Classical Theism, Philosophy, and Religion Forum

You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?

8/04/2017 12:42 pm  #11

Re: Okay, the resurrection is probably historical...

One would presumably first want to know whether the Gospels are generally historically reliable or not. I think you can make that case, at least in substance if not detail.

Then, if taken to be reliable, you'd want to know what exactly the Synoptic Gospels have to say about Jesus's claims to divinity. For example, you'd need to understand what Jesus's references to the Son of Man and the Kingdom of Heaven have to do with the prophecies in Daniel to know what type of Messiah he's portrayed as (e.g. was it merely political or something more?). Then you'd want to look at specific accounts of miracles and what those accounts are being used to illustrate, e.g. Jesus use of the well-known "I AM" of YHWH in the Old Testament to refer to himself when he is walking on water.

You'd need to look at potential aspects of self-revelation as well, e.g. his forgiving of sins when healing the paralytic and his discussion of the Messiah not merely being a descendant of David but also his Lord. Finally we might consider reasons why Jesus was convicted of blasphemy; it certainly wasn't because he claimed to be the Messiah, so what was it? And so on. 

I can go into a bit more depth on any of this if you'd like but I just thought I'd give a general summary. I've picked up most of this stuff from Catholic NT scholar Brant Pitre. His book The Case for Jesus is a nice read.


Board footera


Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum