While the Qur’an often refers to Jesus Christ, it presents a picture which is different from the New Testament. The Qur’an “denies” that Jesus Christ would be the Son of God, implicitly also discounting the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. Jesus is only a creature, a prophet of God, whom God saved from death on the cross.
Paul Tillich reinterpreted Christology along the lines of the method of correlation. We need to ask whether this gigantic enterprise has indeed succeeded in preserving Christianity in its original form. I attempt to prove that a significant discrepancy exists between orthodox and Tillichian theology, especially with respect to dealing with the issue of the historical Jesus, the use of ontological concepts and “incarnation”. I therefore set forth the following observations: 1.
Bei der Betrachtung des Textes von Mk 4,35–41 verwendet der Author die Begriffe des rezeptionskritischen Modelles, wie Empfänger, Leerstelle, implizierte Leser, Leserenzyklopädie usw. Die leserorientierten Aspekte sind mit den historisch-kritischen Ergebnissen verbunden. Die christologische und soteriologische Fragestellungen des Textes sind im Zusammenhang mit der Lebenssituation der Adressaten präsentiert.