From 8885bc956e9ac680d696466e22cc6bec4db2e292 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Camil Staps
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 08:40:07 +0200
Subject: Fixes sum chap 5

---
 sum-chap-5.tex | 26 +++++++++++++-------------
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

(limited to 'sum-chap-5.tex')

diff --git a/sum-chap-5.tex b/sum-chap-5.tex
index 267ac3b..c6fb61b 100644
--- a/sum-chap-5.tex
+++ b/sum-chap-5.tex
@@ -1,22 +1,22 @@
 \begin{chapter}{Jesus, the Fullness of Revelation}
-    Jesus is the \emph{full} revelation of God (Jn.~1:18)i, although He Himself only claimed to proclaim God's Kingdom (and not Himself). What can we say about the inner coherence of and historical reasons to support this claim?
+    Jesus is the \emph{full} revelation of God (Jn.~1:18), although He Himself only claimed to proclaim God's Kingdom (and not Himself). What can we say about the inner coherence of and historical reasons to support the claim of Jesus being the full revelation of God?
 
     \subsubsection*{The Gospels}
-    The Gospels are largely based on eyewitness accounts, on each other and on an unknown source Q. Matthew, Mark and Luke are similar and called synoptic, while John's Gospel emerged from decades of prayerful, theological contemplation, merging \emph{memory} of Jesus and \emph{experience} of the Risen Christ. Luke also presents the Risen Christ, in the Acts of the apostles. It can be argued that the first three evangelist were no eyewitnesses themselves, while John was: this would explain why the first three Gospels are mainly storytelling rather than interpreting -- Matthew, Mark and Luke would try to remain as close as possible to the eyewitness accounts.
+    The Gospels are largely based on eyewitness accounts, on each other and on an unknown source Q. Matthew, Mark and Luke are similar and called synoptic, while John's Gospel emerged from decades of prayerful, theological contemplation, merging \emph{memory} of Jesus and \emph{experience} of the Risen Christ. Luke also presents the Risen Christ, in the Acts of the apostles. It can be argued that the first three evangelists were no eyewitnesses themselves, while John was: this would explain why the first three Gospels are mainly storytelling rather than interpreting -- Matthew, Mark and Luke would try to remain as close as possible to the eyewitness accounts.
 
-    To verify whether sayings ascribed to Jesus, we use the following criteria:
+    To verify that sayings ascribed to Jesus are really His, we use the following criteria:
 
     \begin{description}
-        \item[Embarrassment] of the early Church (e.g. the baptism by John), because if not from Jesus, why would they be included?
-        \item[Multiple attestation] in \emph{independent} traditions, for obvious reasons.
-        \item[Discontinuity] from Jewish and early Christian tradition, like Jesus' title `the Son of Man'.
-        \item[Coherence] with already established knowledge about Jesus.
+        \item[Embarrassment] of the early Church (e.g. the baptism by John), because if not from Jesus Himself, why would embarrassing stories be included?
+        \item[Multiple attestation] in \emph{independent} traditions.
+        \item[Discontinuity] from Jewish and early Christian tradition, like Jesus' title `the Son of Man', because we cannot ascribe those sayings to anyone else.
+        \item[Coherence] with established knowledge about Jesus.
         \item[Deadly opposition] to distinguish Jesus from simply a teacher or some prophet.
     \end{description}
 
-    After this `stage one' tradition, revelation of Jesus is communicated by word of mouth (`stage two') until they were written down by the evangelists (`stage three'). In any case, the Gospels are historically credible because they are largely based on eyewitness accounts given until far in the first century, for Mark and John mainly Peter.
+    After this `stage one' tradition, revelation by Jesus is communicated by word of mouth (`stage two') until written down by the evangelists (`stage three'). In any case, the Gospels are historically credible because they are largely based on eyewitness accounts given until far in the first century.
 
-    It is also not realistic that there was a group of early Christians making up stories about Jesus, because then they would have included positions on some debates of the early Church as sayings of Jesus to support their own point of view.
+    It is also not realistic that there was a group of early Christians making up stories about Jesus, because then they would have included opinions on some debates of the early Church as sayings of Jesus to support their own point of view.
 
     \subsubsection*{The preaching of the Kingdom}
     Jesus revealed the Kingdom as a present or future `new age' to liberate sinful men and women from the grip of evil and bless them with salvation. He did this by telling \emph{parables} and performing \emph{miracles}. We don't know for sure what exact impact these two things had on Jesus' contemporaries,  but for sure they hint at Jesus being divine Wisdom.
@@ -33,14 +33,14 @@
     \subsubsection*{The Kingdom in person}
     The coming of Jesus is inseparably connected with the coming of the Kingdom. This becomes clear in all synoptic Gospels. In the Gospels it is only others who directly call Jesus the king of the Jews or the Messiah, but He Himself also obliquely hints at it. 
     
-    The language of `coming from God' and being `sent by God' is used often in this context, sometimes together. The usage of these words is numerous enough and different enough from Old Testament prophets, to assume that is how Jesus Himself understood His mission. 
+    The language of `coming from God' and being `sent by God' is used often in this context, sometimes together. The usage of these words is numerous enough and different enough from Old Testament prophets, to assume that it shows how Jesus Himself understood His mission. 
 
     Jesus, other than the Old Testament prophets, taught with authority:
 
     \begin{itemize}
-        \item Over the observation of the Sabbath (Mk.~2:23-28; but note that some scholars ascribe verse 28 to Mark or a pre-Markan redactor).
-        \item Over the regulations of the Torah: the oral law imposed by scribes and Pharisees He showed to be incoherent with the Torah (Mk.~7:10-12), the written law He extended, clarified and changed (most notably Mt.~5:21-48; mainly considering the food laws Mk.~7:15,19). Some scholars don't think it's likely that Jesus abolished all food laws at once, and ascribe the sayings concerning those laws to later editors.
-        \item Over the Temple (Mk.~11:15-17; 14:57-59) -- the original saying is untraceable, but had something to do with a new relationship with God, for which Jerusalem as central place wasn't needed any more. 
+        \item On the observation of the Sabbath (Mk.~2:23-28; but note that some scholars ascribe verse 28 to Mark or a pre-Markan redactor).
+        \item On the regulations of the Torah: the oral law imposed by scribes and Pharisees He showed to be incoherent with the Torah (Mk.~7:10-12), the written law He extended, clarified and changed (most notably Mt.~5:21-48; mainly considering the food laws Mk.~7:15,19). Some scholars don't think it's likely that Jesus abolished all food laws at once, and ascribe the sayings concerning those laws to later editors.
+        \item On the Temple (Mk.~11:15-17; 14:57-59) -- the original saying is untraceable, but had something to do with a new relationship with God, for which Jerusalem as central place wasn't needed any more. 
     \end{itemize}
 
     We also see Jesus' authority in His forgiveness of sins and His new name for God, ``Abba''. While Jesus preached the coming of the Kingdom, the Old Testament language of God as king was abolished in the New Testament and replaced by this ``Father dear''.
-- 
cgit v1.2.3

