The Resurrection Of Jesus Is The Focal Point Of Christianity

The world was gripped by the tale of forgiveness, Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross and his subsequent resurrection, as it was written and asserted. Through his first supernatural miracles and preaching, Christ had created a young religious congregation, but after his death Christ’s disciples and followers dedicated themselves to spreading the Word of God and the religion to the far corners of the world. Mass conversions took place with ordinary citizens in awe at the declared majesty of God, as well as the thought of a better life beyond the squalor of ancient

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.

Over the centuries, Christianity has organised its beliefs into a systematic theology that draws from its sacred writing and tradition. While the main beliefs of Christianity are shared by all Christian variants, there are degrees of different in the interpretation of these beliefs and how they are lived out in everyday life. This can be seen in the important of sacred text, principle belief of the concept of salvation in John 3:16, principle belief of divine and humanity in ‘John 1:14’, principle belief of resurrection in ‘Mark 16:1-8’, principle belief of revelation in ‘1 corinthians14:6’, and beliefs through the Trinity in ‘2 Corinthians 13:14’. This essay will explain the important of the sacred text and the principal beliefs of Christianity.

It is possible to write on the life of Jesus from the information gathered from the bible. I will be dividing my essay into three parts. In the first part of the paper, I will talk about the nature of the gospels, John’s views vs. the Synoptic, discuss if the authors of the gospels are eyewitnesses and how they used written sources. Also I will talk about the Q source. Then I will elaborate on the topic of how Matthew and Luke were similar. Then I will continue on by discussing how the Old Testament uses Moses, Samuel and Elijah to interpret Jesus, and finally whether or not the Sermon on the Mount happened. In the second part of my paper, I will talk about Jesus’s birth and childhood, his miracles, his resurrection, and what Jesus did to cure people, spirits and how they are interpreted to the prophet, magician and the mad man compared to Saul and Elijah. The final part of the paper I will talk about what Jesus talked about as regards to the Kingdom of God vs. the Kingdom of the Romans and what he intended by speaking of the end of the world. I will also speak of the reasons behind the Romans executing him. My sources for this paper will be the New Jerusalem Bible Readers edition as my primary source and lecture notes from Professor Trumbach.

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.

This paper will address God, Humanity, Jesus, Restoration, Analysis and Reflection. The debate, research, questions, and conclusions of the existence of God has been happening for thousands of years. Great minds have pondered Him and His Word, the Bible. There have been different opinions and worldviews about God, His Son Jesus Christ and Heaven. Not everyone agrees on any particular view. Humanity has never been the same since the Fall in the Garden of Eden. Some love, some hate. Others are kind, others kill. Jesus was sent to restore mankind’s relationship with God. To be the perfect sacrificial lamb in order for humankind to be saved and spend eternity in Heaven with God. The only way to achieve peace in the

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

126). Next, Strobel writes about his interview with Bruce Metzger concerning the reliability of the text in the New Testament. Since the original books of the New Testament was lost, how do we know that the copied text is identical to the memo? According to Metzger, "the more often you have copies that agree with each other, especially if they emerge from different geographical areas, the more you can cross-check them to figure out what the original document was like" (p. 76). Also, Strobel asked Metzger why some books weren’t included in the New Testament and his response was that the church did want to portray such pictures of Jesus in the canon, that the church only wanted the New Testament to contain only the best historical stories of Jesus. The next scholar interviewed was Edwin Yamauchi. He was asked about additional biblical proof that confirms the New Testament but he was not very convincing. The question for Strobel’s fourth interview was whether archeology increased or decreased the New Testaments reliability. Three New Testament statements are entirely unsupported by archaeology. First, the three hours of worldwide darkness during the crucifixion (Mark 15:33). Second, the resurrection of the saints, and their following appearance to many in Jerusalem (Matthew 27:52-53). Finally third, Jesus ' burial in the tomb.

The focus shifted to be more centralized on evidence and reason (7). Christians need to be equipped to deal with these new challenges that secular society poses against Christians because ultimately the task of apologetics is a Christian’s duty. Christian apologetics should be utilize language well in order to faithfully articulate its message. This includes examining one’s own cultural biases.

The final chapter of Stein's book talks about Jesus' resurrection from the dead, his ascension into Heaven and Christians waiting for his eventual return. This chapter describes the most important aspect of the life of Jesus. It also tells various beliefs on why the accounts of Jesus' resurrection are true and negates the claims on why he didn't rise from the dead. The facts as are stated are that Joseph put Jesus in a tomb.

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.

When judging the historical reliability of the gospels many factors come into paly. In judging the historical reliability of the Gospels the kind of the gospels is important in understanding the intentions of the writers concerning the historical value of the text. When ranking the following sayings of Jesus:

Another picture that was accurately depicted accurately according to history, was the picture of Jesus’ resurrection that was portrayed in the film. However, several historians have found ways around, the miracle of Jesus’ resurrection. They state that he was not actually dead when he was placed in the tomb, because there is no reasonable explanation that would show that he was raised from the dead. Other historians have said, that the man that was crucified could not have been the same person that was on earth. If this were the case, then the movie would not depict the resurrection correctly, because the movie is based on the Christian story of Jesus’ resurrection. In the film, after Jesus took his last breath on the cross, the Romans took him off of the cross, and placed him in the tomb. They closed the tomb with large stones, and then two guards were required to stay in front of

Many people believe that there is only one account of the Passion of Jesus Christ or they believe that each story is the same; whereas there are four separate Gospel accounts of the Passion of Our Lord. Each of these Gospel accounts supplements the others, however each gospel account of the crucifixion of Jesus is unique, not only in how the story is told but also in the events and features themselves. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John clearly present different portrayals of the death of Jesus Christ. By examining each account the reader discovers the evangelist's understanding of the death accounts of the crucifixion and death of Jesus. The reader must examine and compare all of the Gospel accounts to have a full and

Still, the resurrection of Jesus Christ has been under persistent attacks since the Apostolic age. Why? Because it is the central confirmation of Jesus' identity as the incarnate Son of God, and the ultimate sign of Christ's completed work of atonement, redemption, reconciliation, and salvation. Those who oppose