Reading the Church Fathers discussion
Doctrine Matters
>
Who is Jesus?
I think this falls partially under the concept of "Trinity" if not largely. The historical Jesus even so can found in Josephus's Testimonium and so I'm not sure there's much else to be said on that. Still, I think divinity and particularly how that's manifested is the proverbial meat and potatoes of Christian theologia and the Church(s) we know today.
Aaron wrote: "I think this falls partially under the concept of "Trinity" if not largely. The historical Jesus even so can found in Josephus's Testimonium and so I'm not sure there's much else to be said on that..."There are people who still claim that Jesus didn't exist, and that all the references to Christ in the writings of historians like Tacitus and Josephus etc. are either corruptions or misinterpretations by Christians. Apparently, people can still draw opposite conclusions no matter what pieces of evidence are presented.
Oh sure, I think those are following the the few authors with an axe to grind however. To create an entire book on a near un-falsifiable subject considering we have those historical references would seem fishy. They're better off joining us to discuss whether or not he was God.
Aaron, you mentioned in another thread, "while I've formed my own unorthodox (or heretical more accurately) opinions about Jesus I do consider him a savior of sorts."What are your current opinions about Jesus, if you don't mind sharing?
Nemo, I don't mind, although I can't guarantee it will be of much substance for discussion in your group. In a nutshell pinning me down to produce a confession of belief or disbelief has only resulted in my rebellion to whatever position the questioner would choose to challenge me over.As you know I embrace Agnosticism and so I leave the question of divinity up for debate because I honestly do not know enough to make a commitment one way or the other. Where I part with agnosticism I believe Jesus was a revolutionary among his people who offered - all - a way from worldly bondage in whatever form that may have taken.
In that sense I consider him a savior and a light for those who felt shrouded by darkness. I do not hold him accountable of self deception or coercion as I simply cannot judge the mind of man who devoted himself to the sake of others so long ago and produced no writings himself.
Is there truth in his story and existence? I can accept the moral value of it set within a structure of heavenly design however real or mythical whether or not some need to produce or refute solidified earth for his feet to have imprint.
Thank you for sharing, Aaron. I tend to think that we're all agnostic in some things, and firm believers in others. :)P.S. Just out of curiosity, you were a confirmed Catholic, what made you change your mind?
Oh yes confirmed for sure, unlike my friends whose parents let them skip out on that. Although I come from a Catholic family I suppose going through the public school system had some affect. My mind has often questioned the origin of the stars as early as I can remember and I recall the buzz I felt when trying to grasp grand questions like who made God?
*to your question I don't think there was a single point of turning. I think largely just on going inquiry, experience (or lack thereof), fascination with prehistory (although I'm no scientist). My disdain for religious Charlatans helped spur me off in my own path some too. But I have fond memories of my Nonna taking me to mass as boy, so I suppose I'm an apple that hasn't fallen to far from the tree, but isn't sure whether I fell from a tree in the first place.
I was a born and bred atheist, and have no idea what it is like to grow up in a religious environment. My parents--both scientists-- encouraged me to think for myself and challenge authority. Even though they disagree with my current beliefs, they respect them. I don't know how committed religious parents would respond if their children abandon their faith.
Here is another clip by Bishop Robert Barron where he addresses this question of Jesus, "Who do you say that I am?" It is a segment out of the first part of his Catholicism series. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aZsH...
That's interesting to learn Nemo. I don't believe I've ever met a born and bred atheist who found faith so I wouldn't know what it's like to not grow up with the fear and love of God, prayer and all the other traditions and things that came along with religious upbringing.I guess we're all seeking answers some more so than others. I think it's profitable to question ourselves, or faith or lack of it so that we can know we're not merely engaged via habit, or disengaged from ignorance.
Aaron wrote: "That's interesting to learn Nemo. I don't believe I've ever met a born and bred atheist who found faith..."I've met quite of few of them and they shared their experiences with me. Conversely, I've never met in person anyone who turned away from the religion they grew up with, except online and in the news. I suppose this is not small talk material...
