The author of the book of John’s gospel was John the son of Zebedee. The early church father says that author was “an apostle of Jesus Christ”, because “the author leaves tantalizing clue in his gospel which when examined in conjunction with the testimony of the early church father. ” On the other hand, “the author identifies himself as the disciple who Jesus loved (John 21: 20, 24) a prominent figure in the Johannine narrative (John 13:23; 19: 26; 20: 2; 21: 20, 24).” Above all, I think it not very important about John’s gospel date because “one of the points urged by those who favor a late date is the contention that the manner of referring to the Jews points to a time when they had become enemies of the church.” Perhaps, “throughout this
However, according to Christians, this may contradict certain aspects of scripture. For example, in the King James bible, James 2:10 says “For whosoever shall keep the law, and yet offend in one [point], he is guilty of all” (King James Bible, James. 2.10). Moreover, I also read in the biblical text that God judges those according to their spiritual competence; too much is given much is required. The King James Bible in Luke 12:48 confirms “But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes.
Matthew chose to focus more on trying to understand the relationship between Christianity and Judaism. He focuses on how Jesus is the son of God, is the King, and is the promised Savior. Matthew also leaves out some stories that the other Gospels contain. However, these are not contradictions. They are simply not a part of the perspective of the Gospel of Matthew.
Nestorianism, named after Nestorius, was built on the denial that Jesus was fully God and fully human at the same time; his explanation was something like a split personality between the human and the divine nature. The two natures could cannot coexist at the same time, however, they can switch back and forth; although Jesus has both natures inside on him, they could not both at the same time. Eutychianism was named after Eutyches, a man who opposed Nestorianism, who believed that Jesus’ divinity and human nature combined to create a new, third thing. He taught, “Christ’s humanity was so united with his divinity that it was not the same as ours” (Quash and Ward, 41). If Jesus was not able to be both man and God at the same time, he would not have the ability to save us from our sins.
And last, he states that there is a perseverance of saints, therefore all who are saved are saved for eternity. Calvin expressed these ideas in the Institutes of the Christian Religion. This work of his was received with both criticism and intrigue. Calvin’s ideas were very radical, but he sought to back each of them up with what he believed was the ultimate authority of the Scripture. Calvin combats the idea that the church gives Scripture its authority because he believes that the Bible offers “as clear evidence of its truth, as white and black things do of their color, or sweet and bitter things of their taste” (31).
When it comes to knowing and learning the religions of the world one must approach them with a critical mind. One cannot simply just believe every religion and know have their own view points. David Van Biema presents his ideas about Christianity and Jesus in “The Gospel Truth?”. Van Biema’s main point is about how “Matthew, Mark, Luke and John… is notoriously unreliable,” . Van Biema writes about how one cannot be completely sure about whether to believe if Jesus actually said what is written in the bible, he continues to say that Jesus may even be an “imaginative theological construct” .
Muslims believe Jesus never had to suffer crucifixion, but a man who looked similar to Jesus did, while Jesus was ascended to Heaven and is alive until this day. Furthermore, regarding the natural state of humanity, Christianity preaches the idea of Original Sin, where everyone is born a sinner, because they are carrying the burden of the first humans on Earth, Adam and Eve whilst Islam has a distinctly different way of addressing this issue. Muslims believe that every human is born good and pure, and in a state of submission to Allah. These two religions, commonly used for topics of debates, have a range of enlightening similarities and differences and writing this essay has helped me to educate myself properly so it is easier to
Any analysis that considers Jesus Christ and his proclamations historically inaccurate, make the whole Bible worthless. Arguments swing widely between them being either accurate in their portrayal of historical events, or that very few of the events described took place. Many scholars would agree that Christ is a historical figure. The issues that cause controversy are the miraculous events surrounding His life. For this reason, researching the historical accuracy of the setting in the Gospels is crucial to the argument regarding the authenticity of
It is more convenient to receive and possess instead of Take because it is more consistent with a weak church. The King James Bible is said to be the closest to the original. The editors of King James Study Bible do not explain who is to take the Kingdom by force. (Matt.11:11-12) Jesus Himself further declares: “Verily I say unto you, among men that are born, of women, there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist, notwithstanding, he that is least in the Kingdom of heaven is greater than he.” V.12 , and “from the days of John the Baptist until now the Kingdom of heaven suffereth violence and the violent shall take it by force.”That’s right, only the violent shall take it by force; an army with Jesus’ Spirit at the head as in Joel 2. This being the bedrock of God’s eternal plan leaves one to wonder what the driving force is behind the celebrated Rapture theory.
Another historian that would offer a argument of what it means to be a Christian historian is Dr. Mike Kugler. Kugler’s stance on being a Christian historian is again, just a little bit different. He says it is to express one’s identification with Jesus by seeking out and researching the forgotten and marginal aspects of history. I don’t know if I quite understand Kugler’s stance. Why must we make such an effort to research and understand the forgotten areas of our historical past?