critics and came to acknowledge that there is revelation both as “word” and as an “event” and that not all revelation is necessarily self-evident due to human sin and other limitations. Yet his basic insight into “revelation as history” still stood and set itself against all notions of “fideism,” that is, willingness to believe without any rational argument or evidence. Critics have noted that Pannenberg’s proposal suffers from a one-sided rejection of, or—as in his mature theology of revelation—