Kerstin wrote: "Here is another clip by Bishop Robert Barron where he addresses this question of Jesus, "Who do you say that I am?" .."Barron speaks of how Jesus' teaching is focused on himself, whereas the other religious figures are focus on either a "path", or some moral principles. I've never thought much about this until recently. This seems to be what really distinguishes Christianity from other religions.
Nemo wrote: "Barron speaks of how Jesus' teaching is focused on himself, whereas the other religious figures are focus on either a "path", or some moral principles. I've never thought much about this until recently. This seems to be what really distinguishes Christianity from other religions."It does. And it is a point increasingly difficult to bring across, as the cultural mantra says "all religions are the same."
If you can believe it or not I corresponded with someone who was an Arian Christian some years back.
Aaron wrote: "If you can believe it or not I corresponded with someone who was an Arian Christian some years back."What do you mean by an Arian Chrisitian?
The Divinity of Jesus and the Trinity are closely related topics, but they have distinct focuses. Let's focus on the Divinity of Jesus in this thread.Why did the early Church Fathers believe that Jesus was not a mere man? Why do Christians believe?
Susan wrote: "Aaron wrote: "If you can believe it or not I corresponded with someone who was an Arian Christian some years back."What do you mean by an Arian Chrisitian?"
In regards to the Arian heresy (Arius of Alexandria, not to be confused with Ayranism):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01707...
Gotcha thanks. That was dumb of me. Just recently read two books about that. Loved Athanasius etc...not used to seeing it written like that....
Nemo wrote: "The Divinity of Jesus and the Trinity are closely related topics, but they have distinct focuses. Let's focus on the Divinity of Jesus in this thread.Why did the early Church Fathers believe that..."
By all means, I don't intent to derail whatever your intent of this topic will be. I do think you will find the same reasoning as to who Jesus is according to the Church Fathers in the rejection of for example Arius who was more than just a random with an idea whose ideology spread into Europe with the Goths.
But it's not my position to argue his case. Just answering Susan's question. I was surprised myself (referring to when I brought this up) there would be any people in this day and age committed to that view. Then again maybe I shouldn't be hah..
Aaron wrote: "Nemo wrote: "The Divinity of Jesus and the Trinity are closely related topics, but they have distinct focuses. Let's focus on the Divinity of Jesus in this thread.Why did the early Church Fathers..."
I don't know if many identify themselves as 'Arian' Christians, but it sure seems like a lot of people have lost the belief in a divine Jesus and just really think of Him as a cool, insightful guy that is worth listening to.... :(
Aaron wrote: ". I was surprised myself (referring to when I brought this up) there would be any people in this day and age committed to that view...."The Jehovah's Witnesses also hold a nontrinitarian view. I haven't studied their teachings in detail, but their conception of Christ is very similar to Arianism. (A friend of mine converted from mainstream Christianity to JW, and is convinced that they are in the right.)
Does anyone else get frustrated with the lack of basic reply features our group forms have on GR? So when I want to multi-quote or quote someone who's quoted someone else...Anyhow, Susan I don't think there are many Arian's out there now. This individual came to his faith from a self informed pursuit of interest in the Roman Empire and Early Church. The cool guy persona (while sure he's cool) I think is the work both revisionism and lazy belief.
Nemo, I try to avoid the door knockings when I can. Although the last two times the came around both the JW (and Mormons for that matter) were very brief and non-intrusive thankfully. Interesting I'm not sure I knew that about their belief.
I think the term 'Ariansim' has become a generic term of sorts for all Christian faith groups that do not believe in the Trinity, such as Jehovah's Witnesses, Unitarians, Quakers, etc.
Aaron wrote: "Nemo, I try to avoid the door knockings when I can..."I think Mormons have adopted a more effective method of proselytizing, i.e., TV advertising, which is more intrusive than door-to-door. But I digress.
Interacting with evangelists is one thing, talking with a personal friend is quite another. We cannot be certain that evangelists genuinely care for our wellbeing, not just getting their works in, but a friend does care and we listen to them more attentively.
Yeah although you can always just turn off the TV which isn't a bad idea in my opinion :)Kerstin, I think the term is Unitarian rather than Arian. I did some searching and seem to have found a Arian Catholic church and wow they sound pretty orthodox otherwise. They're on facebook too, but I'd rather read more before dropping their links.
