Christology

Encyclopedia : C : CH : CHR : Christology

Christology is that part of Christian theology which studies and attempts to define Jesus the Christ. This area of study is generally less concerned with the minor details of his life; rather it deals with issues such as his nature, the Incarnation, and the major events of his life (his birth, death, and resurrection).

Important issues in Christology include:

• His human nature
• His divine nature
• The interrelationship between these two natures; how they interacted and affected each other

Controversies concerning those who deny Christ's divine nature

Some important controversies have included the controversy with Arians over Christ's divinity and relationship with the Father, which led to the adoption of the Nicene-Constantinople Creed; the controversy over Nestorianism, and that over Monophysitism (and its derivates Monothelitism and Monoenergism) which led to the first Seven Ecumenical Councils and their many decrees, canons and professions of faith. The adoption of the Chalcedonian view of Christology was, as Karl Rahner would say, key to the beginning of Christological Discussion. Other controversies in Christology included the Docetists and the Adoptionists.

We can describe most of these in terms of whether they believed Christ had a divine nature, human nature or both; and if both, in terms of how the two natures coexisted or interacted. All of these views will be presented in simplified form.

One of the earliest disputes within Christianity centered on whether Jesus was God. A number of early Christian sects believed that Jesus was not divine, but was simply a human Moshiach prophet promised in the Old Testament, see Deuteronomy 18. This doctrine, originating in the Jewish Christian community in Nazareth, that believed that Jesus was simply a prophet as promised in the Old Testament, and not truly One with the Father, as the Second Person of the Trinity, True God and True Man, came to be known as the Ebionite heresy by the prevailing orthodoxy. The inclusion of the genealogies of Jesus at Matthew 1:1-17 and Luke 3:23-38 are used to explain the belief that Jesus is the Christ from the line of David. An alternative explanation is that Christ's natures were in opposition to each other, that Jesus Christ only had the illusion of a human body and, thus, no human ancestry at all (see also Jesus wept). This doctrine is thought to have been part of the Gnostic Christians, who were later labeled as heretics by orthodox church authorities. The belief that Jesus was only human was also opposed by church leaders such as Paul and also came to be held as heretical, with mose sects soon subsumed by orthodox churches causing these beliefs to diminish greatly.

A position that is held by many who believe in Binitarianism is that Jesus was the Word, and thus God (John 1), before His birth, that He was not fully God while on Earth in the sense that He could do nothing of Himself (John 5:19,30;8:28), and that Jesus became fully God after the resurrection with all authority () and power of God as He had prior to His incarnation is also considered by most Orthodox Christian scholars as a modern day heresy.

The Chalcedonian view is summarized by the creed of Nicea-Constantinople which was ecumenically accepted at the Council of Chalcedon. This view is that Christ possesses two natures, divine and human, which are united in the one person of Jesus Christ without either nature losing any of its properties nor uniqueness but without any separability. This creed was adapted at the Council of Chalcedon, and was greatly influenced by the Tome of Leo which Pope Leo I sent to be read at that council. It is the dogma of the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches, and is also the view of the Anglican church, and many Protestant churches. One of the doctrines relating in depth to the nature of Jesus while on earth is kenosis.

Some other views lessen the extent to which Jesus was divine, one of which is the Arian view that Christ is not fully divine, but was created by God for the purpose of accomplishing salvation.

Controversies concerning those who deny Christ's human nature

Yet other views made the claim that Jesus was fully divine but not fully human. The strict Monophysite view is that the human nature of Christ was dissolved or consumed by the Divine, whereas the Miaphysite view is that Christ exists as a hybrid nature, simultaneously human and Divine, unique in the universe. The Docetist view is that Christ was never fully human, but only appeared to be human. Semi-docetism only partially denies humanity, usually by asserting that Christ was not subject to temptation nor to any of the normal human frailties of hunger, fatigue, or fear of death.

