The 'Gospel-Witnesses', how do you describe or define the concept?
Is it the Gospels?
Is it the authors of the Gospels?
Is it the apostles?
Is it the Gospels?
Is it the authors of the Gospels?
Is it the apostles?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Gospel witnesses
- Thread starter Gerhard Ebersoehn
- Start date
Tom Butler
New Member
In Hebrews 11, the writer tells of what we call the "Heroes of Faith." Then he follows in Chapter 12 by calling them "so great cloud of witnesses."
Some of the apostles described themselves as witnesses, in part referring to the resurrected Christ.
One of the qualifications for Judas' replacement was that he had to be a witness to Jesus resurrection. Matthias, who was chosen, had to have seen Jesus alive.
Paul's claim to apostleship was based on his encounter with the resurrected Christ, among other things. Others included his direct call from Jesus, and direct teaching from him.
Then we have the gospels and all the New Testament writings, none of which would have been written without the resurrection. The NT is the completed "gospel witness," written mostly by "gospel witnesses."
Some of the apostles described themselves as witnesses, in part referring to the resurrected Christ.
One of the qualifications for Judas' replacement was that he had to be a witness to Jesus resurrection. Matthias, who was chosen, had to have seen Jesus alive.
Paul's claim to apostleship was based on his encounter with the resurrected Christ, among other things. Others included his direct call from Jesus, and direct teaching from him.
Then we have the gospels and all the New Testament writings, none of which would have been written without the resurrection. The NT is the completed "gospel witness," written mostly by "gospel witnesses."
Thank you, Tom Butler. It is long since I have read so good a post on any forum I frequent.
Am I right if I say the 'witnesses' you stipulated, without exception were 'witnesses' of faith, and by faith; that is, not 'witnesses' by sight actually of the Resurrection per se, but -
1) to be an apostle -, at least a 'witness' by sight of the Risen Lord; and
2) every other 'witness' a 'witness' by faith solely - never having seen the Risen Lord in the flesh, but with the only qualification of 'witness by faith', of being called by God to be a witness of Him without having seen Him?
Am I right if I say the 'witnesses' you stipulated, without exception were 'witnesses' of faith, and by faith; that is, not 'witnesses' by sight actually of the Resurrection per se, but -
1) to be an apostle -, at least a 'witness' by sight of the Risen Lord; and
2) every other 'witness' a 'witness' by faith solely - never having seen the Risen Lord in the flesh, but with the only qualification of 'witness by faith', of being called by God to be a witness of Him without having seen Him?
Tom Butler
New Member
Gerhard Ebersoehn said:
GE, you are kind.
The requirement in Acts 1 for Judas' replacement, that he had to have seen the resurrected Christ, is the principal reason I believe the office of apostle no longer exists.
Those of us who live today are, as you put it, witnesses by faith. But it is not blind faith. There is the work of the Holy Spirit to illuminate our minds and change our hearts. Believers also may also give testimony of the transformation of their lives. Those, along with the scriptural record, help us to make sense of things which made little sense before our conversion.
We do not have to reason everything out. In fact, to exclude faith is to displease God.