Nemo wrote: "I was a born and bred atheist, and have no idea what it is like to grow up in a religious environment. My parents--both scientists-- encouraged me to think for myself and challenge authority. Even ..."I can tell you....it is not easy...I have a daughter who has a boyfriend for the last three years, one of those science types...(even though I am a physician myself), and she is a completely different person from who she used to be (she also goes to an extremely liberal NE university which has not helped in the slightest)...it is not easy..it is actually very sad. She has not denounced per se, but again, she is most definitely not who she used to be :( .
Nemo wrote: "Aaron wrote: "That's interesting to learn Nemo. I don't believe I've ever met a born and bred atheist who found faith..."I've met quite of few of them and they shared their experiences with me. C..."
Nemo, if I could ask you, if you were atheist, out of all the choices available, what made you choose the faith you chose?
Susan wrote: "Nemo, if I could ask you, if you were atheist, out of all the choices available, what made you choose the faith you chose? ..."Well, to make a long story short, there were evangelists in my school who made Christ very appealing to me, and I thought, "Why not check Him out?" I have nothing to lose, if He doesn't exist, and much to gain, if He does.
Nemo wrote: "Susan wrote: "Nemo, if I could ask you, if you were atheist, out of all the choices available, what made you choose the faith you chose? ..."Well, to make a long story short, there were evangelis..."
Seems prudent. I think I heard you speak of Calvin. So I guess I assumed you are a Protestant. Would you say you are a Calvinist? Sorry for my ignorance, I really don't even know what the proper terms would be...
Susan wrote: "..it is not easy..it is actually very sad. She has not denounced per se, but again, she is most definitely not who she used to be :( . ."When I read this, I wanted to give you a hug. :) You remind me of St. Monica and St. Augustine, who was converted to Christianity after many tears and prayers of His mother.
I was once called a Calvinist, at a time when I had no idea who he was. I disagree with some points of his doctrine, but I do believe the perseverance of the saints. Surely, if God is real, none of His people would be lost to Him.
Aaron wrote: "Calvinism is about predestination right?"That's one of the doctrines, yes.
Nemo wrote: "Susan wrote: "..it is not easy..it is actually very sad. She has not denounced per se, but again, she is most definitely not who she used to be :( . ."When I read this, I wanted to give you a hug..."
Hahaha. Thanks. Sometimes I could use a hug! Just one of the things that keep me up a lot of nights... It is 3:11 am as I write this...
Recalling the discussion of Jesus' age, I recently saw this in The New St. Thomas Institute: Taylor Marshall was going through why he believes that Jesus' birthday was actually Dec. 25, and (it is a whole video) but had two quotes in there, one from Saint Theophilus (Bishop of Caesarea, d. 181) "We ought to celebrate the birthday of our Lord on whatever day the 25th of Dec. shall happen.", and one from Saint Hippolytus of Rome (3rd century theologian d. 235) "The first advent of our Lord in the flesh occurred when he was born in Bethlehem on Dec. 25."
He then remarks how everything hinges on the death and resurrection of Jesus. He discusses 10 points to confirm the dates of such. 1) In Luke 3:1, John the Baptist begins his ministry in the 15th year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar. 2) Tiberius Caesar succeeded Augustus Caesar Aug. 19, 14. He ruled until 37 AD. Therefore beginning of John's ministry ~ 28/29 AD. 3) This places the baptism of Jesus ~ 29/30 AD. 4) John's Gospel mentions that Jesus, during His ministry, attended at least 3 separate Passovers: 1. John 2:13, 23, 2. John 6:4, 3. John 11:55, 12:1. 5) This means that Jesus' ministry lasted at least 3, if not 4 years...Tradition ~ 3.5 years, therefore death ~ 33/34 AD. 6) Matthew, Mark, Luke and John all agree that the crucifixion happened a few hours before the beginning of the Jewish Sabbath. That would be the evening or nightfall on a Friday and within a day of Passover which is celebrated at the time of a full moon. Astronomical projections and technology have made it possible to learn more. 7) Passover Day called the 14th day of Nisan (Hebrew month). There are only two possible days on which a full moon lands on a Friday: Friday 4/7/30 and Friday 4/3/33. What we know about the reign of Tiberius and the ministry of John the Baptist seems to exclude the first date. 8) Makes resurrection date 4/5/33. 9) It is clear Friday was the Passover Day 4/3/33. If Jesus is celebrating Passover, why did he do it on Thursday? Remember, Jews recognize the beginning of a day at sunset, not sunrise. Genesis: "There was evening and morning, the first day..." etc., (We Catholics can go to Church Saturday night and it fulfills the Sunday obligation) Therefore, Thursday evening IS Passover Friday. At the coming together of the apostles, He has already entered into the ministry of the Passover, recalling the lamb was being slain, delivered from slavery, Red Sea, Promised Land....Jesus attaches His scourging/death to that Passover meal...For Catholics, this takes the Last Supper and the Passover and the Eucharist, and the Passion, and the death of Christ and unites and integrates all of it, into one reality. The Eucharist/the Mass IS the sacrifice of Christ. Christ isn't dying over and over again. It is the one death of Christ, the Perfect offering of the God-man for our sins. In the Mass, we are connected personally and sacramentally with Christ.
One of the comments written under the video mentioned, John 19:14, "It was the preparation day for the Passover, and it was about noon." At noon, annually on the Feast of Passover, the high priest would enter the Holy of Holies in the Jerusalem Temple to offer an unblemished lamb as a sacrifice for atonement of the sins of the nation of Israel. John is showing Christ to be the new Passover unblemished lamb of the New Covenant being led like a sheep to a slaughter, where He, as the new high priest is making this sacrificial offering in the new Temple (His Body) see John 2. Christ as the "Lamb of God" fulfills the Old Covenant while transforming His sacrifice into the New. This takes place right before completing the 4th cup of consummation...mentioned earlier in the liturgical Seder meal that Jesus celebrated annually on the Passover. Mirrors the original Passover in Exodus 12-where they are told to slaughter the lamb and eat in a hurry. Exodus 12:3-12. Just thought it was interesting...
Susan wrote: "Recalling the discussion of Jesus' age, I recently saw this in The New St. Thomas Institute: Taylor Marshall was going through why he believes that Jesus' birthday was actually Dec. 25, and (it is..."
Thanks for posting this, Susan. Could you provide the original sources for the two quotes from Theophilus and Hippolytus?
I missed the connection between full moon and Passover. Could you elaborate on it a little?
Nemo wrote: "Susan wrote: "Recalling the discussion of Jesus' age, I recently saw this in The New St. Thomas Institute: Taylor Marshall was going through why he believes that Jesus' birthday was actually Dec. ..."
I couldn't quickly find that it was clearly noted on the NSTI site. Online I found for Theophilus, Madgeburgenses, Cent. 2. c. 6. Hospinian, de orign Festorum Chirstianorum. I don't know that that helps much.... For Hippolytus it said, (he) "...provides one of the earliest known references to the Dec 25 birth of Christ in his commentary on Daniel." I can try to contact Taylor Marshall but it might be a bit of time, if he answers at all. I think I get the e-book he wrote on the topic of Jesus' bday free. so I will download that and see if it is in there also.
Nemo wrote: "Susan wrote: "Recalling the discussion of Jesus' age, I recently saw this in The New St. Thomas Institute: Taylor Marshall was going through why he believes that Jesus' birthday was actually Dec. ..."
Re: Passover and full moon, all I had written in my notes was what I wrote above....I think if you put that M/M/L and J all agree that the crucifixion happened a few hours before the beginning of the Jewish Sabbath (that would make it a Friday) and that it was within a day of Passover (which is celebrated at the time of a full moon), taking those two facts together, astronomical projections and technology has been able to deduce that there were only two possible days that Passover day (14th day of Nisan), or a full moon lands on a Friday....if I re-listen and have any further clarification, I will post back
I wasn't aware that the Passover was always celebrated on a full moon. From your comment, I would guess that the Passover falls on a Friday about every three years, is that right?
Nemo wrote: "I wasn't aware that the Passover was always celebrated on a full moon. From your comment, I would guess that the Passover falls on a Friday about every three years, is that right?"I'm not sure, but remember the two dates they said it would be possible, was 4/7/30 and 4/3/33...three years apart....
