Originally posted by FarEastBird
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Theology 201 Guidelines
This is the forum to discuss the spectrum of views within Christianity on God's foreknowledge and election such as Calvinism, Arminianism, Molinism, Open Theism, Process Theism, Restrictivism, and Inclusivism, Christian Universalism and what these all are about anyway. Who is saved and when is/was their salvation certain? How does God exercise His sovereignty and how powerful is He? Is God timeless and immutable? Does a triune God help better understand God's love for mankind?
While this area is for the discussion of these doctrines within historic Christianity, all theists interested in discussing these areas within the presuppositions of and respect for the Christian framework are welcome to participate here. This is not the area for debate between nontheists and theists, additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream evangelical doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101 Nontheists seeking only theistic participation only in a manner that does not seek to undermine the faith of others are also welcome - but we ask that Moderator approval be obtained beforehand.
Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 or General Theistics 101 forum without such restrictions. Theists who wish to discuss these issues outside the parameters of orthodox Christian doctrine are invited to Unorthodox Theology 201.
Remember, our forum rules apply here as well. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
While this area is for the discussion of these doctrines within historic Christianity, all theists interested in discussing these areas within the presuppositions of and respect for the Christian framework are welcome to participate here. This is not the area for debate between nontheists and theists, additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream evangelical doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101 Nontheists seeking only theistic participation only in a manner that does not seek to undermine the faith of others are also welcome - but we ask that Moderator approval be obtained beforehand.
Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 or General Theistics 101 forum without such restrictions. Theists who wish to discuss these issues outside the parameters of orthodox Christian doctrine are invited to Unorthodox Theology 201.
Remember, our forum rules apply here as well. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
The Simplicity of the Gospel in One Word
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Paprika View PostOf course they do. Which is why I have used evidence from my claims (ie the lack of mention of the virgin birth in Mark's and John's narratives).
Comment
-
Originally posted by Paprika View PostIndeed. I see gospel as the good news preached by John the Baptist and Jesus, and then later by his early followers. One main difference between the two is the shift in emphasis: for John and Jesus, the kingdom was at hand, with Jesus making little public predictions about his crucifixion and resurrection (with what little he does being cryptic), whereas for the early followers (ie in Acts, and the Pauline epistles) the kingdom is not often explictly mentioned, but the crucifixion and resurrection attain central significance.
One of my main concerns is to carefully distinguish between the various contemporary usage of 'gospel' and the euangelion of Jesus et al., such as to prevent any equivocation and anachonistic projection onto the Scriptural texts of our own conceptions. With respect to my discussion with dacristoy, some contemporary retellings of the story of Jesus, (which the tellers call "gospels"), have the virgin birth as essential to the story, but of course it isn't essential to the original euangelion, as revealed by the utter lack of any birth narratives in Mark's or John's narratives.
I see "doctrine" as something's that's normative, generally propulgated amongst the in-group and "religious" in nature. Whereas the euangelion is a public proclamation mostly for (though not limited to) people outside the group, and doesn't and shouldn't be divided by the Enlightenment "politics"/"religion" divide.
Comment
-
Originally posted by dacristoy View PostHow many times, and by how many authors is it necessary that it be mentioned before its place can be established in the Gospel...Originally posted by Paprika View Post
Of course the interpretation and conceptions I propound are mine, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they're false or inaccurate.
I believe there is a possibility of misconception........ even misinterpretation?Last edited by FarEastBird; 05-14-2014, 07:57 PM....WISDOM giveth life to them that have it. (Ecclesiastes 7:12)
...the ISLES shall wait for his law (Isaiah 42:4)
https://philippinesinprophecies.wordpress.com/
Comment
-
Originally posted by RBerman View PostI do see your point, though I view the four Gospels as intending to interrelate, so that "the gospel" is the story that arise from their summation.
I am interested in this one. What was it? What did Jesus say? What did Jesus do? What does it mean?
I don't mind observing that doctrine necessarily has implications for human interactions, a.k.a. politics.Last edited by Paprika; 05-14-2014, 09:30 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by dacristoy View PostHow many times, and by how many authors is it necessary that it be mentioned before its place can be established in the Gospel...
