Pulse en una miniatura para ir a Google Books.
Cargando... When did Jesus become God? : a christological debatepor Bart D. Ehrman
Ninguno Cargando...
Inscríbete en LibraryThing para averiguar si este libro te gustará. Actualmente no hay Conversaciones sobre este libro. sin reseñas | añadir una reseña
How did early Christians come to believe that Jesus of Nazareth was the divine Son of God? This is the central question in this transcribed conversation between Bart Ehrman and Michael Bird, with a historiographic introduction by Robert Stewart that helps readers understand the conclusions reached by Ehrman and Bird. Ehrman contends that neither Jesus himself nor the apostles believed that Jesus was divine during Jesus' life; it was only after Jesus was crucified and the apostles began to have visions and revelations that they became convinced that Jesus was a godlike figure who was sent by God. Over an extended period of time, the early church solidified its belief that Jesus was God--first, with an inventive claim that Jesus was exalted to divinity, then later by seeing him as a preexistent angel become human. Bird disagrees. Based on different historiographic criteria and different readings of Scripture, he asserts that Jesus himself claimed to be the divine Son during his lifetime and that many of the apostles believed Jesus to be identified with God's own prerogatives and identity. In Bird's account of the early church, Jesus was the preexistent Son of God from the beginning, who then became human, exercised the role of Israel's Messiah, and was exalted as God the Father's vice-regent. No se han encontrado descripciones de biblioteca. |
Debates activosNinguno
Google Books — Cargando... GénerosSistema Decimal Melvil (DDC)232.8Religions Christian doctrinal theology Christ; Christology Divine humanityClasificación de la Biblioteca del CongresoValoraciónPromedio:
¿Eres tú?Conviértete en un Autor de LibraryThing. |
The discussion itself suffered from being a direct transcription. Awkward wording and tangential asides were retained, which undercut the seriousness of the book's purpose. I would have much preferred a judiciously edited version of this conversation that didn't put me in the unsatisfying position of having to sort wheat from chaff, so to speak.
Bird and Ehrman, the two scholars in discussion, are both erudite and leaders in the research attempting to address this question, but a reader would do better to read some of their work written for publication, where precision and organization make the read more productive and satisfying.
I received a free electronic review copy of this title from the publisher via EdelweissPlus; the opinions are my own. ( )