Yom Kippur is the Day of Atonement on the Jewish calendar. Here is a very interesting video (introduced by Todd Bolen) on the significance of the sacrificial lamb in Jewish thought, pointing us to the atonement of Christ.
The Sacrificial Lamb from SourceFlix.com on Vimeo.
What It Is and What It Isn’t by Keith Mathison
Original article starring Paul Newman, the warden utters one of the most memorable lines in film history when he says, in his deep southern drawl, “What we’ve got here is failure to communicate.” I am often reminded of this line when reading about or participating in discussions of the Reformed doctrine of general revelation – particularly when that discussion touches on contemporary debates about science and Scripture.
In one of the Q&A sessions at Ligonier’s 2012 National Conference, Dr. Sproul was asked his opinion on the age of the universe. His answer, which should be carefully listened to by all Christians who are involved in discussions of science and Scripture, may be viewed here. Because his answer was so helpful, Ligonier posted an eight-part blog series explaining the theological and hermeneutical basis for what Dr. Sproul said. At the heart of these blog posts was an attempt to outline the Reformed doctrine of general revelation.
Some, who are either not familiar with the traditional Reformed doctrine of general revelation or who disagree with the Reformed doctrine, have expressed concerns that it entails placing fallible scientific theories on the same level of authority with Scripture – or worse, on a higher level of authority. Such a concern stems from a failure to understand the Reformed doctrine of general revelation. This failure to understand may be the fault of Reformed Christians for not stating the doctrine clearly. It may be the fault of critics for not listening carefully. It may be the fault of both to one degree or another. In any case, what we have is a failure to communicate that is leading to serious misunderstanding and misrepresentation.
The purpose of this brief post is to explain what the traditional Reformed doctrine of general revelation is, and just as importantly, to explain what the traditional Reformed doctrine of general revelation is not.
What General Revelation Is
In order to understand the Reformed doctrine of general revelation, it is necessary first to have a clear grasp of what Reformed theology means by the term “revelation.” The word “revelation” simply refers to “revealing” or “unveiling.” In Reformed theology, it can refer to God’s act of communication to man or to the content of that communication.
Reformed theologians have also traditionally defined general revelation in contrast to special revelation. Article 2 of the Belgic Confession (on the means by which we know God) states the distinction in the following words: Continue reading
Keith Matthison
“How old is the universe?”
During the second Question and Answers period at the Ligonier Ministries 2012 National Conference, the speakers were asked this question in connection with the ongoing debate between Christians who think the universe is less than 10, 000 years old and those who think it is much older. Dr. R.C. Sproul took about five minutes to answer the question, and what he said in that brief period of time should be heard by every Reformed Christian who is interested in this subject and by every Reformed Christian who is discussing and debating it.
Please take a few minutes to watch Dr. Sproul’s entire response.
Science, Scripture, and the Age of the Universe from Ligonier Ministries on Vimeo.
The importance of what Dr. Sproul says in this response lies in the fact that he reminds us of certain issues that are necessary to a proper approach to this question, issues that are routinely mishandled, neglected, or simply ignored. Dr. Sproul, for example, reminds us of the source of both general and special revelation, the difference between God’s revelation (general or special) and our interpretation of that revelation, and the fallibility of our interpretations of both kinds of revelation. In doing so, he reminds us of several aspects of a distinctively Reformed approach to questions of science and Scripture that have been largely forgotten in the debates of the last several decades. Continue reading