To what extent does Special Revelation include factors not spelled out therein (merely implied factors)? Or, are there no implied parts to Special Revelation? Is its nature that of its being monolithically explicit? Was it monolithically explicit prior to the New Testament? Or is it monolithically explicit only now that, as many Christians believe, the Bible is the 'complete revelation of God for the Church Age' (that is, prior to the Thousand Year Reign---a Reign in which, presumably, Christ shall teach more of the Divine than what the Bible, as we have it, spells out)?
Among Christians there is a claim that, in effect, says that Special Revelation has some factors that are mutually alien to General Revelation. For example, many believe that Genesis 1 teaches that the Sun (and Moon and stars) are created belatedly after many of the things that normally rely on the Sun's light, heat, and gravity; so that, according to them, this is an instance of the kind of Special Revelation that is contrary to what that normal reliance would have us expect as to the sequence in which God would create the Sun.
The claim is essentially that, (One), Fallen Man, left to himself, is unable to see Gospel Truth in General Revelation, and, (Two), therefore, General Revelation does not even imply Gospel Truth.
But it seems to me that much of Special Revelation falsifies the conclusion which is (Two). For example, it seems to me self-evident that much of the Bible implies that Fallen Man, left to himself, is not the objective measure of what it is, in total, of which General Revelation consists.
Among Christians there is a claim that, in effect, says that Special Revelation has some factors that are mutually alien to General Revelation. For example, many believe that Genesis 1 teaches that the Sun (and Moon and stars) are created belatedly after many of the things that normally rely on the Sun's light, heat, and gravity; so that, according to them, this is an instance of the kind of Special Revelation that is contrary to what that normal reliance would have us expect as to the sequence in which God would create the Sun.
The claim is essentially that, (One), Fallen Man, left to himself, is unable to see Gospel Truth in General Revelation, and, (Two), therefore, General Revelation does not even imply Gospel Truth.
But it seems to me that much of Special Revelation falsifies the conclusion which is (Two). For example, it seems to me self-evident that much of the Bible implies that Fallen Man, left to himself, is not the objective measure of what it is, in total, of which General Revelation consists.