The title of this post may bring certain concepts to mind as you read and think about it, but very likely, it will bring up different ideas for each reader. That is because there is no such thing as one, monolithic world view, not even among all Catholics, or all Orthodox groups, or all Protestant groups. There will be some balance point that includes to a greater or lesser extent all or some of the following concepts; concept of God, concept of the Holy Spirit, concept of Jesus, and concept of the Bible. Also, how large does tradition loom in a particular faith community? Thomas Aquinas developed a system to try to better formulate how we go about learning about and understanding God. Aquinas developed the concept of two areas of how we set about to understand Gods, ways of knowing which he called “natural revelation” “supernatural revelation”. In pursuing this work, Aquinas further developed the area of natural theology; how to learn about God by using observation and rational thought, collectively termed reason. We now sometimes apply the terms “special revelation” and “general revelation”, which align with Aquinas’ concepts of “supernatural revelation” and “natural revelation”.
Aquinas’ supernatural revelation is directed revelation from God for human understanding – miracles, scripture, and other supernatural means beyond human reason. Natural revelation is understanding of God through observation of the natural world and the use of reason. Various groups give differing weight to supernatural revelation and natural revelation. When these these modes of revelation are accepted by believers, they can be given varying weights. Some may give these methods of knowing equal weight and importance. Some traditions accept natural revelation only through the filter of supernatural revelation (i.e. Does this observation align with the scriptures?). The relative importance and relationship between these ways of knowing has serious consequence for the development of a world view.
Indeed, the Methodist Quadrilateral, formulated by John Wesley, uses four major information sources to come to theological understanding; Scripture, Tradition, Experience, and Reason. If a Christian relies on this or a similar diversity of information to seek understanding of God and development of doctrine, it is less likely that such an individual will adopt a lopsided approach and arrive at a wrong understanding.
Some faith groups open themselves up to doctrinal problems by giving unbalanced consideration to the various ways of knowing and understanding. I know some groups are bible-centered to the exclusion of all other information sources. What a horrible way to attempt to exist in a a modern, scientifically-driven world. Some very liberal faith groups try attempt to rely only on human reason, ignoring the miraculous.
I challenge you to undertake some self examination. How have you arrived at your beliefs? What weight do you give to the various ways of knowing and understanding? Why don’t all faith traditions arrive at the same “truths”? Why do many world religions arrive at the same or similar “truths”? If we step back and think in terms of using the Methodist Quadrilateral, when you examine your personal belief or the doctrine of the church, in which you participate, what is the basis for that particular belief or doctrinal statement?