Today in the newspaper I was able to fit reading for the holidays, from the currently current theological dispute: was the Passion of Christ is a sacrifice by which the people were cleansed from sin, or is this view a time-related, of people in the religion of introduced atavism, a modification of the divine love even, as God obviously does not need such a sacrifice, and the fate of his son, thus understood only as a sign of his devotion to humanity?
Well, my opinion is: you can very well hold on to the classical interpretation when they are simply symbolic means. What principle would not uncommon in biblical content.
For the "original sin is indeed nothing other than the fruit from the tree of knowledge, ability to distinguish self good and evil, and thus a move away from naive childlike sense of basic trust in higher," parental "authority, and especially in God. Jesus is a historical perspective, however, for the Breakthrough Offenbahrungsreligion in which the word is one more than his own knowledge - which in fact represents an overcoming of original sin and a return to blind faith in the divine word.
The Passion makes this process particularly pointed dar. For Jesus follows this with confidence given the fate of God, until death - and without recognizing the meaning behind it, how come in his last words to express.
Whether "the transition from" knowledge "to" faith, from self-knowledge and self-determining individual with its own meaning to run, trusting people, now as desirable or as a failure of looks - the interpretation of Jesus' death as an "overcoming of original sin" seems to this consideration in the overall context in any case is quite consistent and also a modern look at the history of religion meet. Perhaps
knew the authors of the Bible at this point but that is exactly what they said and were not only caught in mystical and archaic victim thinking, but very comfortable in the situation, a timeless truth about faith and the core of the religion of revelation to make.
0 comments:
Post a Comment