救贖－個體的生存見證抑或普遍的歷史意義？

This essay discusses chiefly the historical interpretation of history given by Karl Lowith, Bultmann, and Pannenberg. Their interpretations must be related to such questions : what is the relationship between the individual witness to the redemption in his or her own life and the universal meaning of the history of salvation? How can the universal meaning of history be drawn from the individual existence? Or, conversely, how can the meaning of an individual's life be conformed and integrated in the universal meaning of history? Lowith wanted to dispel the history of the world in the history of salvation, so he took any possible eyewitness of the universal history of salvation away from the individual life. Bultmann combined the Christian eschatology with the existential philosophy, and made a new perspective on the historicity of history. That is his new contribution to the historical interpretation of history. In order to prevent eschatology from entering into the history of salvation ＂externally＂, Bultmann established his existential theology to constitute the ＂inner＂ historicity of history. However, in Pannenberg's view, Bultmann could not solve the problem caused by the universal meaning of hi story due to the merging of historicity into the existentiality. Pannenberg claimed that the individual eyewitness to salvation, which could reveal the hi storical knowledge to us, was the gift from God. The historical knowledge cannot be separated from the Christian faith. Pure knowledge of history does not necessarily lead to the Christian faith, but the problem for us is how to understand the historical events in the revelation of God the Christ. Therefore, Pannenberg insisted on regarding revelation as hi story, meanwhile he showed further the relationship between the revelation as history and the revelation as God.

並列關鍵字