Later persons have called the four texts gospels1. However, only Mark's text self-describes as a euangelion. If the virgin birth is essential to this euangelion, it would be present in Mark's text. But it isn't present, so it isn't essential.
Comment
-
To all: part of the blame for misunderstanding lies with me, as I have hardly clarified in which sense I was using the word gospel. I hope this post will clarify:
εὐαγγέλιον is often translated as 'good news' or 'gospel'.
Gospel has three primary meanings:
1. The rough denotation of genre: eg Gospel of Mark, Gospel of Judas, Gospel of Thomas
2. A story of Jesus's life and work eg. Mark 1:1's "The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God."
3. The gospel as preached by
There is also
4) Paul's usage of εὐαγγέλιονa) The gospel which he serves and preaches (Romans 1)
b) "other gospels" (Galatians 1)
Hovering behind all these are
5) εὐαγγέλιον as denoting good news in generala) the Roman imperial proclamation of the birthday of or the accession of a new emperor (eg. Priene inscription, Josephus Jewish Wars 4.618)6) The Isaianic "good news" (eg Isaiah 40:9 and Isaiah 61:1 in the Septuagint)
(There are other meanings in English which are not relevant to the discussion such as
7) 'gospel truth'Last edited by Paprika; 05-14-2014, 10:11 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by FarEastBird View PostSincerely, Jedidiah, do you really believe that every one who trusts in Christ are saved? The Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, the Catholics, Arminians, Calvinists, Presbyterians, and also those who follow the likes of Creflo Dollar, Joel Osteen, etc? There are sure ardent followers of these beliefs and preachers, and they sincerely trust in Christ, but whoever is deceived is not saved.
And here is good word from apostle Paul:
1 Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved. 2 For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. 3 For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. Rom 10:1-
Jesus himself said: "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." If one does not know the truth, he cannot be set free from the bondage of sin. One cannot submit to the righteousness of good if s/he is still under the bondage of sin.
John said, "5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin. 6 Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him." (1John 3:5-6) While Paul said, "1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? 2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?" Rom 6:1-2
You probably do not understand what John and Paul was talking about.
"Whosoever believes Jesus is the Christ is born of God, . . ." -- 1 John 5:1.
Claims about a "Christ" that is not God's Christ will not result in the new birth.. . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV
. . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV
Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV
Comment
-
Originally posted by Paprika View PostArgh. Let me try again. I don't see the gospel as doctrine, just as Jesus isn't doctrine. There is doctrine about the gospel, just as there is doctrine about Jesus. Just as Jesus isn't merely or necessarily what some teach about him through some doctrines, so the gospel."He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot
"Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman
My Personal Blog
My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)
Quill Sword
Comment
-
"Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . ." -- 1 John 5:1.
"Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. " -- 2 John 1:9.
". . . fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or [if] ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, . . . _ . . . For such [are] false apostles, deceitful workers, . . . _ . . . whose end shall be according to their works." -- 2 Corinthians 11:3, 4, . . . 12, 15.. . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV
. . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV
Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV
Comment
-
Originally posted by Paprika View PostI hope this post will clarify
1) gospel as genre: No.
2) gospel as a story of Jesus' life and work: not necessarily so, as two canonical accounts do not include any mention at all. For the canonical stories that do include it, while the story will be changed by its omission, it is hardly central or essential. For dacristoy's version, I gather that it is essential.
3) a) gospel as preached by Jesus: Unlikely, as we have no records of Jesus preaching of his virgin birth
b) gospel as preached by his disciples: ditto
4) gospel as preached by Paul: ditto.
Conclusion: the virgin birth is not essential to the gospel preached by Jesus, his disciples or Paul. It is not essential to the genre. It is not essential to the stories about Jesus in general - notable are Mark's and John's, though for some specific ones it is.
Comment
-
Comment
-
I did see it, Pap - still digesting."He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot
"Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman
My Personal Blog
My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)
Quill Sword
Comment
widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
Comment