Dear Nathan, Tim and Timothy:
I don’t know if you all will read this last blog, but just in case I wanted to wish the graduates “the best” in their lives and ministries. May our God go with you guys anywhere you will go to serve Him and glorify His name.
For Tim I hope you have a great summer!. I enjoyed and learned a lot from all of you guys. Thank you very much!
Blessing of our Lord!
YSIC
Ana
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Ch. 11- Ana
Chapter 11
1. What do the author's state is the primary purpose of the Book of Revelation? How do you respond to this view?
According to the author, the book of Revelation’s primary purpose is to talk about the present and ‘The End’ times. He states God is active in world’s history and His ultimate purpose is to reach victory and put the universe under His control.
I agree that God is active and will continue be active in world’s history as His Word talks about the present, future but also the past. If past Scriptural prophesies had been exactly fulfilled, we can be absolutely sure that future prophesies will be as well, even when we don’t fully understand them. Now, I don’t agree with the author’s statement (in his words) that God will “conform the universe to His purpose, under His control.” God is already in control of the universe, the Scripture shows us in Job that Satan ‘asked for permission to temp Job’, so; even when we don’t fully understand why He allows certain things to happen, He is still in control. If He wouldn’t He wouldn’t be sovereign and almighty, He wouldn’t be God, but HE IS GOD! He was, He is and He will always be in control. Alleluia!.
2. What literary form, often employed by intertestamental Jewish writers, is also used in the book of Revelation? Why is this significant to the study of Revelation?
Intertestamental Jewish use Apocalyptic literary form as it occurs in both the Old and New Testament. This is a “distinct literary genre” that utilizes visions and symbolism as in the case of the book of Revelations.
3. How do you think world events could affect someone’s view of the millennium?
It can affect in different ways depending of their believes, personality, knowledge about the ‘End Time’ and faith, I believe. I heard some people feeling scare with the idea that the End is coming, I seen others rejoicing and working earnestly, there are others who might see it with disbelief since so many people had “predict” the Last Day and nothing had happened; or because many had heard for years and years that we are living in the end times but live seems to go on, as in the case of Y2K. Now the generalized view appears to be skepticism. There is still many people who deny that a “loving God” could judge people in such a terrible way. I am not sure about our Christian churches but I personally don’t hear many connecting the two things nor rejoicing for the Second Coming. Maybe a serious and deep study of Scripture compare with the current world events might prepare Christians first to properly respond to the imminent Return of our Lord but also to reach earnestly to others who desperately need the hope and faith that we have. It definitely needs to start with each of us first.
1. What do the author's state is the primary purpose of the Book of Revelation? How do you respond to this view?
According to the author, the book of Revelation’s primary purpose is to talk about the present and ‘The End’ times. He states God is active in world’s history and His ultimate purpose is to reach victory and put the universe under His control.
I agree that God is active and will continue be active in world’s history as His Word talks about the present, future but also the past. If past Scriptural prophesies had been exactly fulfilled, we can be absolutely sure that future prophesies will be as well, even when we don’t fully understand them. Now, I don’t agree with the author’s statement (in his words) that God will “conform the universe to His purpose, under His control.” God is already in control of the universe, the Scripture shows us in Job that Satan ‘asked for permission to temp Job’, so; even when we don’t fully understand why He allows certain things to happen, He is still in control. If He wouldn’t He wouldn’t be sovereign and almighty, He wouldn’t be God, but HE IS GOD! He was, He is and He will always be in control. Alleluia!.
2. What literary form, often employed by intertestamental Jewish writers, is also used in the book of Revelation? Why is this significant to the study of Revelation?
Intertestamental Jewish use Apocalyptic literary form as it occurs in both the Old and New Testament. This is a “distinct literary genre” that utilizes visions and symbolism as in the case of the book of Revelations.
3. How do you think world events could affect someone’s view of the millennium?
It can affect in different ways depending of their believes, personality, knowledge about the ‘End Time’ and faith, I believe. I heard some people feeling scare with the idea that the End is coming, I seen others rejoicing and working earnestly, there are others who might see it with disbelief since so many people had “predict” the Last Day and nothing had happened; or because many had heard for years and years that we are living in the end times but live seems to go on, as in the case of Y2K. Now the generalized view appears to be skepticism. There is still many people who deny that a “loving God” could judge people in such a terrible way. I am not sure about our Christian churches but I personally don’t hear many connecting the two things nor rejoicing for the Second Coming. Maybe a serious and deep study of Scripture compare with the current world events might prepare Christians first to properly respond to the imminent Return of our Lord but also to reach earnestly to others who desperately need the hope and faith that we have. It definitely needs to start with each of us first.
Ch 11. Npenland
1. What do the author's state is the primary purpose of the Book of Revelation? How do you respond to this view?
Revelation states that God's people are living in between the times. Scott sees Revelation as an example of the type of prophetic writings which address and alludes to events of the author's own time and also the future. He believes is addresses the experiences of Christians living at the end ofthe first century, during the time of persecution by Emporer Domition.
I personally am weak in studying Revelation. I know that John is addressing specific churches, but I am not sure what alludes to the 1st century and what is directed towards teh end times.
2. What literary form, often employed by intertestamental Jewish writers, is also used in the book of Revelation? Why is this significant to the study of Revelation?
Scott describes the literary form as philosophical orientation. This is significant because we are left to answer when the events are going to occur. Whether they be in the first century or at the end times.
3. How do you think world events could affect someone‟s view of the millennium?
I think people look at world events in the present and try to predict when the millennium is going to begin. They see Tsunamis and earthquakes or any other natural disaster and predict that Christ is coming soon. There is also alot of emphasis on the Middle East and Israel. The political nature and role in different wars. Some look at these to try to determine when the millennium will begin. I am not sure if this is what they wanted, but I tried to answer the best I could.
Revelation states that God's people are living in between the times. Scott sees Revelation as an example of the type of prophetic writings which address and alludes to events of the author's own time and also the future. He believes is addresses the experiences of Christians living at the end ofthe first century, during the time of persecution by Emporer Domition.
I personally am weak in studying Revelation. I know that John is addressing specific churches, but I am not sure what alludes to the 1st century and what is directed towards teh end times.
2. What literary form, often employed by intertestamental Jewish writers, is also used in the book of Revelation? Why is this significant to the study of Revelation?
Scott describes the literary form as philosophical orientation. This is significant because we are left to answer when the events are going to occur. Whether they be in the first century or at the end times.
3. How do you think world events could affect someone‟s view of the millennium?
I think people look at world events in the present and try to predict when the millennium is going to begin. They see Tsunamis and earthquakes or any other natural disaster and predict that Christ is coming soon. There is also alot of emphasis on the Middle East and Israel. The political nature and role in different wars. Some look at these to try to determine when the millennium will begin. I am not sure if this is what they wanted, but I tried to answer the best I could.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
1. What are the three different ways the early church has responded to the social order in which it lived?
We are to enter into our culture, but to rise above it. We are refuse to comprimise Christ to the society around us. Third is the attempt to transform a culture. These are three different ways in which Christians have tried to reach the culture around them. Each has its unique attributes and each could work in the right context.
2. St. Paul said that he became "all things to all men" for the purpose of spreading the Gospel. What are the limits to this approach in being a Christian witness?
All things must not be contrary to Scripture. A person can integrate themslef into a culture or society as long as they don't comprimise what the Bible teaches as sin. This also includes causing someone else to stumble. The Christian Witness must realize that their purpose is for Christian Witness and keep their focus upon that.
3. Regarding the apostles, Scott says "The hostile, negative reaction they experience from society is to be expected." (P. 267) Question: What kinds of negative reaction do you experience from this current society?
I think that the media is one of the biggest avenues for negative reaction. It seems that Hollywood is looking for someone who claims to be a believer who is willing to go onto a reality show so they can document them sinning. Their claim is that the "Christians" are no different than the rest of society. Another area is when a person has had a bad experience in the church (Maybe by no fault of the church at all). Many people complain just for the sake of complaining.
4. Scott states; "The state, on the other hand, does not know of the lordship of Christ but still serves Him unconsciously and against its will." (P. 287) Question: What action can we take to help change the state for serving Christ and following God‟s Will?
Portraying our faith as real and showing others how it affects us on a daily basis is a start. It seems that the church secludes themselves and talks about the Lord to each other, but not to those who don't believe. The society must be taught what serving the Lord is and what His will is. They will not know if they have not been told.
We are to enter into our culture, but to rise above it. We are refuse to comprimise Christ to the society around us. Third is the attempt to transform a culture. These are three different ways in which Christians have tried to reach the culture around them. Each has its unique attributes and each could work in the right context.
2. St. Paul said that he became "all things to all men" for the purpose of spreading the Gospel. What are the limits to this approach in being a Christian witness?
All things must not be contrary to Scripture. A person can integrate themslef into a culture or society as long as they don't comprimise what the Bible teaches as sin. This also includes causing someone else to stumble. The Christian Witness must realize that their purpose is for Christian Witness and keep their focus upon that.
3. Regarding the apostles, Scott says "The hostile, negative reaction they experience from society is to be expected." (P. 267) Question: What kinds of negative reaction do you experience from this current society?
I think that the media is one of the biggest avenues for negative reaction. It seems that Hollywood is looking for someone who claims to be a believer who is willing to go onto a reality show so they can document them sinning. Their claim is that the "Christians" are no different than the rest of society. Another area is when a person has had a bad experience in the church (Maybe by no fault of the church at all). Many people complain just for the sake of complaining.
4. Scott states; "The state, on the other hand, does not know of the lordship of Christ but still serves Him unconsciously and against its will." (P. 287) Question: What action can we take to help change the state for serving Christ and following God‟s Will?
Portraying our faith as real and showing others how it affects us on a daily basis is a start. It seems that the church secludes themselves and talks about the Lord to each other, but not to those who don't believe. The society must be taught what serving the Lord is and what His will is. They will not know if they have not been told.
Ch. 10 - Ana
Chapter 10
1. What are the three different ways the early church has responded to the social order in which it lived?
I believe the first thing was, as Jesus said, that we are in the world but no part of it, our citizen is in heaven and obeying to God our priority. Second we should give to society of state what belongs to them and to God what belongs to Him. And third we should denounce and rebel against anyone who what’s to take God’s place in our lives. That’s what the early church did and that is what we should do.
2. St. Paul said that he became “all things to all men” for the purpose of spreading the Gospel. What are the limits to this approach in being a Christian witness?
I believe the limit is to do something sinful that others do to feel accepted by them and supposedly sharing the Gospel. I should add that doing this will be confusing for them but most than anything else denying the Scripture since we ought to be doers of the Word before we become witness of the Word.
3. Regarding the apostles, Scott says “The hostile, negative reaction they experience from society is to be expected.” (P. 267) Question: What kinds of negative reaction do you experience from this current society?
I had experience people at work and even family and friends making fun of me, people walking away when I started to share the gospel, friends getting separated from me or not inviting me to their gatherings, I had lost friends that I have had for years, I had people at work expressively telling me not to talk about religion and I was also defied by someone who assure me he was going to get me out of that absurd religion.
4. Scott states; “The state, on the other hand, does not know of the lordship of Christ but still serves Him unconsciously and against its will.” (P. 287) Question: What action can we take to help change the state for serving Christ and following God‟s Will?
I am not sure I understand this question, but according to the Scott, our responsibility is to respect and obey the state as long as its goal is to create peace and order which is God’s will; but since the state can also be used by the devil, if the state would required from us to do something that “clearly” is against Scripture we should remember our first allegiance is to Christ and the Scripture.
1. What are the three different ways the early church has responded to the social order in which it lived?
I believe the first thing was, as Jesus said, that we are in the world but no part of it, our citizen is in heaven and obeying to God our priority. Second we should give to society of state what belongs to them and to God what belongs to Him. And third we should denounce and rebel against anyone who what’s to take God’s place in our lives. That’s what the early church did and that is what we should do.
2. St. Paul said that he became “all things to all men” for the purpose of spreading the Gospel. What are the limits to this approach in being a Christian witness?
I believe the limit is to do something sinful that others do to feel accepted by them and supposedly sharing the Gospel. I should add that doing this will be confusing for them but most than anything else denying the Scripture since we ought to be doers of the Word before we become witness of the Word.
3. Regarding the apostles, Scott says “The hostile, negative reaction they experience from society is to be expected.” (P. 267) Question: What kinds of negative reaction do you experience from this current society?
I had experience people at work and even family and friends making fun of me, people walking away when I started to share the gospel, friends getting separated from me or not inviting me to their gatherings, I had lost friends that I have had for years, I had people at work expressively telling me not to talk about religion and I was also defied by someone who assure me he was going to get me out of that absurd religion.
4. Scott states; “The state, on the other hand, does not know of the lordship of Christ but still serves Him unconsciously and against its will.” (P. 287) Question: What action can we take to help change the state for serving Christ and following God‟s Will?
I am not sure I understand this question, but according to the Scott, our responsibility is to respect and obey the state as long as its goal is to create peace and order which is God’s will; but since the state can also be used by the devil, if the state would required from us to do something that “clearly” is against Scripture we should remember our first allegiance is to Christ and the Scripture.
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Ch. 9 UP IN HERE!
1. How does the church today mimic the church described in the chapter? How does it not?
The church today mimics the church in the chapter in many ways. One particular way is in the way that both the church in the chapter and today’s church is in relationship with Christ. Those who are called the church in the chapter and in today's church are called that as a result of this relationship. Without a relationship with the God of the universe through His son Jesus Christ one cannot be considered as part of the church in the sense that it was addressed here.
2. Define the Church
The church as defined by http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=435 (I am in agreement) is as follows: There is only one church, or the unity of the church. Every Believer in Jesus Christ is a member of the church of Jesus Christ (I Cor. 12:27; Rom. 15:7). Jesus Christ is the Head of the Church (Eph. 5:23; Col. 1:18). Every believer in Jesus Christ is a priest (I Pet. 2:5,9). In the church, as in marriage, the man is to reflect the headship of Christ and the woman is privileged to portray the submission of the church to her Lord. A New Testament church is one that expresses the life of Christ in a tangible way.
The church today mimics the church in the chapter in many ways. One particular way is in the way that both the church in the chapter and today’s church is in relationship with Christ. Those who are called the church in the chapter and in today's church are called that as a result of this relationship. Without a relationship with the God of the universe through His son Jesus Christ one cannot be considered as part of the church in the sense that it was addressed here.
2. Define the Church
The church as defined by http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=435 (I am in agreement) is as follows: There is only one church, or the unity of the church. Every Believer in Jesus Christ is a member of the church of Jesus Christ (I Cor. 12:27; Rom. 15:7). Jesus Christ is the Head of the Church (Eph. 5:23; Col. 1:18). Every believer in Jesus Christ is a priest (I Pet. 2:5,9). In the church, as in marriage, the man is to reflect the headship of Christ and the woman is privileged to portray the submission of the church to her Lord. A New Testament church is one that expresses the life of Christ in a tangible way.
1. How does the church today mimic the church described in the chapter? How does it not?
Again, I think these are pretty weak questions that are so broad that cannot be answered without going through the entire chapter. To ask for the church as a whole is almost impossible to describe. Are they talking about the Southern Baptist realm, or all Christian denominations. Even to go with one denomination would be pretty difficult since each church is autonomous. Anyway, most churches try to mimic the ministries and sacraments that are described in Scripture. Each church may have a different interpretaion of passages, but hold to their beliefs based on their interpretation. Again, I don't think this is very good question, I hope I gave enough reasons and answered sufficiently for you all.
How do you Define Church?
The Church is the body of Christ. Made of many parts coming together to work for one purpose (1 Cor. 12). The Church is also the Bride of Christ, submitting to the Lord and waiting for his guidance and Love (Eph 5). Most of all it is God's followers. Not a building, or place to worship, but a community that is committed to the Lord.
Again, I think these are pretty weak questions that are so broad that cannot be answered without going through the entire chapter. To ask for the church as a whole is almost impossible to describe. Are they talking about the Southern Baptist realm, or all Christian denominations. Even to go with one denomination would be pretty difficult since each church is autonomous. Anyway, most churches try to mimic the ministries and sacraments that are described in Scripture. Each church may have a different interpretaion of passages, but hold to their beliefs based on their interpretation. Again, I don't think this is very good question, I hope I gave enough reasons and answered sufficiently for you all.
How do you Define Church?
The Church is the body of Christ. Made of many parts coming together to work for one purpose (1 Cor. 12). The Church is also the Bride of Christ, submitting to the Lord and waiting for his guidance and Love (Eph 5). Most of all it is God's followers. Not a building, or place to worship, but a community that is committed to the Lord.
Monday, April 13, 2009
1. How does the church today mimic the church described in the chapter? How does it not?
2. How do you define "church"?
Here are the questions for the blog, I guess we none of us did them. I am not surprised because the questions are kinda weak. anyway, if we just want to blog about them we can at least get the points for that!!
2. How do you define "church"?
Here are the questions for the blog, I guess we none of us did them. I am not surprised because the questions are kinda weak. anyway, if we just want to blog about them we can at least get the points for that!!
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Ch.8 - Ana
Chapter 8
1. Discuss Scott's findings on the "filling" or "baptism" of the Holy Spirit. Did you agree or disagree with his view? How did it fit with your own personal view on this subject?
Scott states the New Testament has several evidences that the baptism and the filling with the Holy Spirit referred to different things. The baptism of the Spirit is related to His presence and activity in the life of the new believer, and the new believer’s identification with the Family of God. The filling of the Spirit has the purpose to meet a special need or provide a special ability for the benefit of the Christian community. Whether is by baptism or by filling, I believe all of those who have place their faith in Christ had been sealed by the Holy Spirit, and He helps the believer in their Spiritual journey by helping them to mature and providing gifts and abilities for this purpose and the edification of the church.
2. Discuss Scott's Presentation of Church governance. What may be the best method?
Congregational church government seems to be the best method, because is democratic and in it each member (who should have made a statement of faith in Jesus) has an equal vote in all church matters. This implies the leadership of a gifted and called servant of God, but a system of accountability as well. It should include a system of “checks and balances”; but the most important thing as the author states is that the congregation recognized Christ as the head, the Spirit as the presence and catalyst of God’s purpose and the authority of the Scriptures.
3. Why is the word ekklesia appropriate to designate this particular group or body? pp. 199
It is appropriate because it designates its function and involves a close communion, service and worship. It refers to a group of believes in Christ who have a relationship with God in Christ. The term carries a concept of individual needs but also one of wholeness and community; it is also free from racial or nationalistic limitations, it conveys novelty and is able to express the deepest expression of a relationship between God and His people.
4. Compare and contrast the role of prophecy in the Old Testament with the New Testament.
The prophets’ task in the OT was:
1. To remind Israel of God’s past revelation (the Covenant, Law and Exodus).
2. To call attention to and condemn sins and to explain how this breaks their relationship with God.
3. Depending on how they respond to the message: to warn of punishment or promise blessings.
4. To promise restoration after times of punishment. (Revelation).
In the NT the apostles were mainly God’ spokespersons; their responsibility was to give revelation, and new information while speaking of the life and ministry of Jesus and interpret those facts; they applied the teachings of the New and Old Testament.
In essence the OT prophets interpreted and applied previously given revelation to God’s people; while according to Scriptures besides the apostolic writes, Agabus, God’s revelation was completed in our Lord Jesus Christ; any new message needs to be tested based on the existent revelation and cannot contradict it since God can not contradict Himself.
1. Discuss Scott's findings on the "filling" or "baptism" of the Holy Spirit. Did you agree or disagree with his view? How did it fit with your own personal view on this subject?
Scott states the New Testament has several evidences that the baptism and the filling with the Holy Spirit referred to different things. The baptism of the Spirit is related to His presence and activity in the life of the new believer, and the new believer’s identification with the Family of God. The filling of the Spirit has the purpose to meet a special need or provide a special ability for the benefit of the Christian community. Whether is by baptism or by filling, I believe all of those who have place their faith in Christ had been sealed by the Holy Spirit, and He helps the believer in their Spiritual journey by helping them to mature and providing gifts and abilities for this purpose and the edification of the church.
2. Discuss Scott's Presentation of Church governance. What may be the best method?
Congregational church government seems to be the best method, because is democratic and in it each member (who should have made a statement of faith in Jesus) has an equal vote in all church matters. This implies the leadership of a gifted and called servant of God, but a system of accountability as well. It should include a system of “checks and balances”; but the most important thing as the author states is that the congregation recognized Christ as the head, the Spirit as the presence and catalyst of God’s purpose and the authority of the Scriptures.
3. Why is the word ekklesia appropriate to designate this particular group or body? pp. 199
It is appropriate because it designates its function and involves a close communion, service and worship. It refers to a group of believes in Christ who have a relationship with God in Christ. The term carries a concept of individual needs but also one of wholeness and community; it is also free from racial or nationalistic limitations, it conveys novelty and is able to express the deepest expression of a relationship between God and His people.
4. Compare and contrast the role of prophecy in the Old Testament with the New Testament.
The prophets’ task in the OT was:
1. To remind Israel of God’s past revelation (the Covenant, Law and Exodus).
2. To call attention to and condemn sins and to explain how this breaks their relationship with God.
3. Depending on how they respond to the message: to warn of punishment or promise blessings.
4. To promise restoration after times of punishment. (Revelation).
In the NT the apostles were mainly God’ spokespersons; their responsibility was to give revelation, and new information while speaking of the life and ministry of Jesus and interpret those facts; they applied the teachings of the New and Old Testament.
In essence the OT prophets interpreted and applied previously given revelation to God’s people; while according to Scriptures besides the apostolic writes, Agabus, God’s revelation was completed in our Lord Jesus Christ; any new message needs to be tested based on the existent revelation and cannot contradict it since God can not contradict Himself.
Tim On The Eighth Chapter Of Scott
1. Discuss Scott's findings on the "filling" or "baptism" of the Holy Spirit. Did you agree or disagree with his view? How did it fit with your own personal view on this subject?
I would agree with Scott that the Holy Spirit does indeed come upon the Church. However I would disagree with him to some extent because I believe that it can be upon the individual as well.
2. Discuss Scott's Presentation of Church governance. What may be the best method?
That’s a great question. I have only experienced a congregational model in my life and it has worked well. As for the other models, I am sure that they work well too. I think Nathan stated it well when he said “In each case a church can be run effectively if the persons involved are following the Word of God and praying through their decisions.” I believe the Lord is faithful and those he places in positions of any kind of power or responsibility can pursue a governing style that is both worthy, efficient and proper.
3. Why is the word ekklesia appropriate to designate this particular group or body? pp. 199
It names a particular group of people, the Christians, who are the “People of God”.4. Compare and contrast the role of prophecy in the Old Testament with the New Testament.
New Testament prophets were concerned with giving information that was of the Lord that was also new. As for the Old Testament prophets, they were concerned with giving Israel the proper words of the Lord dealing with their sin, giving blessing and punishment and to establish the hope of restoration.
I would agree with Scott that the Holy Spirit does indeed come upon the Church. However I would disagree with him to some extent because I believe that it can be upon the individual as well.
2. Discuss Scott's Presentation of Church governance. What may be the best method?
That’s a great question. I have only experienced a congregational model in my life and it has worked well. As for the other models, I am sure that they work well too. I think Nathan stated it well when he said “In each case a church can be run effectively if the persons involved are following the Word of God and praying through their decisions.” I believe the Lord is faithful and those he places in positions of any kind of power or responsibility can pursue a governing style that is both worthy, efficient and proper.
3. Why is the word ekklesia appropriate to designate this particular group or body? pp. 199
It names a particular group of people, the Christians, who are the “People of God”.4. Compare and contrast the role of prophecy in the Old Testament with the New Testament.
New Testament prophets were concerned with giving information that was of the Lord that was also new. As for the Old Testament prophets, they were concerned with giving Israel the proper words of the Lord dealing with their sin, giving blessing and punishment and to establish the hope of restoration.
Nathan Chap 8
1. Discuss Scott's findings on the "filling" or "baptism" of the Holy Spirit. Did you agree or disagree with his view? How did it fit with your own personal view on this subject?
Scott says that the Holy Spirit, for the most part, does not come upon an individual, but on the church. I see what he is saying with the accounts of Acts and how the Spirit worked within the church. My question would be with Christ. I know that most times he would rely on His Father, but the Holy Spirit did descend on Him at His baptism. Would that count as the Spirit working through an individual. Personally I think that it can be both. The Holy Spirit can work through an individual and of course through the body of Christ.
2. Discuss Scott's Presentation of Church governance. What may be the best method?
The three different models are The Monarchial, meaning the the control is with one or a few different persons, The Presbyterial, the leasership is held with the elders, and the Congregational, which each member of the congregation has an equal vote.
This seems to me to be a loaded question that the answer is determined by individuals. In each case a church can be run effectively if the persons involved are following the Word of God and praying through their decisions. In the same way corruptness could come from any system. I have grown up with a congregational model that I have seen work effectively, but also has been used to for selfish reasons. So I don't know what the best method is.
3. Why is the word ekklesia appropriate to designate this particular group or body? pp. 199
It names a particular group of people, Christians, whoa are distinct from but have community with the Old Testament society, they are "the People of God." (taken from Scott 199)
4. Compare and contrast the role of prophecy in the Old Testament with the New Testament.
OT prophets were spokespersons of God to remind Israel of God's revelation, call attention to sins in the peoples lives, warn of punishment and give blessing, and promise restoration after times of punishment. NT prophets were spokespersons of God but were primarily concerned with giving new information and help applying the new information.
Scott says that the Holy Spirit, for the most part, does not come upon an individual, but on the church. I see what he is saying with the accounts of Acts and how the Spirit worked within the church. My question would be with Christ. I know that most times he would rely on His Father, but the Holy Spirit did descend on Him at His baptism. Would that count as the Spirit working through an individual. Personally I think that it can be both. The Holy Spirit can work through an individual and of course through the body of Christ.
2. Discuss Scott's Presentation of Church governance. What may be the best method?
The three different models are The Monarchial, meaning the the control is with one or a few different persons, The Presbyterial, the leasership is held with the elders, and the Congregational, which each member of the congregation has an equal vote.
This seems to me to be a loaded question that the answer is determined by individuals. In each case a church can be run effectively if the persons involved are following the Word of God and praying through their decisions. In the same way corruptness could come from any system. I have grown up with a congregational model that I have seen work effectively, but also has been used to for selfish reasons. So I don't know what the best method is.
3. Why is the word ekklesia appropriate to designate this particular group or body? pp. 199
It names a particular group of people, Christians, whoa are distinct from but have community with the Old Testament society, they are "the People of God." (taken from Scott 199)
4. Compare and contrast the role of prophecy in the Old Testament with the New Testament.
OT prophets were spokespersons of God to remind Israel of God's revelation, call attention to sins in the peoples lives, warn of punishment and give blessing, and promise restoration after times of punishment. NT prophets were spokespersons of God but were primarily concerned with giving new information and help applying the new information.
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Chapter 7
1. What does it mean the spiritual life is a “cooperative effort” and what do you believe this implies?
I believe what Scott is saying is that life with Christ is participatory. It involves us actively pursuing growth and understanding of ourselves, God and others better. This process does not just happened automatically but only after we chase after God and what He desires.
2. Some denominations believe that the gift of the Holy Spirit can be gained and lost. Can human‟s affect the work of the Holy Spirit to the point where it can be lost and regained in one‟s life?
I do not believe that we can lose the Holy Spirit. Once He comes He is there to stay.
3. What is the purpose of the Sermon on the Mount as presented by Scott? How does Scott's understanding contribute to the sanctification process?
Scotts understanding of the Sermon on the Mount leads us to understand that it was there to help us know how to live according to the law. As the theme of this chapter was sanctification, I believe the Sermon on the Mount is there to help us through the process of sanctification.
1. What does it mean the spiritual life is a “cooperative effort” and what do you believe this implies?
I believe what Scott is saying is that life with Christ is participatory. It involves us actively pursuing growth and understanding of ourselves, God and others better. This process does not just happened automatically but only after we chase after God and what He desires.
2. Some denominations believe that the gift of the Holy Spirit can be gained and lost. Can human‟s affect the work of the Holy Spirit to the point where it can be lost and regained in one‟s life?
I do not believe that we can lose the Holy Spirit. Once He comes He is there to stay.
3. What is the purpose of the Sermon on the Mount as presented by Scott? How does Scott's understanding contribute to the sanctification process?
Scotts understanding of the Sermon on the Mount leads us to understand that it was there to help us know how to live according to the law. As the theme of this chapter was sanctification, I believe the Sermon on the Mount is there to help us through the process of sanctification.
Ch. 7 Timothy Fatheree
1) When I was younger in my faith I often fell into the rut that it was only the Holy Spirit working inside of me that brought about sanctification. Of course, the negatives to this way of thinking is that there were times in my life when I did not grow as rapidly as other times because I myself was not striving along with the Spirit to bring about my sanctification. Now let's get it straight that when we grow to be more like Christ it is all God. There is nothing we could do to become more like God without the Holy Spirit. So God receives all of the glory. However, it is necessary that we take the changes that the Holy Spirit brings about inside of us and put them into practice. It is also necessary that we work along side the Holy Spirit in doing things such as keeping ourselves out of situations which would probably lead to our own sin.
2) No, we can not lose the Holy Spirit. Once the Holy Spirit has been gained by a believer he belongs to God forever. If there is nothing that we can do in and of ourselves to gain salvation then there is nothing that we can do to lose our salvation either. I believe that this way of thinking, that we can lose our salvation based on something wrong we have done, is just as wrong as someone believing if they can just be a good enough person they can make it to heaven. It all revolves around Christ. He and His work on the cross did away with this whole line of thinking. It is not for us to lose the Holy Spirit. Christ has already assured us through His work on the cross that we are forgiven of our sins and justified, belonging to the Lord for all eternity.
3) "A careful study suggests that the Sermon on the Mount is a selected sampling of Jesus' teachings which demonstrate in general and by example the type of life and attitudes expected of those who are citizens of the Kingdom of God." Scott's understanding of the Sermon on the Mount would open the way for a believer to view what it is that he/she has in store for him/herself when they are before Christ and glorified/perfected. To be a little bit more straightforward, Jesus' sermon on the Mount is a great set of guidelines for Christians to strive to follow seeing as how they are the details of how people are expected to act in the Kingdom of God. So, seeing as how we as Christians are continually seeking to grow closer to being like Christ, which would be putting into practice the lessons taught in the Sermon on the Mount, we can use the Sermon on the Mount as something which points us in the right direction on our journey towards sanctification.
2) No, we can not lose the Holy Spirit. Once the Holy Spirit has been gained by a believer he belongs to God forever. If there is nothing that we can do in and of ourselves to gain salvation then there is nothing that we can do to lose our salvation either. I believe that this way of thinking, that we can lose our salvation based on something wrong we have done, is just as wrong as someone believing if they can just be a good enough person they can make it to heaven. It all revolves around Christ. He and His work on the cross did away with this whole line of thinking. It is not for us to lose the Holy Spirit. Christ has already assured us through His work on the cross that we are forgiven of our sins and justified, belonging to the Lord for all eternity.
3) "A careful study suggests that the Sermon on the Mount is a selected sampling of Jesus' teachings which demonstrate in general and by example the type of life and attitudes expected of those who are citizens of the Kingdom of God." Scott's understanding of the Sermon on the Mount would open the way for a believer to view what it is that he/she has in store for him/herself when they are before Christ and glorified/perfected. To be a little bit more straightforward, Jesus' sermon on the Mount is a great set of guidelines for Christians to strive to follow seeing as how they are the details of how people are expected to act in the Kingdom of God. So, seeing as how we as Christians are continually seeking to grow closer to being like Christ, which would be putting into practice the lessons taught in the Sermon on the Mount, we can use the Sermon on the Mount as something which points us in the right direction on our journey towards sanctification.
nathan ch 7
1. What does it mean the spiritual life is a "cooperative effort" and what do you believe this implies?
Scott's definition gives that the responsibility relies not only on the Spirit, but on the believer for continuing growth. We cannot just sit on our tail and expect growth. There must be effort and learning on our part to continue to grow in the Lord.
2. Some denominations believe that the gift of the Holy Spirit can be gained and lost. Can human‟s affect the work of the Holy Spirit to the point where it can be lost and regained in one‟s life?
Tim F. and I have talked about this numerous times this Semester. I believe that a true believer will (as Tim puts it) perservere to the end. If no they might not have ever been a believer. This is a tough question that I wanted to get everyone else's opinion on this question.
3. What is the purpose of the Sermon on the Mount as presented by Scott? How does Scott's understanding contribute to the sanctification process?
Scott communicates that the purpose of the Sermon on the Mount was for Jesus to instruct on HOw to fulfill the Law. He stresses that the disciples will be governed by their relationship with God and not what they do. Jesus is saying that believers are to have the same mature of the nature and intent of the Law the way God veiws it.
Jesus is giving specific instructions on how to communicate with the Father. This contributes to the sanctification process in that He teaches us how to have a reationship with the Father. Spiritual lessons that will continue to challenge a believer t no matter how mature they are in their faith.
Scott's definition gives that the responsibility relies not only on the Spirit, but on the believer for continuing growth. We cannot just sit on our tail and expect growth. There must be effort and learning on our part to continue to grow in the Lord.
2. Some denominations believe that the gift of the Holy Spirit can be gained and lost. Can human‟s affect the work of the Holy Spirit to the point where it can be lost and regained in one‟s life?
Tim F. and I have talked about this numerous times this Semester. I believe that a true believer will (as Tim puts it) perservere to the end. If no they might not have ever been a believer. This is a tough question that I wanted to get everyone else's opinion on this question.
3. What is the purpose of the Sermon on the Mount as presented by Scott? How does Scott's understanding contribute to the sanctification process?
Scott communicates that the purpose of the Sermon on the Mount was for Jesus to instruct on HOw to fulfill the Law. He stresses that the disciples will be governed by their relationship with God and not what they do. Jesus is saying that believers are to have the same mature of the nature and intent of the Law the way God veiws it.
Jesus is giving specific instructions on how to communicate with the Father. This contributes to the sanctification process in that He teaches us how to have a reationship with the Father. Spiritual lessons that will continue to challenge a believer t no matter how mature they are in their faith.
Ch. 7 - Ana
Chapter 7
1. What does it mean the spiritual life is a “cooperative effort” and what do you believe this implies?
This means the believer must be actively involved in furthering his/her own spiritual growth. The believer does his/her part and thus cooperates with God to reach spiritual maturity. It is a conscientious human effort.
2. Some denominations believe that the gift of the Holy Spirit can be gained and lost. Can humans affect the work of the Holy Spirit to the point where it can be lost and regained in one’s life?
I don’t believe one can lose the gift of the Holy Spirit. The Bible tells us that we are sealed with the Spirit once we believe in Jesus and accept Him in our hearts and that the seal is the testimony of our mutual commitment and belonging to Him. Stating that we lose the Holy Spirit is as much as saying we lose our salvation and the Bible clearly tell us that “nothing can separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus” Rom 8:37-39.
3. What is the purpose of the Sermon on the Mount as presented by Scott? How does Scott's understanding contribute to the sanctification process?
The purpose is to help believers on their growth and development. Sanctification is and intellectual commitment which involves faith or in other words trust in the truth. The Sermon on the Mount is where Jesus provides us with some guidelines to help us in the process of sanctification which came with blessings, but those also imply faith; as we trust in God’s sovereignty and allow the Holy Spirit to do His job in us we will be blessed.
1. What does it mean the spiritual life is a “cooperative effort” and what do you believe this implies?
This means the believer must be actively involved in furthering his/her own spiritual growth. The believer does his/her part and thus cooperates with God to reach spiritual maturity. It is a conscientious human effort.
2. Some denominations believe that the gift of the Holy Spirit can be gained and lost. Can humans affect the work of the Holy Spirit to the point where it can be lost and regained in one’s life?
I don’t believe one can lose the gift of the Holy Spirit. The Bible tells us that we are sealed with the Spirit once we believe in Jesus and accept Him in our hearts and that the seal is the testimony of our mutual commitment and belonging to Him. Stating that we lose the Holy Spirit is as much as saying we lose our salvation and the Bible clearly tell us that “nothing can separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus” Rom 8:37-39.
3. What is the purpose of the Sermon on the Mount as presented by Scott? How does Scott's understanding contribute to the sanctification process?
The purpose is to help believers on their growth and development. Sanctification is and intellectual commitment which involves faith or in other words trust in the truth. The Sermon on the Mount is where Jesus provides us with some guidelines to help us in the process of sanctification which came with blessings, but those also imply faith; as we trust in God’s sovereignty and allow the Holy Spirit to do His job in us we will be blessed.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Ch. 6
1. A believer should live in relationship. in relationship with others, self and God. Additionally and ultimately I believe a Christian ought to live in Christ, under the sovereignty of God whose purpose is to live for the praise of His glory.
2.Its goal is the restoration of the divine image, of Gods purposes and eventually, glorification. And of course I agree, I like many others believe that God intended our relationship with Him, our entire being to be in union with Him. This includes bearing the image that He intended from the beginning which was blameless, fully complete and absent of sin. However we know that it didn't work out that way until Christ made it possible for us after His death and resurrection.
3.We are in constant battle! The battle between the old and the new creation is part of this world as a result of sin and a new life found in Christ. If this tension was left out of the story how much more people might be confused; not knowing that this tension was part of this life and then not knowing how to react to such tensions. Not knowing that this tension exists could lead people down some very rough roads of unfulfilled expectations and major disappointments.
1. A believer should live in relationship. in relationship with others, self and God. Additionally and ultimately I believe a Christian ought to live in Christ, under the sovereignty of God whose purpose is to live for the praise of His glory.
2.Its goal is the restoration of the divine image, of Gods purposes and eventually, glorification. And of course I agree, I like many others believe that God intended our relationship with Him, our entire being to be in union with Him. This includes bearing the image that He intended from the beginning which was blameless, fully complete and absent of sin. However we know that it didn't work out that way until Christ made it possible for us after His death and resurrection.
3.We are in constant battle! The battle between the old and the new creation is part of this world as a result of sin and a new life found in Christ. If this tension was left out of the story how much more people might be confused; not knowing that this tension was part of this life and then not knowing how to react to such tensions. Not knowing that this tension exists could lead people down some very rough roads of unfulfilled expectations and major disappointments.
Saturday, March 21, 2009
nathan ch 6
1. How does the author seek to answer the question, "How should believers live?" (p. 132)
The authors answer to this consists of a believer having relationships with God, others, their self and with the world. A believer will alsio have commitment, purpose, and meaning that relfect God and are diffrent from the world. He also describes it as a life of tension between what god wants and what the world wants. A believer loves justice, righteousness, and mercy. He also strives for peace and holiness.
2. According to Scott, what does he define as the GOAL of the Christian Life? Do you agree or disagree and why? (p. 133)
The goal is the restoration of the divine image, of God's purposes, and eventually glorification.
When going back to creation before the fall of humanity. This is what God had in mind for us from the beginning. I agree with this goal. As James puts it, we are to be mature and complete, not lacking anything." Though impossible with our current bodies, it is something that we strive for in this life and will attain in the life to come.
3. After all the good things the author lists in regards to what the Christian life is, why does he land on "the Christian life is a life in tension"? (p. 134)
Why would he not include this? It is a constant fight between the human nature and what the Lord has commanded. He mentions that we are foreignors in this world. It is a tension to continue to choose to live according to His purposes and not ours.
The authors answer to this consists of a believer having relationships with God, others, their self and with the world. A believer will alsio have commitment, purpose, and meaning that relfect God and are diffrent from the world. He also describes it as a life of tension between what god wants and what the world wants. A believer loves justice, righteousness, and mercy. He also strives for peace and holiness.
2. According to Scott, what does he define as the GOAL of the Christian Life? Do you agree or disagree and why? (p. 133)
The goal is the restoration of the divine image, of God's purposes, and eventually glorification.
When going back to creation before the fall of humanity. This is what God had in mind for us from the beginning. I agree with this goal. As James puts it, we are to be mature and complete, not lacking anything." Though impossible with our current bodies, it is something that we strive for in this life and will attain in the life to come.
3. After all the good things the author lists in regards to what the Christian life is, why does he land on "the Christian life is a life in tension"? (p. 134)
Why would he not include this? It is a constant fight between the human nature and what the Lord has commanded. He mentions that we are foreignors in this world. It is a tension to continue to choose to live according to His purposes and not ours.
Friday, March 20, 2009
Ch. 6 - Ana
Chapter 6
1. How does the author seek to answer the question, "How should believers live?" (p. 132)
According to the author, believers should grow, as Jesus did, in different areas: intellectually, spiritually, socially and physically. Socially one needs to grow in one’s relationship with God, with oneself, with others and with the world. Living in Christ is to have a commitment, purpose and meaning in life; is living under the sovereignty of /god, the Lordship of Christ and under the power of the Spirit. Believers should live a life characterized by the fruit of the Spirit; an observance of the 10 commandments but ultimately a life that pleases God.
2. According to Scott, what does he define as the GOAL of the Christian Life? Do you agree or disagree and why? (p. 133)
The goal of the Christian Life is the restoration of the divine image of God’s purposes and eventually glorification according to the book.
I completely agree because as the Word says we are God’s ambassadors, we represent Him here on earth, we are His hands and feet on His perfect purpose to restored humanity. His goal is to shape us, mold us and fashion us to the image of His perfect and obedient Son who pleases Him. His purpose is to grow us to be more like Him so others can see all His attributes in us and by doing so glorify the Father in heaven as Jesus glorified Him with His life.
3. After all the good things the author lists in regards to what the Christian life is, why does he land on “the Christian life is a life in tension”? (p. 134)
First, the author uses this phrase when referring to New Christians. He compares them with: a child who kept falling down his bed; when his mother had asked him for the reason of this he had responded it could probably be because he sleeps to close to the edge. New believers as well live on the edge between the New Life Christ offers them and their old life; due to this, they face a constant struggle on attempting to left behind that old life and embrace the new life ahead of them. A struggle from living their old ways, habits, sins and relying on the power of God to overcome them and grow more to the likeness of Christ. Therefore the tension is between living their lives under the Lordship of Christ or holding on the control of their lives; as they grow they release the control of their lives more and more into the hands of their Lord, Savior and King.
1. How does the author seek to answer the question, "How should believers live?" (p. 132)
According to the author, believers should grow, as Jesus did, in different areas: intellectually, spiritually, socially and physically. Socially one needs to grow in one’s relationship with God, with oneself, with others and with the world. Living in Christ is to have a commitment, purpose and meaning in life; is living under the sovereignty of /god, the Lordship of Christ and under the power of the Spirit. Believers should live a life characterized by the fruit of the Spirit; an observance of the 10 commandments but ultimately a life that pleases God.
2. According to Scott, what does he define as the GOAL of the Christian Life? Do you agree or disagree and why? (p. 133)
The goal of the Christian Life is the restoration of the divine image of God’s purposes and eventually glorification according to the book.
I completely agree because as the Word says we are God’s ambassadors, we represent Him here on earth, we are His hands and feet on His perfect purpose to restored humanity. His goal is to shape us, mold us and fashion us to the image of His perfect and obedient Son who pleases Him. His purpose is to grow us to be more like Him so others can see all His attributes in us and by doing so glorify the Father in heaven as Jesus glorified Him with His life.
3. After all the good things the author lists in regards to what the Christian life is, why does he land on “the Christian life is a life in tension”? (p. 134)
First, the author uses this phrase when referring to New Christians. He compares them with: a child who kept falling down his bed; when his mother had asked him for the reason of this he had responded it could probably be because he sleeps to close to the edge. New believers as well live on the edge between the New Life Christ offers them and their old life; due to this, they face a constant struggle on attempting to left behind that old life and embrace the new life ahead of them. A struggle from living their old ways, habits, sins and relying on the power of God to overcome them and grow more to the likeness of Christ. Therefore the tension is between living their lives under the Lordship of Christ or holding on the control of their lives; as they grow they release the control of their lives more and more into the hands of their Lord, Savior and King.
Sunday, March 8, 2009
QUESTIONS
When I was doing my readings I start having these questions. I know we all are busy but if someone can give me a little bit of insight at least on one I will greatly appreciate it.
QUESTIONS:
1) If Jesus told Peter he will be the rock of the church, why the Scripture talks so little of his ministry and a lot of Paul’s ministry to the Gentiles?
2) How Jesus could be from the lineage (family) of David if He was not the child of Joseph but only of Mary by the power of the Spirit?
3) If Mt 23:34 says that John the Baptist was the last prophet how is that Jesus continued prophesying?
Blessings,
Ana
QUESTIONS:
1) If Jesus told Peter he will be the rock of the church, why the Scripture talks so little of his ministry and a lot of Paul’s ministry to the Gentiles?
2) How Jesus could be from the lineage (family) of David if He was not the child of Joseph but only of Mary by the power of the Spirit?
3) If Mt 23:34 says that John the Baptist was the last prophet how is that Jesus continued prophesying?
Blessings,
Ana
Ch. 5 - Ana
Chapter 5
1. Reconciliation: Are we reconciled to God, or is God reconciled to us, or both? Explain. (p111-112)
According to the author, reconciliation is the work of God through Christ, He changes us who were enemies into friends, and He brings us closer to Him. God is not our enemy, so He doesn’t need to be reconciled; it was us who rebelled and departed from His perfect plan and will and became His enemies. God is the initiator the Reconciler but He also reconciled himself with all of us.
2. How did Jews and Gentiles differ in their view of salvation? How should a Christian view salvation? (p103-104)
Besides the Greco-Roman view of salvation as a deliverance from dangerous and threatening situations or circumstances; such us a severe disease, battle, etc.; or obtaining a position of well-being, safety and security, Gentiles pursued salvation from fear of death, purposelessness, the insecurities of life and unseen powers. On the other hand Jews wanted to be saved from the penalty of breaking God’s Law; but the Bible tell us that Salvation is by faith alone in the work of Christ apart from good deeds. Jesus’ sacrifice in the cross was unique, powerful and perfect and does not need human deeds to be completed. So salvation is by faith.
3. What is “kerugma” and what is it made up of according to Scott? Would you agree or disagree with his position – justify your answer. (p106)
According to Scott, this means the proclamation or preaching; the content of the early Christians when they were attempting to make new converts. It answers the question: What must I do to be saved?. Scott states the Word of God contains the important points even if they are in different order; so this is the base for someone to reach salvation. I agree first because the Bible can not contradict itself; and then because when we go through the epistles we see those core points require for salvation: true repentance, acknowledgement of the need to be save, believe in Jesus, proclaim Him as Lord and Savior and follow Him.
1. Reconciliation: Are we reconciled to God, or is God reconciled to us, or both? Explain. (p111-112)
According to the author, reconciliation is the work of God through Christ, He changes us who were enemies into friends, and He brings us closer to Him. God is not our enemy, so He doesn’t need to be reconciled; it was us who rebelled and departed from His perfect plan and will and became His enemies. God is the initiator the Reconciler but He also reconciled himself with all of us.
2. How did Jews and Gentiles differ in their view of salvation? How should a Christian view salvation? (p103-104)
Besides the Greco-Roman view of salvation as a deliverance from dangerous and threatening situations or circumstances; such us a severe disease, battle, etc.; or obtaining a position of well-being, safety and security, Gentiles pursued salvation from fear of death, purposelessness, the insecurities of life and unseen powers. On the other hand Jews wanted to be saved from the penalty of breaking God’s Law; but the Bible tell us that Salvation is by faith alone in the work of Christ apart from good deeds. Jesus’ sacrifice in the cross was unique, powerful and perfect and does not need human deeds to be completed. So salvation is by faith.
3. What is “kerugma” and what is it made up of according to Scott? Would you agree or disagree with his position – justify your answer. (p106)
According to Scott, this means the proclamation or preaching; the content of the early Christians when they were attempting to make new converts. It answers the question: What must I do to be saved?. Scott states the Word of God contains the important points even if they are in different order; so this is the base for someone to reach salvation. I agree first because the Bible can not contradict itself; and then because when we go through the epistles we see those core points require for salvation: true repentance, acknowledgement of the need to be save, believe in Jesus, proclaim Him as Lord and Savior and follow Him.
1) Reconciliation: are we reconciled to God or is God reconciled to us, or both?
There is an obvious need for us to be reconciled to God. We are the part of the relationship which has gone astray. We are the part of the relationship that has to live up to a standard. I know that Scott says God must be reconciled to us, and he uses the very highly esteemed Leon Morris as a source to back his position, however, I think it is clear that the main ingredient in this issue is mankind being reconciled to God. There is a reason the New Testament never speaks of God needing to be reconciled to human beings. We are the ones who went astray. We are the part of the relationship that must brought back into a right relationship.
2) How did the Jews and Gentiles differ in their view of salvation? How should Christians view salvation?
Gentiles sought to be saved from a number of different forces in life, some being, death, purposelessness, the nameless insecurities of life, and the unseen powers. The Jews sought salvation from the penalty brought about from breaking God's law. From a Christian perspective, though, "salvation is to be delivered from sin, its guilt and punishment, from the separation and enmity it brings between God and a person, and all that it entails."
3) What is the "kerygma" and what is it made up of according to Scott? Would you agree or disagree with his position - justify your answer.
Scott borrows quite a bit from C. H. Dodd, which is very common, in his view of the content of the kerygma. The kerygma is the early teachings of the New Testament church, mainly Peter and Paul, about who Christ is and what is the foundation of beliefs that Christians are to hold. Scott lists the kerygma as follows:
A) The age of fulfillment predicted in the Old Testament has dawned, the promises have been fulfilled, the Messiah has come.
B) This has taken place in Jesus of Nazareth.
a) He was descended from the seed of David.
b) He went about teaching, doing good, and executing mighty works by the power of God through which God indicated His approval of Him.
c) He was crucified in accordance with the purpose of God.
d) He was raised by the power of God.
C) The Church is witness to these things.
D) He has been exalted into heaven at the right hand of God where He reigns as the Messianic head of the New Israel with the title Lord.
E) The Holy Spirit in the Church is now the seal of Christ's present power and glory.
F) Jesus will come again for judgment and the restoration of all things.
G) Therefore all who hear should repent and be baptized for the remission of sins.
I agree with his standpoint on the kerygma. These teachings were what the early church was teaching about who Christ was. Dodd and Scott are correct in basing their findings on the kerygma from the sermons in Acts. That is where we find the absolute foundation of Christianity from its very earliest origins.
There is an obvious need for us to be reconciled to God. We are the part of the relationship which has gone astray. We are the part of the relationship that has to live up to a standard. I know that Scott says God must be reconciled to us, and he uses the very highly esteemed Leon Morris as a source to back his position, however, I think it is clear that the main ingredient in this issue is mankind being reconciled to God. There is a reason the New Testament never speaks of God needing to be reconciled to human beings. We are the ones who went astray. We are the part of the relationship that must brought back into a right relationship.
2) How did the Jews and Gentiles differ in their view of salvation? How should Christians view salvation?
Gentiles sought to be saved from a number of different forces in life, some being, death, purposelessness, the nameless insecurities of life, and the unseen powers. The Jews sought salvation from the penalty brought about from breaking God's law. From a Christian perspective, though, "salvation is to be delivered from sin, its guilt and punishment, from the separation and enmity it brings between God and a person, and all that it entails."
3) What is the "kerygma" and what is it made up of according to Scott? Would you agree or disagree with his position - justify your answer.
Scott borrows quite a bit from C. H. Dodd, which is very common, in his view of the content of the kerygma. The kerygma is the early teachings of the New Testament church, mainly Peter and Paul, about who Christ is and what is the foundation of beliefs that Christians are to hold. Scott lists the kerygma as follows:
A) The age of fulfillment predicted in the Old Testament has dawned, the promises have been fulfilled, the Messiah has come.
B) This has taken place in Jesus of Nazareth.
a) He was descended from the seed of David.
b) He went about teaching, doing good, and executing mighty works by the power of God through which God indicated His approval of Him.
c) He was crucified in accordance with the purpose of God.
d) He was raised by the power of God.
C) The Church is witness to these things.
D) He has been exalted into heaven at the right hand of God where He reigns as the Messianic head of the New Israel with the title Lord.
E) The Holy Spirit in the Church is now the seal of Christ's present power and glory.
F) Jesus will come again for judgment and the restoration of all things.
G) Therefore all who hear should repent and be baptized for the remission of sins.
I agree with his standpoint on the kerygma. These teachings were what the early church was teaching about who Christ was. Dodd and Scott are correct in basing their findings on the kerygma from the sermons in Acts. That is where we find the absolute foundation of Christianity from its very earliest origins.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
npenland Chapter 5
1. Reconciliation: Are we reconciled to God, or is God reconciled to us, or both? Explain. (p111-112)
I have a hard time with claiming that God is reconciled to us. He is the One who is perfect, which all other standards are measured again. It seems that we are striving toward that perfection as well (James 1:4). If God has to change so that we can be reconciled to each other, then is he becoming less than what He already is? There has not been a need for God to be reconciled, but there has been a need for man who is imperfect to be reconciled. So I think that we are reconciled to God, He brings us to Him through Christ.
2. How did Jews and Gentiles differ in their view of salvation? How should a Christian view salvation? (p103-104)
Gentiles sought salvation from purposelessness, fear of death, nameless insecurities of life, and unseen powers
Jews sought salvation from penalty of breaking God's law
Christians veiw slavation as being delievered from sin, it's guilt and punishment, and eternal seperation from God.
It is amazing that Christ brought this Salvation to all of these groups. He met the needs of those that He calls. I feel that the Christian view mentioned above is correct, it is not all that Christ was intending when He came to offer Salvation. He came so the my have life abundantly, or to the fullest. I think that Christians revert back to both the Jewish and Gentile way of thinking and worrying about doing things right or even being paralized spiritually by their insecurities. If we really grasp what Christ has done by delivering us from our sins, then it liberates us to follow Him in this abundant life.
3. What is "kerugma" and what is it made up of according to Scott? Would you agree or disagree with his position – justify your answer. (p106)
kerugma- proclamation or preaching
Accoring to Scott it is
1. The Age of fulfillment predicted in the Old Testament, the Messiah has come
2. This has taken place in Jesus of Nazareth
A. Descended from David
B. Taught and did good works by the power of God
C. Crucified according to God's purpose
D. Raised by the power of God
3. The Church is a witness to these things
4. He has been exalted to the right hand of God and is Lord of all
5. Holy Spirit in the Church is now the seal of Christ's present power and glory
6. Jesus will come again for judgement and restoration
7. Therefore all who hear should repent and be baptized.
Yeah, I would agree. It seems that we tend to focus on number two while we evangelize to others. I think that we tend to forget that this plan of slavation was planned throughout history. I even forget that Christ is seated at the right hand of God waiting for the time to come and judge the world. I think if I would focus on the whole of this account it would create more urgency in evangelism in my life.
I have a hard time with claiming that God is reconciled to us. He is the One who is perfect, which all other standards are measured again. It seems that we are striving toward that perfection as well (James 1:4). If God has to change so that we can be reconciled to each other, then is he becoming less than what He already is? There has not been a need for God to be reconciled, but there has been a need for man who is imperfect to be reconciled. So I think that we are reconciled to God, He brings us to Him through Christ.
2. How did Jews and Gentiles differ in their view of salvation? How should a Christian view salvation? (p103-104)
Gentiles sought salvation from purposelessness, fear of death, nameless insecurities of life, and unseen powers
Jews sought salvation from penalty of breaking God's law
Christians veiw slavation as being delievered from sin, it's guilt and punishment, and eternal seperation from God.
It is amazing that Christ brought this Salvation to all of these groups. He met the needs of those that He calls. I feel that the Christian view mentioned above is correct, it is not all that Christ was intending when He came to offer Salvation. He came so the my have life abundantly, or to the fullest. I think that Christians revert back to both the Jewish and Gentile way of thinking and worrying about doing things right or even being paralized spiritually by their insecurities. If we really grasp what Christ has done by delivering us from our sins, then it liberates us to follow Him in this abundant life.
3. What is "kerugma" and what is it made up of according to Scott? Would you agree or disagree with his position – justify your answer. (p106)
kerugma- proclamation or preaching
Accoring to Scott it is
1. The Age of fulfillment predicted in the Old Testament, the Messiah has come
2. This has taken place in Jesus of Nazareth
A. Descended from David
B. Taught and did good works by the power of God
C. Crucified according to God's purpose
D. Raised by the power of God
3. The Church is a witness to these things
4. He has been exalted to the right hand of God and is Lord of all
5. Holy Spirit in the Church is now the seal of Christ's present power and glory
6. Jesus will come again for judgement and restoration
7. Therefore all who hear should repent and be baptized.
Yeah, I would agree. It seems that we tend to focus on number two while we evangelize to others. I think that we tend to forget that this plan of slavation was planned throughout history. I even forget that Christ is seated at the right hand of God waiting for the time to come and judge the world. I think if I would focus on the whole of this account it would create more urgency in evangelism in my life.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Ch.5
1.) Reconciliation: Are we reconciled to God, or is God reconciled to us, or both? Explain.
According to Scott we are reconciled to God. To be honest I am not following the possibility of God being reconciled to us or the both argument. According to the Greek word reconcile, ‘katalla’, the process of reconciliation is a one sided action. Romans 5:8 demonstrates this one sided reconciliation process well, “…while we were yet sinners Christ died for us.” In other words, reconciliation by definition includes both parties taking part in reconciliation; however, it does not play out like this in the process that occurred as a result of Christ’s death. We were sinning and God, in His great love, still chose to die in order that we might be reconciled to him.
2.) How did Jews and Gentiles differ in their view of salvation? How should a Christian view salvation?
The difference between Jewish and Gentiles belief in salvation varied little, in my understanding. The meaning of salvation generally meant that one would be spared from a dangerous physical circumstances, saved, at peace. Salvation also meant that one was not fearful of death; it gave men purpose, and meaning. Christians on the other hand can experience salvation in the same way that both Jews and Gentiles did in a literary sense but ultimately salvation, Salvation from God, is to mean “deliverance from sin, guilt, and punishment, from the separation and enmity it brings between God and a person.”
3.) What is “kerugma” and what is it made up of according to Scott? Would you agree or disagree with his position – justify your answer.
“Kerugma” is the term for preaching or proclaiming. According to Scott or C.H. Dodd, it is made up of the following:
1. The age of fulfillment has come, the Messiah is here.
2. Jesus of Nazareth
a. Descendent of David
b. He taught, did good works and carried out powerful works by God
c. He was crucified
d. He was raised
3. Church was witness
4. Christ was exalted into Heaven at right hand of God
5. The Holy Spirit is in the Church and is seal of Christ’s present power and glory
6. Jesus will return for judgment and restoration
7. All who hear should repent and be baptized of sins
I would completely agree. All aspects of ‘kerugma’ are truthful and needed for one to experience salvation in Christ Jesus. I’m not sure if I have answered according to the liking of Ana or the one who came up with this question, I’ll guess we’ll see…comment away.
According to Scott we are reconciled to God. To be honest I am not following the possibility of God being reconciled to us or the both argument. According to the Greek word reconcile, ‘katalla’, the process of reconciliation is a one sided action. Romans 5:8 demonstrates this one sided reconciliation process well, “…while we were yet sinners Christ died for us.” In other words, reconciliation by definition includes both parties taking part in reconciliation; however, it does not play out like this in the process that occurred as a result of Christ’s death. We were sinning and God, in His great love, still chose to die in order that we might be reconciled to him.
2.) How did Jews and Gentiles differ in their view of salvation? How should a Christian view salvation?
The difference between Jewish and Gentiles belief in salvation varied little, in my understanding. The meaning of salvation generally meant that one would be spared from a dangerous physical circumstances, saved, at peace. Salvation also meant that one was not fearful of death; it gave men purpose, and meaning. Christians on the other hand can experience salvation in the same way that both Jews and Gentiles did in a literary sense but ultimately salvation, Salvation from God, is to mean “deliverance from sin, guilt, and punishment, from the separation and enmity it brings between God and a person.”
3.) What is “kerugma” and what is it made up of according to Scott? Would you agree or disagree with his position – justify your answer.
“Kerugma” is the term for preaching or proclaiming. According to Scott or C.H. Dodd, it is made up of the following:
1. The age of fulfillment has come, the Messiah is here.
2. Jesus of Nazareth
a. Descendent of David
b. He taught, did good works and carried out powerful works by God
c. He was crucified
d. He was raised
3. Church was witness
4. Christ was exalted into Heaven at right hand of God
5. The Holy Spirit is in the Church and is seal of Christ’s present power and glory
6. Jesus will return for judgment and restoration
7. All who hear should repent and be baptized of sins
I would completely agree. All aspects of ‘kerugma’ are truthful and needed for one to experience salvation in Christ Jesus. I’m not sure if I have answered according to the liking of Ana or the one who came up with this question, I’ll guess we’ll see…comment away.
Sunday, March 1, 2009
1.) The names of Jesus tell us more of what he did, according to Cullmann, “the names and titles provide clues to the individuality and nature of Jesus as well as give interpretation of his significance.” His character is revealed in names such as “Christ”, “The Son of God”, and “The Righteous / Just One”. One of the names of Jesus that means the most to me is “Savior”.
2.) Savior, reconciler, messiah, crucified, servant, creator, sustainer, ruler, redeemer, resurrected, shepherd, guardian, master, preserves, and glorifies. These are all the ways in which the New Testament reveals the fact that Jesus Christ was indeed relational.
3.) I believe that Christ functioned both in the role of the divine but was also indeed divine.
4.) Yes, the New Testament says much about the nature and background of Jesus. As I have mentioned in previous questions, Jesus is a servant, is the Messiah, is the ruler of all, is creator, is the shepherd, is the master and is resurrected… As for Jesus’ background, again, yes the New Testament speaks directly to His background. Most of the gospels and epistles are all letters that speak to both the nature and background of Jesus.
2.) Savior, reconciler, messiah, crucified, servant, creator, sustainer, ruler, redeemer, resurrected, shepherd, guardian, master, preserves, and glorifies. These are all the ways in which the New Testament reveals the fact that Jesus Christ was indeed relational.
3.) I believe that Christ functioned both in the role of the divine but was also indeed divine.
4.) Yes, the New Testament says much about the nature and background of Jesus. As I have mentioned in previous questions, Jesus is a servant, is the Messiah, is the ruler of all, is creator, is the shepherd, is the master and is resurrected… As for Jesus’ background, again, yes the New Testament speaks directly to His background. Most of the gospels and epistles are all letters that speak to both the nature and background of Jesus.
1) How do the names of Jesus in the New Testament help us to see God's character? Which of these means the most to you and why?
Each name given to Jesus in the New Testament reveals a characteristic of God. It is revealing of the character of God in that Jesus is the exact imprint of the invisible God. Therefore, when a name is ascribed to Jesus it should likewise be attributed to God Himself. They are not just names being given to Christ but they are describing the very nature of who He is. Among all of the wonderful names given to Jesus I come down to Jesus as Mediator and Jesus as Savior. I believe that Jesus as Savior is the name though that I connect with the most. It is Jesus as Savior that even makes it possible for us to have a relationship with God. I don't think I could ever overlook this fact.
2) How does the rest of the New Testament reveal Christ as a relational savior?
Among the many names that help to reveal Jesus as a relational savior are the names Savior, Mediator, High Priest, and Reconciler. Perhaps this is the reason I chose Savior and Mediator as the two names that mean the most to me. They reveal part of God's very character that makes it possible for sinful people like us to have a relationship with Him when we are so far from deserving. I believe the relational part of Jesus is what makes Him worth living and diving for, as well as everything in between.
3) What do you think of the statement on page 82 that Jesus was not really divine but functioned in that role ("Functional Christology")?
It is ridiculous. Heresy at it's height. It is necessary for Christ to have been divine. If Christ was not God he could not have been perfect, thus He would not have been a sufficient Savior for mankind. All of Christianity banks on the fact that Christ was both human and divine.
4) Does the New Testament say anything about the background and nature of Jesus? If so, what?
Of course it speaks about the background and nature of Jesus. John 1 is a wonderful passage which reveals to us that not only was Jesus with God from the beginning, but that he is in fact God Himself. Also, Colossians chapter 1 shows us that Jesus was preeminent from the beginning of the world and that all things hold together through Him. Also, Philippians 2 shows the humility of Christ, willingly emptying Himself of all of His rights as God to become a man. The question should not be whether the New Testament says anything about Christ, but what it says and how much.
On a side not, it is passages such as the ones that I listed which make the very prospect of Functional Christology insane. We know who Christ is IN HIS NATURE because the Bible reveals to us who he is. And to say there is nothing there which presents Christ's divinity is unfounded.
Each name given to Jesus in the New Testament reveals a characteristic of God. It is revealing of the character of God in that Jesus is the exact imprint of the invisible God. Therefore, when a name is ascribed to Jesus it should likewise be attributed to God Himself. They are not just names being given to Christ but they are describing the very nature of who He is. Among all of the wonderful names given to Jesus I come down to Jesus as Mediator and Jesus as Savior. I believe that Jesus as Savior is the name though that I connect with the most. It is Jesus as Savior that even makes it possible for us to have a relationship with God. I don't think I could ever overlook this fact.
2) How does the rest of the New Testament reveal Christ as a relational savior?
Among the many names that help to reveal Jesus as a relational savior are the names Savior, Mediator, High Priest, and Reconciler. Perhaps this is the reason I chose Savior and Mediator as the two names that mean the most to me. They reveal part of God's very character that makes it possible for sinful people like us to have a relationship with Him when we are so far from deserving. I believe the relational part of Jesus is what makes Him worth living and diving for, as well as everything in between.
3) What do you think of the statement on page 82 that Jesus was not really divine but functioned in that role ("Functional Christology")?
It is ridiculous. Heresy at it's height. It is necessary for Christ to have been divine. If Christ was not God he could not have been perfect, thus He would not have been a sufficient Savior for mankind. All of Christianity banks on the fact that Christ was both human and divine.
4) Does the New Testament say anything about the background and nature of Jesus? If so, what?
Of course it speaks about the background and nature of Jesus. John 1 is a wonderful passage which reveals to us that not only was Jesus with God from the beginning, but that he is in fact God Himself. Also, Colossians chapter 1 shows us that Jesus was preeminent from the beginning of the world and that all things hold together through Him. Also, Philippians 2 shows the humility of Christ, willingly emptying Himself of all of His rights as God to become a man. The question should not be whether the New Testament says anything about Christ, but what it says and how much.
On a side not, it is passages such as the ones that I listed which make the very prospect of Functional Christology insane. We know who Christ is IN HIS NATURE because the Bible reveals to us who he is. And to say there is nothing there which presents Christ's divinity is unfounded.
Ch. 4 - Ana
Chapter 4
1. How do the names of Jesus in the New Testament help us to see God’s character? Which of these means the most to you and why.
The names of Christ help us to see His character first, I believe, because they talk about a close relationship between God the Father and the Son as well as a unity; as such they help us understand better God’s love, mercy and desire to reestablish the relationship with His creation by sending His Son, who himself shows God’s glory as His name, own character, words and works revealed to us.
The one that means more to me is that Jesus is our “shepherd” because He gives me the assurance of God’s care, provision and protection.
2. How does the rest of the New Testament reveal Christ as a relational Savior?
Many of the names attributed to Jesus imply a relationship with God and with His people; such as: The Son of God, Savior, The Mediator, The High Priest, The Reconciler and The Son of Man among others. A son title implies a relationship or belonging to a father, a High Priest and a Mediator are intercessors between people, one in authority or superiority or to solve a disagreement or a separation, he reconciles to parties in conflict or separation; that is exactly what Jesus does for us before the Father since sin causes a permanent separation from God.
3. What do you think of the statement on page 82 that Jesus was not really divine but functioned in that role (“Functional Christology”)?
I completely disagree with the functional Christology; as well as Cullmann, I believe that not just Jesus’ names but His works, miracles, character and His very relationship with the Father are a testimony of His divinity. His life, from His birth fulfill the OT prophesies confirming the fact that He proceeded directly from God and is God. Many passages from the NT speak of Him being recognized as sent by God such us: when He was baptized, the demons recognized Him, Peter in the Spirit revealed who He was. We also find Him in every book of the Bible being part of creation, revelation, the perfect plan of Salvation, etc. The prophesies He spoke about Himself and different future events also showed His Deity. The fact that He was able to foresee the future tells us that He was more than doing a role, He is, was and will always be God.
4. Does the New Testament say anything about the background and nature of Jesus? If so, what?
The New Testament has a lot of information about who Jesus was and where He came from. For example in Revelation we find that He is the alpha and the omega, the beginning and the end, that everything was created for Him. John also tells us He was that Jesus existed from the beginning with God and that He is God. His names also give us a lot of information about His nature. He is the Messiah, the Son of the living God, this tells us He came to save us, to rescue us from an eternal separation from God and by His sacrifice we who believe in Him are co-heiress with Him and children of God’s eternal family.
1. How do the names of Jesus in the New Testament help us to see God’s character? Which of these means the most to you and why.
The names of Christ help us to see His character first, I believe, because they talk about a close relationship between God the Father and the Son as well as a unity; as such they help us understand better God’s love, mercy and desire to reestablish the relationship with His creation by sending His Son, who himself shows God’s glory as His name, own character, words and works revealed to us.
The one that means more to me is that Jesus is our “shepherd” because He gives me the assurance of God’s care, provision and protection.
2. How does the rest of the New Testament reveal Christ as a relational Savior?
Many of the names attributed to Jesus imply a relationship with God and with His people; such as: The Son of God, Savior, The Mediator, The High Priest, The Reconciler and The Son of Man among others. A son title implies a relationship or belonging to a father, a High Priest and a Mediator are intercessors between people, one in authority or superiority or to solve a disagreement or a separation, he reconciles to parties in conflict or separation; that is exactly what Jesus does for us before the Father since sin causes a permanent separation from God.
3. What do you think of the statement on page 82 that Jesus was not really divine but functioned in that role (“Functional Christology”)?
I completely disagree with the functional Christology; as well as Cullmann, I believe that not just Jesus’ names but His works, miracles, character and His very relationship with the Father are a testimony of His divinity. His life, from His birth fulfill the OT prophesies confirming the fact that He proceeded directly from God and is God. Many passages from the NT speak of Him being recognized as sent by God such us: when He was baptized, the demons recognized Him, Peter in the Spirit revealed who He was. We also find Him in every book of the Bible being part of creation, revelation, the perfect plan of Salvation, etc. The prophesies He spoke about Himself and different future events also showed His Deity. The fact that He was able to foresee the future tells us that He was more than doing a role, He is, was and will always be God.
4. Does the New Testament say anything about the background and nature of Jesus? If so, what?
The New Testament has a lot of information about who Jesus was and where He came from. For example in Revelation we find that He is the alpha and the omega, the beginning and the end, that everything was created for Him. John also tells us He was that Jesus existed from the beginning with God and that He is God. His names also give us a lot of information about His nature. He is the Messiah, the Son of the living God, this tells us He came to save us, to rescue us from an eternal separation from God and by His sacrifice we who believe in Him are co-heiress with Him and children of God’s eternal family.
npenland ch 4
1. How do the names of Jesus in the New Testament help us to see God‟s character? Which of these means the most to you and why.
I think the names of Jesus shows that he relates to all people and gives us a glimpse of how big He is. The word thst keeps coming to me (because of my joy for athletics) is versatile. He fits so many descriptions. He is the comple package. The first to be risen and be in the Glorified state. I would say that the one that means the most to me right now is Perfector. He knows all things and discipleship is the obedience to Him daily as he continues to perfect our faith. It will be great when we will be made mature and complete.
2. How does the rest of the New Testament reveal Christ as a relational Savior?
Different names that are given that depict a relational Jesus are Servant/ Child, Reconciler, The Great Shepherd. Also as Paul acknowledges having knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ, being able to know Christ personally so that we are able to follow His example. These (not an exaustive list) are a few names that describe His relational being.
3. What do you think of the statement on page 82 that Jesus was not really divine but functioned in that role ("Functional Christology")?
This is diminishing who Christ is, almost saying that anyone could have done it. The nature of Christ is just as important as the life he lived. Without HIm being divine, Christianity doesn't uphold Salvation, a perfect sacfrifice who is able to take away the sins of the world. Without HIm being divine, he is not perfect.
4. Does the New Testament say anything about the background and nature of Jesus? If so, what?
I don't know if this question pertains to His boyhood, or existence before becoming flesh. The New Testament speak much about Christ existing before coming to earth. John 1 and Phillippians 2 are just two examples. Jesus also says that He was before Abraham. The names that Scott mentions also gives us an idea of who Jesus is. I feel this question being so broad that I don't know exactly what they desire fore an answer.
I think the names of Jesus shows that he relates to all people and gives us a glimpse of how big He is. The word thst keeps coming to me (because of my joy for athletics) is versatile. He fits so many descriptions. He is the comple package. The first to be risen and be in the Glorified state. I would say that the one that means the most to me right now is Perfector. He knows all things and discipleship is the obedience to Him daily as he continues to perfect our faith. It will be great when we will be made mature and complete.
2. How does the rest of the New Testament reveal Christ as a relational Savior?
Different names that are given that depict a relational Jesus are Servant/ Child, Reconciler, The Great Shepherd. Also as Paul acknowledges having knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ, being able to know Christ personally so that we are able to follow His example. These (not an exaustive list) are a few names that describe His relational being.
3. What do you think of the statement on page 82 that Jesus was not really divine but functioned in that role ("Functional Christology")?
This is diminishing who Christ is, almost saying that anyone could have done it. The nature of Christ is just as important as the life he lived. Without HIm being divine, Christianity doesn't uphold Salvation, a perfect sacfrifice who is able to take away the sins of the world. Without HIm being divine, he is not perfect.
4. Does the New Testament say anything about the background and nature of Jesus? If so, what?
I don't know if this question pertains to His boyhood, or existence before becoming flesh. The New Testament speak much about Christ existing before coming to earth. John 1 and Phillippians 2 are just two examples. Jesus also says that He was before Abraham. The names that Scott mentions also gives us an idea of who Jesus is. I feel this question being so broad that I don't know exactly what they desire fore an answer.
Sunday, February 22, 2009
1) John presents Jesus as the Son of Man by revealing Him as being lifted up to die and His coming glorification.
2) The 'signs' point to the uniqueness and power of Jesus and His relation to God. They show Jesus to be both the Messiah and the Son of God.
3) It changes your understanding of the verse because you realize that it is God who is completely drawing us to Himself. We are always showing resistance. It reveals the love of God. It reveals His mercy, compassion, patience, longsuffering, and grace. Even though we pull away from Him He still pursues us and loves us.
2) The 'signs' point to the uniqueness and power of Jesus and His relation to God. They show Jesus to be both the Messiah and the Son of God.
3) It changes your understanding of the verse because you realize that it is God who is completely drawing us to Himself. We are always showing resistance. It reveals the love of God. It reveals His mercy, compassion, patience, longsuffering, and grace. Even though we pull away from Him He still pursues us and loves us.
Ch. 3 Questions
1.) What was John trying to get readers to know about “son of man”, Jesus, instead of “man of God”, Jesus?
John’s purpose in using the “Son of Man” was intended to shed light on Christ’s heavenly origin and God’s saving work, both in His being lifted up to die and in glorification.
2.) What was Jonh’s purpose in using the word “sign” according to Scott and what does it reveal about the character of Jesus?
The word “sign” is intended to point people to Jesus. In particular the sign’s help validate Christ as Messiah and also His being the Son of God. In general the “signs” show us that Christ’s power is legitimate and real and is an avenue to further His kingdom in truth.
3.) John 6:44-45 significance in Greek word ‘Helkuo’. How does understanding this word’s meaning change your understanding of the verse and/or of God?
The Greek word helkuo literally means to drag, haul, pull, and attract. In addition, it always implies resistance. In relation to this passage of scripture and as Scott speaks of, it leads us to the security of who God as well as His power in this world. Yes, you might question the freedom in the choice of the person placing his/her faith in the Lord but in v.45 it speaks of those who have been taught of God, which all people were taught and have a choice in hearing and learning from the Father which allows the action of being raised on the last day. The choice lies in the hearing and learning for the person, this may or may not be one of resistance but the majority of times resistance occurs as anyone attempts to hear and learn something new. In other words my understanding of this verse and of God affirms His power in this world and in my salvation. For as long as I commit to hearing and learning who God is and who he has created us to be I will be raised on the last day. (This is my own interpretation, I have not consulted any other source or insight other than what is presented by Scott. In saying this I admit that I could be way off base.)
John’s purpose in using the “Son of Man” was intended to shed light on Christ’s heavenly origin and God’s saving work, both in His being lifted up to die and in glorification.
2.) What was Jonh’s purpose in using the word “sign” according to Scott and what does it reveal about the character of Jesus?
The word “sign” is intended to point people to Jesus. In particular the sign’s help validate Christ as Messiah and also His being the Son of God. In general the “signs” show us that Christ’s power is legitimate and real and is an avenue to further His kingdom in truth.
3.) John 6:44-45 significance in Greek word ‘Helkuo’. How does understanding this word’s meaning change your understanding of the verse and/or of God?
The Greek word helkuo literally means to drag, haul, pull, and attract. In addition, it always implies resistance. In relation to this passage of scripture and as Scott speaks of, it leads us to the security of who God as well as His power in this world. Yes, you might question the freedom in the choice of the person placing his/her faith in the Lord but in v.45 it speaks of those who have been taught of God, which all people were taught and have a choice in hearing and learning from the Father which allows the action of being raised on the last day. The choice lies in the hearing and learning for the person, this may or may not be one of resistance but the majority of times resistance occurs as anyone attempts to hear and learn something new. In other words my understanding of this verse and of God affirms His power in this world and in my salvation. For as long as I commit to hearing and learning who God is and who he has created us to be I will be raised on the last day. (This is my own interpretation, I have not consulted any other source or insight other than what is presented by Scott. In saying this I admit that I could be way off base.)
Saturday, February 21, 2009
nppenland ch 3 questions
1. Scott tells us that Jesus is most commonly referred to as the "Son of man" in the gospel of John. What was John trying to get readers to know about Jesus as being the "Son of man", instead of emphasizing him as the "Son of God?"
Scott talks about John's concern in communicating that Jesus was "the Annointed One." This knLong awaited deliverer. I think that John was trying to communicate Jesus' humanity, but also his annointing. Throughout his Gospel, John mentions the Son of man being glorified, giving eternal life, given authority, etc. I have to think that John understood the neccesity and sacrifice that Christ made by being made human (as Paul describes in Philippians 2) but recgonized that difference in Him (His annointing) than any others that were claiming to be the "Messiah."
2. According to Scott John had a specific purpose in using the word „sign‟. What was John‟s his primary purpose in using this word according to Scott, and what does this word reveal about the character of Jesus?
Scott says the "signs" point to the unique power of who Jesus is and allowed His followers to compare Him to others. ("Who can do more signs that Him?" John is proving Jesus' identity to his audience by giving them signs as proof to His annointing. I think these signs point to Jesus' mercy. Many of The signs that he portrays are those that serve others. He has Mercy on sinful people that realize He has the power to help. John may be using lesser signs to show the power of Christ so that they may believe the greatest "sign," the ressurection, which would save them.
3. In Scott‟s discussion of John 6:44-45 he notes a significance about the Greek word helkuo. How does understanding the Greek meaning of this word change your understanding of the verse? and/or your understanding of God.
This word that John uses implies that God is willing to do anything to attract a sutbborn, sinful people to Himself. To Haul, Drag, Pull, or Attract. These four words are different ways that the Lord brings us to Him and back to Him. For me it proves that God puts value in His relationships with people and that he desires to bring individuals to Him.
Scott talks about John's concern in communicating that Jesus was "the Annointed One." This knLong awaited deliverer. I think that John was trying to communicate Jesus' humanity, but also his annointing. Throughout his Gospel, John mentions the Son of man being glorified, giving eternal life, given authority, etc. I have to think that John understood the neccesity and sacrifice that Christ made by being made human (as Paul describes in Philippians 2) but recgonized that difference in Him (His annointing) than any others that were claiming to be the "Messiah."
2. According to Scott John had a specific purpose in using the word „sign‟. What was John‟s his primary purpose in using this word according to Scott, and what does this word reveal about the character of Jesus?
Scott says the "signs" point to the unique power of who Jesus is and allowed His followers to compare Him to others. ("Who can do more signs that Him?" John is proving Jesus' identity to his audience by giving them signs as proof to His annointing. I think these signs point to Jesus' mercy. Many of The signs that he portrays are those that serve others. He has Mercy on sinful people that realize He has the power to help. John may be using lesser signs to show the power of Christ so that they may believe the greatest "sign," the ressurection, which would save them.
3. In Scott‟s discussion of John 6:44-45 he notes a significance about the Greek word helkuo. How does understanding the Greek meaning of this word change your understanding of the verse? and/or your understanding of God.
This word that John uses implies that God is willing to do anything to attract a sutbborn, sinful people to Himself. To Haul, Drag, Pull, or Attract. These four words are different ways that the Lord brings us to Him and back to Him. For me it proves that God puts value in His relationships with people and that he desires to bring individuals to Him.
Monday, February 16, 2009
1. What did the Jewish people expect the "Kingdom of God" to look like in redeeming Israel? Did these views mirror Jesus? (p. 49-55)
The Jewish people expected the Kingdom of God to be a renewal of all that had been under the Kingdom of Satan. In other words the Kingdom of God entailed national deliverance, cosmic renewal social order and the spiritual disposition of people would be changed. Ultimately the Kingdom of God was seen as a "reassertion of Gods right to rule over the universe and bringing humankind under his authority."
By all means did the Jewish views mirrored Jesus' plan and action. Little did many of them know that Christ was the Messiah. One aspect that I believe the Jewish people did not have a good grasp of was the process in which the Kingdom of God would manifest itself. For one Christs death but also the renewal process it seems was expected to happen automatically and fully at the coming of the Messiah. Renewal did come but suffering and struggle still remain at the surprise of some Jewish people.
2. Did the Synoptic gospels suggest the idea of 'Messianic Secrecy'? If so, did Scott's explanation suggest a strong reason for Jesus to deliberately conceal his identity? (p.55-6)
Who really knows the answer to this? From my point of view Scott's illustration and explanation of the differing views concerning the Messianic Secrecy it by all means is a possibility. Parts of the Synoptic Gospels does allude to such a secret but for what reasons I am not sure.
3. Why did Jesus want to be baptized? Why was this significant enlight of the Jews?
The reason for the baptism of Jesus was for identification with sinners. I also believe it was a public statement of his Messiahship, as well as the beginning of his ministry.
4. According to the text, has the Kingdom of God arrived or are we still awaiting its arrival?
The Jewish people expected the Kingdom of God to be a renewal of all that had been under the Kingdom of Satan. In other words the Kingdom of God entailed national deliverance, cosmic renewal social order and the spiritual disposition of people would be changed. Ultimately the Kingdom of God was seen as a "reassertion of Gods right to rule over the universe and bringing humankind under his authority."
By all means did the Jewish views mirrored Jesus' plan and action. Little did many of them know that Christ was the Messiah. One aspect that I believe the Jewish people did not have a good grasp of was the process in which the Kingdom of God would manifest itself. For one Christs death but also the renewal process it seems was expected to happen automatically and fully at the coming of the Messiah. Renewal did come but suffering and struggle still remain at the surprise of some Jewish people.
2. Did the Synoptic gospels suggest the idea of 'Messianic Secrecy'? If so, did Scott's explanation suggest a strong reason for Jesus to deliberately conceal his identity? (p.55-6)
Who really knows the answer to this? From my point of view Scott's illustration and explanation of the differing views concerning the Messianic Secrecy it by all means is a possibility. Parts of the Synoptic Gospels does allude to such a secret but for what reasons I am not sure.
