The cover story of a recent Newsweek, which can be found here, is titled thus: "Who was Jesus?"
The author of the article, Dr. Bart Ehrman, is a professor of New Testament Studies at UNC Chapel Hill. For those who take Christianity seriously he's a proverbial button pusher. Below is the final paragraph of his article, as well as my response to it."These are books that [are] meant to declare religious truths, not historical facts. For believers who think that truth must, necessarily, be based on history, that probably will not be good news at all. But for those with a broader vision, a more generous appreciation of literature, and a fuller sense of theological meaning, the story of the Christ-child and his appearance in the world can be founded not on what really did happen..."
If the events did not happen in real history (granted, precise dates aren't incredibly important), then there is no Christian theology. The study of the Christian God is centered around God being born a man, living a man, dying a man, and rising again a man. A real one, in history. If those events did not take place then there is no real Christianity. Without the reality of the crucifix and the empty grave, there is nothing to celebrate. Death is not defeated. Evil wins.
When you die you stay dead.
Sure, as Ehrman points out the birth narratives may be off by a bit as they concern dates and the number of wise men, etc., but if somebody loses their faith because there were 19 wise men and not three, then they probably didn't have much stock in their beliefs to begin with. But if Jesus was not born and did not live and did not die and rise, then we've got nothing to hope in.
Dust to dust. Good game.
One final thought: There are many explanations to the problems raised by Ehrman, and many, many scholars (believing and non-believing) who straightforwardly disagree with his findings.
"But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised.For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied." (1 Corinthians 15:13-19, ESV)
May all be informed:
ReplyDeleteBased from the Bible revelations of Teacher Erano Evangelista in the link:
http://www.thename.ph/thename/revelations/greatestdeception-en.htm
There is a Word of God about Jesus-the descendant/offspring of King David that we should know:
2 Samuel 7:12-14
New International Version (NIV)
12 When your days are over and you rest with your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring to succeed you, your own flesh and blood, and I will establish his kingdom. 13 He is the one who will build a house for my Name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. 14 I will be his father, and he will be my son. WHEN HE DOES WRONG, I WILL PUNISH HIM WITH A ROD WIELDED BY MEN, WITH FLOGGINGS INFLICTED BY HUMAN HANDS
In the said verses: 2 Samuel 7:12-14 - we can read that God speaks of a coming offspring of David and not a literal "son of God" as what the religions preach
Is it really true that Jesus was a descendant of David?
…to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David.
The virgin's name was Mary.
Luke 1:27 (NIV)
Jesus' true father is Joseph who belongs to the house of David. So if we are to believe the teaching of the religions that Jesus is the “son of God,” then it should be Mary who should belong to the house of David.
And:
You will be with child and give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus.
Luke 1:31 (NIV)
And who was Jesus' father?
He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David,
Luke 1:32 (NIV)
"will be called" - As you have read it, Jesus was only a son or a descendant of David not a real"son of God;" he was just a man.
Is this true –That Jesus is a son of David? In Matthew 1:1
A record of the genealogy of Jesus Christ the son of David, the son of Abraham-Matt 1:1
Now we can see that the prophecy in 2 Sam7:12-14 about a coming descendant of David and not a son of God was now fulfilled
Considering the prophecy in II Samuel 7:12-14 that if the descendant of David commits a wrong or an iniquity he will be punished with the rod of men, Maestro Evangelista says Jesus was also punished by men, what is the proof?
All the people answered, "Let his blood be on us and on our children!" Then he released Barabbas to them. But he had Jesus flogged, and handed him over to be crucified.
Matthew 27:25-26 (NIV)
However Jesus was flogged by men which when we read again what God stated in the prophecy in 2 Sam 7:14:
14 I will be his father, and he will be my son. WHEN HE DOES WRONG, I WILL PUNISH HIM WITH A ROD WIELDED BY MEN, WITH FLOGGINGS INFLICTED BY HUMAN HANDS
We can discover for ourselves that based on what God said in the prophecy that the real reason why He allowed Jesus -the descendant of king David to be beaten by men was not for our sins but for his (Jesus) own wrongdoing.
It appears now that the Apostles-the writers of the New testament who claimed that Jesus was sent by God to be beaten for our sins were hiding from us what really happened to Jesus.
The pastors would say -it was King Solomon who was prophesied here but he wasn't flogged by men when he committed sin against God.
It was Jesus -the offspring of David who was flogged and beaten by the rod of men.
Again, Read this link: http://www.thename.ph/thename/revelations/greatestdeception-en.htm
What is the authority of the teacher in www.thename.ph -Maestro Erano Evangelista to reveal this truth about Jesus:
Read Jesus' own words in the Bible:
http://www.thename.ph/thename/revelations/counselor-en.html-
If you think that Jesus was the one prophesied in Isaiah 53 -go to this link:
http://www.thename.ph/thename/revelations/suffvant-en.html
Share the said website to all you know and study it with your Bible
I think you have some genuine concerns. It is a difficult undertaking to interpret prophetic (or seemingly prophetic) Old Testament passages to New Testament contexts.
ReplyDeleteIn 2 Samuel 7 there is a specific problem at hand: David hasn't yet built a temple, and one is supposed to come from his line. God sends Nathan as his prophet to David to tell him not to build the temple, that it will be David's offspring who will build the temple. And, sure enough, Solomon builds the temple.
Although the passage may seem similar to a prophesy concerning the messiah, and indeed may be that in some respects, the line that has you concerned, "WHEN HE DOES WRONG, I WILL PUNISH HIM WITH A ROD WIELDED BY MEN, WITH FLOGGINGS INFLICTED BY HUMAN HANDS," is not. The problem with your interpretation is that, on this matter of the messiah, it does not follow what exegetes call "the analogy of scripture."
Analogy of scripture is, basically, the idea that a part (passage) should be interpreted based upon the context of the whole(whole Bible>testament>book>chapter or main idea>verse). For example, if throughout the Bible adultery was seen as a sin, but in one strange and vague passage in Deuteronomy there was a reference which looked like adultery was not a sin, one would follow the "analogy" of the rest of scripture and conclude that this passage must not be as it seems. Otherwise, one could take verses out of context and make them say whatever they might like, against what the rest of scripture says.
The messiah was to be sinless, and to suffer for the sins of the world. This is seen in numerous places throughout the O.T., as well as in extra-biblical apocryphal writings of the ancient Jews. So to base an entire interpretation on one line in a fairly vague passage seems rather hasty. I would encourage you to do some reading in Old Testament interpretation as well as in some other ancient sources, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls. The messiah prophesied was to be sinless. He was, in one sense, to be a fulfillment of all those sin offerings where spotless lambs were sacrificed.
Spotless was always an issue.