In Romans 1, Paul introduces the idea that knowledge of God is universally available. In Rom 1:19-20, much like Psalm 19, Paul points out that creation itself is a revelation of God, a making known of the otherwise unknown. And Paul is adamant that this revelation is not inaccessible; it is “plain to them, because God has shown it to them,” not only at one time but “ever since the creation of the world” and not only in one place but everywhere since God’s “eternal power and divine nature” “have been clearly perceived” “in the things that have been made,” i.e. creation. There is, then, a universally available knowledge of God. Now, this is not a knowledge made available for the taking, but a knowledge that presses on the conscience of every person. God’s general revelation is actively engaging each and every individual.
But in Rom 1:18, Paul notes the corresponding idea of the universal rejection of the truth by unbelievers. Paul declares in this verse that the unbeliever suppresses the truth that is evident in the universal call. Note again that this is an active idea; those who should know the truth, at least of God’s eternal power and divine nature, nevertheless suppress that truth “in unrighteousness.” Now, if you were to ask the average Joe if he thinks that he is actively suppressing the truth in unrighteousness, he’d probably pop you in the nose. At a minimum, he would certainly deny it. How, then, do we square the universal availability of the knowledge of God and its rejection?
As I see it, the answer seems to lie in the fact that the fall of Adam deeply affected the whole of our persons, personalities, and psychological functions. Reflecting on Romans 1, J.H. Bavinck comments in one brief pamphlet that there is a disposition to perceive God in his works of creation, a sense of the divine as Calvin called it, which is not itself destroyed in the fall of Adam but “really is affected by the power sin” and has “come into the magnetic field of sinful desires.” Bavinck reminds us that this effect on man’s disposition to perceive God, which is related to the idea of total depravity, is an effect on the whole person, such that humanity’s cognitive, emotional, and volitional functions are all impacted. “In a certain sense,” Bavinck then concludes, “one may say that a man sees and thinks and remembers and understands what he wants to see and wants to think and wants to remember and wants to understand.” Now, when he speaks of what we “want” to see and understand, Bavinck notes that this has to be thought of “in terms of unconscious strivings.”[1]
The point, then, is that, due to this holistic effect on a person, “though this ‘sensus divinitatis’ really exists … [it] can still only work counterproductively.” That is to say, “One really does take in glimpses of ‘eternal power’ but ‘perceives’ them wrongly.”[2] Thus, someone may “know” in one sense about God, but not actually “know” reality, or at least act according to reality. That knowledge very well may remain suppressed in the unconscious so that God appears to be missed as he really is, even if a kind of seeking after God is intended by the person. This is what Paul argues in Rom 1:21-22. And then the result is an immediate, largely or perhaps even exclusively unconscious exchange of God for not-God. That is what Paul says in Rom 1:23. J.H. Bavinck thus summarizes Paul’s teaching with the following words:
The knowing faculty, whereby one can perceive the works of God, is caught in the magnetic field of sinful powers and tendencies whereby it works completely counterproductively. It still receives the image of God’s works, and also still penetrates to the unseen background [of all perceived reality], but it is only able to see that unseen background in caricature-form. There is a continual process of “suppression” and “substitution” that resides deep in the human heart.[3]
The depths of this suppression and substitution explains why someone is unlikely to acknowledge it.
The usefulness of wrestling with the universal call of God is that it highlights its relationship with the gospel call. The rejection of the universal call necessitates the gospel call. To say it another way, only answering the call of Jesus will open our eyes to God’s revelation all around us and to see it as it really is.
[1] J.H. Bavinck, “Het Probleem van de Pseudo-Religie En de Algemeene Openbaring,” Publicaties van de Reunisten-Organisatie van de N.D.D.D. 12 (n.d.): 15.
[2] Bavinck, 16.
[3] Bavinck, 8.
Comments