tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post7401509482759242510..comments2024-03-29T13:30:56.758+13:00Comments on Anglican Down Under: How did Jesus get to be what we believe him to be?Peter Carrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-6101272409928839222011-12-19T22:01:22.550+13:002011-12-19T22:01:22.550+13:00Indeed, Andrew, and Jesus' conception and birt...Indeed, Andrew, and Jesus' conception and birth is surprisingly different: his mother was not elderly and/or barren.Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-16776254278723152532011-12-19T21:48:46.654+13:002011-12-19T21:48:46.654+13:00Something else to consider, Peter, is the way the ...Something else to consider, Peter, is the way the Bible uses birth narratives. Whenever we find a birth narrative in the OT, especially with an aspect of God intervening supernaturally, we get a hint that this baby will be used by God in a special way. The examples that come to mind immediately are Isaac, Jacob, Moses, and Samuel. Perhaps Matthew and Luke, who both make extensive use of OT prophecies, are seeking to follow this pattern and highlight the pre-eminence of this birth? We certainly get that sense in Luke, where we have a parallel birth narrative for John the Baptist.Andrew Reidnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-76142117763197082902011-12-19T15:32:03.549+13:002011-12-19T15:32:03.549+13:00I agree, Peter, that something like the thought ex...I agree, Peter, that something like the thought experiments you engage in regarding Jesus’ remarkable (human/divine) identity are very worthwhile. True, Mark, Bauckham has recently put NT Criticism on its ear; via his <i>Jesus and the Eyewitnesses</i> especially. But that does not negate, but rather requires trying to track and/or trace such thoughts as to how and why the early 1st C Christians developed their insights into Jesus’ full identity. Already some decades ago Martin Hengel did something similar with his <i>The Cross of the Son of God</i> trilogy, even if nowadays we’d emphasize even more the element of worshipping this individual - so Hurtado and Bauckham again.<br /><br />All of which just, IMHO, helps us to get under the skin, as it were, of the NT texts. And from which helps us engage more readily with a complex multifaith 21st C world as ours.<br /><br />PS Mark: there is another (parallel) way of also reading Mark’s Gospel’s opening. Having read through the entire Gospel once, and having got the point re “the Way” (e.g. Mk 8-10), then a subsequent read would allow the “you” to be the reader(s), and Jesus to be the “messenger” - for after all, he too announces a few vv. later, “the Gospel of God”, again with suitable double meaning.Bryden Blackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15619512328964399016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-38191770167286845022011-12-18T20:09:10.742+13:002011-12-18T20:09:10.742+13:00"Were they madly inventing this part of Jesus..."Were they madly inventing this part of Jesus' life to suit the conclusion reached by the early Christians after his resurrection? It makes sense, I suggest, to think that the conclusion reached had its antecedents before Jesus' might works as an adult: from the beginning of his life, indeed before the beginning, there were signs of God doing a great thing."<br /><br />Well, I can hardly disagree. Since Richard Bauckham has developed Tal Ilan's work on onomasticon to argue for eyewitness accounts behind the Gospel pericopes (see the highly illuminating lecture at Lanier Theol. Library by Peter Williams of Tyndale House using this methodology), it doesn't seem hard to me to think that Mary and Joseph are the sources for the infancy narratives. Once we give up Bultmannian paradigms, we can start to think more clearly.<br />Further, Mark's gospel itself begins with a subtle indicator of pre-existence: 'I will send my messenger ahead of *you'; - who is the 'you' spoken to here? The pre-existent Son.<br />MarkAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-49823840408136171992011-12-18T09:37:44.512+13:002011-12-18T09:37:44.512+13:00"What on earth led to this person (Jesus) bei..."What on earth led to this person (Jesus) being proclaimed as the One to fulfil to O.T. prophecises?"<br /><br />Surely, Peter, the determination by God to become "tabernacled among men (and women)" :- <br /><br />To bring the fullness of redemption to ALL humanity This is why today's Gospel reading - about Gabriel's Annunciation to Mary, that she was to become Mother of The Lord is so important. This is why the Church calls her 'Blessed' - because Mary embraced the will of God for her life. - A good pattern for us.<br /><br />At the Incarnation of Christ, God became human, so that human beings could share in the divine life.<br /><br />No longer would the Word of God be confined to the pages of The Book. "The Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory - the glory as of the Only-Begotten of the Father; full of grace and truth. Alleluia!<br /><br />Simple? Maybe, but fundamental.Father Ron Smithhttp://kiwianglo.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.com