What is your opinion about the "Historical Jesus"?
- Thread starter jd01
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
The historical Jesus is the only begotten Son of God. God anointed him with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him. And he that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. Vain men who disagree with the Word of God have been deceived by the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience. For the apostles have not followed cunningly devised fables, when they made known unto us the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, this is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
“Luke & Matthew copy Mark so to that extent we can say they are based on eye-witness testimony, but they themselves were not eye-witnesses”
see Luke explains this part
“Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us, even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
( this is why we have the gospels they are what we believe )
it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus, that thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed.”
Luke 1:1-4
Luke is writing an orderly account of things the apostles established and also things he himself knew from the very beginning. So if we take Luke as credible it’s based on his own and others eye witness accounts
mark , he also would be setting an orderly account of things everyone had saw and experienced being present both he and Luke in the early church and both mark and Luke were beneficial participants and fellow workers in Paul’s gentile ministry
“For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith: henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.
Do thy diligence to come shortly unto me: Only Luke is with me. Take Mark, and bring him with thee: for he is profitable to me for the ministry.”
2 Timothy 4:6-9, 11 KJV
Luke isn’t based on his own witness like acts , he says it’s based on his own witness and understanding of things and the things as the apostles had witnessed also to the believers in the region
see in reality they were always preaching the things we have now written down in the four gospels the epistles are letters sent to help correct things circles didn’t grasp and help
Offer more understanding of the four gospels
definately they aren’t personal witness accounts in Luke only or mark I agree they are definately witness accounts though like this , this is based on eye witness accounts
“ Jesus taketh with him Peter, and James, and John, and leadeth them up into an high mountain apart by themselves: and he was transfigured before them.
And his raiment became shining, exceeding white as snow; so as no fuller on earth can white them.
And there appeared unto them Elijah with Moses: and they were talking with Jesus.
And Peter answered and said to Jesus, Master, it is good for us to be here: and let us make three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias. For he wist not what to say; for they were sore afraid. And there was a cloud that overshadowed them: and a voice came out of the cloud, saying, This is my beloved Son: hear him. And suddenly, when they had looked round about, they saw no man any more, save Jesus only with themselves. And as they came down from the mountain, he charged them that they should tell no man what things they had seen, till the Son of man were risen from the dead. And they kept that saying with themselves, questioning one with another what the rising from the dead should mean. And they asked him, saying, Why say the scribes that Elias must first come? And he answered and told them, Elias verily cometh first, and restoreth all things; and how it is written of the Son of man, that he must suffer many things, and be set at nought. But I say unto you, That Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him.”
Mark 9:2-13 KJV
Only someone there would know the details of what was said and asked and what Jesus replied
and Peter answered and said to Jesus, ( he knows who spoke to who and what was said ) Master, it is good for us to be here: and let us make three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.
For he wist not what to say; for they were sore afraid.
( he knows how they felt and why peter said it )
what I mean is they are all this way coming from eye witness accounts even mark and Luke they are attempts like Luke says to present an orderly account of Jesus life after his baptism walking among mankind his ministry and teachings , miracles , death and suffering , resurrection and even his ascention is all based on eye witness accounts no matter if Matthew mark or Luke wrote or even John
his of Course is much more intimate and spiritual as the others are more of a record of what happened and what was said
see Luke explains this part
“Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us, even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
( this is why we have the gospels they are what we believe )
it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus, that thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed.”
Luke 1:1-4
Luke is writing an orderly account of things the apostles established and also things he himself knew from the very beginning. So if we take Luke as credible it’s based on his own and others eye witness accounts
mark , he also would be setting an orderly account of things everyone had saw and experienced being present both he and Luke in the early church and both mark and Luke were beneficial participants and fellow workers in Paul’s gentile ministry
“For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith: henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.
Do thy diligence to come shortly unto me: Only Luke is with me. Take Mark, and bring him with thee: for he is profitable to me for the ministry.”
2 Timothy 4:6-9, 11 KJV
Luke isn’t based on his own witness like acts , he says it’s based on his own witness and understanding of things and the things as the apostles had witnessed also to the believers in the region
see in reality they were always preaching the things we have now written down in the four gospels the epistles are letters sent to help correct things circles didn’t grasp and help
Offer more understanding of the four gospels
definately they aren’t personal witness accounts in Luke only or mark I agree they are definately witness accounts though like this , this is based on eye witness accounts
“ Jesus taketh with him Peter, and James, and John, and leadeth them up into an high mountain apart by themselves: and he was transfigured before them.
And his raiment became shining, exceeding white as snow; so as no fuller on earth can white them.
And there appeared unto them Elijah with Moses: and they were talking with Jesus.
