Biblical revelation speaks to this impasse through its perception of mystery as appearing to us precisely in the mode of promise.
Not exact matches
It may be increasingly necessary, however, to allow the concrete situation, rather than the
biblical revelation, to propose the «doctrinal» loci or the organizing forms in terms of which
biblical faith needs to
speak, because the secularism of our time has so transformed the way people think that Christian faith is now in a cross-cultural situation.
It is the
Biblical notion that miracles have ceased to be normal... This is not to say that God has stopped performing miracles, or that the Holy Spirit has stopped working, but only that the Apostolic miracles such as
speaking in tongues, prophecy /
revelation, and healings have ceased as a normative gift to individual believers: 1) The Holy Spirit's purpose in imparting the «sign gifts,» has expired 2) The sign gifts were given exclusively to the original Twelve Apostles, so that the sign gifts and Apostleship are inextricably linked 3) The gift of Apostleship no longer exists
However,
biblical faith has influenced theologians to
speak also of «
revelation in history,» «historical
revelation,» or «special
revelation» in addition to God's universal or «general» self -
revelation.
Christians can rightly
speak in this case of natural - law theory, but we should also
speak without shame of
biblical revelation.
(We are
speaking here of the formal theology of
revelation and not of the concrete life of faith in which, at least to some degree, the theme of promise remained alive, though not always in the
biblical sense.)
Should one
speak only of God's self -
revelation as events in
biblical history?
Third, if the forms of religious discourse are so pregnant with meaning, the notion of
revelation may no longer be formulated in a uniform and monotonous fashion which we presuppose when we
speak of the
biblical revelation.