The existentialist view may seem to be supported
by scriptural texts such as, «No one has ever seen God» (John 1:18) and «Now we are seeing a dim refection in a mirror; but then we shall be seeing face to face.
They were those particular acts either prohibited
by scriptural texts or contrary to natural law — acts done with the wrong person, in the wrong way or for the wrong purpose.
Not exact matches
I don't want to compare my experience to that of Moses, since I was only called to open my heart, but I find the
scriptural account moving in that when Moses first notices the burning bush — a moment we have come to think of as a great theophany — the impression given
by the
text is more humdrum.
For each of the five points, they provide a theological explanation for the point, and then «prove» it
by citing numerous pages of
Scriptural proof -
texts, without ever attempting an explanation of any of those
texts.
By contrast, a teaching such as the Immaculate Conception, as with so much Marian dogma, makes claims that not only stand on a highly contestable reading of an extremely narrow
scriptural base but also seem to stand in tension with, if not even in contradiction to, significant biblical
texts.
In this section I intend to illustrate the christological hermeneutic
by showing how it bears on
scriptural exposition My aim is not to give an exegesis of the
texts in question but simply to show the kind of approach I would use in discovering the meaning of Scripture.
Further, the
texts Bates helps us penetrate afresh need — as do all
Scriptural texts — to be repeatedly pondered; and for this task, the concepts, distinctions and guidelines offered
by the dogmatic Tradition can help.
But the significance and content of all such views will be defined completely in terms of thinking about them in the view of larger facts of Jesus Christ and the gospel — not primarily
by gathering and arranging pieces of
scriptural text that seem to be relevant to such topics in order to pinpoint the «biblical view» on them.»