And Peter answered and said to Jesus, Master, it is good for us to be here: and let us make three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias. For he wist not what to say; for they were sore afraid. And there was a cloud that overshadowed them: and a voice came out of the cloud, saying, This is my beloved Son: hear him. And suddenly, when they had looked round about, they saw no man any more, save Jesus only with themselves. And as they came down from the mountain, he charged them that they should tell no man what things they had seen, till the Son of man were risen from the dead. And they kept that saying with themselves, questioning one with another what the rising from the dead should mean. And they asked him, saying, Why say the scribes that Elias must first come? And he answered and told them, Elias verily cometh first, and restoreth all things; and how it is written of the Son of man, that he must suffer many things, and be set at nought. But I say unto you, That Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him.”
Mark 9:2-13 KJV
Only someone there would know the details of what was said and asked and what Jesus replied
and Peter answered and said to Jesus, ( he knows who spoke to who and what was said ) Master, it is good for us to be here: and let us make three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.
For he wist not what to say; for they were sore afraid.
( he knows how they felt and why peter said it )
what I mean is they are all this way coming from eye witness accounts even mark and Luke they are attempts like Luke says to present an orderly account of Jesus life after his baptism walking among mankind his ministry and teachings , miracles , death and suffering , resurrection and even his ascention is all based on eye witness accounts no matter if Matthew mark or Luke wrote or even John
his of Course is much more intimate and spiritual as the others are more of a record of what happened and what was said
-
1
- Show all
No.
Yes.
just like the Bible does...
God -> Baby -> Boy -> Man -> Crucified Man -> Resurrected Man -> Returning Conqueror.
Revelation 19
12His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.
13And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
14And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
15And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
16And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.
Yes.
just like the Bible does...
God -> Baby -> Boy -> Man -> Crucified Man -> Resurrected Man -> Returning Conqueror.
Revelation 19
12His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.
13And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
14And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
15And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
16And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.
-
1
- Show all
That's the problem. Luke CLAIMS 'perfect understanding' but obviously has quite a few things wrong. Therefore why have to read his account with discernment, some parts are accurate and not doubt correct, while others are not. We have to understand the errors as best we can and then decide what to do with them.
Sir, the holy apostles have not followed cunningly devised fables, when they made known unto us the power and coming of the Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. And no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
The Historical Jesus is the Christ of Theology. There is no actual difference between them, except in the minds of Atheists and Liberals. Scores of Archaeological Discoveries have been made that confirm the Biblical and Gospel record in detail.
"Oxford-educated archaeologist Sir William Ramsay, embarking on a journey to investigate the historicity of the Gospel records and Acts, was skeptical. Taught by liberals and having adopted prevalent errors on the alleged late origin and supposed non-historicity of the Gospels and Acts, Sir William fully expected his own work to corroborate those liberal theories. Instead, to his utter amazement, after lifelong study on the Book of Acts, he wrote later, “Further study … showed that the book [Luke-Acts] could bear the most minute scrutiny as an authority for the facts of the Aegean world, and that it was written with such judgment, skill, art and perception of truth as to be a model of historical statement.”
Sir William said about Saint Luke in particular, author of Luke and the Acts to Theophilus (who may have been the high priest Theophilus ben Ananas), “You may press the words of Luke in a degree beyond any other historian and they meet the keenest scrutiny and the hardest treatment.” Other scholars commenting on his work have agreed: “Ramsay, after a lifetime of research, ranks Luke as the greatest of all historians, ancient or modern. The Gospel stands the same test that the Acts has undergone. It is not only the most beautiful book in the world, but it is written with the utmost care and skill.” The Gospels are early historical records." https://onepeterfive.com/matthew-first-dates-gospels/
God Bless.
"Oxford-educated archaeologist Sir William Ramsay, embarking on a journey to investigate the historicity of the Gospel records and Acts, was skeptical. Taught by liberals and having adopted prevalent errors on the alleged late origin and supposed non-historicity of the Gospels and Acts, Sir William fully expected his own work to corroborate those liberal theories. Instead, to his utter amazement, after lifelong study on the Book of Acts, he wrote later, “Further study … showed that the book [Luke-Acts] could bear the most minute scrutiny as an authority for the facts of the Aegean world, and that it was written with such judgment, skill, art and perception of truth as to be a model of historical statement.”
Sir William said about Saint Luke in particular, author of Luke and the Acts to Theophilus (who may have been the high priest Theophilus ben Ananas), “You may press the words of Luke in a degree beyond any other historian and they meet the keenest scrutiny and the hardest treatment.” Other scholars commenting on his work have agreed: “Ramsay, after a lifetime of research, ranks Luke as the greatest of all historians, ancient or modern. The Gospel stands the same test that the Acts has undergone. It is not only the most beautiful book in the world, but it is written with the utmost care and skill.” The Gospels are early historical records." https://onepeterfive.com/matthew-first-dates-gospels/
God Bless.
-
1
- Show all