Knowing God

Over the past couple of days, I have begun to read through Karl Barth's Dogmatics in Outline. I have not particularly been a person who has agreed with much that I have seen attributed to Karl Barth. And in my reading so far, I find Barth's view that knowledge of God is impossible apart from a specific revelation of God to man (or at least this is where I see Barth going). No doubt, this is owing to his Reformed leanings. Thus, it is no surprise that I would disagree with it either. I do not find much that is redeemable in the teachings that are particular to the Reformed tradition (not to say that Barth's ideas are in full acceptance by other strains of the Reformed tradition).

Instead of writing where I disagree with Barth though, I will address what I believe to be the proper understanding regarding man and obtaining knowledge of God (I prefer to speak in terms of what I believe instead of what I do not believe).

First off, it is important to recognize that God is not bound to be known, but we can only know about God so much as He is willing to be shown. On that point, I doubt many would disagree with me. However, what Barth seems to stipulate is that only by revelation can we learn anything about God.

Lets define revelation. I would define revelation as the giving of some knowledge that would not otherwise be obtainable (though there are other aspects of revelation that I am not define). For instance, the idea that the sun and not the earth is the center of the solar system to ancient civilizations would be a revelation (or close to it) because they would not have the tools and knowledge to understand that. However, for a person at the invention of the telescope who had some proper understanding, to find out that the earth revolves around the sun, while an astounding find, would not be what I would call revelation. Likewise, I would find revelation the same Biblically. The idea of a Messiah would not have been revelation because the prophets foretold of the coming Messiah, but the way in which the Messianic prophecies would be fulfilled is revelation, because the Words of God revealed by the prophets did not give a satisfactory knowledge base to be able to derive the coming Messiah in the way that Jesus came.

But I do not find revelation to be the only means that God reveals Himself. God reveals Himself in nature (which would be termed a "natural theology"). Paul speaks about such in Romans 1:19-20. In Psalm 19, the Psalmist agrees in saying that the heavens (the sky) reveals the glory of God. The creation reveals God in a way. Additionally, the principles that are seen to apply to this world (though they do not work 100% of the time) speak about the one who created the world in such a way. For instance the idea that a bad deed will receive punishment (what some religions might term as "karma") show the way God Himself will in the end punish every evil deed. Likewise with the principle that good deeds receive rewards.

Knowledge of God can be obtained in other ways to. In our human nature, though flawed, do show some of the characteristics of God. Genesis speaks to humanity being make in the likeness of God. While certainly our nature is not that of total conformity to godliness, the idea of forgiveness, of unconditional love, of "brotherly" love, of justice, of righteousness, of joy, of anger, etc. all can, if properly understood, can show the nature of God.

There are multiple ways in which we can obtain knowledge about God, though many wrong conclusions can be drawn about those things is not properly understood.

And I think it is improper to assess to humanity a total inability to put some of the pieces together without revelation from God. Humanity's knowledge is essentially restricted and we are very, very, VERY prone to error in our knowledge, but this is not a denial of the ability to understand.

With all this said, the revelation of Christ was essential for us to fully understand God. A natural theology could reveal some of God's nature and workings, but it could not fully reveal who God is. But now that Christ has been revealed, all that is necessary for a full trust in God and what our future holds has been given.

It needs to be said that this revelation was made to humanity as a whole and not to people individually. Most all people are capable of putting together what has been shown in revelation and nature to take faith in God (only those who have so twisted their mind to a certain level have lost that capacity). Personal individual revelation is not required for faith (as the Reformed tradition would say), but instead all that is required for faith to be possible, humanity has. But our proneness to error, whether it be intellectual or moral, is what makes true faith in God and repentance so unlikely. However, our proneness does not take away our ability to move towards the truth in knowledge and morality. Instead, it cause us to see the world through colored lenses, where the perception of the world is changed so as to give the wrong ideas, but the perception is not totally different from reality.

Let me add that while I did not provide much Scripture and no exegesis in this, I have based my view upon an interpretation of Scripture (and experience interpreted through the eyes of the interpretation of Scripture), so I would more than welcome a discussion on the Biblical basis (especially from the Reformed tradition).