delicatemusictastemaker - Tumblr blog

delicatemusictastemaker · 5 years

Text

The Resurrection of the Lord - The Center of The Faith of the Church

4) As we have seen until now, the death witness of the Lord's resurrection is where people fall. Collapse means failing, betrayed, degraded, abandoned, humiliated, etc.

All such words appear in the Bible about Christ's passion and death. Everything that doesn't seem desirable in the human world. Stupid to Greeks, tripped to Jews. It doesn't mean you don't need to be stupid if you don't need to. But at the same time, people are impatient when they call for their destructive, "testimony" that has no meaning in this world. There is a proof where it is not. If you do not consider the Passion of the Lord and the cross, you will never know. If you can't find a satisfactory explanation on your own, you end up feeling dead. If it's for what you feel makes sense, you can put up with what's hard ,I want to offer any sacrifice.

However, Christ's resurrection testimony is that it lacks explanations that convince himself well. It may seem like it makes a lot of sense for someone to follow Christ. That's really true. But the Passion of the Lord and the death of the Cross are only stupid trips for the world. Poul wrote this very strongly.

Following Christ is just following this stupidity.

Christ gave everything to Jews and Romans without leaving anything for himself. The Lord did not even let himself know if all of him was gone.

When I try to reflect on whether I have done everything and look back on what I have done, when I try to reflect on it and look back on what I have done, I still have enough to reflect and look back. However, it is a limit of man that I remain in the person no matter how far it goes like this. You can't blame it for being bad or not making enough effort. If we do not go to god's grace, we cannot exceed ourselves. Only by the grace of God can we exceed this limit and pass ourselves to us without rest, and become a testimony of The Lord's resurrection. To be the resurrection of Christ in this way is to be able to do it only by the grace of the Lord, where as far as the meaning and consent a person can think for himself. Then, such death takes the form of destruction by all means.

(5) Let's think about the situation in more detail. There is a limit to how much you can explain or understand. There are two limits that cannot be explained any more of this limit.

① When a person faces the reality of God

God is eternal, infinite, absolute. The true, the good and the beautiful, which cannot be understood by the human limited head.

There is no explanation of who this is, except by his son Jesus Christ. So is Jesus Christ at least easy to understand? But it is not. Christ himself is ingenuity in his passion, death on the cross, and resurrection. Neither the Greeks nor the Jews know. For Christians, it's the only way of accepting belief. With the limited mind and head of human beings, it cannot be digested.

② When a person faces the reality of God

To be continued

#＃tbuko

32 notes · View notes

delicatemusictastemaker · 5 years

Text

Feed My Sheep

3

Feed My Sheep (15-17)

The Church of the Primacy is entrusted to Peter by the Lord of the Resurrection, Jesus Christ. Petro's hard work is to feed Christ's sheep. The Lord did not ask Petro for any human abilities, previous achievements, career, etc., when letting Petro do this. Petro denied the Lord three times, when the Lord was most important. Petro couldn't imagine shepherding Christ's sheep. But Jesusha says nothing about that. I only asked three times, "Do you love me more than these people?" Those who are called in the church must also strive to love the Lord Jesus more than others. And that effort must continue forever. Christ gave the sheep to Petro. This means that the Lord will not let the sheep go. The Lord gives a green ranch and gives the sheep life and abundance .... As a good shepherd, abandon life for the sheep (John 10; 1-18). The Lord's sheep can certainly live with him on this earth, in the church of Petro. Some people like Petro, others don't. Petro must have a shortcoming and a fault, also. But in the end, only to the person whom the Lord has set up,

There is no sure communion of life with the Lord. Petro himself has nothing to do with trusting in the Lord's sheep, other than trusting the Lord. It is not something you can do with your own strengths and talents. That is why we must just love the Lord and do more to our neighbors and the little ones.

