roger wasson company - cheapersunglasses.com

It is only in a personal encounter with God that the circle of
such isolation can be broken.(Footnote: 57: Ibid., p. 371.
On the other hand, Brunner accords, as over against Barth, at
least some negative value to argumentative theism: while the
certainty of our knowledge of God does not depend on the
processes of proof,(Footnote: 58: Ibid., p. 340. and while the
God of the proofs is a mere intellectual abstraction and not the
God of faith,(Footnote: 59: Ibid., pp. 340, 341. the “proofs” at
least show that “by thinking we do not necessarily fall away
from faith in God, but rather that we are led toward Him. . .
.”(Footnote: 60: Idem. Yet this salute to argumentative theism
seems little more than a passing gesture, since in another passage
Brunner affirms: “We must decide either for proof or for
trust, either for rational evidence or for personal encounter. . .
.”(Footnote: 61: Ibid., p. 179
Positive doctrine of divine encounter.---(1) The knowledge
of God.
More positively, the knowledge of God is an intensely personal
experience in which man finds himself directly confronted
with God in Christ through the divine revelation. Nor is
the revelation distinct from the experience: revelation is personal
encounter between the divine and human subjects; and the
revelation is not revelation apart from this relation to the subject,
God. “The revelation actually consists in the meeting of
two subjects, the divine and the human, the self-communication
of God to man.”(Footnote: 62: Ibid., pp. 33, 48.
Faith which knows God, then, is not related to a doctrine as
its object: “It is wholly a personal relationship: my trustful obedience
to Him who meets me as the gracious Lord.”(Footnote:
63: Ibid., p. 36. Knowing God is thus an experience of God’s
presence, and “this truth is neither subjective nor objective, but
it is both at once: it is the truth which may be described, in
other words, as the encounter of the human ‘I’ with God’s