Sentences with phrase «meant by revelation»

The resolution of this dispute depends on what is meant by revelation as a «given.»

Not exact matches

Following the revelations that the U.S. National Security Agency had secured all - but - unfettered access to user data held by the largest U.S. tech companies, including Microsoft, Google and Yahoo, politicians and businesses around the world were struggling to figure out what exactly this news meant for them.

Established in 2006 by Australian activist Julian Assange as a means to anonymously divulge sensitive information about countries and institutions, Wikileaks was best known for its revelations about U.S. military operations, diplomatic activities, detention camps and abetting of NSA leaker Edward Snowden — until 2016, when the site involved itself in the U.S. presidential election by releasing troves of Democratic party emails allegedly supplied by Russian operatives.

Betz is on safer ground when he suggests that «the ultimate point of the analogia entis, as employed by Przywara, is precisely not by philosophical means to close the gap between God and creatures, grace and nature, reason and revelation (as Barth seems to have feared), but rather to widen it.»

We can not meaningfully affirm that Christ is the incarnation or revelation of God unless we can explain what we mean by God, (Ibid., p. 2.)

Wright notes that «Israel was thus constituted, from one point of view, as the people who heard God's word — in call, promise, liberation, guidance, judgment, forgiveness, further judgment, renewed liberation, and renewed promise... This is what I mean by denying that scripture can be reduced to the notion of the «record of a revelation,» in the sense of a mere writing down of earlier, and assumedly prior, «religious experience.»

No, it means that God calls people to respond by faith to the revelation that they have been given, and when they do, God makes sure that they receive further revelation.

In order to interpret this core - principle of revelation, we must understand its essential presupposition; namely, that events are present «in» other events - present not just abstractly (through «eternal objects»), i.e., mediated by the «general,» but as singular events that effect their further history by their unique concreteness (PR 338).12 Whitehead recognizes precisely this constellation when he says:» [T] he truism that we can only conceive in terms of universals has been stretched to mean that we can only feel in terms of universals.

By Christ he meant the principle of New Being, which is the eternal principle of God's self - revelation, which his contemporaries recognized in Jesus.27

The imagery of thought provided by this period literally closed the modern mind to dimensions of meaning which such terms as «revelation,» «spirit,» and «grace» convey.

I have a bible study and i was given this chapter over past weeks i had it over and over not getting what it realy means... when i read this sermon i was transformed by it and i got even more revelation thank you.

And what he seems concerned to emphasize in this recent article is that (assuming the truth of the Christian understanding of existence) the Christian revelation embodies a view of life that objectively represents the meaning of human existence, so that if a person is indeed to grasp in a reflective way what the meaning of life in fact is he or she must understand it precisely in the way represented by the Christian witness.

For this reason the narrative portrait of Paul's relationship with the apostles is not simply meant to show that Paul was not taught by them; it is also meant to model the unity that is only possible in the fear of God and the revelation of Christ in the gospel.

That means, it seems to me, rejecting the ancient vs. modern distinction as the key to understanding the West and even reason vs. revelation the way it is understood by many Great Books teachers.

«Trinity» did not originally mean, as it does for some later, that there are three kinds of revelation, the Father speaking through creation and the Spirit though experience, by which the words and example of the Son must be corrected; it meant rather that language must be found and definitions created so that Christians, who believe in only one God, can affirm that he is most adequately and bindingly known in Jesus.

It means that each soul, redeemed from self - interest by The revelation of Divine Love, is taken and used again for the spread of that redeeming work.»

All these features are characteristic of the writing of books of revelation and do not require explaining by means of theories of various sources or even of various documents.

The deposit of revelation is said to be finished or fixed, but this can be a salvific teaching only if it means that there is sufficient evidence in our past history to convince us that we live within the horizon of a promise which by its nature always looks to the future for fulfillment.

In her account of her «shewings», by which she meant the disclosures (or series of revelations) which she believed were given her in the cell which as an «anchoress» or hermit she occupied adjoining St. Julian's Church in Norwich (hence the name which has been given her), she sets forth what she has learned to be the proper «ghostly [spiritual] understanding» of the basic Christian message.

And from this starting point there is an incessant coming and going, from the revelation by means of the word to the word concerning the revelation, from the word as inspiration to the word freely spoken as expression of this inspiration.

He remembers that there have been plenty of theologians down to the present day who by subtle doctrines and distinctions have not wanted to admit the meaning of that text from the Letter to Timothy, or who tried to evacuate its clear sense and force by saying that such non-Christians could not believe because they have not got the historical revelation of God's word and so could not be saved, because without real faith salvation is impossible.

Yet he does not seem to recognize that this can only mean one thing: The revelation of God in Christ must come to you and me by way of a kind of interchange between individuals in deep communion, whereby the meaning of past events can possess our minds and transform our lives, even as it did in the fellowship that formed around Jesus.

But the prophet, as distinct from both priest and sage, received his revelation deep in his own consciousness by means that for him were genuinely supernatural.

The revelation of God, given in Scripture, is regarded as authoritative only insofar as it provides clarifying images which illuminate experience as it is critically interpreted by reason.Theology within this framework articulates the meaning of the inherited tradition of the Christian community in the light of empirical knowledge supplied by the sciences.