4

Martyrdom of Petro

#tbuko

2 notes · View notes

delicatemusictastemaker · 5 years

Text

The Call of the Disciples

1 The Call of the Disciples (2–12) The appearance of Chapter 21 clearly shows the state of the calling. The first thing to do is to take fish. Petro says, "I'm going fishing" (verse 3), and everyone gets in the boat. The church and the Primate of Petro are often displayed around here. However, it is not possible to take anything even if it tries all night long. "You can't do anything away from me" (John15; 5)。 When the Lord Jesus comes, it becomes a big catch only by it. This big catch is very stressed. In fact, fish can't be caught after dawn in the morning. Still, if the Lord is with us, it will be a great catch. The number of 153 fish did not actually count there. It seems to be a number that symbolizes the whole world. It is said that it is a great success only if it works only by the disciples in the middle of the night, and it was not able to be taken, and it was able to take one, and the Lord comes, and the net is lowered to one side according to the word of the Lord. No matter how many people and how many different people come together, the network of the church cannot be broken. The net of the big catch which was not able to be done by everyone pulls up as it thinks lightly by Petro alone, and it is up to the number. It seems that the fact that Petro was naked has something to do with that Petro was a sinner who had rejected the Lord first.

#1 The Call of the Disciples (2–12) The appearance of Chapter 21 clearly shows the state of the calling. The first thing to do is to take fis #tbuko

1 note · View note

delicatemusictastemaker · 5 years

Text

An Old Traditon that Christ Appeared in Galilee

1; Chapter 21 adds an old tradition that Christ appeared in Galilee.The main body only mentions the appearance in Jerusalem.So I added the old tradition, which seems to be missing in this body, the appearance in Galilee, and tried to include the old line . 2; In the Gospel of Next comes Petro's Primate. Luke, indirectly, puts Petro's Primate at the last supper. "Simon, but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned again, strengthen your brothers. (Luke22; 32)" Petro's Primate does not appear. So, later on, in Chapter 21, he combined it with the appearance of Galilee. 3; Under these circumstances, the appearance of the formation of the Gospel of John becomes clear. The authors of Chapter 21 are trying to get their hands on the body up to Chapter 20 and bring it back to the traditional, even slightly more traditional line. The autheors have been rewritten to be less progressive. But on the other hand, despite the rewriting with a brush, the character of the whole sentence is consistently the same. So the whole John Gospel does not appear to be written by anyone as an individual, but as a joint work with a group of people. They wrote up to chapter 20 and considered it. As a result, what I thought was absent by a group of peoples was now put together in a new chapter, Chapter 21. He also rewrote parts of the body that he thought would be better.

Four; After all, chapter 21 is a postscript addition to the body. This chapter The whole is not organized, and the relationship between them is not very clear. I have no idea what the relationship between the appearance of the Lord in Jerusalem and the appearance in Galilee is. The authors don't care at all. It is not very clear when the fish was caught. First of all, "Because I got a lot, everyone could not lift it" (verse six). Nevertheless, only one person later, "Simon Petro went and lifted his net to land" (verse eleven). He lifted this net because he said, "Please bring a little fish you have just taken." . As a continuation, the continuation is not good. But this is not the result of a flaw in the story. Rather, the combination of the emergence and the supremacy, which are irrelevant in nature, became inconsistent as a storyline. He arranged the objects in the body and put them together to make it look better. That's why Petro had to pull it up alone, even though we couldn't lift it together. This cannot be called a paradox of the story. The writer was thinking about something different than the continuation of the story. The author first wanted to say that the fish was miraculously caught. It was said that the fish were not raised even if everyone caught them to show that the fish were large. Next, they try to show together the mysterious appearance that the net was not broken even though a lot of fish were caught. To show that the net is not broken, you must first raise it. Petro will raise. It was good to say that the number was 153 and that the net did not break. Who is raised is not so important. It doesn't matter whether you raise it alone or as many people as you like. As a matter of fact, reading here doesn't seem so strange that Petro pulled the net alone. Can be read without resistance. That's because the appearance of this place moves from one to the next, like a picture-story show or slide. Like the appearance of the Lord in Chapter 20, the appearance of Chapter 21 is hardly a live-action record of the time. He, of course, tells his disciples about the appearance of Christ. However, the character of the sentence is that Rather than reporting, he is trying to emphasize the meaning of the Lord's appearance. The meaning of the appearance described in this way can be roughly divided into the following five.

