Protestantism

» GodChsr - others

Well the followers of Jesus were not the only ones to write about Jesus and His character

-- posted by GodChsr

» Migisi - others

In response to others posted by GodChsr:

.
Who are the 'others' you mean?
.
Wouldn't the 'followers' who knew him - those who walked & talked with him in the flesh - know him better than anyone else? Someone who'd never met him in person wouldn't be as credible, would they?

-- posted by Migisi

» badactor - Characteristics of Christ

In response to Characteristics of Christ posted by BrianTubbs:
As I read the bible I can't find any one Jesus. He seem more a composit of a few to several. Thats why there are so many denominations, beliefs and skewed ideas and testimony. Which Jesus anyone wrote about depended on which Jesus they were referring to. You can see the development from Marks Jesus 1.0 to Johns 4.0.

Which Jesus are you referring to?

-- posted by badactor

» Migisi - Characteristics of Christ

In response to Characteristics of Christ posted by badactor:

.
Good observations, and good question.

-- posted by Migisi

» Brian Tubbs - Mark to John

In response to Characteristics of Christ posted by badactor:

First, I believe that the Gospels were written by the men to whom they've been historically attributed. Therefore, I believe that the author of the Gospel of Mark was John Mark, a witness to at least some of Jesus' ministry (probably as a child or very young teenager) and then a friend and protege to the Apostle Peter.

And the author of the Gospel of John was the disciple John, who was almost certainly a teenager or a man in his very early twenties at the time of Jesus' active ministry. (That he was present at the cross and was not bothered by anyone hints at the fact he was probably a teenage boy).

John and Mark then were probably not far apart in age, and both wrote the books attributed to them.

Second, Mark fashioned his Gospel based on his personal recollections, the likely source "Q" (possibly a set of written records kept by one of Jesus' disciples DURING Jesus' ministry), and the Apostle Peter. Mark's Gospel was brief, but conveyed the central elements of Jesus' nature and ministry.

Third, John's Gospel - while it is more emphatic and (at times) eloquent than Mark's - does not present a new Jesus to the world. The reason that John's Gospel is more emphatic is probably due to the fact that there were false teachings and misunderstandings developing about Jesus - to which John wished to respond.

» pink101 - Thinking About Jesus

.
There is a great division in Christianity today.
.
Perhaps it has always been there to some degree.
.
It seems to be human nature that people who are set in their ways are the most difficult with whom to discuss any controversy about which they have taken any stand. This is not to fault them for that; but, to make a point of significance.
.
When we are thinking about Jesus, we enter into an area where great controversy exists. According to the Evangelical & Fundamentalist mind set, there are two ways to see Jesus, their way and the wrong way.
.
No questions, suggestions, or divergences will even be considered.. They are seen as the work of the devil.
.
The way I think about Jesus is held in great disrupute in most "Christian" circles, that is to say, Evangelical & Fundamentalist circles.
.
Both of these groups are driven by the same force--puritanism. They get into a box of thinking they are able to purify the Gospel so that it is a universally accepted concept. Once you get in that box and nail the lid down on top of yourself, you have closed your mind to growth. You put a halt to the process that is continually unfolding.
.
So, what is the substantial symbology of the Gospel message.
.
What does Jesus stand for?
.

-- posted by pink101

» Brian Tubbs - Thinking About Jesus

In response to Thinking About Jesus posted by pink101:
According to the Evangelical & Fundamentalist mind set, there are two ways to see Jesus, their way and the wrong way.

Anyone who believes in the correspondence approach to truth claims (which is just about everyone when you get down to day-to-day practice) understands that there is a right way and a wrong way to look at different people. Someone for example that claims Abraham Lincoln supported the right of the southern states to secede would be wrong. Someone who claims John F. Kennedy wasn't shot, but that the assassination was all a hoax and that JFK was really kidnapped by Martians -- that person would be wrong.

.
No questions, suggestions, or divergences will even be considered.. They are seen as the work of the devil.

This is a ridiculous statement, Pink. Sure, there are some fundamentalist extremists that fit this caricature, but to apply it to all those in the fundamentalist and evangelical mindset is ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous. That's the best I can say for it.

You obviously are unfamiliar with the work of scholars like Gary Habermas, William Lane Craig, Craig Evans, and on and on - scholars who love looking at and considering the "questions, suggestions, or divergences." Just because they don't come to the conclusions YOU want them to doesn't mean that they are closed-minded fundamentalists.

» pink101 - What Does Jesus Stand For

In response to Thinking About Jesus posted by BrianTubbs:

.
So, the question is, "What does Jesus stand for". That is, what IS the substantive message of the Gospel?
.
How is the answer to this question portrayed in today's postmodern churches?
.

-- posted by pink101

» Brian Tubbs - What Does Jesus Stand For

In response to What Does Jesus Stand For posted by pink101:

The ONLY appropriate way to answer this question is to look at HISTORY. And before you chalk that up as evidence of fundamentalist narrow-mindedness, please note that I would apply this standard to any historical figure.

It is not for postmodernists to REINVENT or REIMAGINE Jesus. Jesus is not a fictional character. He's an authentic, historical figure. What he stood for is a question that only HE is qualified to answer.

» pink101 - Evading The Major Question

In response to What Does Jesus Stand For posted by BrianTubbs:

.
I think it is very telling that you are evading the major question of all Christianity--what does Jesus stand for.
.
I am using postmodern in the sense of time--not beliefs.
.
I grew up in a Baptist church that was separating itself from Baptist Modernism which was, very much, based on a social gospel. The leadership in "my" church hyped the idea that the Gospel message was one that applied to all times--in other words it could be applied to the present time without an historical understanding of the times in which Jesus walked in Palestine.
.
My question was plain and simple and is about what Jesus symbolizes to us in the twenty-first century. What does Jesus stand for in our time? What is the idea of Jesus to us today?
.
Think of the questioner as some stranger that has found his way into your church on some Sunday morning. He is curious about Jesus and of what his existence might mean to him.
.

-- posted by pink101