Discussion Board 1

Theology of Christianity appears in many forms. It is a concentration of the study of both the old and new testaments, as well as Christian traditions. Such theologies discussed by the author are: biblical criticism, systematic theology, historical theology, moral theology, pastoral theology, liberation theology, natural theology, liturgical studies and sacramenta theology, and mystical

The foundation of the Christian faith is cradled within truth of the virgin birth, life, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. As diverse as the world-wide Christian culture is, the truth in the birth and life of Jesus stands without border and language limitations. Just as each individual life story can be adapted to be relevant for a variety of audiences, the birth story of the Messiah was also. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke are an example of the well-rounded and diverse narration of the birth story of Jesus—Matthew’s narration spoke to the history of the Jewish people and Luke presented to the citizen of Rome.

Some scholars argue that evidence of Jesus of Nazareth 's existence can only be found within the writings of the New Testament. They believe that the New Testament is a biased and unreliable source for the existence of Jesus. They therefore claim that Jesus did not exist. The historical existence of Jesus is necessary to demonstrate the truth of Christianity. While Christian scholars do not discount the reliability of the New Testament as a historical document, they are also able to point to other historical documents and consider non-Christian writings which support the existence of Jesus. In this paper I will argue that Jesus the Nazarene was an actual, historical person and that this can be demonstrated through extra-Biblical resources.

Over the course of history, the historical information regarding Jesus Christ has been interpreted by many different individuals and has led to different beliefs and views regarding the existence of Jesus Christ as a real man. Today I will be interpreting this evidence and i will be attempting to answer the question “Was Jesus Christ a real man?”. The evidence I will be looking at to answer this question will be information regarding the context of Jesus Christ, the historical accounts of non-Christian authors as well as the evidence for the Bible which is the main source regarding the life of Jesus Christ.

DB # 5 Explain how profits, piety, and politics affected American foreign policy in the late 19th century.

The most rebutted aspect of the work done by the scholars was their idiosyncrasy to equate “unverifiable” with “unauthentic.” Most scholars who study the elements attribute to the life of Jesus stand on common ground when it comes to the realization that many of the sayings and deeds associated to Jesus in the Gospels lack sufficient evidence to establish authenticity. However, to many scholars insufficient evidence means an element cannot be verified, and therefore should not be deemed as historical. In contrast, the Jesus Seminar went beyond this scope and maintained that Jesus did not say or did not do things that cannot be authenticated by evidence. For example, it is widely accepted that there is very little evidence to support whether or not Jesus was born from his virgin mother, Mary. As a result, this element of his life has just been something that one would believe on the foundation of religious faith rather than historical science. However, the Jesus Seminar applied a post-Enlightenment historical scientific view to this element in order to determine authenticity. Under this assessment, they determined not only what is confirmable but what also is scientifically possible. Therefore, the scholars deemed the virgin birth as non-historical, concluding that Jesus had been conceived through normal sexual intercourse between a male and female because it fit the paradigm known today. This stance held by the Jesus Seminar “turn[s] a corner in the traditional understanding of the relationship that faith and philosophy bear to science and history” (Powell, 115). For this reason, I reject the integrity of their work. I believe faith and philosophy should be kept separate of science and history, unless the two aim to support one another. Rescinding concepts of faith simply because they do fall within current scientific boundaries is illegitimate. The major flaw of the Jesus Seminar is their

1. Although online bibliographic generators are generally accurate, it 's always best practice to verify the accuracy of the citations by

Built up by Article I of the Constitution, the Legislative Branch comprises of the House of Representatives and the Senate, which together frame the United States Congress. The Constitution stipends Congress the sole expert to institute enactment and proclaim war, the privilege to affirm or dismiss numerous Presidential arrangements, and considerable investigative forces.

N.T. Wright releases “How God Became King: The Forgotten Story of the Gospels” with the affirmation that the church has come to emphasis almost exclusively on Jesus’ birth, death and resurrection. Although, the gospels devote the majority of their time on Jesus’ life. Jesus’s life, death, resurrection and rise did not hint the end of the old Israel story, but redirected it further to a worldwide effort of adaptation. Wright addresses several New Testament documented interpreters who present the gospels as simply “the prognosis of early Christian faith, reflecting the disputes and predicaments of the early church,” something Wright calls a “half-truth”. Wright argues that notwithstanding the gospels countless differences, none of

The Book of John, and the life and death of Jesus Christ are key components of the authors evidence to back up his ways of solving the issues of Christian worldviews. Along with this, the author includes testimonials of his friends that specifically dealt with real-life issues in conflict with their Christian views as well.

The purpose of the paper is to differentiate between Christ of faith and Jesus of history. New Testament biblical scholars from the 19th Century have been preoccupied by the notion of Christ of faith versus Jesus of History. Jesus of history can be described as the quest for historical Jesus, while the Christ of Faith is the Christ of Christian belief either through the Church or historically. Some traditions even went ahead to argue that the Jesus of History could never be found and therefore the Christ of faith is the only way forward for Christians. On the other hand, those who have been promoting the Jesus of History have often assumed that the historical Jesus is much superior as compared to the Christ of Faith. Despite the key differences between Christ of faith and the historical Jesus, both these aspect have an implication for Western Christianity.

Overall, there seems to be a very high Christology in the New Testament. However, due to the various authors of the books that comprise the anthology, there is an inherent variation of the level of Christology found between the different books. In order to examine the Christology of a religious text, one must first understand the notion of Christology. Christology refers to the level of divinity that Jesus is portrayed to have, and can be understood as a spectrum with an extremely high Christology at one end and an extremely low Christology at the other. The highest possible Christology refers to texts in which Jesus is described at being equal to God, while the lowest possible Christology refers to texts in which Jesus is described as being completely human. These extremes are typically never fully realized in the New Testament; a position on the spectrum between them is usually taken. When analyzing the Christology of the Gospel of Mark, the Book of Revelation, and the Pauline Epistles, it becomes apparent that there is in fact a difference in the Christology of the three. Mark seems to have a lower Christology than the Pauline Epistles, which have a lower Christology than the book of Revelation, which has a very high Christology.

Throughout history, Christianity always had a reputation, or a “name” following it. Different perspectives approached the reputation that was attached to Christianity in different manners. Justin Martyr and Porphyry had objectives when defining whether this “name” really defined Christianity and the past. They wondered whether the past really represented Christianity. Additionally they honed in on the question of was the past that people represented as Christianity really the roots of Christianity? All around Porphyry and Justin was perceptions of what Christianity rooted from and stood for.

This paper will provide an understanding the theories of theology of the history of the church, the celebration of the atonement; Jesus Christ being the vicarious substitutionary lamb slain for the sins of mankind.

LADD, G.L. I Believe in the Resurrection of Jesus (1975). The work of G. L. Ladd provides a strong historical argument for the bodily resurrection of Jesus in a brief but informative manner. His work focuses on the interaction between historical evidence and faith and proposes the use of inductive historical method rather than the “scientific” historical-critical method. Thus, he stated, “We must first appreciate the importance of the doctrine of the resurrection. We must make clear the problem of faith and history that so much colors the contemporary discussion. Then our primary aim is to try to explain the rise of the resurrection faith.”