Understanding the sense of self-understanding of the "historical Jesus"

[sidetrack]

is vital to understand and fill in the gaps on who and what Jesus is theologically. Just a thought. What do you guys think?.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

is vital to understand and fill in the gaps on who and what Jesus is theologically. Just a thought. What do you guys think?.

He is exactly who the Church says he is, the God-man, the Second Person of the Trinity who assumed a human nature. The Second Person of the Trinity assumed a human nature, he united a human nature to his own Divine Nature and Person, but not so the two natures are mixed or confused in any fashion. Yet this union of natures in the Divine Person allowed each nature to function in its own proper manner, yet there is no human person present, only the Divine Person.

Is that what you wanted?

God Bless
Linus2nd

 

[sidetrack]

He is exactly who the Church says he is, the God-man, the Second Person of the Trinity who assumed a human nature. The Second Person of the Trinity assumed a human nature, he united a human nature to his own Divine Nature and Person, but not so the two natures are mixed or confused in any fashion. Yet this union of natures in the Divine Person allowed eachistoricallyre to function in its own proper manner, yet there is no human person present, only the Divine Person.

Is that what you wanted?

God Bless
Linus2nd

To tell you the truth not really as it does suffice who and how he was historically which requires a different sort of conviction. I was wondering about the social climate in first century Israel and thinking that an answer of who he was historically , as in how in he was seen via the contemporary lenses around him might be interesting because I’m also curious
to know if who he was historically will resonate with Muslims and Jews.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

To tell you the truth not really as it does suffice who and how he was historically which requires a different sort of conviction. I was wondering about the social climate in first century Israel and thinking that an answer of who he was historically , as in how in he was seen via the contemporary lenses around him might be interesting because I’m also curious
to know if who he was historically will resonate with Muslims and Jews.

If you read the New Testament you will find the answer to that question. The short answer is that in his life time, he was accepted only by a very limited circle of Apostles and disciples. And that has proven true today, especially in regard to the Jews and Muslims.

Pax
Linus2nd