#tbuko

0 notes

delicatemusictastemaker · 5 years

Text

John21;1-23

Four John21; 1-23

This is almost the entire chapter 21.It is made up of three parts. 1. Disciple goes fishing on Lake Tiberias.At dawn, the Lord appears on the shore and becomes a big catch (1-14). 2.The Lord gives Petro first place and leaves the church (15-19). 3.Disciples that Jesus loved (20-23) Originally John's Gospel ended with twenty chapters. Chapter 21 is an afterthought. Marxsen responds in two ways. First, the person who wrote the main body (Chapter 2-20) has a slightly different idea than the person who wrote Chapter 21 later. Also, the person who wrote Chapter 21 has made some efforts toward the main body. Secondly, the body has a slightly innovative, new direction. In that way the person who wrote 21 chapters edites the innovative place of this main body and is going to pull it back to the traditional line once again. Whether or not Marxsen's explanation is adequate is still to be considered by everyone. However, it is clear that chapter 21 is united with the main body of chapter 20 and reflects the problems of the church at that time, leaving a trace of efforts to address it. Chapter 21 tells of the appearance of Christ on Lake Tiberias in Galilee. Three things are noticeable here. The appearance of the Lord in Galilee, Petro's presidency in the church, and his successors. None of these have been written by chapter 20. It is missing in the body. The person who wrote the body did not write it for some reason. That was what the author of Chapter 21 wrote. It seemed that something important was missing. So I added it all together as Chapter 21. This is a rough impression of reading the main body up to chapter 20 and chapter 21. Also here is the "Disciple whom the Lord loved." However, the person who wrote this chapter must have been well aware of the names of the twelve disciples. Still, saying "the disciples that the Lord loved" is too reminiscent. If you were thinking of one specific disciple, you could have mentioned that name. Also, as some say, if it were the person who wrote this chapter, this is also very weird. Is he a disciple whom the Lord loved? And if you keep what you write in verse 23, those who wrote chapter 21 know that "the disciples whom the Lord loved" have died. Then the author here can only think that no one is thinking of a particular person. After all, here is the ideal figure of a disciple. Perhaps he wanted such an ideal person as a successor to Petro. Everything written there is even assured that the disciple had seen and heard on his own and that he was certain (verse 24). In this way, it may have seemed like a real person. Next, let's summarize a little about here.

#tbuko

0 notes

delicatemusictastemaker · 5 years

Text

1 John’s writing that the Church of that times had faced "Believing without seeing means,"What are the three problems?"His memories of it will soon disappear.

When the Gospel of John was written, it was nearly the end of a century. 70 years after Christ's resurrection. Christ's direct witness of the resurrection and his memories of it will soon disappear. Thirty years have passed since Peter and Paul died. Paul could still say he was strong. "The Lord appeared to more than 500 siblings at the same time, and the majority are still alive (1 Corinthians 15; 5-8). He was roughly in the 50's and 60's AD. By 90 to 100 years, the Witnesses of the Lord's resurrection were no longer "the majority, still alive."

2　A much greater extent, torture.

The second problem at that time was that persecution became increasingly severe. Until then, two emperors, Nero and Domitian, persecuted Christianity. But under Emperor Nerva, for a short period of two years, the church could breathe a little. In the meantime, however, Trajan, who came to power from 98 to 117, persecutes Christianity even more.The persecution has killed Martyrdom of Antioch bishop Ignatius.

At the time when the Gospel of John was written, the belief in the resurrection of Christ was waiting for a destiny to be killed. This is a big deal. No one can be convinced. I don't know when to get caught and sniffed. On top of that, many of the captives had abandoned their religions, fearing the suffering of death and, to a much greater extent, torture. I knew such circumstances from persecution by Nero and others too much. Instead of believing in Christ, he is killed. The Church suffered this incomprehensible situation and had to say, "Blessed are those who believe without seeing it."

#tbuko

1 note · View note

delicatemusictastemaker · 5 years

Text

3.

Three In addition, there was the problem of Gnosis. At that time, Pratonian philosophy was actively incorporated into Christian religion. At one point, Christianity was at great risk of falling into philosophical teaching of enlightenment. Persecution was also a great suffering for the church. But in the end, the teachings of Gnosis were far more terrifying than persecution. The persecution was intense. However, it hasn't trailed so far. Rather, the church grew up suffering in it. However, Gnosis's teachings have been lingering until now. After that, Gnosis will continue to appear in all ages, including Manichaeism, Les cathares, and Modernismo. The church had to fight each time. Perhaps Gnosis is one of the fundamental human weaknesses that the Catholic Church must fight until the end of the world. Only then, at the end of the century, is the fight against Gnosis fierce. The mark is clearly visible in the Gospel of John. The Gnosis-like direction is to replace the notion of an absolute idea with the practice of spiritual unity, instead of the faith centered on the resurrection of Christ. Contemplating this one thing is also a huge attraction for religion. But if you look closely, it's just a kind of naturalism. Through the practice of the spirit, the most immutable truth can be imagined. In response, the association says, "Blessed are those who believe without looking." Taking these three things together, John's appearance of the Lord is not just an appearance. Rather, it seeks to elaborate on the deeper meaning and call that the advent has for the church of John's day. Isn't that a method like the double depiction used earlier? No more gospels are allowed in the church, with John's Gospel as the last. At the very end of God's revelation in the form of the Gospel, God left this word of encouragement to the church, which must deal with this same problem from now until the end of the world. "Blessed are those who believe without looking."

#tbuko

0 notes

delicatemusictastemaker · 5 years

Text

John20; 19-29

Three John20; 19-29 This also begins with the appearance of the first evening of the week, the evening of the resurrection. But there are two occurrences here. First, when there is no Thomas. Then eight days later. Thomas was with me. At that time, the door of the room was supposed to have been regarded. It was about "fearing the Jews," but with it he was trying to say the miraculous appearance of the appearance. John emphasizes that, unlike Luke, the resurrection of Criss was heavenly. The fact that the door was closed was very important to John's author. Not only at verse nineteen. In the second appearance of Thomas, he once again refused, saying, "The door was closed" (verse 26). Nevertheless, Christ appeared without relation to doors and walls. The apostle Thomas is used in various ways for sermons and meditation. It is very unbelief to never "believe" (v. 25) unless one looks at the nails and the scars beside him with his own eyes. But if you think about it, you can't blame Thomas alone. According to Mark, all his disciples were unbelief. "Jesus then appeared where the eleven disciples were sitting at the table, and blamed them for their disbelief and the hardships of those who had seen Jesus resurrected. I did not believe that. "(Marco 16; 14). Of course, there is a problem with Marco 16: 9. Nevertheless, this part has been carefully handed down by the church as part of the Gospel of Marco. It still shows the revelation of God. In the emptied tomb of the Lord, the angel tells the women about the resurrection of the Lord. The women also told this to the apostles. However, the disciples do not believe it. "The other women who were with them also told the apostles this, but to the apostles it seemed stupid and did not believe it." (Luke24; 9 -11). Disciples other than Thomas could not believe just by hearing from others. Only when Jeez came in and showed his hand and aside, did he "please see the Lord" (19-20). Until then, he shut the door and "feared Jews." Because even if they listened to the story of the women, they could not understand it. It wasn't just Thomas who didn't believe. So what exactly did John's author bring about Thomas' disbelief? To admonish unbeliever about Thomas? Still, it is unfair to say only Thomas. After all, we had to see for ourselves before we could not believe. Nobody was satisfied with what people said. Still, John's author wrote only about Thomas. What is this all about? Actually, there is a double description as a method of expression or explanation. Already at the beginning of chapter 20, there is a double description in the story of Mary Magdalene. In other words, an empty grave appears twice. These two times are really just drawing the same thing from two sides. First make sure that the two disciples are empty of the grave. This is a report from outside the facts. Next, an angel and Christ appear in Mary. This is an explanation of the same empty tomb, illuminated from its meaning, that is, from inside. First, say that the tomb is empty. The second is to explain the deeper meaning of the same fact. The same method is used in the current location. What is important here is not who believes obediently and who does not stubbornly believe. The name Thomas is not, in fact, grounds of doubt at that time. The name Thomas is not, in fact, grounds of doubt at that time. It is more expedient for explanation. Thomas, as an individual, does not appear to be particularly suspicious here. But again, I can't say that I didn't doubt. Rather, the eyes of this place are a little different. There are two occurrences here. The first appearance shows the fact that the disciples saw and believed in the Lord of the Resurrection. Then, if the religion at that time was a faith that moved the mountains without doubt, it would have a second appearance. The same religion is illuminated from both the front and the back, trying to reveal the whole. The disciples also seem to be honest in the table. But behind it was the feeling, "I never believe unless I see it and touch it" (verse 25). From a later generation's point of view, the disciples may have taken part in the emergence, so it may seem natural to believe. But for the disciples, it was not so easy to believe in the resurrection. This is the general meaning. The verse 29, "Fortunately believe without seeing," states that the author is at the same time facing himself and the reader. Lord Jesus appears to Thomas, and Thomas has seen the Lord. It doesn't make much sense to say to Thomas that the Lord has to express himself and says, "Blessed are those who believe without seeing." It's just a grudge, or something similar. In fact, this is a call to those who have not yet seen the Lord's appearance, other than Thomas. Here, we must consider three issues facing the church of the time when John was written. It can be said to be three meanings of "believe without seeing".