Other views support the idea of Jesus as a man, for example, the Nestorian view is that the divine, and the man, shared the same body but retained two separate personhoods. The Adoptionist view is that Jesus was born a man only, but became God's son by adoption when he was baptized in the Jordan, whereas Psilanthropism is the view that Jesus is literally "only man", and not in any way divine.

There is also the view held by some Messianic Jews that Yeshua (Jesus) and YHVH (the Lord) are the same entity, with the the Ruach haKodesh and Elohim being separate parts of the Godhead. YHVH appears in the Hebrew Bible, while Yeshua is the incarnate form of YHVH found in the Brit Hadashah. In this view, Yeshua is born fully man and becomes fully God upon His baptism by the Ruach haKodesh (symbolizing our inclusion into the family of God upon our own baptism with Ruach haKodesh).

It could also be argued that Roman Catholics and Calvinists, who believe in a strict concept of original sin also fully or partially deny the human nature of Christ. The Catholic doctrine of the immaculate conception of Mary is but one of several necessary doctrinal bulkheads implemented in the wake of the dogma of original sin.

Roman Catholics and Calvinists follow St Augustine’s teachings on original sin in believing that human beings inherit not only the tendency and urges to sin, but the actual guilt of sin as well. They commonly cite Paul’s statement "Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned." (Rom 5:12 NRSV). However this leaves the question of Jesus Christ in an untenable position. If we are all born with the actual guilt of sin, then Christ was also born a sinner.

In order to get around the concept that Jesus was born a sinner, the Catholic dogma on the immaculate conception of Mary took shape. This doctrine should not be confused with the virgin birth of Christ, which is commonly but incorrectly called the immaculate conception.

According to common Catholic understandings, Mary the mother of Jesus was preserved by God from the stain of original sin by being born totally sinless. Mary is then said to have never sinned ever in her life. The net result of this doctrine is that when Jesus was born, he did not inherit the same sinful nature as the rest of humanity. He was born with the nature of Adam before the fall, not after the fall like the rest of us.

The problem of this is it denies Christ the same frail post-fall human nature we all have to live with. It also appears inconsistent with a number of other statements by the Apostle Paul:

- "For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do: sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the just requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit" (Romans 8:3-4).

- “Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil— and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death. For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham's descendants. For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for[f]the sins of the people. Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted” (Hebrews 2:14-18).

Other Christians such as Eastern Orthodox or Protestants like Seventh-day Adventists would claim that Roman Catholics and Calvinists fail to understand the real nature and origin of sin. They would claim that there is a big difference between the tendency or urge to sin (i.e. temptation) and the actual act of sinning (see section on original sin).

Eastern Orthodox and Seventh-day Adventists would argue that Paul is stating that Christ, like any other human being, inherited the same frail human body as the rest of humanity. Christ nor any other human inherits the actual guilt of sin. What Christ inherited was the tendency and urge to sin. Christ’s temptation is testament to this. He felt the same kind of hunger, the same weaknesses.

- "For this reason [Jesus] had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people" (Hebrews 2:17).

An Eastern Orthodox and Seventh-day Adventists might argue that understanding Christ’s human nature is just as crucial to understanding His mission and earthly ministry as understanding His divine nature.

- “Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist” (2 John 7).

Concerning the Sinlessness of Christ

The controversy concerning the sinlessness of Christ focuses upon the human nature which Christ assumed. The question must be asked if it is possible to be fully human and not be a participant in the "fall" of Adam? Adam and Eve existed in an "unfallen" status before the "fall" according to Genesis 2-3.

Kinds of sin

The sinless nature of Christ involves two elements according to MacLeod, “First, Christ was free of actual sin.”[1] Studying the gospels there is no reference to Jesus praying for the forgiveness of sin, nor confessing sin. The assertion is that Jesus did not commit sin, nor could he be proven guilty of sin; he had no vices. “Secondly, he was free from inherent sin [or "original sin"].”[2]

The temptation of Christ

The temptation of Christ presented in the gospels affirms that Christ was tempted. Indeed, the temptations were genuine and of a greater intensity than normally experienced by humans.[3] He experienced all the frail weaknesses of humanity. Jesus was tempted through hunger and thirst, pain and the love of his friends. Thus, the human weaknesses could engender temptation.[5] Nevertheless, MacLeod notes that “one crucial respect in which Christ was not like us is that he was not tempted by anything within himself.”[4]

