17 year time span

[jcrichton]

But the Trinity doctrine uses “essence” to mean substance. Jesus is “consubstantial” with the Father or of the same essence. Different than the understanding of the “essence of God” which corresponds more with our idea of charism or ‘grace’.

…yet, even if that term was used to mean the same (as of God’s Spirit) it is still distinct from its usage when Christ is concerned since Christ is of the Same Essense (genetic copy) while we are merely a measured out portion of God’s essense…

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[inkaneer]

…yet, even if that term was used to mean the same (as of God’s Spirit) it is still distinct from its usage when Christ is concerned since Christ is of the Same Essense (genetic copy) while we are merely a measured out portion of God’s essense…

Maran atha!

Angel

There is no way I am going to agree with that. Christ is not a clone “(genetic copy)” of the Father. He is a distinct person.

 

[annem]

Jesus died in 33AD right? In 50 AD the beginning of the New Testament was written? If this is true, then doesn’t oral tradition cover these 17 years? So when people claim to only follow the Bible and nothing else, isn’t that logic failed? Thanks and God bless.

I am very interested in oral traditions and Second Temple Judaism–there is a lot of scholarship going on right now about it.

Essentially,. the ancient Jews believed in both oral and scriptural traditions, and surprise, the Catholic church also believes in the sacred deposit of faith or tradition and scripture. And the ancient Jews also had a high priest, as we now have the pope, and they had a sacrificial system to remove sin. Yes, once again, the Catholic church does too.

Oral tradition was considered as binding and as sacred as scripture itself . (Josephus-Antiquities 10.2.1 XIII,297 and Philo -10.2.2 The Special Laws IV 143-150)

When Paul uses the words paradosis and paradidonai -he was using technical words which -any Jew- would recognize instantly. Paul was passing on binding oral tradition.

I would- be very interested in hearing anything anybody else has learned about oral tradition and how it was conveyed. ANyone have any good books on the subject?

. God bless, ANnem

 

[karebear92]

I am very interested in oral traditions and Second Temple Judaism–there is a lot of scholarship going on right now about it.

Essentially,. the ancient Jews believed in both oral and scriptural traditions, and surprise, the Catholic church also believes in the sacred deposit of faith or tradition and scripture. And the ancient Jews also had a high priest, as we now have the pope, and they had a sacrificial system to remove sin. Yes, once again, the Catholic church does too.

Oral tradition was considered as binding and as sacred as scripture itself . (Josephus-Antiquities 10.2.1 XIII,297 and Philo -10.2.2 The Special Laws IV 143-150)

When Paul uses the words paradosis and paradidonai -he was using technical words which -any Jew- would recognize instantly. Paul was passing on binding oral tradition.

I would- be very interested in hearing anything anybody else has learned about oral tradition and how it was conveyed. ANyone have any good books on the subject?

. God bless, ANnem

There are a few books by Pope Benedict XVI that are on the top of my reading list right now: The Fathers, and The Apostles. I haven’t read them yet, but I would imagine they would have some information regarding oral tradition.

From what I have been taught, however, it seems that the Apostles believed Christ was coming again soon after, so they preached orally as it wasn’t a message that they thought would need to last for generations. After a while, however, that idea changed, which sparked the writing of the Gospels. Paul on the other hand was writing letters as early as the 50s, I believe, which really isn’t that long after Christ’s death, as Paul had to spend a great deal of time with Peter to ensure that he was teaching accurate information.

 

[jcrichton]

There is no way I am going to agree with that. Christ is not a clone “(genetic copy)” of the Father. He is a distinct person.

…I am not saying that Christ is a clone… I was merely intending to convey that Christ is of God as fully Divine not as man who has been Created and brought to Life by a portion of God’s Spirit… so the Spirit that dwells in us, though of the same substance of God, does not make us equally Divine with God.

I apologize if my attempt to convey this cuased you any harm.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

There are a few books by Pope Benedict XVI that are on the top of my reading list right now: The Fathers, and The Apostles. I haven’t read them yet, but I would imagine they would have some information regarding oral tradition.

From what I have been taught, however, it seems that the Apostles believed Christ was coming again soon after, so they preached orally as it wasn’t a message that they thought would need to last for generations. After a while, however, that idea changed, which sparked the writing of the Gospels. Paul on the other hand was writing letters as early as the 50s, I believe, which really isn’t that long after Christ’s death, as Paul had to spend a great deal of time with Peter to ensure that he was teaching accurate information.

…also, if we pay attention the the Epistles we can note that there was an urgency to set Christian Doctrine apart from both Jewish and Gentile beliefs and doctrines… the Gospels demonstrate that there were efforts being made to preserve Christ’s Teachings through direct eyewitness accounts–they do not seem to be directed to any specific heresy or correction, as evident in the Epistles.

Maran atha!

Angel