#tbuko

1 note · View note

delicatemusictastemaker · 5 years

Text

A Summary of What was Resurrected by Christ

This is a summary of what was resurrected by Christ at Luke's church at that time. This is not to say that this was the story at the time of appearance, or that there was no other story. Such places include the traditions of the church as material. The form of the text and expression is that of the author of Luke. But it is clear that it is the teachings of twelve disciples who have been handed down to the Church.

When it comes to Emmaus, why was the only Luke author picking it up? At the same time Matthew's Gospel did not mention Emmaus. John's author does read Luke's Gospel a lot, but nevertheless does not address Emmaus. Perhaps the author of Luke thought that the story of Emmaus could better express the faith he wanted to convey. But the authors of Matthew and John didn't find that necessary. So I omitted it. From this point, another fact emerges in the background. The Lord Jesus came back to the disciples in a truly resurrected, unquestionable and clear form, and as a result, the disciples believed in the fact of the resurrection. Some of the writing styles are tricky, and some do not know whether they are in context or outside of the Bible. But they are not a reason to doubt the Bible or Church facts. Each author has made every possible effort in the local church at that time to somehow communicate this undeniable fact of Christ's resurrection. Even if there is a discrepancy, it is a discrepancy that emerged from that effort. There is no reason to doubt.

#tbuko

0 notes

delicatemusictastemaker · 5 years

Text

Discrepancy between the Ascension dates of the Lord

1 Discrepancy between the Ascension dates of the Lord. Christ's ascension, according to the Acts, is forty days after the resurrection (Acts 1; 3). However, in the Gospel of Luke, ascension is cut out as "from then" in connection with the emergence of the resurrection. It's like following the appearance of the evening on the day of the resurrection. I'm not quite sure why the same author wrote this different thing. However, both "from then" and "over 40 days" seem not to be adverbs of time.

