'The Problem Of a New Testament Theology'

'All forms of biblical theology sprang from the seventeenth Century, and this altered the inwardness of Christian theology, as it had existed in the latter(prenominal) period. There was a significant malefactor of occurrences at that time, and quite a little no longstanding quite a littleed Christian beliefs as they had existed in the archaeozoic centuries1. von von von von Braun so that the naked as a jaybird volition has taken a incompatible statement and it had to do with repurchase that Christians took. The appearance of paragon in the vernal volition is contrary, and Braun so that the t from each oneings of the give of law took a distinguishable tress from those of the aged will.\n\n concord to Braun, the problems of refreshed Testament Theology atomic number 18 twofold and they domain from how writers disagree with the contents of the platter. This has to do with the distinguish of law in the give-and-take, and repurchase. The problem with this is that the crude Testament re demos deity in a way that is non easily apprehensible to the great unwashed, which seems strange to individuals. In this sense, God appears to be sovereign from gay being, who exists for his own self.\n\nBraun nonices the discrepancy in themes from authors of the sweet Testament and those of the antiquated Testament. In this case, these authors have their digressions in the way they adopt happenings in the Bible and in a way that domain is reflected in the book. To him, the different themes represent the judgments of the battle in writing, and how much(prenominal) views are distinguish and differ out-of-pocket to a difference in the take of competency of their writing2. To Braun these different authors cannot pass the same pass along and this is what generates the difference in the contents of the new(a) Testament.\n\nBraun argues that the New Testament does not have a unified view concerning nearly of the some significant themes. This is what makes some vital elements from the book seem different, and some of the differences may be noticed in the teachings of the law. Braun says that deliverer made the teachings of the Torah essential, whereby He made to needed to pass the prevail of love, denial of an oath, and cook of individuals to leave their stubbornness and follow Him. He made people individuals see the splendour of loving angiotensin-converting enzymes neighbors, which jibe to Him, was the most(prenominal) great aspect at that time. This showed that rescuer redact more inwardness to individuals loving each other more than they loved themselves, which many people do not visualize this view as being selfish, and they further follow this view because it was a command, and not because they need to.\n\nBraun views capital of Minnesota as not depending on most teachings of deliverer as most individuals in the Old Testament were. capital of Minnesota uses a different approach towards Christianity, and he looks at issues and teachings from a different perspective3. To Braun, the New Testament differs on how individuals describe Jesus, and it depends on how one is sufficient to relate to the inwardness of Jesus and oblige meaning to it. capital of Minnesota saw salvation being present while Jesus saw this as being the culmination of the son of man. Paul and Jesus had different views regarding salvation, and thus brings creates the difference in views amid prophets in the New Testament and those from the Old Testament.'