No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 February 2009
It is generally assumed that the two words ‘revelation’ (apocalypsis) and ‘manifestation’ (phanerosis) should be considered as synonymous and used as such in the exegesis of the New Testament. Nevertheless a closer examination of their peculiarities and use in the early Church would probably bring forward new material for the theological discussion of our time. Our study purposes to survey the matter and to relate its findings to the question of a revelation to the heathen and to the reason of their being without excuse before God's judgment.2
page 44 note 1 cf. Barth, K., Against the Stream (S.C. M. Press, London, 1954), p.203Google Scholar.
page 44 note 2 The Bible quotations will appear in English. It should nevertheless be mentioned that the texts have been selected considering the two original words: phanerosis and apocalypsis, as put forward by Schmoller, A., Handkonkordanz zum Griechischen Neuen Testament, 9th ed. (Stuttgart, 1951).Google Scholar
page 46 note 1 cf. Barth, K. and Brunner, E., Natural Theology (Geoffrey Bles, London, 1946).Google Scholar
page 47 note 1 Brunner, E., Revelation and Reason (The Westminster Press, Philadelphia, 1946), pp. 65ffGoogle Scholar. Brunner, E., Doctrine of Creation and Redemption, Dogmatics II (The West-minster Press, Philadelphia, 1952), pp. 29ff, 42ffGoogle Scholar. Barth, K., Church Dogmatics (Edinburgh, T. & T. Clark, 1956), Vol. I, 2, pp. 303ff.Google Scholar
page 47 note 2 Barth, K., Petit Commentaire de l'Építre aux Romains (Labor et Fides, Geneva, 1956) PP. 26ff.Google Scholar
page 48 note 1 O. Cullmann writes in his article ‘Necessita della Teologia per la Chiesa secondo il Nuovo Testamento’ which appeared in Protestantesimo, No. 1, 1958, that we should be reminded that the verb to know in the New Testament Greek allows an interchange between the active and the passive form, as in Gal. 4.9 and in 1 Cor. 13.12. If we can apply this rule to the text of Rom. 1.18ff then we should have many interesting suggestions: ‘that which may be known of God’ should read ‘that through which God has known’ (v. 19); ‘when they knew God’ should read ‘when God knew them’ (v. 21) and finally ‘knowing the judgment of God’ should read ‘being known by the judgment of God’ (v. 32).