2 Here is another verse that cannot be explained. "Then Jesus takes them close to Bethany." As we saw earlier, the two disciples who returned from Emmaus arrived at Jerusalem already past midnight. "And then." Even if they could enter the gate of Jerusalem, they would go to the place where the eleven disciples gathered, and the Lord would appear in the middle. This is also a weird story, but we all had a meal at midnight, there was a story from the Lord, and it must have been a tough time. At that time, everyone has to go out of town again. Even if you come out, You have to walk 3.2 miles on the midnight road to Bethany. Did they really walk together? I can't say that such a thing is absolutely impossible. There may have been miracles. However, it is something that cannot be thought of normally.

This is not to try to raise any doubt about the Bible. I want to clarify what makes the Bible text different from news articles. When writing about the Lord's resurrection, Luke gathers a variety of resources into one compact form. It is like drawing a picture of a person's life. Because it is a picture, the time and place spread naturally into the narrow screen. The viewer has to try it back in his head again. The same thing can be said about the present part. Therefore, this part is recognized as it is, and of course, the context of time and place goes out of order. Whether the resurrection of Jesus was exactly as it was written or not can not be said without consideration of the past. Problems remain with the Lord's own body. According to Paul, at the time of the resurrection, a person is reborn as a body of the flesh, a spiritual body (1 Corinthians 15; 42-49). But the Lord's body that Luke and John are trying to represent is the same flesh as it is on earth. According to one explanation, eating a fish at that time was a miracle. Indeed, there was a great deal of resurrection. In comparison, it is much easier to make disciples appear to have physical bodies, even spirits, making them feel as if they had eaten fish. But this interpretation is different from what Luke wrote. What this author wants to say is the very fact that the Lord Jesus was really resurrected. At that time, as in the case of St. Paul, many must have doubted or rejected the Lord's resurrection. "What happened to some of you saying that there was no resurrection of the dead?" (1 Corinthians 15-12). Luke's authors, in turn, emphasize that the Lord has really been resurrected. The disciples did not believe in seeing something ghostly, but believed in seeing Jesus Christ, the same Lord as in life. However, the expression was not limited to the spirit at all, but I had no choice but to show my hands and feet, touch them, and ate fish. The same is true of the Lord's words at the time of appearance (verses 46-49). This can be summarized as follows.

Passion and resurrection on the third day. Christ's name gives forgiveness and repentance. Starting in Jerusalem, salvation is brought to the whole world. The disciple is a witness of the resurrection. Spirits are sent.

#tbuko

0 notes

delicatemusictastemaker · 5 years

Text

Luke24; 36-53

2 Luke24; 36-53

The first appearance to the disciples reported by the Gospel of Luke is in Jerusalem on the evening of the resurrection. When they return to Emmaus and talk about their journey, the Lord suddenly appears in the middle of everyone. The disciples were "afraid and surprised and thought they were looking at the spirit" (verse ninety-seven), but the Lord had already appeared before him in Simmon, and the word had spread to everyone. It is therefore a little wrong that the disciples were "frightened and surprised" by this second appearance. Everyone had already said, "I knew she had appeared in Simmon, so there must have been some reasonable expectations and preparedness. Why were they" frightened and surprised "?" In fact, this fear and surprise has nothing to do with its appearance in Simmon. This is rather in line with the latter verse 40, where the Lord "showed his hands and feet." The author of Luke wanted to say that the resurrected Christ is the same Lord, with the same body as he was in his lifetime. However, it doesn't just mean that you'll just show up and "show your hands and feet." If you tie this to where the Lord appeared in Simmon before, it would be very confusing. John's Gospel turns this fear and surprise into joy. "The disciples were glad to see the Lord," (John 20; 20). For another reason, John's author preferred joy. At the end, pleased. Luke can't joke like he wrote the beginning and John wrote the latter. It cannot be interpreted that way without good reason. Unless you have a good reason, such an interpretation can be daunting. The Lord Jesus gives this disciple the fear and surprise of his pupils three pieces of proof that he really is. First, "Look at your hands and feet," then "try to touch" (verse 39), Thus, the grilled fish was "eat in front of everyone" (verse 43), the author of Luke greatly emphasizes that the resurrection Lord ate the fish. He seemed to consider it to be an indispensable and powerful reason to prove the resurrection. Even in the Acts of the Apostles written by the same author, food comes out. "We drank together after Jesus was resurrected from the dead" (Acts 10; 41). From verse 50 it is the Ascension of the Lord. If this part follows the part up to verse 49, there are two things that cannot be explained.

#tbuko

0 notes

delicatemusictastemaker · 5 years

Text

Matthew28;16-20

16 Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them.

17 And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted.

18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

According to Matthew, the Lord's first appearance was on the mountain of Galilee.

So I guessed which mountain in Galilee it was. But the Gospel does not say anything in detail. I don't really know which mountain it is. Matthew often brings up mountains. But, for example, the Sermon Mountain at the summit is clearly not a real mountain. It is just a matter of convenience for the purpose of summarizing the story. Matthew's Gospel originally ends with the appearance of Galilee on the mountain. Like Paul,

Matthew's author makes no distinction between the Resurrection of the Lord and the Ascension. The Lord first appears to his disciples in Galilee. On the morning of the resurrection, he told the angels in the empty tomb. Matthew duplicates Marco's text almost exactly. Sources of the Galilee appearance appear to be older. Luke and John's legend of the appearance of the Lord in Jerusalem seems to have come later. Jerusalem since the temple of Jerusalem was destroyed by Roman troops,

Has gradually played a central role in the Church of Christ. And since then Galilee has become less important. But still, this Galilee

The question of Jerusalem cannot be easily cleared by itself. The resurrected Christ first appears in 11 disciples, mainly in Petro. It does not mean that either is acceptable or both. About this, it can be considered as follows.

#＃tbuko

0 notes

delicatemusictastemaker · 5 years

Text

Go to the whole world and Baptize

2 Go to the whole world and Baptize

The appearance of the Lord in Matthew does not depict the appearance of the Lord at all. There are no specific things like showing limbs or eating fish. Even more mysterious is that "but there were doubters" (verse seventeen). There were only 11 disciples on the mountain. Who was suspicious? Moreover, the words of the Lord that follow do not address only the eleven of them. It is aimed at the whole Early Church. "Go to the whole world and give baptism, teach everything."

In fact, it is difficult to decide whether the word itself is the first appearance of the resurrection or the word of the Lord to the disciples.

Within the Early Church, the disciples are in great strife about whether to spread the gospel to the Gentiles and whether to accept them into the Church. If the Lord had so clearly stated "the whole world" since the beginning of the resurrection, there was no contention. The conflict is detailed in the Acts of the Apostles (Chapters 10, 15).

And saying, "Sometimes doubted," does not mean that any of the eleven disciples had doubted. Matthew's author, while talking about the appearance of the Lord in his eleven disciples, must have remembered in his head the entire church at the time.

#tbuko

0 notes

delicatemusictastemaker · 5 years

Text

Between Jerusalem and Galilee

① Between Jerusalem and Galilee The angel asks the women for a message in the empty tomb. He told them to go to Galilee (Matthew28; 7). Then on the morning of the resurrection, the eleven disciples would still be in Jerusalem. If, by this message, the disciples assume that they have departed immediately, so will they reach Galilee by that evening? There is a direct distance of 60 miles from Jerusalem to Galilee. If you go on a normal road, it is 90 miles, besides on the top of the mountain. It takes time to climb. I don't think the 11 disciples were all in a hurry on a horse. No matter how much you run, can you go 48 miles a day? In other words, by the evening of the resurrection, you will not be able to reach the top of Galilee anyhow. It is natural to see that the Lord first appeared to 11 disciples in Jerusalem on the day of the resurrection. Thus, if the Jerusalem appearance theory is true, Where did the Galilee theory come from? Either way, it doesn't make much sense. Perhaps this Galilee mountain is not a symbolic location on the map, but a symbol that resembles the appearance of God in Moses on Mount Sinai.