of stopping.
The Wesleyan doctrine of prevenient grace intervenes at this point for Wesleyan-Arminians, with its presentation of a God who sees our condition and helplessness, and extends grace to us before we ask, indeed, before we are capable of asking. For Calvinists predestination intervenes. Those who are predestined to be saved are enlightened by God.
In the late 4th and early 5th centuries CE, two powerful theological minds were in conflict over this very issue. Augustine held the doctrine of original sin in its strongest form. According to Augustine, human beings are not capable of seeking God or choosing good. Pelagius believed that human beings could choose either way. Calvinism was built on the pelagian understanding. If people can only choose the right by the power of God's grace, then those who receive God's grace do so, and others do not.
Jacobus Arminius, in the 16th century also opposed Calvinism. His doctrines have been preserved through the Wesleyan tradition. Wesleyan-Arminians are often accused of semi-pelagianism, or even outright pelagianism. According to Arminians, prevenient grace given to everyone which gives them a choice, thus nobody is predestined. Doctrinally there is a difference, but the effect is that every person has a choice for good or for evil. The opportunity is provided by God, but the individual must nonetheless choose to accept it.4
But Paul continues later:
12 All who have sinned apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law. 13 For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but the doers of the law who will be justified. 14 When Gentiles, who do not possess the law, do instinctively what the law requires, these, though not having the law, are a law to themselves. 15 They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, to which their own conscience also bears witness; and their conflicting thoughts will accuse or perhaps excuse them 16 on the day when, according to my gospel, God, through Jesus Christ, will judge the secret thoughts of all. — Romans 2:12-16 (NRSV)
This passage makes several additional points. First, according to verses 15 & 16, this knowledge is sufficient for one to take into judgment, and God may find the person acceptable. I think this denies certain concepts of original sin which suggest that there is no option for a person to come to understand God without the scriptures or some form of special revelation. (This is different from the requirement for prevenient grace.) Second, there is an interesting possible allusion to the law written on the heart (Jeremiah 31:33), a characteristic of the Messianic age. Third, it is apparent that one can follow the law instinctively.
To make this complete, to make each person without excuse, there must not only be the necessary information, but also the ability to make the choice. Either prevenient grace or a pelagian understanding of the will provide that element.
Other passages on the creation emphasize that the creation, the physical universe, results from God’s word, from God’s will and command. This suggests that we can learn a great deal about God simply from the way he has constructed the universe. I would suggest that Christians ignore this aspect of God’s revelation too frequently
Let me suggest some questions:
1 What can we learn about God from nature?
2 What is the role of the Holy Spirit when we receive revelation?
3 Does the Holy Spirit always enlighten the mind of one who honestly seeks knowledge (a broadened, prevenient grace)?
4 How does the revelation of God in the natural world interact with direct or special revelation?
I want to suggest some answers, though I would hardly suggest these are firm conclusions.
Learning from Nature
The things somebody makes definitely reflect something about that person. We can see this most clearly in art, but if you look at a person's work product, you will see something of their nature. At the same time, you will not learn everything about that person through the things they have made.
Supposing I write a computer program to do something fairly simple and straightforward, but it is something that many people want to do. Let's say that I do a really good job so quite a number of people use the program, and regard it as effective. They could conclude some things about me from looking at the program. First, I do know how to program a computer. (Note that in real life I haven't produced any substantial commercial successes!) Second, I was able to produce a program that accomplished something they wanted to accomplish. They could imagine from those observations that I'm a careful person who does good craftsmanship. (It would be hard, of course, for them to be certain that this single instance hadn't exhausted my capabilities.)
But they could also make some more questionable assumptions. They might assume that I was dedicated to the task performed by that particular program and thus had gone to an extraordinary effort to make sure people would be able to do that one thing. They might imagine me as a committed crusader, spending hours daily trying to carry out my crusade. Of course all that would ignore the possibility that I am a mercenary who desires lots of money and credit for my skills.
When we deal with the creation, we're in a similar position with God. We can look at the way the universe functions and we can see certain things about what is necessary to live in the universe. We can try to imagine the attributes of God that are reflected in his natural universe. These would include the law of cause and effect, and the apparent desire for creatures that have a range of freedom of action. Simple application of the law of cause and effect could make moral creatures of us, though we might choose rather different value systems.
But if God has a greater purpose for this world, this universe, and for our individual lives, the universe itself is not going to inform us. For that we would need special revelation if we are to know at all.
The Holy Spirit and Revelation
It's easy to talk generally about the Holy Spirit and his involvement in revelation. We know that the Holy Spirit teaches us (John 14:26). The question is just what is that role? I will discuss this more later, but right now I simply want to suggest that the Holy Spirit is in the business of helping people pursue truth. There is no knowledge that is a prerequisite to having the Holy Spirit work in your life.
I combine the teaching role of the Holy Spirit with the basic freedom apparent in the universe to suggest that the Holy Spirit enlightens everyone to whatever extent they are willing to receive. Obviously this places me in direct opposition to the Calvinist position on predestination, yet it seems to combine the evident freedom of the universe and the experience of God quite nicely.
This same freedom suggests that God's Holy Spirit enlightens everyone, and not just a select few. Fairness would call for that. We have no way of being certain that God intends to be fair—just would be a more Biblical term—but the Bible does seem to suggest that he is. It seems difficult to me to combine fairness and partiality.
Combining General and Special Revelation
The role of each type of revelation seems obvious to me, provided that we simply look at how each functions. We look at nature and observe its facts. Facts of the physical world and explaining how they fit together are the province of scientific observation. We have repeated demonstrations of the effectiveness of this process in functioning technology, such as the computer and word processor I'm using to produce this book.
On
