David, I see your point...I, too, beleive that the cross is central, but
still, without the resurrection the gospel would have been meaningless.
Preaching would have been in vain...faith would have been in vain.
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: <TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org>
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] apostles and prophets
Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:04:52 -0500
Perry wrote:
> In Paul's mention of the crucifixion, the resurrection
> was implicit. Many were crucified, why would Jesus'
> be any different unless the resurrection was in view?
The difference is that Jesus is the only leader in history who ever went TO
the cross of his own will and doctrine. Hitler was killed too, but it was
under very different circumstances.
The doctrine of the cross is very important. Granted, the doctrine of the
resurrection is necessary for it to have meaning and fulfillment, but I
think the cross is primary with the resurrection being secondary rather
than
the other way around. The doctrine of the cross is where we live every
day.
The doctrine of the resurrection is a hope we have that gives us the
strength to walk in the doctrine of the cross on a daily basis.
Perry wrote:
> The reference to crucifuxion also would bring
> to mind OT prophecies relating to the crucifixion
> of the Messiah, thus, the resurrection.
There is not much in the OT concerning the resurrection, Perry. Several
veiled prophecies that can be read in a different way is about it.
Perry wrote:
> Both David and Isaiah prophecied the resurrection.
> Surely those familiar with the Prophets would have
> expected this, especially the Bereans (Acts 17:11),
> if, indeed, Jesus was the Messiah. Their accepting
> the gospel prior to the resurrection was based on the
> belief that Jesus WAS the messaiah, or at least that he
> was the Son of God, and on that faith their sins were
> forgiven. Had he NOT been resurrected, then their
> faith would have been in vain, and they still would be
> in sin. (1 Cor 15 again).
They had read these prophecies, but the meaning eluded them prior to the
resurrection event. Why? Partly because they had believed the gospel
already and had preached it and saw the power of the gospel even without
knowledge of the resurrection of Christ. Again, I am not saying that the
resurrection is not important. I'm simply saying that the preaching of the
gospel began before the resurrection. For more than 3 years, the preaching
of the gospel did not include the resurrection of Jesus Christ. The only
resurrection they had perhaps preached was the resurrection of the saints
on
the last day, but even that took second fiddle to the primary message of
the
gospel which was the message that the kingdom of God is here now... time to
get in.
Peace be with you.
David Miller.
----------
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may
know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6)
http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a
friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
----------
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you
ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL
PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to
join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
