Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: PigRigger
From what I gather, you believe that the Messiah Jesus evolved from the Rabbi Jesus. That is his divinity was made up after the fact?

I wouldn't say that it was "made up" afterward, but rather that it evolved over time by a process of theological reflection. You can see the difference in Christology even reading Mark vs. John. I think that the apostles believed Jesus to be the messiah, but I don't think they had the concept of him being the incarnation of the second person of a triune godhead. I think the theosis of Jesus developed over centuries, with a number of theological twists and turns, before reaching what became the "orthodox" Christian formulations expressed at Nicea and, with even more clarity, by the Cappadocian fathers some 50 years later.

353 posted on 04/15/2005 8:46:35 AM PDT by malakhi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 349 | View Replies ]


To: malakhi

RE: "I wouldn't say that it was "made up" afterward, but rather that it evolved over time by a process of theological reflection. You can see the difference in Christology even reading Mark vs. John. "

From an article i recently found:
"
The codex was written by three scribes, and the use of computer images that reveal details invisible to the naked eye may well make it possible to determine who made the corrections. Some are contemporary with the original manuscript, while others are later. The texts will be examined in depth. For instance, in Codex Sinaiticus the Gospel of St Mark ends at chapter 16, verse 8, with the discovery that Christ’s tomb was empty, although later Bibles have another 12 verses on the Resurrection. The study may well transform our understanding of the development of early Biblical texts. "

ping to: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1384289/posts


357 posted on 04/15/2005 8:52:21 AM PDT by 1 spark (Jeremiah 16:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 353 | View Replies ]

To: malakhi
"I don't think they had the concept of him being the incarnation of the second person of a triune godhead."

That would infer that either the words attributed to Christ (mentioning the Father and the Holy Spirit) are not what He stated or the early Church interpreted his words incorrectly?

Which do you believe to be the case? (please elaborate if I am interpreting your statements incorrectly - I find this interesting)
359 posted on 04/15/2005 8:57:50 AM PDT by PigRigger (Send donations to http://www.AdoptAPlatoon.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 353 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson