tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post115888268349124752..comments2024-03-25T13:40:30.747-04:00Comments on Faith and Theology: Theology for beginners (15): AscentBen Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03800127501735910966noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-1159259309994546942006-09-26T04:28:00.000-04:002006-09-26T04:28:00.000-04:00And so I bet you can't guess which book's on my 't...And so I bet you can't guess which book's on my 'to read' list!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-1159223688341022352006-09-25T18:34:00.000-04:002006-09-25T18:34:00.000-04:00Terry said: "it's a question of identity" -- yes, ...Terry said: "it's a question of identity" -- yes, absolutely! Richard Bauckham's superb little book makes this point with great force and clarity.Ben Myershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03800127501735910966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-1159171756852389282006-09-25T04:09:00.000-04:002006-09-25T04:09:00.000-04:00I guess Ben makes my point, Byron - the writers of...I guess Ben makes my point, Byron - the writers of the New Testament were dealing with this man Jesus and only upon reflection realised that he was God acting amongst them. They didn't start with Chalcedonian categories - which isn't, of course, to say that Chalcedonian categories are wrong. But it's a matter of how we understand them. I don't think Scripture tries to assert that Jesus is fully God, fully human by means of trying to reconcile them, as I think much modern christology tries to do. It's a question of identity: <I>this</I> man <I>is</I> <I><B>this</B></I> God.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-1159139045070317472006-09-24T19:04:00.000-04:002006-09-24T19:04:00.000-04:00I quite like Terry's point -- since a christology ...I quite like Terry's point -- since a christology "from below" has to start with the man Jesus, not simply with a theology of pre-existence or incarnation.<BR/><BR/>Thanks, David: I'm glad you noticed the echoes of <I>CD</I> IV!Ben Myershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03800127501735910966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-1159137243565090792006-09-24T18:34:00.000-04:002006-09-24T18:34:00.000-04:00Ben,You did a phenomenal job of summarizing CD IV....Ben,<BR/><BR/>You did a phenomenal job of summarizing CD IV.2 in just a few hundred words. Excellent post!David W. Congdonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03009330707703611224noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-1159112568913756822006-09-24T11:42:00.000-04:002006-09-24T11:42:00.000-04:00Why is that terry?Why is that terry?byron smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17938334606675769903noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-1159003727752691032006-09-23T05:28:00.000-04:002006-09-23T05:28:00.000-04:00Can a truly biblical christology be articulated wi...Can a truly biblical christology be articulated without it <I>sounding</I> adoptionist (which isn't the same as it <I>being</I> adoptionist)?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-1158999205725315052006-09-23T04:13:00.000-04:002006-09-23T04:13:00.000-04:00Again, I feel I am missing something. I find these...Again, I feel I am missing something. I find these posts quite moving, yet many of your phrases sound adoptionist:<BR/><I>The dead man Jesus is raised into fellowship with God. His human life is transformed and translated into the new life of God’s future. Just as Jesus has dedicated himself wholly to the will of God, so now God expresses his unqualified acceptance of Jesus. Jesus becomes the first fully human person – the first human being to arrive at the true goal of created humanity.</I><BR/>I'd love to hear further thoughts you might have on this issue.byron smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17938334606675769903noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-1158966912440350692006-09-22T19:15:00.000-04:002006-09-22T19:15:00.000-04:00Good to hear from you, Rachel, and thanks for your...Good to hear from you, Rachel, and thanks for your excellent post.<BR/><BR/>Churchpundit: I agree, this is really one of the greatest themes of Barth's theology.<BR/><BR/>Kim: Thanks for raising this point. I agree about the political implications here, even though I haven't had the space to discuss these implications. But you'll be glad to know that I've just finished drafting the post entitled "Freedom" -- the theme of this post is that the Lordship of the risen Jesus sets us free from all other social, political and economic "lords".Ben Myershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03800127501735910966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-1158957491850374882006-09-22T16:38:00.000-04:002006-09-22T16:38:00.000-04:00I've just posted on Bonino on Barth on my blog fro...I've just posted on Bonino on Barth on my blog from Argentina.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-1158949231667988282006-09-22T14:20:00.000-04:002006-09-22T14:20:00.000-04:00Excellent, as usual, Ben, as was "Descent". Witho...Excellent, as usual, Ben, as was "Descent". Without splitting hairs, one searches in vain for anything with which to disagree with you about, and one is grateful for your sharpness and concision. <BR/><BR/>But a question - one that covers all the loci you're covering, really. For Barth, theology and ethics are inextricably connected. To re-coin a Kantian phrase, doctrine without ethics is empty, ethics without doctrine is blind. <BR/><BR/>To wit, the ascension of Christ has been called the most <I>political</I> of all Christian doctrines - Christ as cosmic <I>Lord</I> who rules not just the church but the <I>world</I> with truth and grace. Any thoughts?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com