Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Camio · 02-08-2007, 01:33 PM

What about kata sarka? It is not included in Part II if I am not mistaken.

Malachi151 · 02-08-2007, 01:44 PM

Well, I said that even if Jesus had been on earth in Paul's mind it wasn't in a historical way, just an abstract way, which sort of addresses the issue, but I can address it more in the book or another edit. Do you have a particular "in the flesh" passage in mind?

GakuseiDon · 02-08-2007, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

Well, I said that even if Jesus had been on earth in Paul's mind it wasn't in a historical way, just an abstract way, which sort of addresses the issue, but I can address it more in the book or another edit. Do you have a particular "in the flesh" passage in mind?

How about Heb 5:7?

who in the days of his flesh both prayers and supplications unto Him who was able to save him from death -- with strong crying and tears -- having offered up, and having been heard in respect to that which he feared

Malachi151 · 02-08-2007, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

How about Heb 5:7?

who in the days of his flesh both prayers and supplications unto Him who was able to save him from death -- with strong crying and tears -- having offered up, and having been heard in respect to that which he feared

I meant from the 7 "authentic" letters of Paul.

BTW, I just added these three quotes to the section on beliefs that Jesus did not exist in the flesh, which included two that are clearly of the type or similar to what Earl Doherty talks about.

Quote:

Afterwards, again, followed Saturninus: he, too, affirming that the innascible Virtue, that is God, abides in the highest regions, and that those regions are infinite, and in the regions immediately above us; but that angels far removed from Him made the lower world; and that, because light from above had flashed refulgently in the lower regions, the angels had carefully tried to form man after the similitude of that light; that man lay crawling on the surface of the earth; that this light and this higher virtue was, thanks to mercy, the salvable spark in man, while all the rest of him perishes; that Christ had not existed in a bodily substance, and had endured a quasi-passion in a phantasmal shape merely; that a resurrection of the flesh there will by no means be.
- Against All Heresies; Tertullian, 3rd century

To this is added one Cerdo. He introduces two first causes, that is, two Gods—one good, the other cruel: the good being the superior; the latter, the cruel one, being the creator of the world. He repudiates the prophecies and the Law; renounces God the Creator; maintains that Christ who came was the Son of the superior God; affirms that He was not in the substance of flesh; states Him to have been only in a phantasmal shape, to have not really suffered, but undergone a quasipassion, and not to have been born of a virgin, nay, really not to have been born at all. A resurrection of the soul merely does he approve, denying that of the body.
- Against All Heresies; Tertullian, 3rd century

Close on their heels follows Apelles, a disciple of Marcion, ... The Law and the prophets he repudiates. Christ he neither, like Marcion, affirms to have been in a phantasmal shape, nor yet in substance of a true body, as the Gospel teaches; but says, because He descended from the upper regions, that in the course of His descent He wove together for Himself a starry and airy flesh; and, in His resurrection, restored, in the course of His ascent, to the several individual elements whatever had been borrowed in His descent: and thus—the several parts of His body dispersed—He reinstated in heaven His spirit only. This man denies the resurrection of the flesh.
- Against All Heresies; Tertullian, 3rd century

Camio · 02-08-2007, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

Do you have a particular "in the flesh" passage in mind?

No, it was meant to be a general remark. Thank you for your response.

GakuseiDon · 02-08-2007, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

Quote:

Originally Posted by GDon

How about Heb 5:7?

who in the days of his flesh both prayers and supplications unto Him who was able to save him from death -- with strong crying and tears -- having offered up, and having been heard in respect to that which he feared

I meant from the 7 "authentic" letters of Paul.

But there are as few details in Hebrews about a Gospel Jesus as in Paul. Do you regard Hebrews as talking about a HJ?

Malachi151 · 02-08-2007, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

But there are as few details in Hebrews about a Gospel Jesus as in Paul. Do you regard Hebrews as talking about a HJ?

No, but I think that Hebrew is kind of a midway point in the historization process. Hebrews doesn't present Jesus historically, but it presents him as "in the flesh" and it presents the theological reasoning for why he had to be flesh and blood.

GakuseiDon · 02-08-2007, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

No, but I think that Hebrew is kind of a midway point in the historization process. Hebrews doesn't present Jesus historically, but it presents him as "in the flesh" and it presents the theological reasoning for why he had to be flesh and blood.

How do you determine that Hebrews is midway through the historization process? Where would you put Paul on that line?

The problem I see is this: Hebrews uses the same kind of language as Paul (descendent of a person, "in the flesh", etc), and has the same lack of "gospel" details as Paul. So they would seem to hang together, IMO. I'd be interested in what parts in Hebrews IYO show that it is further along the historization process.

Malachi151 · 02-08-2007, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Hebrews 9:
When Christ came as high priest of the good things that are already here, he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not man-made, that is to say, not a part of this creation. He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption. The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean. How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!

For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.

In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is living. This is why even the first covenant was not put into effect without blood. When Moses had proclaimed every commandment of the law to all the people, he took the blood of calves, together with water, scarlet wool and branches of hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and all the people. He said, "This is the blood of the covenant, which God has commanded you to keep." In the same way, he sprinkled with the blood both the tabernacle and everything used in its ceremonies. In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.

It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Christ did not enter a man-made sanctuary that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God's presence. Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.

...

Hebrews 10:
Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God. Since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool, because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.

Of course it is wrong to present these things as linear, there was a whole mess of stuff going on and many different view coexisting at the same time, but here the requirement of flesh and blood expressed, and Jesus is referred to as high priest and mentioned in an earthly setting in Hebrews. It also says that he will appear a "second time" something that you don't see in the letters of Paul.

GakuseiDon · 02-08-2007, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

Of course it is wrong to present these things as linear, there was a whole mess of stuff going on and many different view coexisting at the same time, but here the requirement of flesh and blood expressed, and Jesus is referred to as high priest and mentioned in an earthly setting in Hebrews. It also says that he will appear a "second time" something that you don't see in the letters of Paul.

So: the author of Hebrews thought that Jesus appeared on earth. Why didn't he refer to Gospel details? Was he unaware of them, but believed that Jesus came to earth anyway? Or was he aware of them, but didn't feel the need to include them? (You probably won't be surprised that I wonder how your answer here will apply to Paul)

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-08-2007, 01:33 PM	#41
Camio Junior Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: France Posts: 88	What about kata sarka? It is not included in Part II if I am not mistaken.

02-08-2007, 01:44 PM	#42
Malachi151 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Colorado Posts: 8,674	Well, I said that even if Jesus had been on earth in Paul's mind it wasn't in a historical way, just an abstract way, which sort of addresses the issue, but I can address it more in the book or another edit. Do you have a particular "in the flesh" passage in mind?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.