Here, we find no awareness of the Fall (except as a means of affirming total personal responsibility), no doctrine of sin as opposed to evil, no past or
future eschaton, no atonement (except as a moral example), and no Incarnation (except as a «renewal» of the sense of the present immediacy of God).
Not exact matches
He clearly means to accomplish this metaphysical task via a final
eschaton, that
future reconciling of time and eternity in which a whole is formed that can give meaning to all moments of history.
Polk's article correctly zeroes in on one of the major challenges that Pannenberg's doctrine faces: how to preserve the real openness of the
future in light of his insistence on a completed and changeless immanent Trinity, a final
eschaton, and the primacy of the
future?
Whether this
future is conceived as eternal life for the individual, or a new heaven and a new earth for mankind, or as the conquest of evil in or beyond human history, the trajectory is toward the
future, the
eschaton.
If in the Old Testament, in Judaism, and in the New Testament, the unworldly takes the form of a
future hope, of eschata — «last things» in the traditional sense — that is only one among other possible conceptions of man's relation to the unworldly, though no doubt it enshrines a genuine insight into human existence, namely that from a human perspective the
eschaton can only be
future.
The word «
eschaton» means «end times» or «last things,» but it has never simply involved concern for a far - off
future, because, as Jesus and his followers realized, what we believe about the
future dramatically affects how we live in the present.