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
C. S. Lewis noted: "We need intimate knowledge of the past. Not that the past has any magic about it, but because we cannot study the future, and yet need something to set against the present." The journey of the Church was changed for the better, due to the aftermath of Martin Luther’s Thesis. Luther believed in a more active role of Christians in their walk with God and that the rules set by the Catholic Church were not based from Biblical rules that are required of them. From the time of Jesus, the search for the freedom to worship freely had been a struggle, with many followers of Jesus losing their life.
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). He was constantly searching for ways to prove the consistency of the Bible, so he could further establish how authoritative it was. Calvin and Luther did not agree on the sacraments or the use of the law, but both were very influential theological figures of the Protestant Reformation and they both claimed that Scripture, not the church, was the true
Throughout his lecture, Bertrand Russell presents quite a few convincing arguments for the reasons he is not a Christian. Watering down of the foundations and expectations of Christianity, rejection of the advances of science, and behavior uncharacteristic of the Christ that Christians claim to emulate are all valid concerns that merit further consideration. While Russell makes many valid points throughout his account that I agree with, I would speculate that Russell based these observations on a broad response to the summary of Christianity, rather than consideration of the individuals involved and how their personally held beliefs might differ from these generalizations. To begin with, Russell’s frustration with the core definition of Christian belief is understandable; having a set of once-vital, basic beliefs viewed more as suggestions for exceptional living proves confusing and misleading. Russell’s observation that the title of Christian “does not have quite such a full-blooded meaning” (Russell, 1) as it once did is such a merited concern that, in recent years, some members of the church itself share this view; this
This triple division or classification was first suggested by Rudolf Bultmann, although he only recognized as authentic the third of the three categories. One thing that many theologians unfortunately overlook is the fact that in the great majority of the quotations in which Jesus uses the expression the Son of Man there is a marked emphasis on his authority in relation to something that identifies him as a supernatural character. For example, in Mark 2, chapter 5 Jesus says to a paralytic: "Son, your sins are forgiven" (Mk 2: 5). The scribes who were present accuse Jesus of blasphemy and say: "Who can forgive sins but God alone?" (2: 7).
Voltaire suggests that a true and honest religious practitioner would overlook religion in a time of need. However the Protestant Minister’s behavior does not match the ideology behind Christian morality. This can be seen through the Protestant Minister’s statement, “...do you believe the pope to be Antichrist...be gone, rogue; begone, wretch; do not come near me again”(21). Instead of coming to the aid of Candide, the Protestant Minister evaluates Candide’s religious status before deciding if he will help Candide or not. If he were to be a “true” Christian, then Candide’s religious beliefs would
But when we get into the details, we find that things are a little more complicated than many assume. Failure to recognise this is not really dangerous in itself. But there are two problems that often arise when Christians have simplistic assumptions about precisely what they mean when they say that the Bible is true. Problems with simplistic assumptions about the Bible First, there is the problem of Christians doubting the inspiration of the Bible or even doubting the Christian faith itself. A Christian may have certain assumptions about what it means to
The existential question of suffering has plagued humankind for millennia. Numerous philosophies and theologies have attempted to explain the reality of suffering in the world. Answers range from there being no meaning to suffering to those who see suffering as having redemptive value. The book of Job in the Bible recognizes God’s sovereignty and justice in the midst of suffering. For the Christian, the question of the question suffering becomes particularly difficult: why would God allow suffering?
He wrote a commentary on the epistle to the Romans. In this commentary Barth did not follow historical-critical questions about the Bible, which he considered to be a human attempt to bring the Word of God under our control. Instead of it, he tried to understand what the book of Romans says. Through study of the teaching of St. Paul in the Epistle to the Romans he struggled to clarify the relation between justification and social righteousness which governed all he had to say in later life about the relation of the Gospel to the power of the state and the oppression of the poor. His first major works established his position as a notable theologian with a new message about the sheer Goodness of God and the unlimited range of his grace.
Introduction The encounter between Jesus and Nicodemus (John 3) offered divergent biblical interpretations with regards to the development of Christian baptism. There have been dissimilar interpretations for and against a reference to Christian baptism in John 3. Basically, the paper seeks to explore the encounter in John 3 and its importance for the understanding of Christian baptism. Though the paper affirms references and exact meaning to Christian baptism as presented in John 3, there will also be a presentation of arguments against such assertions. These arguments which are contrary to references of Christian baptism in John 3 are presented to help outline their flaws and misconceptions.