yet still believe."

Couldn't you say that of those who don't hear, but still believe? I'm not saying that they are saved apart from Christ's work, I'm just saying that God in his grace may credit whatever faith they do have in whatever revelation they have been granted.

And I agree with your pastor friend. I believe God will give more light to those who follow what light they have been given, but isn't God's grace deep and wide enough to cover someone's ignorance of scripture's more specific revelations, if for whatever reason more light (i.e. the gospel) never comes? Do we really believe that Rahab had any real understanding of Jesus or his atoning work on the cross? I think she just feared the God of Israel and chose to hide the spies in faith that their God would save her too. That response didn't earn salvation. She still deserved hell and just punishment for her sin, which Christ took on her behalf. But, didn't God simply credit righteousness to her account on behalf of the faith she acted upon in hiding those spies? Is that mustard seed size of faith sufficient for God, in his Grace, to exalt the humble, the weak, the undeserving, if He so chooses?

Notice, I'm not saying she deserved salvation. She didn't merit it. It is ALL of grace.

Does what I'm saying make sense?

It makes sense.

Besides the verses I gave above, John Wesley believed what you are positing, most of his theological descendants believe it, the Quakers believe it, most General Baptists believe it, many Anabaptists believe it.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Can one be saved through general revelation? Why or why not?

No, they cannot; because it is the special revelation of Jesus Christ's work on the cross which is necessary for salvation, but the following of "general" revelation is, however, IMO a sufficient guarantor of exposure to the gospel and the opportunity to accept and repent.

I believe that there are a few....who have followed what "general" revelation there is, to the point that God HAS, in fact, sent "a preacher"...in other words, I do not believe that there are any people who are capable of belief or, alternatively, who would or might, in certain alternative circumstances repent and believe in Christ, who have been robbed of the opportunity to hear and accept and repent.

I think there simply is no such thing as someone who's eternal fate is based upon any happenstance of circumstances. I believe that God knows anyone who would or might repent and believe, and that their "general" revelation is sufficient to condemn...there simply ARE no persons, who, through virtue of circumstance are capable or likely to truly believe (given special revelation) who are simply without a witness.

Put succinctly....the "what about those who have never heard?" question, is answered by saying:
They don't exist.
Hope that helps and provides a certain possible response.

 

[Skandelon]

Oh, and one more thing Tom. The missionaries are the ones bringing 'more light' so that those who hear and see it might experience the abundant life we can have in Christ.

That light may be given to one who is already been seeking (fearing) God from what they have known, or it may be coming to someone who has ignored the general revelation. Either way, both need it still. Just because God COULD save Thomas without showing him more light, he knows it would be better to reveal more of himself so that relationship can be more than mere fear.

 

[Skandelon]

So, Heir, what you are saying is that those who respond to the light of general revelation will most certainly be sent 'more light' (special revelation), right?

While that may be true, you have to admit that the 'special revelation' of the gospel wasn't really made known until after Christ came and the apostles were sent, so do you believe that prior to Christ's coming that people may have been saved without ever having that full revelation brought to them?

 

[HeirofSalvation]

And I agree with your pastor friend. I believe God will give more light to those who follow what light they have been given, but isn't God's grace deep and wide enough to cover someone's ignorance of scripture's more specific revelations,

My answer would be no....but it would be with the caveat that anyone who satisfies the conditions you have set forth....will, in fact, have a "preacher" sent to them....

if for whatever reason more light (i.e. the gospel) never comes?

I don't think that is a possible scenario...do you see the difference between where I am coming from and you are coming from? We are both trying to fairly answer the: ("What about those who never heard"?) question, and we both demand the same basic result...That is, that no one is a victim of mere ill-luck and chance...but rather than say that there are alternative possibilities for those with lesser revelation...I believe anyone capable of salvation is GIVEN that revelation, and anyone WITHOUT that revelation is one who would not believe in any set of circumstances.

