Once the existence of a Supreme Intelligence is accepted, the next question we face is whether that Supreme Intelligence has communicated with humankind. We can have no real knowledge of God without revelation. God must act in history and speak to us if we are to know anything about God.
Even if the existence of a Supreme Intelligence/Creator is admitted, some people maintain that God is too transcendent to communicate with time-bound, finite beings. As a result, some individuals may hold to an impersonal deistic concept that sees God as totally isolated from the world and indifferent to the concerns of humankind. While not going the whole way to atheism, deists maintain that there is no evidence that God is concerned with humanity when human cruelty and the indifference of nature are considered.
Another option is monism (all is one) as in Buddhism, which has no concept of a god that possesses intellect, will, or conscious purpose. In fact, Buddha was essentially an atheist. However, like other Eastern religions, all lives are governed by the impersonal law of karma, the idea that an individual's actions determine the course of his or her future lives in the scheme of reincarnation. But how did the impersonal give rise to a purposeful mechanism like karma with its iron-clad justice? Buddhists would probably say that such a question should not be asked. The existence of karma is simply a fact that cannot be explained. However, such a worldview is held by faith and cannot be proven.
The late Christian apologist and philosopher, Francis Schaeffer identifies the one presupposition that causes Westerners to reject the possibility of revelation----a commitment to the concept of an absolute naturalism; that is, a "closed system of cause and effect" that has never once been broken. However, this view is also held by faith for a proof would require an exhaustive knowledge of all moments and places in time and space. Such knowledge is not available to any person or group of persons. Furthermore, it can be demonstrated that exceptions to natural law (the normal course of cause and effect) have been observed and documented. For example, there are several medically documented miracles that involve direct physical healing of diseases or conditions that were not psychosomatic.
Philosopher, Dallas Willard states that ". . .there is the widespread conviction now that human consciousness (representation, thought) simply must be interpreted in physical or naturalistic terms." He adds, "Naturalism means that consciousness must be understood as a feature of either the brain, or of language as a social practice."
Therefore, naturalism has no room for the classic concept of truth, which is objectively real and external to our consciousness. While Willard's discussion focuses on the concept of truth, the totally naturalistic (reductionistic) views of human consciousness he cites render the idea of revelation meaningless as there is no truth or reality that is not completely shaped by biological and socio-linguistic factors. This includes ideas about God. Therefore, statements or propositions about God are viewed as meaningless. Given such as view, there is no truth spoken into the human condition from outside. He quotes John Hick as saying, "The world is indeed there, and is as it is; but we do not have access to it as it is in itself, unperceived by us. We are aware of it only as it impinges upon us and is perceived and inhabited by us in terms of many kinds and levels of disposition meaning."1
Refutations of physicalism characterize it as a scientific reductionism, which confuses conscious states with physical states. In addition, clinically documented cases of near death experiences also seem difficult to explain by an appeal to a strict physicalism.2
Another objection brought forward claims that the early Christians along with the general population of that time were very superstitious and credulous and could be conned into believing fanciful tales. While this was somewhat true of Greco-Roman culture, the Jews had more reserved views about miracles and divine action. In fact, one group within Judaism, the Sadducees, were the secularists of their day. They did not believe in miracles and the resurrection of the dead and were legalists and pragmatists. Also, given the violence of oriental despots, such as Herod and the Roman occupiers of Palestine, everyone knew that dead people do not rise again. Everyone understood that death was final. The first Christians proclaimed the resurrection against all expectations both religious and practical. The Jews expected a victorious Messiah, a glorious military leader, who would immediately overthrow the Romans and set up the Kingdom of God on earth. Christ's disciples were in total despair following his crucifixion and went into hiding for fear of their fellow Jews.
However, if the Supreme Intelligence created the earth, and created human beings using whatever process and amount of time desired, the late Christian philosopher and apologist, Francis Schaeffer asks, "Why couldn't the Supreme Intelligence speak to those creatures that the Supreme Intelligence had created? Is there one rational or philosophical argument against it?" Is such a thing beyond the capability of the Powerful Intelligence that brought the universe and the natural world into being? We cannot know the Creator's intentions unless the Creator speaks. The issue here is whether or not that is a possibility. The answer, in light of this logic, is yes.3
Enlightenment naturalists retained the idea of a creator but rejected the idea of revelation based on rationalistic pride and the view that the universe is a machine and, in fact, humans are machines. The "philosophes" were smitten with the idea that the universe must be rationally comprehensible to the human mind and, therefore, advocated for and assumed a closed system of cause and effect. However, they failed to ask whether we can trust our own perceptions given that we are ourselves a part of nature. How can we humans as merely physical entities transcend our own physicality?
