From: Graham E. Morbey (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri May 23 2003 - 13:39:42 EDT
Hi George, et al,
I was thinking more broadly when I used the term Creeds (meaning that I
should have been more careful!). However, Heidlelberg Catchism, Lord's Day
18, Question 46 asks: What do you mean by saying: ''he ascended into
heaven"? and the Answer: That Christ, while his disciples watched, was
lifted up from earth into heaven and will be there for our good until he
comes again to judge the living and the dead.
Also, the three I mentioned on the road to Emmaus reference is
Luke24:13-35. My hypothetical camera was focussed on verse 31. John
20:29 could be translated today (before digital technology perhaps) as
" Have you believed because you have photos? Blessed are those who have
no photos and yet have come to believe."
George Murphy wrote:
>Graham E. Morbey wrote:
>>Years ago a professor of mine once asked Tillich if a camera could have
>>recorded the Resurrection of Jesus. The curt reply was "no!"
>>Now, was that because of the limitation of the camera (no record of a
>>personal observation of the actual Resurrection in Scripture)? Perhaps a
>>" Would the camera have recorded the three of them on the road to
>>Emmaus?" The answer for Tillich, I believe, is still "no". The Creeds
>>teach a camera faith!
> My gut reaction is to agree with you, but I think some care is needed. The
>creeds say simply that "he rose again." Though some witnesses of the resurrection
>"doubted," (Mt.28:17), there are no accounts of rank unbelievers (at least after the
>event) seeing the risen Christ. Those who were with Saul on the Damascus rode did not
>see him (Acts 9:7). The emphasis on light in his own account of the event give one the
>impression that a camera would have simply been overexposed.
> "Every eye shall see him" (Rev.1:7), but that is an eschatological promise.
>George L. Murphy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri May 23 2003 - 13:40:02 EDT