Take the Rahab example....she wasn't ULTIMATELY judged in lieu of the special revelation given to Israel, but WITH IT!! Her "general revelation" was a sufficient guarantor that she be provided the "special revelation" which she could respond to for salvific faith. She, in fact, became a Jewish proselyte and an ancestor of Christ himself.

 

[kyredneck]

So, Heir, what you are saying is that those who respond to the light of general revelation....

Jn 3:21 makes it crystal clear that those that come to the light God has already wrought within them....

 

[HeirofSalvation]

So, Heir, what you are saying is that those who respond to the light of general revelation will most certainly be sent 'more light' (special revelation), right?

Yes

While that may be true, you have to admit that the 'special revelation' of the gospel wasn't really made known until after Christ came and the apostles were sent, so do you believe that prior to Christ's coming that people may have been saved without ever having that full revelation brought to them?

Well, this sounds like merely explaning the difference between the OT believer and the NT believer....I think they are one and the same, and they are ALL saved by the finished work of Christ, and that the OT believer "believed" what was the "shadow" of better things to come, and that all OT believers are all secured in Christ like anyone else...I don't see how there is any difference in my scenario between any OT believers and any NT believers.

 

[Tom Butler]

I'm reminded of Jesus' words to Thomas, "You have seen me and believed, but blessed are those who don't see yet still believe."

Couldn't you say that of those who don't hear, but still believe? I'm not saying that they are saved apart from Christ's work, I'm just saying that God in his grace may credit whatever faith they do have in whatever revelation they have been granted. (reminds me of those who believed John the Baptist's message but had yet to be baptized in Christ...clearly they believed the truth of what had been revealed up to that point but they just didn't know the whole truth yet)

And I agree with your pastor friend. I believe God will give more light to those who follow what light they have been given, but isn't God's grace deep and wide enough to cover someone's ignorance of scripture's more specific revelations, if for whatever reason more light (i.e. the gospel) never comes? Do we really believe that Rahab had any real understanding of Jesus or his atoning work on the cross? I think she just feared the God of Israel and chose to hide the spies in faith that their God would save her too. That response didn't earn salvation. She still deserved hell and just punishment for her sin, which Christ took on her behalf. But, didn't God simply credit righteousness to her account on behalf of the faith she acted upon in hiding those spies? Is that mustard seed size of faith sufficient for God, in his Grace, to exalt the humble, the weak, the undeserving, if He so chooses?

Notice, I'm not saying she deserved salvation. She didn't merit it. It is ALL of grace.

Does what I'm saying make sense?

You've raised some excellent questions, and I'm hesitant to reject the possibilities out of hand. I don't want to limit God or tie his hands, so to speak.

There is another reason. Someone very close to me once gave his testimony he didn't really know when the Lord saved him. That produced some reaction from those who believe we ought to be able to go back to a day and time when we were saved. His testimony was that he was a religious man, but one day he realized that he now enjoyed studying God's word. It was no longer a chore. He began to love the preaching of the Word. He began to love the Lord more than he had ever done before. Yet he didn't know when this change occurred in him. I wondered about this testimony too, but this was one of the Godliest men I ever knew. Something happened to him and he was changed.

I believe God saves through means. I believe the gospel is the power of God to salvation. I believe God saves through preaching. I believe that Jesus is the way, truth and light and nobody comes to God except through Him. Yet, I will leave the door open for God to act unilaterallly as he wills and on whom he will.

 

[kyredneck]

You've raised some excellent questions, and I'm hesitant to reject the possibilities out of hand. I don't want to limit God or tie his hands, so to speak....

Well, yea, Christ did tell us that the Spirit blows where He wills; doesn't sound as if He limited God or tied His hands now did He? Don't you believe Christ?

I believe God saves through means. I believe the gospel is the power of God to salvation. I believe God saves through preaching.....

Per post #7:

"What do you mean by 'SAVED'? (I assume you gom it up, as do the many, and make it to be synonymous with the 'birth from above')"

 

[Skandelon]

the OT believer "believed" what was the "shadow" of better things to come, and that all OT believers are all secured in Christ like anyone else...I don't see how there is any difference in my scenario between any OT believers and any NT believers.