Schaeffer asks "Is there one reason why God, the creator of the human mind and human language, cannot reveal God's reality, nature, and purpose to humanity using language?" (Not exhaustively, but clearly enough to accomplish God's purpose.) Schaeffer continues, "If the uncreated Personal [God] really cared for the created personal [humans], it could not be thought unexpected for God to tell the created personal things of a propositional nature . . ."4
Schaeffer continues, "Within this frame-work, why would it be unthinkable that the non-created Personal would communicate with the created personal in verbalized form, if the non-created Personal made the created personal a language-communicating being?"5
Finally, Schaeffer states, ". . . there is no intrinsic reason why the uncreated Personal (God) could communicate some vaguely true things, but could not communicate propositional truth concerning the world surrounding the created personal (humans) . . ." 6
Jews and Christians have maintained the idea of revelation preserved in an authoritative scripture. Jews and Christians revere the Torah, Prophets, History, Psalms, and Wisdom literature of the Hebrew Bible. Christians extend Scripture to include the New Testament documents, which we believe correctly interpret what we refer to as the Old Testament. It is granted that the Biblical documents were written in certain cultural contexts (the ancient Near East and the Greco-Roman world). While the cultural background is ancient, it still speaks to the basic issues of human life. Revelation must speak to multiple generations, including pre-scientific people in a range of cultures and life situations. While 21st century people may complain that the Bible is pre-scientific, John Calvin stated the following words in his Commentary on the Psalms,
"The Holy Spirit has no intention to teach astronomy . . . the Holy Spirit would rather speak childishly than unintelligibly to the humble and unlearned."
The Scriptures are addressed to all generations living through the centuries. Therefore, while they are set in a particular time and culture, they are basic, universal, and transcultural---simple, yet profound.
One piece of evidence pointing to the authenticity of the Biblical revelation is the presence of ideas that are counter-intuitive or unexpected given normal human behavior and perspectives. For example, there is something unusual about God's judgment as it is portrayed in the Bible, which runs counter to what might be expected if such an idea was merely the product of human imagination. If the idea of God's judgment had to do exclusively with the punishment of other people groups, while the Israelites were always portrayed as virtuous and godly, then we might suspect a mere tribalism or an all too human ethnocentrism to be behind Biblical accounts of God's use of the Israelites as instruments of his judgments on the peoples occupying Palestine. However, in Biblical history the judgment of God also falls on God's own people who are called "stiff-necked" and "stubborn". After years of ignoring the pleas of the prophets to cease turning away from God, God allows his own covenant people, the Jews, to go into captivity after being defeated by the Assyrian and Babylonian Empires. This runs counter to the human tendency of ethnic groups to justify their own behavior while disparaging the behavior or worth of other groups.
Another example from the New Testament is the account of women as the first witnesses of Christ's resurrection. In first-century Palestine, the testimony of women was not recognized in legal matters. Women were regarded as having little credibility. If the gospel accounts of the resurrection were fabrications, Peter and John would no doubt have been portrayed as the first witnesses. The account of the women being the first to encounter the empty tomb and the resurrected Christ is included simply because it happened that way.7
Skeptics often ask how Christians can trust an ancient book written by pre-scientific people. However, just because the early Christians were pre-scientific does not mean they were incapable of accurately recording carefully memorized sayings and events. Scholars have often emphasized the careful transcription and preservation of traditions in ancient Near Eastern culture. This practice was especially characteristic of the Jews. In contrast to the current hyper-skepticism about the reliability of the Gospels, a strong case has been made for their contents being based on the carefully preserved testimony of eyewitnesses.8
There is further confirmation in Luke's accurate history recorded in the Book of the Acts of the Apostles, which has been confirmed by archeology and contemporary historical accounts. Luke accompanied Paul on some of his missionary journeys and so some portions of Acts are literally eyewitness accounts written from a first-person point of view. Luke sets out his approach to recording the events of Christ's life in his gospel as follows:
"Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught."
These words indicate that some care was taken to record events and places accurately with reliance on eyewitness testimony. For example, Luke's identification of the cities throughout Asia Minor is completely accurate. At one time, scholars thought Luke made an error in not mentioning that Iconium was in the province of Lycaonia along with Lystra and Derbe. However, later archeological discoveries confirmed that Iconium was in Phrygia proving that Luke was correct. He also accurately records a variety of details, such as the titles and names of Roman officials in several cities.9
Then there is Paul's appeal to eyewitness testimony in his first letter to the Corinthians, which all New Testament scholars regard as authentic."For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me." (I Cor. 15:3-7)
____________________
1Dallas, Willard, "Truth in the Fire: C.S. Lewis and the Pursuit of Truth Today" (For the C. S. Lewis Centennial, Oxford, July 21, 1998.) (www.dwillard.org)
2J.P. Moreland, "Consciousness as a Case Study: How Scientism Fails", jpmoreland.com, 2018.
3Francis Schaeffer, He is There and He is Not Silent, Tyndale House Publishers, 1972 p. 91.
4Ibid p. 91ff.
5Ibid p. 91ff.
6Ibid p. 91ff.
7Keller, Timothy, The Reason for God: Belief in an Age of Skepticism, Riverhead Books, 2008, p. 213.
8Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony. Wm. B. Erdmans, 2006.)
9Josh McDowell, Evidence for Christianity: Historical Evidences for the Christian Faith, Thomas Nelson, 2006 p. 95.