Confessor
Puritan Board Senior
As I looked at John Gill's commentary on 1:18, I noticed that he said the unbelievers referred to in Romans 1 are those who have not yet heard the Gospel (they know only "the law of nature"), or at least unbelievers who have not necessarily heard the Gospel. (If this preliminary assumption is wrong, then I have no questions.)
Anyway, just what does this passage mean? Clearly, natural revelation does not reveal Jehovah as specifically as the Bible does -- e.g., unbelievers who have never heard the Gospel do not know anything about the Trinity; they do not know that God is Trinitarian from natural revelation. Yet, v. 20 says that "God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse."
What is the nature of this knowledge via natural revelation? How extensive is it? And, seeing as the Bible is so important -- i.e. seeing as we are to learn about God with the Bible as our sole authority -- then how can we blame people who have never heard the Gospel for not knowing things that only the Bible could reveal?
Clearly a line has to be drawn, for Romans 1 speaks of very specific attributes of God, yet the specificity cannot be too extensive, or the Bible itself becomes superfluous, because we would know everything from natural revelation. Where is that line?
Anyway, just what does this passage mean? Clearly, natural revelation does not reveal Jehovah as specifically as the Bible does -- e.g., unbelievers who have never heard the Gospel do not know anything about the Trinity; they do not know that God is Trinitarian from natural revelation. Yet, v. 20 says that "God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse."
What is the nature of this knowledge via natural revelation? How extensive is it? And, seeing as the Bible is so important -- i.e. seeing as we are to learn about God with the Bible as our sole authority -- then how can we blame people who have never heard the Gospel for not knowing things that only the Bible could reveal?
Clearly a line has to be drawn, for Romans 1 speaks of very specific attributes of God, yet the specificity cannot be too extensive, or the Bible itself becomes superfluous, because we would know everything from natural revelation. Where is that line?