Jeremy i am surprised you never countered my argument Up till now the above view has been my understanding however things change when the holy spirit speaks.He amazes me because its always new never old and it reveals why we often misunderstand scripture in the case of the woman caught in adultery.We see how she was condemned to die and by the grace of God Jesus came to her rescue that seems familar to all of us then when they were alone he said to her Go and sin no more.This is the point we misunderstand prior to there meeting it was all about her death when she encountered Jesus something incredible happened he turned a death situation into life situation so from our background as sinners we still in our thinking and understanding dwell in the darkness our minds are closed to the truth.In effect what Jesus was saying to her and us is chose life and do nt look back that is what he meant and that is the walk we need to live for him.That to me was a revelation it was always there but hidden.Does it change that we need discipline in the church that we need rules and guidelines for our actions no we still need those things.But does it change how we view non believers and even ourselves definitely its not about sin but its all about choosing life and living.He also revealed some other interesting things on salvation so i might mention those on the once saved always saved discussion.Jeremy just want to say i really appreciate your website because i have not really discussed issues like this and it really is making me press in to the Lord for answers to some of those really difficult questions.regards brentnz

When we inquire further as to the concrete meaning of Jesus, after his death, within the life of the early Christian community, we find ourselves at once forced to deal with two theological issues of fundamental importance: the nature of the church and the nature of revelation; for the essential and permanent significance of Jesus lies in the fact that he was the center and head of the church and that he was the central figure in that revelation of God which we have received and by which we are saved.

It is now «revealed» — it being understood, of course, that by «revelation» is meant an actual presence and activity not a mere announcement or declaration.

Now «revelation» is to a considerable degree a «weasel - word,» to use a term employed nowadays by some of the semanticists; that is, it is a word which is susceptible of many meanings and which therefore must be defined if we are to grasp the significance which it possesses for Christians.

By liberal Protestantism we mean those churches which stress the historical approach to the Bible and hence its spiritual rather than literal inspiration, and find the source of Christian authority not in any creedal statement but in God's total and progressive revelation of himself in nature, history, human experience, and supremely in Jesus Christ.

This does not mean that the content of revelation needs to pass the specific tests devised by academically critical methods which generally accept only those ideas that pass muster with scientists.

H. Richard Niebuhr suggests that these sources offer to faith, among many other rich elements, the gift of an image that makes intelligible what would otherwise remain unintelligible: «By revelation in our history we mean... that special occasion which provides us with an image by means of which all occasions of personal and common life become intelligiblBy revelation in our history we mean... that special occasion which provides us with an image by means of which all occasions of personal and common life become intelligiblby means of which all occasions of personal and common life become intelligible.

Since Catholics believe in tradition as a channel of revelation, they do not expect everything to be demonstrable from biblical evidence alone, nor by means of neutral historical research.

And the philosophical concept of revelation leads us back to this primacy of what is said over the inspiration of the narrator by means of a second analogy that is no longer that of inspiration, but that of manifestation.

By an opaque concept of revelation, 1 mean that familiar amalgamation of three levels of language in one form of traditional teaching about revelation: first, the level of the confession of faith where the lex credendi is not separated from the lex orandi; second, the level of ecclesial dogma where a historic community interprets for itself and for others the understanding of faith specific to its tradition; and third, the body of doctrines imposed by the magisterium as the rule of orthodoxBy an opaque concept of revelation, 1 mean that familiar amalgamation of three levels of language in one form of traditional teaching about revelation: first, the level of the confession of faith where the lex credendi is not separated from the lex orandi; second, the level of ecclesial dogma where a historic community interprets for itself and for others the understanding of faith specific to its tradition; and third, the body of doctrines imposed by the magisterium as the rule of orthodoxby the magisterium as the rule of orthodoxy.

A hermeneutic of revelation must give priority to those modalities of discourse that are most originary within the language of a community of faith; consequently, those expressions by means of which the members of that community first interpret their experience for themselves and for others.

H. Richard Niebuhr in his classic study The Meaning of Revelation, put this idea in the context of religious revelation:»... no universal knowledge of things as they are in themselves is possible,... all knowledge is conditioned by the standpoint of the knower.

The aim of natural theology is to show by means of a scrupulously positive («objective», «secular», «ecumenical») inquiry that knowledge of God may be had without resort to revelation.

At its heart would be the Christian proclamation that there is a sovereign God, incarnate in Jesus Christ and attested by the biblical revelation, and that this reality shapes the meaning and purpose of human existence.

We live by revelation, as Christians, as artists, which means that we must be careful never to get set into rigid molds.

Is not this only what has been meant by religious people when they have claimed that the «initiative» in any «disclosure» or «revelation» must come from God?

The RE syllabus is too often dictated by the needs of public examinations, but even within this some fine work could be done, and the Faith communicated for what it is: essential knowledge, rich and deep, that opens wide the whole of life's meaning and purpose and sets it in the context of centuries of God's revelation and 2,000 years of Church history that is thrilling to discover.

But it is the domain of theology, which is a speculative discipline, to elaborate upon what is given in revelation by means of reason.

This point is particularly important when we are placing our own religion's sense of life's meaning, allegedly given to us by a special historical revelation, into an encounter with other traditions» sense of life's meaning, given to them by their own symbolic traditions.

This means that we will not experience revelation simply by reading the Bible or attending a religious service.

In terms of the long human search for adequate representations of the universally intuited dimension of mystery we may now gain more understanding of what Christian theology means by a «special» historical revelation.

This is what is meant by the theological notion of «general revelation.»

In this he argues that the proclamation is not revelation, but leads to revelation, so that the historical Jesus is the necessary and only presupposition of the kerygma (a play on Bultmann's famous opening sentence of his Theology of the New Testament), since only the Son of man and his word, by which Jeremias means the historical Jesus and his teaching, can give authority to the proclamation.

We have approached the question of revelation by considering what it might mean in terms of six distinct aspects of our situation.

I do mean to suggest that we can begin by assuming that what each claims to be true — claims with greatest confidence based on its primary revelation and surest intuitions — is true.

It's hard to begin to know what the Cheshire - based makeup artist meant by this odd revelation about her husband's hygiene, nor what to think of the defender's dazed smile in the photo.