A place to share about the most human thing ever written -- the twin libraries called "Bible" which are many, many stories, yet One Word. The Bible is God's (divine) Word (human). Stay. Think. Pray. Comment.
Here are questions from the third class of Bible Alive: Jesus Christ, meeting Tuesday nights. To follow you will need to read the book Jesus Christ: Fundamentals in Christology, by Roch Kereszty, o. cist. ISBN-10: 081890917X ISBN-13: 978-0818909177 It can be ordered here NOTE: YOU NEED to read the book.
The following questions cover pp. 32-47. Class Three Questions:
1. What two facts are the “rock bottom” foundation for a theological history of Jesus? 2. Could some kind of “Jesus Religion” have begun without “Easter Faith”? 3. What are the advantages of starting biblical Christology with an analysis of the proclamation of Jesus’ saving death and resurrection by his disciples? 4. What is the most widely accepted fact about Jesus? 5. How can you prove the historicity of Jesus’ death on the cross? 6. Give an overview of the logical steps of the book’s argument that concludes that it is reasonable to believe in the bodily resurrection of Jesus. 7. Give a detailed exegesis of 1 Cor 15:3-8. In particular, why is this text so important for our purpose? How old is the tradition embodied in 3b-5? Does Paul view the appearance of Jesus to himself as a historical event? If so, what special kind? 8. Interpret the appearance narratives of both the Gospels and Acts, as well as the empty tomb narratives. 9. What facts connected to the origin of resurrection faith can be established by the historian? In particular, how do you prove the historicity of the empty tomb?
Here are questions from the second class of Bible Alive: Jesus Christ, meeting Tuesday nights. To follow you will need to read the book Jesus Christ: Fundamentals in Christology, by Roch Kereszty, o. cist. ISBN-10: 081890917X ISBN-13: 978-0818909177 It can be ordered here NOTE: YOU NEED to read the book.
The following questions (modified and added to those on pp. 489-492) cover pp. 22-31. Class Two Questions: 1. How is the historical uncertainty about some events and sayings of Jesus consistent with the reality of the incarnation? 2. How can you prove the general historicity of the New Testament records about Jesus? 3. Explain each criterion for an authentic Jesus tradition. Give examples of each? 4. From what you have learned so far, what is the value of the construct, “historical Jesus,” for apologetics?
Finally, take a look at this lecture by a worldwide leading Jesus scholar:
2.What are the implications of this one major presupposition?
3.What is the role of the New Testament witness to Christ in relation to the Old Testament?
4.What is the role of the New Testament regarding future christological developments?
5.For Catholics—What is the role of the Magisterium regarding future christological developments?
6.For Catholics—On what grounds do we affirm that we can find valuable christological insights in the works of non-Catholic Christian theologians?
7.For all Christians—On what grounds do we affirm that we can find new perspectives for understanding the mystery of Christ in non-Christian religions?
8.Define “christology from above” and “christology from below” and explain their importance. Explain what happens if either of these is stressed at the expense of the other.
9.Describe the Liberal Quest. What is the basic presupposition for the “Liberal Quest” for the historical Jesus?
10.What cause or causes put an end to the “Liberal Quest”?
11.Describe the New Quest. When and how did the New Quest begin? Why?
12.Explain the inadequacies of the New Quest:
13.What characterizes the so-called “Third Quest” of the 1990s? To what extent is it justifiable to say that the quest for the historical Jesus runs in cycles?
14.What can we learn for a biblical christology from the study of Jesus by recent Jewish authors?
15.Define the basic presuppositions of the method of the Biblical part of this study. In particular:
a.How are “facts” the product of objective data and interpretation?
b.Why must a historian, pace Luke Timothy Johnson, go BEYOND facts?
c.In order to understand a person or persons, what else is needed beyond the knowledge of data and a rational analysis of the data? Why are the latter not sufficient?
d.Why should historians RESIST the rationalistic attempt to subsume every new act or person under general categories?
e.Why can every human person be understood only from the perspective of his or her death?
f.Why and how does the question of meaning arise in the study of history?
g.Why does the question of the meaning of history call for a philosophy or theology of history?
h.In light of the above, how do the method of historiography and the question of meaning in history call for a theological history of Jesus?
i.What can such a theological history of Jesus accomplish? What are its limitations?
Here are some subjects that should be touched upon:
1)Philosophical foundations should be established. We should touch upon how reality is perceived by us through faith and reason. Faith is not in the same level as imagination. Many people only except truth and reality through reason. You should talk about how all humans take a leap of faith when it comes to the full perception of reality. You should talk about what truth is and if it can be obtained. You should touch upon the nature of free will and predestination. You should talk about being. So it looks like we're dealing with ontology and epistemology. The philosophical framework should be fully established before we move on with this blog.
2)Talk about the Bible and its role in the Church. How did the Bible come together. What does inspiration mean. What does inerrancy mean. Is the Bible the sole authority on matters of faith and morals, or is it the Church. Of course you say the church (the magisterium) is the final authority, explain these things. Give us a good understanding of revelation and tradition; how God communicates with the Church.
3)The other day we had a conversation of how we handle the general consensus regarding origins science. You mentioned materialistic reductionism (i think), naturalism, emergetism, etc. Mention those things and the flaws, and what the best approach to philosophically answer the question of why creation (or nature) is the way it is.
I cannot remember anything else at this moment. But these three things (in the order that they are) should be addressed.
Thank you very much Bill
I will see what I can do, Bernie. Thank you for your continued interest and investment. As a wise friend says, "the low watermark of love is paying attention."
