Why God Became Man Critique
THEO 313 – D02 LUO
Journal Article Critique
Critique In Lehman Strauss’ article, “Why God Became Man” the issue of Jesus’ incarnation is explored. Throughout the article Strauss demonstrates a thorough grasp of scripture – both Old and New Testament, approaching the issue of the incarnation of Jesus with an evangelical Christian worldview – applying the Bible literally, believing the scriptures to be inerrant. Strauss’ interaction with the scriptures is a clear strength of this article, as he repeated links multiple verses together to formulate clear and distinct points. Not only does Strauss exhibit a grounded view of scripture, he also interacts with history to build and support his defense, citing multiple early Christian councils …show more content…
Each point addresses a specific issue and directs the reader’s attention to biblical support for his stance – one drawback to this is that a circular argument leaves no “on ramp” for external critique. However, Strauss’ high view of scripture lends itself to this as 2 Timothy 3:16 emphasizes that all scripture is good for teaching and doctrine, so what better document on Christian theology than the inspired word of God …show more content…
I believe that cynicism arises from our very public disputes on non-salvation issues, not that the incarnation of Jesus is a non-salvation issue – it is. To quote an article I read recently in RELEVANT Magazine about cynicism, “things like reality, petty disputes and little vices get in the way.”3 However, to the not-yet Christian, the importance of this issue is a mystery to them and if we are to truly live out the Great Commission of Matthew 28:16-20, we must approach issues as such with a tempered resolve and a handful of grace. The only section of the article that grabbed my attention as speaking to the not-yet Christian, was when Strauss made point in the section, “He Came to Redeem Man” that Jesus’ express purpose was to rescue the sinner. Nothing in the rest of the article addresses the need for discipleship, the very thing that must happen to prevent wayward doctrines like Nestorianism (deemed anathema at the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D.) from rising up again. While I agree that Strauss lays out a strong apologetic defense in support of Jesus’ divine incarnation, the hole in his ship, albeit small, is the lack of concern to address the un-evangelized and cynical. I believe that a correct understanding of Christology is critical to salvation,
Journal Article Critique
Critique In Lehman Strauss’ article, “Why God Became Man” the issue of Jesus’ incarnation is explored. Throughout the article Strauss demonstrates a thorough grasp of scripture – both Old and New Testament, approaching the issue of the incarnation of Jesus with an evangelical Christian worldview – applying the Bible literally, believing the scriptures to be inerrant. Strauss’ interaction with the scriptures is a clear strength of this article, as he repeated links multiple verses together to formulate clear and distinct points. Not only does Strauss exhibit a grounded view of scripture, he also interacts with history to build and support his defense, citing multiple early Christian councils …show more content…
Each point addresses a specific issue and directs the reader’s attention to biblical support for his stance – one drawback to this is that a circular argument leaves no “on ramp” for external critique. However, Strauss’ high view of scripture lends itself to this as 2 Timothy 3:16 emphasizes that all scripture is good for teaching and doctrine, so what better document on Christian theology than the inspired word of God …show more content…
I believe that cynicism arises from our very public disputes on non-salvation issues, not that the incarnation of Jesus is a non-salvation issue – it is. To quote an article I read recently in RELEVANT Magazine about cynicism, “things like reality, petty disputes and little vices get in the way.”3 However, to the not-yet Christian, the importance of this issue is a mystery to them and if we are to truly live out the Great Commission of Matthew 28:16-20, we must approach issues as such with a tempered resolve and a handful of grace. The only section of the article that grabbed my attention as speaking to the not-yet Christian, was when Strauss made point in the section, “He Came to Redeem Man” that Jesus’ express purpose was to rescue the sinner. Nothing in the rest of the article addresses the need for discipleship, the very thing that must happen to prevent wayward doctrines like Nestorianism (deemed anathema at the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D.) from rising up again. While I agree that Strauss lays out a strong apologetic defense in support of Jesus’ divine incarnation, the hole in his ship, albeit small, is the lack of concern to address the un-evangelized and cynical. I believe that a correct understanding of Christology is critical to salvation,