Believing and knowing
Today a sharp dividing line is drawn between “Belief” and “Knowledge”. The Christian believes that Jesus was the Son of God, that He performed miracles and that He came to earth in order to die for us on the cross. The historian knows that a man named Jesus lived and that in the wake of His teachings a worldwide church slowly formed. Investigation stops at the connections between belief and knowledge, curtailed by an alien thought that a religious disposition could stimulate research activity (or vice versa).
Anyone who is disinclined to accept that religion and science are entirely mutually exclusive will seek a connection between the historical Jesus and the Christ of faith which will reveal a logical overall view of this towering personality. As long as one is prepared to have an open mind, it is quite possible to bring historical and theological sources into accord. It is then that the life of Jesus can be recognised in its actual historical and spiritual significance.
Perceptions are blinkered in many ways so that just one definite outlook is regarded as true and correct. For example, a Christian fundamentalism which presents the traditional biblical texts as inviolable truth is spread in many churches and sects. Believers do not dare to question a particular statement or textual interpretation out of fear of losing inner hold or committing a sacrilege. On the other hand, many scientists believe that there is in truth only material substance, and that God – together with the divinity of Jesus Christ – is only a human invention. To my mind, this, too, is evidence of blinkered thinking, only appearing less emotive in replacing sensitivity of understanding by intellectual pretence.
Since for the considerations to follow we need a basis upon which science and religion can co-exist, some common ground must be agreed. Whoever can accept or combine this with their own outlook may also succeed in seeing the life of Jesus of Nazareth in a new light.
2006-12-21 05:53:42
·
answer #1
·
answered by wellcome 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I answered a similar question. Part of the Jewish dogma is the waiting for the prophet of Elijah to make an appearance first, then the Messiah comes after.
Of course, if you believe Jesus was the Messiah then you know Elijah never came. However, among some theologians John the Baptist came in his spirit and was to proclaim Jesus as the Chosen (or Anointed) One when he baptized him in the Jordan.
2006-12-21 04:51:21
·
answer #2
·
answered by Sick Puppy 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I have under no circumstances heard of this 'Godor', nor what "aGod" is. Oh all good. Jesus replaced into not a god, nor the son of a god, nor a guy who grew to change right into a god. He replaced into only a guy. If he even extremely existed in any respect.
2016-12-01 01:27:45
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
he was a guy that lived about 2,000 years ago that was killed by Roman authorities out of fear that he might start a rebellion.
this is the opinion of one Jew -> Me
2006-12-23 15:05:21
·
answer #4
·
answered by Gamla Joe 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
A. Jesus was a liberal Jew.
B. Jesus is my gardener.
C. Jesus is the name my buddy Juan is going to name his kid.
2006-12-21 04:49:51
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
He was a cool liberal dude who didn't mind reading about other religions = Buddhism
He was a cool dude who didn't mind learning some magic tricks
2006-12-21 04:47:53
·
answer #6
·
answered by mr america 2
·
0⤊
1⤋