Pointedstick wrote:
Xan wrote:
I'm not tortoise, either, PS, and I'm short of time right now, but I can shed some light on some of those.
* Abraham, Isaac, and the ram: God demands a sacrifice so terrible that we can't pay it. He lets us off the hook and provides the sacrifice himself.
* Moses and the bronze serpent:
And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.
God's gift of forgiveness of sins [the snakes that were biting people were a punishment for sinning] by itself foreshadows Jesus. Now picture the forgivness of sins being fastened to a pole and lifted up in the air.
I've often noticed that highly religious people seem to have minds that are far more highly attuned to symbolism and associations between seemingly unrelated things than mine is. My brain just doesn't make these kinds of associations at all. It's hard for me to even really understand how you could do it. The connections just seem so thin. Maybe that's part of the problem. All the richness that other people see just passes me by because it's expressed in a hidden language of symbolism that I don't understand.
PS,
One "clue" that made it much easier for me was to read the First Testament (OT) through the lens of the Second Testament (NT); that is we know the answer so use it to go back and look at the path for how we got to the answer. Understanding the symbolism and associations came slower at first for me, then gained speed as I kept seeing more and more of the First Testament revealed as a foreshadowing of Christ. It came slowly to me, just like many subjects take years to somewhat master - e.g. math starting with counting in first grade and ending with calculus or "advanced" math in college. The more I learned, the more I wanted to learn - like my wanting to learn how to be proficient with a weapon - mucho effort, commitment, study, and practice required! Corny example of "revealing", but kind of like noticing an odd color car on the road, then seeing many more of them that were previously unnoticed as you meander on down the highway.
You also asked: "Maybe can you describe what revelation looked like to you? How did this stuff come to be revealed? What did you have to do? What was it like?"
First, before I address your questions, here are definitions and discussions concerning "revelation" from an overall point of view that may be helpful in understanding my personal answers at the end of this post. Sorry for the length, but you are asking "big" questions so I thought I'd provide you a detailed response that gives Scriptural sources and some linguistic material so we can perhaps be on the same page when you read my personal reply (italicized sources are Lutheran CTCR documents from 1998 and 1995):
From first document: Although God is known through the things he has made and through his continuing providential work (natural revelation), Christian faith is based upon special revelation. Natural revelation is given to all and to all equally. It is given in creation and in the life and life circumstances which God gives to each human being. Therefore, Paul can speak of the “eternal power and deity” of God which has been revealed since the creation of the world (see Rom. 1:18–23). On the other hand, special revelation is specific and particular. It is historical and is given through human speech and through human act. Special revelation is given through the various theophanies in which God speaks (Exodus 3–4; 19–20), and it is given through the speaking of the inspired prophets to whom the “word of the Lord” came (see Jer. 1:4, 9 as typical). Moreover, special revelation is given in the election of a particular people through whose history God makes known his will and begins to effect his final, salvific purposes. The special revelation which the church apprehends is therefore constituted in the history of Israel in the particular rendering of that history given in the books of the Old Testament. Finally, God’s special revelation is given in that particular history of Jesus of Nazareth in which God’s speech and God’s act become one. Jesus is, in the specificity and particularity of his person, the revelation of God’s Word. He is the Word of God (John 1:1 f.). The revelation of Jesus as the Word of God through whom God fulfills his purpose for humankind’s eternal destiny is rendered for us through the written testimony of the evangelical and apostolic writings of the New Testament. The language of revelation, therefore, is exclusively biblical, in that through the prophetic and apostolic writings we receive and possess the normative conceptual and linguistic data of revelation. This language, and not simply thoughts and ideas abstracted from this language, is the revelation which governs the church’s use of language about God; about Jesus, the Savior; and about those who receive in faith the Spirit of God, through whom the Scriptures themselves were inspired. Accordingly, the church must resist demands to change the words of Scripture or to replace them with words derived from common human experience, cultural predilections, or the ideas of philosophers and lawgivers. The claim is sometimes made that the language of Scripture is merely the function of a patriarchal culture and that we are free—perhaps even required—to name God and to speak about him in the light of our own cultural egalitarianism. Such a claim, however, carries with it the cost of giving up the specificities of biblical revelation. Israel did not choose on its own to speak of God in the way of the Bible. Rather, God has revealed himself in the specific and particular events and words of the Scriptures. If the church is to speak meaningfully of a God who speaks and acts, and who in those words and deeds reveals himself, it is crucial that the church resist the temptation to think of the language of the Bible as merely an expression of cultural bias. The church must affirm that the language of the Bible is precisely the language by which, and alone by which, God wishes to be known and is known. The language of the Scriptures, therefore, is the foundational and determinative language which the church is to use to speak about God and the things of God.
And from second document: The term "revelation" denotes every disclosure that God has given to men of His being, will, purposes, and acts whether this be through general revelation in the things which He has made and in His continuing providence, or through special revelation as in theophanies, visions, and dreams, in the Word of the Lord that came to the prophets for the instruction of His people, or in the incarnation of His Son.
The term "inspiration" denotes the guidance of the Holy Spirit under which the Biblical authors recorded what God had revealed to them about the mysteries of His being and the meaning of His mighty acts in human history for man's salvation and under which they wrote concerning any other subject, even if it was about a matter of which they had knowledge apart from revelation (e. g., that Josiah was killed at Megiddo, that Demas deserted Paul, that Eutychus fell out of a window).
Apokalupsis (revelatio) means the drawing back of a veil to disclose hidden things; theopneustos (inspiratus) refers to that which is breathed into, infused. In theology these terms are used to express the truth that the Holy Spirit inspired the writings. When holy men were speaking about the mysteries of God's being, of His eternal purposes, and of His actions in human history, then both revelation and inspiration were involved. 2 Peter 1:20-21 teaches that no prophecy in the Scriptures about the power and coming of God's Son into human history is a matter of some human being's private interpretation of what God was doing, but holy men spoke from God as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.
Note how revelation and inspiration are related in 1 Cor. 2:9-13: the Holy Spirit reveals the mysteries of God's grace and teaches the words in which the mystery is spoken. However, inspiration is not always inseparably associated with revelation in the Scriptures. While revelation is frequently accompanied by a command to write down what was seen and heard (Ex. 34:27; Deut. 31:9; Is.8:1; Jer.30:2; 36:2; Hab.2:2; Rev.1:11 et al.), there were occasions when there was revelation without such a command (Gen. 28:10-15; Luke 2:1-14). Conversely, revelation is not always associated with inspiration. The prophets and apostles wrote of many things of which they had knowledge apart from revelation. St. Luke, for instance, says that he compiled his narrative on the basis of information delivered by eyewitnesses of the events he records. (Luke 1: 1-4)
It was by inspiration of the Holy Spirit that the apostle Paul wrote to the Corinthians that he did not know whether he had baptized anyone else besides the household of Stephanus (1 Cor. 1:16); by inspiration of the Holy Spirit he included in his Second Epistle to Timothy the plea to come soon and bring along the cloak, books, and parchments that he had left with Carpus at Troas (2 Tim. 4:9, 13); by inspiration he volunteered his personal opinion about the advisability of getting married in times of persecution (1 Cor. 7:25-26). But no revelation was needed for him to know that his memory failed him about how many people he had baptized in Corinth, or to know that he wanted his cloak and books, or to know it was his opinion that in view of the impending distress it might be better not to get married.
While inspiration is predicated of "all Scripture" (2 Tim. 3: 16), the sacred writers speak of revelation only in connection with supernatural disclosure of divine mysteries and secret counsels concerning which man could otherwise have no knowledge. (Matt. 11:25-27; 16:17; Luke 2:26; Rom. 1:17; 1 Cor. 2:10; Eph. 3:3-5; 1 Pet. 1:12; Gal. 1:12; Rev. 1:1)
From the standpoint of the Biblical authors, then, it is possible to distinguish between revelation and inspiration in that they wrote some things by inspiration on the basis of revelation, and some things by inspiration alone without need of supernatural disclosure. It is useless for us, however, to whom their writings have come, to attempt to draw a sharp line between what we have received through that operation of the Holy Spirit called inspiration and the operation called revelation, for to us all the inspired writings are revelatory. Apart from the inspired Scriptures we have no other revelation of God, of His will, and of His redemptive acts in human history which can make us wise unto salvation and which is profitable for teaching, reproof, restoration, and training (2 Tim.3:15-16). And the Scriptures do not acknowledge any other revelation that can save and instruct us if we refuse to hear them. (Luke 16:31)
Now for my personal answers to your questions: "Maybe can you describe what revelation looked like to you? How did this stuff come to be revealed? What did you have to do? What was it like?"
To me, I see, feel, smell, taste and hear natural revelation all around me. Plants, animals, mountains, waterfalls, oceans, stars, planets, the cosmos, a baby, a cell, a virus, atoms, photons that behave as particles and waves, subnuclear entities that may be matter or energy - from the very smallest we have discovered to the very largest observable. It is all so very intricate and synergistic and almost incomprehensible to me how it all works together to stay together. It seems to me there must be a Creator. The odds of a random creation to me are so small as to be extremely unlikely. It just would require a WAY bigger leap of faith than I am capable of to believe in the random worldview.
To me, special revelation is located where God promises it to be, in Baptism and the Lord's Table and wherever two or three are gathered together to hear the Word proclaimed. I was Baptized an early age (about one). I put myself in situations were two or three were gathered together to hear the Word proclaimed, explained and taught - I asked hundreds of piercing questions. I thought I was smarter than most and could find holes - I did not and as of yet, have not. The more I studied, the more it all seemed to make sense and fit together better than any human writing I'd ever read did. I never have had visions or "God is speaking directly to me right now" moments; actually, if I did, I'd worry it was demonic. Jesus did say on the cross "it is finished" meaning his work of defeating death for all time was complete - so, even though I believe God can do anything, anywhere, anytime He wants, I do not think, based on what He tells us in Scripture that direct "in your face" revelation continued past the end of the apostolic age (year 100 AD or so).
Jesus not only spoke the Word of God, He IS the Word of God. God's Word speaks and things happen. He is in the water, wine, bread and the spoken word of a called and ordained Pastor (or Priest); His Word is in the Holy Scriptures as written by man. Those Holy Scriptures are fully man written and fully God inspired and inerrant, similar to how Jesus is fully God and fully man and is fully inerrant, incapable of untruth. The work of the Holy Spirit is to make Jesus known.
What did I have to do to understand special revelation? On one hand, I would say nothing, God did it all. On the other hand, I'd say that God led me to read and study His written word and hear and ponder and probe and question His Word proclaimed by Pastors - so, did I do it or did the Lord do it? That IS the question isn't it? I honestly don't know for sure, other than for some reason, I have come to believe that God is totally in charge, but I also believe when I pick out my shirt of a morning, I have a hard time thinking God picked the shirt - but, then again, why not if He is all knowing and all powerful and all present - everywhere and at all times. Provable? No. Based on the evidence is it probable? I'd have to say a resounding yes. What was it like (to have this stuff revealed)? Awesome, scary, peaceful, hopeful, weird, humbling, joyful, and most of all eye opening. Also, a feeling of being very, very small and unworthy of the kind of love Jesus gives freely and being very, very thankful of what Christ did for me. As with what I said about natural revelation, it would require a WAY bigger leap of faith than I am capable of for me to NOT believe in Christianity.
Hope that helps to answer some of your questions.
... Mountaineer
Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help. Psalm 146:3
. Do you think I should I say I'm sharing my ubiquitarian contextual awareness?