Do we have any evidence that OT believers really understood the concept of the coming messiah and his crucifixion for the atonement of sins? I mean even his own apostles weren't really getting it until after he was resurrected.

My point is, what if someone (for whatever reason) never really understands the concept of who Christ was or what he accomplished; yet does express a measure of faith in God's revelation. What would prevent God, in his grace, to credit their faith as righteousness? Do you feel like God couldn't do that in the same manner he might do so for a mentally handicap person, or an infant who dies? Understand my question?

 

[Yeshua1]

Nothing? .......

General revelation means that ALL persons will NOT have an excuse, as His creation shows off that God exists, but ONLY special revelation of the Bible and especially jesus enables a sinner to be saved by the grace of God!

For sinners can and do see God as alive, as Muslims/Buddhists/Hindus all do, but the ONLY way God saves out sinners is by special revelation, as JUST the elect receive that from the Lord!

 

[Skandelon]

General revelation means that ALL persons will NOT have an excuse

No excuse for what?

 

[Yeshua1]

No excuse for what?

that God does not exist, that they are not sinners etc!

 

[Jedi Knight]

I heard Adrian Rodgers once say that every man has enough light "general revelation" to condemn them but not enough to save them.

 

[Iconoclast]

You say this as if you a sure he doesn't have a choice in the matter. (when I say 'choice,' I actually mean two actual options)

So, either man freely choose to suppress the truth, by his own independent will, but he could have willingly done otherwise (which is what I believe). Or man is born conditioned to suppress the truth by design from his creator.

(Note: that design may be fallen due to Adam, but nevertheless it was by God's design, for He and no one else decided what the result of the fall would be. He decided what the punishment for Adam's sin would be. No one else could have decided that except God, so you can't avoid the charge that this is by His design.)

All men suppress truth is what scripture declares.Your speculation does not change rom1. Men are fully responsible for their sin...not God.
You cannot seem to post on this without blaming God.That is sinful.

 

[Skandelon]

All men suppress truth is what scripture declares.

Which verse says that?

Did Enoch, Job, Abraham, Moses and Isaac suppress the the truth? Are you suppressing the truth right now?

Your speculation does not change rom1. Men are fully responsible for their sin...not God.

My statement doesn't contradict Romans 1 or that conclusion, so I'm not sure what you are talking about.

You cannot seem to post on this without blaming God.That is sinful.

I'm arguing that your view of God (not God himself) teaches that all mankind is born (by God's design) only able to suppress the truth, which makes God seem to be culpable for that suppression of the truth. I reject that notion so I don't blame God, your view does. At least that is my argument, which you refused to answer.

 

[Skandelon]

that God does not exist, that they are not sinners etc!

So, the verse is saying that the lost don't have any excuse for not believing God exists? Yet, if they do believe God exists and they fear him, like many are said to have done in OT times, is it your contention that they couldn't be saved?

 

[Michael Wrenn]

I heard Adrian Rodgers once say that every man has enough light "general revelation" to condemn them but not enough to save them.

And Adrian was wrong.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

Do we have any evidence that OT believers really understood the concept of the coming messiah and his crucifixion for the atonement of sins? I mean even his own apostles weren't really getting it until after he was resurrected.

My point is, what if someone (for whatever reason) never really understands the concept of who Christ was or what he accomplished; yet does express a measure of faith in God's revelation. What would prevent God, in his grace, to credit their faith as righteousness? Do you feel like God couldn't do that in the same manner he might do so for a mentally handicap person, or an infant who dies? Understand my question?

You didn't address this to me, but maybe you won't mind my answering:

God could do this, has done it, and will continue to do it. His word affirms it.

 

[Bronconagurski]

You didn't address this to me, but maybe you won't mind my answering:

God could do this, has done it, and will continue to do it. His word affirms it.

First, God did what? Second, give me examples of how he had done it, will continue to do it, and how He affirms that? Because I see that there is no other name other than Jesus whereby we must be saved. I don't see that as general revelation.