The Religion as both a Spiritual and Temporal Power, one wherein even its leaders legitimately believe and ponder their faith and how it has to do with everyday affairs
Even having theological arguments to account for the existence of nonhumans and whether or not they have souls
And unlike ASOIAF, spiritual and intellectual pursuits are connected and as such you wouldn’t get an Order of Maesters, instead you get Scientist-Priests doing stuff like figuring out how to do surgery and body preservation.
Hello!
I'm listening to Theology: The Basics by Alister E. McGrath. It has gotten me more interested in the historical development of Christian theology. I'm especially interested in the Apostolic Fathers era through the first seven ecumenical councils.
Would the scholars here have any recommendations for good books that would cover this time period? Or any historical theology book favorites in general?
Thanks!
I've read somewhere that 4 gospels are mostly based on paulinian theology. From what I've skipped through on wikipedia valtorta's books seem to be similar to gospels but with much more socio-cultural details. Are her books also basically paulinian theology? How would her potrayal of Jesus compare to modern historical reconstructions? Are there some scholarly works with textual criticism applied to her writings?
I recently started to wonder if this woman got her hands on some kind of extra biblical sources,maybe some ancient apocryphical texts providing her with information that enabled her to write such an incredibly complicated work.
The Jesus of history is very different from the Jesus of theology. Since the historical-critical method is "scientific," presupposing methodological naturalism and looking at the bible objectively, like it would any other ancient document, we have every reason to believe that the emerging, more scientific portrait of Jesus is far more accurate than the Jesus of mythology.
How can belief in the traditional Jesus survive if what science says is at odds with the NT and ultimately Christian belief? Won't it be like evolution supplanting creationism in the 19th century, with the majority of Christians looking at the life of Jesus as recorded in the NT as allegory, just as they do Genesis?
Paul's teaching on the inheritance of sin and redemption through Jesus Christ, basically his entire salvation history, is based on the assumption Adam was a real person. Through Adam's disobedience, sin entered into the world, hence the need for Christ's victory over sin to release man from its bondage as god's eschatological agent (Rom. 5:12-21, 1 Cor. 15:22).
When we jettison the historical Adam, Paul's theology unravels and loses its cogency. If there was no disobedience in the Garden of Eden how did sin enter into the world? How did we end up with our corruptible bodies? What would have been the purpose of Christ's obedience, if not to release man from the sin all men inherited because of Adam's disobedience? Or how would Paul have justified spiritual resurrection bodies, if not for the physical bodies introduced by Adam?