Susan wrote: "...Tiberius Caesar succeeded Augustus Caesar Aug. 19, 14. He ruled until 37 AD..."AD is the year of Jesus' birth, how is that year determined? I know a lot of research has been done on this and according to Wikipedia, "Most scholars assume a date of birth between 6 BC and 4 BC." I'm not sure how they came to their conclusions, and what caused the the differences in their opinions. It is interesting.
It is interesting. I don't ever look at Wikipedia, but I read through the comments under the video and one person does ask a similar question to this. Taylor responds that he does address that in the book (which I haven't read yet) and that Josephus' 4 - 6 year discrepancy cannot be trusted for a number of reasons-primarily that he contradicts himself on the reign of Herod." I will try to post back after I have read the book.
I didn't know there is a connection with the Passover and the full moon. How interesting! Now, Easter is always celebrated on the first Sunday after the first full moon in spring. This year the first full moon in spring is April 11, a Tuesday, hence Easter is on the 16th. Once this date is set, all other dates connected to Easter are determined, Ash Wednesday, Palm Sunday, Ascension (40 days after Easter), Pentecost (50 days after Easter).
Many medieval cathedrals actually double as astronomical observatories, usually in their steeples, to calculate the moon phases in connection with the days for the spring/fall equinox to determine the correct day for Easter. Every year on Epiphany (Jan. 6th) the Church announces all moveable holidays for the current liturgical year, these days usually announced by the cantor in each parish. When this practice started I couldn't tell you, but it must go back a ways.
I just noticed this quote on GR under Athanasius of Alexandria:“He became what we are so that he might make us what he is.”
― Athanasius of Alexandria
Wow! That's of course totally out of context, but man could we run with that one!!! He of all people to write it!
Aaron wrote: "I just noticed this quote on GR under Athanasius of Alexandria:“He became what we are so that he might make us what he is.”
― Athanasius of Alexandria."
That quote is from On the Incarnation, "He assumed humanity that we might become God"
Why did you say "He of all people to write it"?
Aaron wrote: "I just noticed this quote on GR under Athanasius of Alexandria:“He became what we are so that he might make us what he is.”
― Athanasius of Alexandria
Wow! That's of course totally out of contex..."
Great quote!
Isn't he the guy from whom we have the Athanasian Creed?
https://www.ccel.org/creeds/athanasia...
Though I don't know off the top why we don't use it in the liturgy. Perhaps it is too long? Some language that's imprecise and confusing?
Kerstin wrote: "Aaron wrote: "Isn't he the guy from whom we have the Athanasian Creed?https://www.ccel.org/creeds/athanasia...
Though I don't know off the top why we don't use it in the liturgy. Perhaps it is too long? Some language that's imprecise and confusing? "
Yes that's him, as to the quote's origin I'm not 100% certain since there are others with his name following him:
https://www.goodreads.com/author/show...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athanas...
Nemo wrote: "Aaron wrote: "Why did you say "He of all people to write it"?"
Nemo you answered for me. "is" rather than "like".
Reading the Church Fathers
Books mentioned in this topic
The Trinity (other topics)On the Incarnation (other topics)
At the bottom of all the modern debates surrounding the historical Jesus, the historicity of the resurrection, the reliability of the New Testament, etc. is the question Jesus asked his disciples more than two thousand years ago. If I'm not mistaken, the doctrine of the Divinity of Jesus is under intensified scrutiny, if not attack, in our time, and it would be good to reflect on how the early Church Fathers dealt with the controversy.
Just to get the discussion started, I think the arguments of the early Church Fathers for the Divinity of Jesus fall into three broad categories:
1. From the point of view of Old Testament Judaism, how Jesus fulfills the promise of a Messiah, not just as a powerful or holy man, but as God-incarnate.
2. From the point of view of the pagan religions, how Jesus is on a par with, and surpass, the Greco-Roman gods in terms of supernatural birth, power, including the power to defeat death, and excellence of virtue.
3. From the point of view of atheists, how the judgement of God on both the righteous and the unrighteous is a reality, and resurrection and eternal life is also a reality.