Part I
Introduction to Part I
The following four chapters that comprise part I primarily seek to understand the person of Jesus Christ. The first three do this by following an ascending Christology, beginning with what can be known about Jesus historically and following the development of Christology in the early church and patristic era up until the Councils of Nicaea (325 CE) and Chalcedon (451 CE). An ascending Christology seeks to show the legitimacy of the affirmations of these councils as ways of understanding Jesus by showing the continuity between what they state and what can be known about Jesus historically and what was affirmed about him by the early church in the New Testament
Chapter 1 offers a portrait of Jesus drawn from the quest for the historical Jesus. Faith in Jesus Christ does not usually begin with what can be known historically about Jesus and it is not based upon this. But this study of Jesus Christ begins here for the following reasons. The Gospels interpreted the history of Jesus each in a different way in light of his resurrection, the early churchās experiences of the Holy Spirit, and the concerns and insights of the church communities they originated from. The quest for the historical Jesus attempts to discern the historical figure of Jesus amidst this interpretation. The results of this quest are never final. But historical knowledge of Jesus can provide a check on the human imaginationās temptation to fashion images of Jesus determined by self-interests and can also help keep an understanding of Jesus historically concrete, showing how and where Jesus located himself amidst the social conflicts of his day. From this we can gain a sense of where one should follow Jesus and expect to encounter him in the present.
Chapter 2 examines New Testament descriptions of Jesusā resurrection and its meaning for Christian faith. It is necessary to study Jesusā resurrection in order to understand who Jesus Christ is and the nature of his saving significance. It was as a result of Jesusā resurrection that he was proclaimed as the Christ and became the center of what became a new religion. In the course of this Jesusā resurrection triggered a far-reaching doctrinal development that eventually helped transform the Christian understanding of God.
Chapter 3 traces the course of this transformation, examining the development of the patristic churchās understanding of Jesus Christ that culminated in the decisions of the Councils of Nicaea and Chalcedon. These decisions did not end christological inquiry. They are interpreted here as providing guidelines for understanding Jesus Christ. In tracing this development this chapter also notes some gains and losses it involved for the early churchās understanding of Jesus Christ.
Chapter 4 reverses the direction of inquiry and presents a descending Christology. Chapter 3 traced and critically accepted the developments leading to the affirmations of Nicaea and Chalcedon. This chapter seeks to understand Jesus Christ and God in light of them. Given that Jesus is the Christ, the incarnation of the second person of the Trinity, how should the Trinity be understood? What was the reason for the incarnation? By answering these questions, this chapter provides a metaphysical framework for the understanding of Jesusā saving significance and relationships that follows in parts II and III.
1 The Historical Jesus:
His Message and Person
The gospels differ among themselves in regards to historical details about Jesus and in their overall interpretations of him. These differences, along with the extraordinary claims the gospels make about him, raise the question, what can be known historically about Jesus? In a society where historical inquiry is an accepted form of knowledge this question cannot be avoided. This is the starting point for the quest for the historical Jesus, which can be traced back through various stages to Hermann Samuel Reimarus (1694ā1768). This quest is usually undertaken with some purpose related to the Christian faith. It has theological importance. Historical inquiry is one source of knowledge about Jesus. It can help assess the continuity and discontinuity between what faith claims about Jesus Christ and the life he lived. It can also give historical concreteness to oneās understanding of Jesus, showing how he was situated amidst the social conflicts of his day.
The quest has produced numerous contradictory images of Jesus. These often betray an ideological bias in relation to cultural, political, and religious conflicts of the present. Yet understandings of Jesus produced by the quest cannot be simply dismissed as expressions of current
ideologies. Research into the historical Jesus needs to be critically evaluated in terms of whose interests it serves. But it remains a potential source of knowledge about Jesus that has emancipatory power. The presence of ideological distortions in historical claims about Jesus can only be demonstrated through further historical inquiry. Therefore this inquiry needs to continue. What can be known historically about Jesus, like any historical knowledge, is always subject to correction or refutation by further research. It is not the basis of faith in Jesus Christ. This faith is based on experiencing the proclamation of Jesus Christ as true in a compelling way. But knowledge about Jesus gained through the quest can and should inform this faith.
This chapter presents a description and interpretation of Jesusā message and person drawn from the work of people engaged in the quest for the historical Jesus. Subsequent chapters will return to the historical Jesus in relation to particular questions. This chapter has a broader focus: Jesusā proclamation of the coming reign of God and how this was intertwined with his person. Who Jesus was and how he lived was a medium for his message. Conversely this message and the way he proclaimed it made an implicit claim about his person, which eventually led to his death.
The Setting
Apart from one or more trips to Jerusalem, Jesus lived and worked in Galilee. He probably first became publicly active between 26 and 29 CE. His death outside Jerusalem probably occurred in 30 CE. These dates cannot be certain, partly because of the nature of the evidence in the gospels, and partly because of the time and place in which he lived. Galilee was a hinterland to Jerusalem. Jerusalem was a hinterland to imperial Rome. Jesus had no significant impact on the Roman Empire during his lifetime. From a Jewish perspective he was only one of a number of charismatic leaders of messianic movements who were killed by Roman forces or by Herod, their client-king. In relation to the political and cultural centers of his time, he lived and died in almost complete obscurity. Consequently, little exists in the way of records or historical references independent of the New Testament or related literature like the Gospel of Thomas by which a more precise dating of his activities could be obtained.
Galilee in Jesusā time was experiencing deep social tensions along religious, cultural, political, and economic lines....