3. Why did Jesus want to be baptized? Why was this significant enlight of the Jews?
The reason for the baptism of Jesus was for identification with sinners. I also believe it was a public statement of his Messiahship, as well as the beginning of his ministry.
4. According to the text, has the Kingdom of God arrived or are we still awaiting its arrival?
I believe yes, the Kingdom of God has arrived. I do not believe it has completely been fulfilled or has eliminated all of the Kingdom of Satan from this world. However, the path in which we do have freedom from the Kingdom of Satan has been paved and is one in which we are able to walk on as a result of Christs death and resurrection.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
1) The Jewish people believed that Satan's control of the material world would end and it would usher in a kingdom where God's people would see all of their problems solved. Cosmic renewal, as well as changes in social order and spiritual disposition were issues debated over with the ushering in of the Kingdom of God. The main change which was believed to take place though was national deliverance, which in the time of Jesus would have meant freedom from Rome.
Jesus' view of the Kingdom of God was not the same as the Jewish view of the Kingdom of God. While the Jews were waiting for a political leader who would put the nation of Israel's enemies under their feet, Jesus was ushering in a new age in which God was taking the world back from Satan.
2) I think the Scripture is rather clear that Jesus chose to keep his nature as the Messiah secret from certain people at certain times. Why he did that is another thing. I think Scott's explanation of why Jesus kept his identity secret is sufficient. There definitely would have been an enormous amount of expectations which came along with the Messiah and Jesus was wise in his speech in order to make sure that things would play out in God's time.
3) Jesus' baptism was important because it associated him with John's baptism which was declaring that the Messiah had come into the world. Jesus' baptism also established him as the Messianic King and the suffering servant which had been alluded to throughout the Old Testament. This was significant in light of the Jews because the Jews had the Old Testament Scriptures so they had what was needed to know that Jesus was indeed the Christ. However, he was the stumbling block which they would stumble over instead.
4) Yes, the Kingdom of God has arrived. Through Christ there is the idea that the Kingdom of God is realized and is present at this moment but is still awaiting its ultimate fulfillment in the future.
Jesus' view of the Kingdom of God was not the same as the Jewish view of the Kingdom of God. While the Jews were waiting for a political leader who would put the nation of Israel's enemies under their feet, Jesus was ushering in a new age in which God was taking the world back from Satan.
2) I think the Scripture is rather clear that Jesus chose to keep his nature as the Messiah secret from certain people at certain times. Why he did that is another thing. I think Scott's explanation of why Jesus kept his identity secret is sufficient. There definitely would have been an enormous amount of expectations which came along with the Messiah and Jesus was wise in his speech in order to make sure that things would play out in God's time.
3) Jesus' baptism was important because it associated him with John's baptism which was declaring that the Messiah had come into the world. Jesus' baptism also established him as the Messianic King and the suffering servant which had been alluded to throughout the Old Testament. This was significant in light of the Jews because the Jews had the Old Testament Scriptures so they had what was needed to know that Jesus was indeed the Christ. However, he was the stumbling block which they would stumble over instead.
4) Yes, the Kingdom of God has arrived. Through Christ there is the idea that the Kingdom of God is realized and is present at this moment but is still awaiting its ultimate fulfillment in the future.
Chapter 2
1. What did the Jewish people expect the "Kingdom of God" to look like in redeeming Israel? Did these views mirror Jesus? (p. 49-55)
They expected Satan to lose control over the material world. This in turn will solve their individual, social and environmental among other problems they had. They wanted to be recognized as the greatest of all nations and have the dominion of the political sphere.
2. Did the Synoptic gospels suggest the idea of 'Messianic Secrecy'? If so, did Scott's explanation suggest a strong reason for Jesus to deliberately conceal his identity? (p.55-6)
Yes, Jesus purpose of keeping “The Messianic Secret” might e due of timing. He didn’t want his Messiahship to be known until his death and mostly his resurrection when all His teachings and purpose of His coming will be clarified to all the ones who wanted to believe.
3. Why did Jesus want to be baptized? Why was this significant in light of the Jews? (pg. 52)
He wanted to be baptized because this will identify Him with John’s ministry in the fact that one can have a relationship with God. This was also the beginning of his commission; but most importantly because during His baptism the Jews could have recognized His Messiahship because the coming of the Holy Spirit, according to Isaiah was the symbol of His anointing, coronation or inauguration as the Servant of God. The declaration of the Father, according to Isaiah and Psalm 2 would associate Him with the family of King David, as a servant who will accomplish His mission thorough suffering but most that anything else as the ‘beloved Son’, the One who pleases the Father.
4. According to the text, has the Kingdom of God arrived or are we still awaiting its arrival?
According to the author of the text the Kingdom of God come when our Lord Jesus became flesh and dwell among us, bringing us the New Covenant, the hope of salvation and the expectation of being in the Kingdom of God one day.
1. What did the Jewish people expect the "Kingdom of God" to look like in redeeming Israel? Did these views mirror Jesus? (p. 49-55)
They expected Satan to lose control over the material world. This in turn will solve their individual, social and environmental among other problems they had. They wanted to be recognized as the greatest of all nations and have the dominion of the political sphere.
2. Did the Synoptic gospels suggest the idea of 'Messianic Secrecy'? If so, did Scott's explanation suggest a strong reason for Jesus to deliberately conceal his identity? (p.55-6)
Yes, Jesus purpose of keeping “The Messianic Secret” might e due of timing. He didn’t want his Messiahship to be known until his death and mostly his resurrection when all His teachings and purpose of His coming will be clarified to all the ones who wanted to believe.
3. Why did Jesus want to be baptized? Why was this significant in light of the Jews? (pg. 52)
He wanted to be baptized because this will identify Him with John’s ministry in the fact that one can have a relationship with God. This was also the beginning of his commission; but most importantly because during His baptism the Jews could have recognized His Messiahship because the coming of the Holy Spirit, according to Isaiah was the symbol of His anointing, coronation or inauguration as the Servant of God. The declaration of the Father, according to Isaiah and Psalm 2 would associate Him with the family of King David, as a servant who will accomplish His mission thorough suffering but most that anything else as the ‘beloved Son’, the One who pleases the Father.
4. According to the text, has the Kingdom of God arrived or are we still awaiting its arrival?
According to the author of the text the Kingdom of God come when our Lord Jesus became flesh and dwell among us, bringing us the New Covenant, the hope of salvation and the expectation of being in the Kingdom of God one day.
Ch. 3 - Ana
Chapter 3
1. Scott tells us that Jesus is most commonly referred to as the "Son of man" in the gospel of John. What was John trying to get readers to know about Jesus as being the "Son of man", instead of emphasizing him as the "Son of God?"
According to the book he wanted to convey Jesus was God in flesh. The Messiah, the Christ, the Anointed One.
2. According to Scott John had a specific purpose in using the word „sign‟. What was John‟s his primary purpose in using this word according to Scott, and what does this word reveal about the character of Jesus?
John wanted to convey or say something about the effect of Jesus works on his observes. He uses “dunamis” which means ‘power’ and “teras” meaning ‘wonder’, but most than anything else he used the word ‘sign’ as pointing towards something. The sings were a demonstration of the uniqueness, power and authority of Jesus as well as His relationship with the Father. They validated Him as both, the Messiah and the Son of God.
3. In Scott‟s discussion of John 6:44-45 he notes a significance about the Greek word helkuo. How does understanding the Greek meaning of this word change your understanding of the verse? and/or your understanding of God.
The translation of this word in addition to ‘draw’ includes: ‘drag, pull, haul, and attract’, according to the text, but what it surprised me the most was that always implies resistance. This made me think about my own pre-conversion experience when I was resistant to the truth of God and to my brother who attempted to share it with me. Even the very day when I received the Lord, I wasn’t very sure how in the world I had end up in front of the altar. At first I felt deceived and suspicious, but even that God used to continue bringing me closer and closer to him. Now I understand that “nothing can separate us (or keep us far) from the love of God” not even our own resistance.
1. Scott tells us that Jesus is most commonly referred to as the "Son of man" in the gospel of John. What was John trying to get readers to know about Jesus as being the "Son of man", instead of emphasizing him as the "Son of God?"
According to the book he wanted to convey Jesus was God in flesh. The Messiah, the Christ, the Anointed One.
2. According to Scott John had a specific purpose in using the word „sign‟. What was John‟s his primary purpose in using this word according to Scott, and what does this word reveal about the character of Jesus?
John wanted to convey or say something about the effect of Jesus works on his observes. He uses “dunamis” which means ‘power’ and “teras” meaning ‘wonder’, but most than anything else he used the word ‘sign’ as pointing towards something. The sings were a demonstration of the uniqueness, power and authority of Jesus as well as His relationship with the Father. They validated Him as both, the Messiah and the Son of God.
3. In Scott‟s discussion of John 6:44-45 he notes a significance about the Greek word helkuo. How does understanding the Greek meaning of this word change your understanding of the verse? and/or your understanding of God.
The translation of this word in addition to ‘draw’ includes: ‘drag, pull, haul, and attract’, according to the text, but what it surprised me the most was that always implies resistance. This made me think about my own pre-conversion experience when I was resistant to the truth of God and to my brother who attempted to share it with me. Even the very day when I received the Lord, I wasn’t very sure how in the world I had end up in front of the altar. At first I felt deceived and suspicious, but even that God used to continue bringing me closer and closer to him. Now I understand that “nothing can separate us (or keep us far) from the love of God” not even our own resistance.
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Chapter 2 question 2,3,4
Did the Synoptic gospels suggest the idea of 'Messianic Secrecy'? If so, did Scott's explanation suggest a strong reason for Jesus to deliberately conceal his identity? (p.55-6
I don't think that they suggest Messianic Secrecy. Maybe a prolonging of HIs ministry, but not to keep people from knowing who he was. I think one of the reasons deals with the previous question and the expectations of the Kingdom of God as Scott aslso suggests in his chapter (56).
Why did Jesus want to be baptized? Why was this significant enlight of the Jews?
Scott describes it as Jesus' innauguration as forseen in Isaiah. Jesus' baptism identified him with John, meaning the coming of the Messiah and the repentance of sin. This was significant in that he identified with John, a proven religious leader already.
According to the text, has the Kingdom of God arrived or are we still awaiting its arrival?
Yes!
I don't think that they suggest Messianic Secrecy. Maybe a prolonging of HIs ministry, but not to keep people from knowing who he was. I think one of the reasons deals with the previous question and the expectations of the Kingdom of God as Scott aslso suggests in his chapter (56).
Why did Jesus want to be baptized? Why was this significant enlight of the Jews?
Scott describes it as Jesus' innauguration as forseen in Isaiah. Jesus' baptism identified him with John, meaning the coming of the Messiah and the repentance of sin. This was significant in that he identified with John, a proven religious leader already.
According to the text, has the Kingdom of God arrived or are we still awaiting its arrival?
Yes!
Chapter 2
1. What did the Jewish people expect the "Kingdom of God" to look like in redeeming Israel? Did these views mirror Jesus? (p. 49-55)
End of control of the material world by Satan. Their individial, social, environmental and other problems would be solved. Isreal would be dominant politically and be the greatest of all nations.
Yes, Jesus ended the control of Satan. It didn't result in Israel's problems being solved on earth. Israel's ideal of the Kingdom was through power. Jesus' idea of entering the Kingdom was following Him. He was not concerned with the powerful, but the weak. That is who he began with to begin the Kingdom of God. He also did it through a cross, a symbol of shame in Hebrew society. Jesus had the same ideal as the Jewish people in the defeat of Satan, but a very different method.
End of control of the material world by Satan. Their individial, social, environmental and other problems would be solved. Isreal would be dominant politically and be the greatest of all nations.
Yes, Jesus ended the control of Satan. It didn't result in Israel's problems being solved on earth. Israel's ideal of the Kingdom was through power. Jesus' idea of entering the Kingdom was following Him. He was not concerned with the powerful, but the weak. That is who he began with to begin the Kingdom of God. He also did it through a cross, a symbol of shame in Hebrew society. Jesus had the same ideal as the Jewish people in the defeat of Satan, but a very different method.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)