The temptations Christ faced focused upon his person and identity as the incarnate Son of God. MacLeod writes, “Christ could be tempted through his sonship.” The temptation in the wilderness and again in Gethsemane exemplifies this arena of temptation. Regarding the temptation of performing a sign that would affirm his sonship by throwing himself from the pinnacle of the temple, MacLeod observes, “The sign was for himself: a temptation to seek reassurance, as if to say, ‘the real question is my own sonship. I must forget all else and all others and all further service until that is clear.’”[6] MacLeod places this struggle in the context of the incarnation, “...he has become, a man, and he must accept not only the appearance but the reality.”[7]

1.Donald MacLeod, The Person Of Christ: Contours of Christian Theology, Downer Grove: IVP. 1998, 220.
2.Ibid.
3.NRSV; Matthew 4.1-11.
4.Macleod, The Person of Christ,  226.
5.Ibid.
6.Ibid. 227.
7.Ibid.

Controversies concerning the two natures of Christ

Chalcedonian theology states that Christ had two natures in hypostatic union. Jesus was fully human and fully divine. The above sections deal with controversies regarding the extent to which Christ had each of the two natures; this section deals with how the two natures co-existed.

The Council of Chalcedon (451) said the “…two natures are in perfect unity, without mixture, division, confusion, or separation.

The Westminster Confession of Faith (1647). Chapter 8 states: “So that two whole, perfect, and distinct natures, the Godhead and the manhood, were inseparably joined together in one person, without conversion, composition, or confusion. Which person is very God and very man, yet one Christ….”

The communion in attributes (communicatio idiomatu) of Christ’s divine and human natures is understood according to Chalcedonian theology to mean that they exist together with neither overriding the other. That is, both are preserved and coexist in one person. Christ had all the properties of God and humanity. God did not stop being God and become human. Christ was not half-God and half-human. The two natures did not mix into a new third kind of nature. Although independent, they acted in complete accord; when one nature acted, so did the other. The natures did not commingle, merge, infuse each other, or replace each other. One was not converted into the other. They remained separate (yet acted with one accord).

The two prominent other views were Monophysitism and Nestorianism. Monophysitism taught that the two natures mixed together to form a new third kind of nature. Nestorianism taught that there were two totally separate persons in Christ, a human person and a Divine person, not just two natures.

The kenotic theory states that the logos laid aside some of God’s characteristics when God became human. Typically, omniscience, omnipresence, and omnipotence were laid aside, since these characteristics seem incompatible with a being a human. This also attempts to solve the problems when Jesus appears to show incomplete knowledge (Matthew 24:36), presence (Luke 13:33), or ability (John 4:6). Reformed theology suggests that Jesus put self-imposed limitations on himself. Jesus chose to only be in one place at a time, to limit his power, and to limit his knowledge.

Concerning the Virgin Birth of Christ

(See Virgin Birth for a discussion of the literary and historical issues surrounding the doctrine of the Virgin Birth of Christ.)

The Gospels of Matthew and Luke clearly attest to a virgin birth for Jesus Christ. It is currently commonplace to disregard or even refute this doctrine. This article looks at the Christological issues surround belief or disbelief in the virgin birth.

Christological implications of a non-virgin birth

A non-virgin birth would seem to require some form of adoptionism. This is because a human conception and birth would seem to yield a fully human Jesus, with some other mechanism required to make Jesus divine as well.

A non-virgin birth would seem to support the full humanity of Jesus. William Barclay: states, “The supreme problem of the virgin birth is that it does quite undeniably differentiate Jesus from all men; it does leave us with an incomplete incarnation.” [1]

Christological implications of a virgin birth

Karl Barth speaks of the virgin birth as the divine sign “which accompanies and indicates the mystery of the incarnation of the Son.” [2]

Donald MacLeod [3] gives several Christological implications of a virgin birth:

• Highlights salvation as a supernatural act of God rather than an act of human initiative.
• Avoids adoptionism (which is virtually required if a normal birth).
• Reinforces the sinlessness of Christ, especially as it relates to Christ being outside the sin of Adam (original sin).

1.Barclay, William. “The Plain Man Looks at the Apostles’ Creed,” London:Collins. 1967,  81.
2.Barth, Karl. “Church Dogmatics,” IV.1 Edinburgh:T&T Clark. 1956, 207.
3.MacLeod, Donald. “The Person of Christ,” Downers Grove:IVP. 1998, 37-41.

Christological views reflected in names and titles of Jesus

Christ the King

King of Kings and Lord of Lords

King of Heaven

ὁ Ὤν}}» inscribed in the cross in the halo. The "IC XC" abbreviation appears in the upper corners.

HO ON

Christ, the new Adam

1 Corinthians 15:45 reads, “Thus it is written, The first man, Adam, became a living being; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit.”[1] and Romans 5:12 reads, “ Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death came through sin, and so death spread to all because all have sinned.” [2] Jesus came as the new the Adam, a new prototype, to reconcile humanity and establish a relationship with the Godhead, establishing a new humanity. The first Adam participated in the Fall, which brought death through sin; while the second Adam brought grace, righteousness, and salvation.[3] Pannenberg connected the second Adam imagary to the New Testament in “Paul and John’s doctrine of Jesus as the incarnate Logos.” According to Pannenberg the work of Jesus as the second Adam is the essential link between anthropology and Christology, “affirming the unity of creation as salvation history directed by God towards its eschatological fulfillment in Jesus Christ."[4]

1. New Revised Standard Version, NRSV.
2. NRSV
3. Greene, J.D. Colin, Christology in Cultural Perspective. (Michigan: Eerdmans, 2003), pp. 53.
4. Panneberg, Systematic Theology, Vol.2, 297-315.

Christ as lion and lamb

The relationship of the Trinity is that of a triangle, rather than a linear line, thus showing equal partnership among the Members, often referred to as the Godhead. Throughout history Jesus Christ has been called the ‘Lion of Judah’ and the ‘Lamb of God’. The lion metaphor represents Christ as a powerful, regal and mighty warrior. The lamb metaphor refers to Jesus as gentle, meek and powerless.

Christ as lamb: sample biblical passages

John 1:29, 36

The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him and declared, "Here is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!

(Christ is atoned the sins of human beings, so they may be reconciled to God.)

Now the passage of the scripture that he was reading was this: Like a sheep he was led to the slaughter, and like a lamb silent before its shearer, so he does not open his mouth.

(Christ was gentle and meek.)

Clean out the old yeast so that you may be a new batch, as you really are unleavened. For our paschal lamb, Christ, has been sacrificed.

(Jesus Christ was the ultimate sacrifice.)

You know that you were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your ancestors, not with perishable things like silver or gold, but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without defect or blemish.

(Jesus Christ was perfect and flawless.)

Christ as lion: sample biblical passages

Hosea 13:7-8

So I will become like a lion to them, like a leopard I will lurk beside the way. I will fall upon them like a bear robbed of her cubs, and will tear open the covering of their heart; there I will devour them like a lion, as a wild animal would mangle them.

(God of fearful strength.)

The lion has roared; who will not fear? The Lord GOD has spoken; who can but prophesy?

(God equates Himself as a lion’s roar, authoritative.)

And among the nations the remnant of Jacob, surrounded by many peoples, shall be like a lion among the animals of the forest,

(God is the King and God is all powerful.)

1. Greene, 53.
2. Katie Skurja, Living in the Intersection.  Imago Dei Ministries, (1/06), pp. 82.
3. New Revised Standard Version

Abbreviations

IHS or JHS Christogram of western Christianity

Starting in the third century the nomina sacra, or names of Jesus, were sometimes shortened by contraction in Christian inscriptions, resulting in sequences of Greek letters such as IH (iota-eta), IC (iota-sigma), or IHC (iota-eta-sigma) for Jesus (Greek Iēsous), and XC (chi-sigma), XP (chi-ro) and XPC (chi-rho-sigma) for Christ (Greek Christos). Here "C" represents the medieval "lunate" form of Greek sigma; sigma could also be transcribed into the Latin alphabet by sound, giving IHS and XPS. Some of these Greek monograms continued to be used in Latin during the Middle Ages. Eventually the correct meaning was mostly forgotten, and erroneous interpretation of IHS led to the faulty orthography "Jhesus". Towards the close of the Middle Ages IHS became a symbol with the "H" appearing as a cross and underneath it three nails, while the whole figure is surrounded by rays. IHS became the accepted iconographical characteristic of St. Vincent Ferrer and of St. Bernardine of Siena. Bernardine, at the end of his sermons would exhibit this monogram devoutly to his audience for which he was criticized and even brought before Pope Martin V. The Society of Jesus (Jesuits) founder, Ignatius of Loyola adopted the monogram in his seal and it became the emblem of his institute. IHS was sometimes wrongly understood as "Jesus Hominum (or Hierosolymae) Salvator", i.e. Jesus, the Saviour of men (or of Jerusalem=Hierosolyma).

The Resurrection

The resurrection is perhaps the most controversial aspect of the life of Jesus Christ. Christianity hinges on this point of Christology. If Jesus was not resurrected, his legacy would only be that of a great teacher and role model for all humankind. But Christians claim that if he was resurrected, then the future of the world is forever altered. Jesus’ resurrection brings reconciliation with God (II Corinthians 5:18), the destruction of death (I Corinthians 15:26), and forgiveness of sins for followers of Jesus Christ. The Resurrection begins now (Multmann, 81). It is not a mere resuscitation from death, but the demonstration that God loves us and has come to us (Hodgson, 270).

Though God reveals himself in many ways, most people are dependent on Scripture to provide details of the resurrection. Christians hold to the Bible as a reliable source. The Bible states that there are over 500 witnesses testifying to Jesus’ resurrection including men and women. The Bible says the tomb he was buried in was empty. Even those in Scripture who doubted his resurrection acknowledge that the tomb was empty, claiming that Jesus’ body was stolen from the tomb.

After Jesus had died, was buried, and was raised, Christians believe he appeared to others in bodily form. Some skeptics say his appearances were only perceived by his followers in mind or spirit – a sort of collective hallucination. This would not be a resurrection. His new body was a glorified body. We know it had changed because many who saw him had difficulty recognizing him at first (Rausch, 112). Yet we are also told it was still a physical body because he talked, ate, was touched, and still retained visible wounds from the crucifixion (Schwarz, 273).

Some who doubt his resurrection state that Jesus never died in the first place. He merely passed out on the cross and later revived in the tomb – the swoon theory. Some have suggested that those who went to the empty tomb actually went to the wrong tomb. This is refuted by arguing that prominent Jews’ burial sites were frequently visited and not easily forgotten (Craig, 149).

One cannot dispute that at the very least, a major world religion began at this point. Some claim that the perception of Jesus as the Savior of the world was manufactured by Paul and contradicts the message of the gospels. Christians argue that the gospels agree with Paul’s Christology. The gospels tell us that the disciples believed they witnessed Jesus’ resurrected body and that led to the beginning of the faith. They had previously hid in fear of persecution after Jesus’ death. After seeing Jesus they made a complete turn-around and boldly proclaimed the message of Jesus Christ despite tremendous risk. They obeyed Jesus’ mandate to be reconciled to God through repentance (Luke 24:47), baptism, and obedience (Matthew 28:19-20).

It is doubtful that they intentionally fabricated a resurrection story. Not only were they putting their lives in danger, but the concept of resurrection was only understood by Jews in the context of a resurrection for Israel as a whole at the end of the world. An individual’s resurrection was not a Jewish teaching (Craig, 160). How did this scared group instantly change into a “dedicated missionary troop (Schwarz, 267)?” Jesus’ resurrection changed these men who in turn began to change the world.

Bibliography:

Craig, William Lane. “Did Jesus Rise from the Dead?” Edited by Michael J. Wilkins and J.P. Moreland. Jesus Under Fire. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1995.

Hodgson, Peter C. Winds of the Spirit: A Constructive Christian Theology. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1994.

Moltmann, Jürgen. Jesus Christ for Today’s World. Translated by Margaret Kohl. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994.

Rausch, Thomas P. Who is Jesus? An Introduction to Christology. Collegeville, Minnesota: Liturgical Press, 2003.

Schwarz, Hans. Christology. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1998.

Work of Christ

The Offices of Christ: \"Prophet, Priest, and King\"

Jesus Christ, the Mediator of humankind, fulfills the three offices of Prophet, Priest, and King. Eusebius of the early church worked out this threefold classification, which John Calvin developedJohn Calvin, Calvins Calvinism BOOK II Chapter 15 Centers for Reformed Theology and Apologetics [resource online] (1996-2002, accessed 03 June 2006);available from http://www.reformed.org/books/institutes/books/book2/bk2ch15.html#one.htm and John Wesley discussedH. Orton Wiley, Christian Theology Chapter 22 [resource online] (Nampa, Idaho: 1993-2005, accessed 03 June 2006); available from http://wesley.nnu.edu/holiness_tradition/wiley/wiley-2-22.htm .

Prophet

Christ is the mouthpiece of God as the Prophet, speaking and teaching the Word of GodRobert Letham, The Work of Christ, (Downers Grove, IL.: InterVarsity, 1993), 143., infinitely greater than all prophets, who spoke for God and interpreted the will of GodColin Brown, Ed., New International Dictionary of NT Theology, Volume 3 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986), 1107.. The Old Testament prophet brought God’s message to the people. Christ, as the Word[(John 1:1-18)]/Logos is the Source of revelation. Accordingly, Jesus Christ never used the messenger formula, which linked the prophet’s words to God in the prophetic phrase, Thus says the Lord.William Sanford La Sor, David Allan Hubbard, Frederic William Bush. Old Testament Survey : The Message, Form, and Background of the Old Testament, (Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.; 2nd ed 1996), 221-230. Christ, being of the same nature,Cleon L. Rogers, Jr. and Cleon L. Rogers III, The New Linguistic and Exegetical Key to the Greek New Testament, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan 1998), 175. provides a definitive and true exposition of God.

The Word/Logos is Light. As the true Light[(John 1:1-18)], Jesus Christ exclusively enlightens humankind in the office of Prophet. Jesus affirmed his divine identity and ultimate authority, revealing God to humanity, continuing His work into the future as the Light[(Revelation 22:3)].

Priest

Christ, whom we draw near to in confidence, offered Himself as the sacrifice to humanity as High Priest[(Hebrews 4:14)]. Old Testament priests declared the will of God, gave the covenant of blessing, and directed the processing of sacrifices.Victor H.Matthews, and Don C. Benjamin, Social World of Ancient Israel, 1250-587 BCE, (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1993),187-198. The priest represented humankind before God. While humankind took the office of priesthood in their weakness, Jesus holds the position with an indestructible power that overcomes the weakness of humanity as described throughout the book of Hebrews [(see Hebrews 2:17, 3:1, 4:14, 4:1-16, 5:1; 6:20; 7:1, 8:3, 9:1-10:39, and 13:11)]. As High Priest, Christ became one with humanity in human weakness, offered prayers to God, chose obedience through suffering, and sympathized with the struggles of humanity.

The atoning death of Christ is at the heart of His work as High Priest. Metaphors are used to describe His death on the cross, such as, “Christ, the Lamb of God, shed His blood on the cross as the sin offering for humankind.” Christ made one sin offering as High Priest in contrast to the Old Testament priests who continually offered sacrifices on behalf of humanity. Because of the work of Christ on the cross, humanity has the opportunity to have a living relationship with God. Conversely, the individuals that deny the work of God are described as dead in sin, without God and without hope.

King

Christ, exalted High Priest, mediates the sin that estranges humankind from the fellowship of God. In turn, He has full rights to reign over the church and world as King. Christ sits at the right hand of God, crowned in glory as "King of kings and Lord of lords.”Rev. 19:16 (NRSV) God put this power to work in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the age to come. And he has put all things under his feet and has made him the head over all things for the church.Eph. 1:20-23 (NRSV)

References

Jesus Christ, \"The Son of Man\"

The Son of Man “is the only title Jesus applied to himself” (Cullman, 137) in the Four Gospels. Taken in its most literal meaning, Jesus was telling everyone that He was a son of a man, as both genealogies in Matthew 1:1-16 and Luke 3:23-38 confirm. In the Old Testament there is deeper meaning for this title, Daniel 7:13 refers to one “like a Son of Man”, and this person was given dominion, glory, and kingship over the entire world for eternity. Jesus is making reference to this Son of Man when He uses the title on Himself, for these are the things that have been given to Him, (ref. Matthew 28:18, Ephesians 1:21). The Son of Man is a title that describes the very mission that Jesus has been sent to perform. In the Synoptic Gospels there are three kinds of sayings that associate Jesus with the Son of Man (Chilton, 35). The first is the way that people treat the Son of Man, without respect but through His suffering He will be vindicated (Matthew 8:20; Luke 9:22; Mark 9:12). The second is the Son of Man’s authority i.e. the forgiving of sins, which is His divine mission (Matthew 9:6; Mark 2:28; Luke 11:30). And the third is the Son of Man as an eschatological redeemer, the Judge of all during the end of times (Matthew 10:23; Mark 8:38; Luke 21:36). In the Gospel of John in the first chapter three titles are assigned to Jesus: Son of Joseph (John 1:45) referring to Jesus’ humanity; Son of God (John 1:49) referring to Jesus’ divinity; and Son of Man (John 1:51) which combines both titles to affirm that Jesus is both fully human and fully divine. “Thus all the ‘Son of Man’ references in the Fourth Gospel appear to have in mind the paradox of Jesus’ divine and human origin: it is precisely the human Son who is also the divine Son.” (Walker, 42). In Revelation 14:14-16, the Son of Man completes His mission and reaps the earth with his sickle.

References:

Chilton, Bruce. “The Son of Man: Who Was He?” Bible Review. Aug. 1996, 35+.

Cullman, Oscar. The Christology of the New Testament. Revised ed. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1963.

Walker, William. “The Son of Man in the Fourth Gospel.” Journal For the Study of the New Testament. Dec. 1994; 31-42.

Further reading

• Berkhof, Louis. The History of Christian Doctrine. Carlisle: Banner of Truth, 1996. ISBN 0851510051
• Bonino, Jose Miquez. Faces of Jesus: Latin American Christologies. Eugene: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 2002. ISBN 1592440975
• Brana, Fernando Ocariz. The Mystery of Jesus Christ: A Christology and SoteriologyTextbook. Dublin: Four Courts Press, 1994. ISBN 1851821279
• Brown, Raymond E. An Introduction to New Testament Christology. Mahwah: Paulist Press, 1994. ISBN 0809135167
• Brummer, Vincent. Atonement, Christology and the Trinity: Making Sense of Christian Doctrine. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing Company, 2005. ISBN 0754652300
• Casey, Michael. Fully Human, Fully Divine: And Interactive Christology. Liquori: Liguori Publications, 2004. ISBN 0764811495
• Chemnitz, Martin. The Two Natures in Christ. trans. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1970. ISBN 0570032105
• Cullmann, Oscar. The Christology of the New Testament. trans. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1980. ISBN 0664243517
• Dunn, James D.G. Christology in the Making: A New Testament Inquiry into the Origins of the Doctrine of the Incarnation. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing, 1996. ISBN 0802842577
• Dupuis, Jacques. Who Do You Say I Am?: Introduction to Christology. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1994. ISBN 0883449404
• Fruchtenbaum, Arnold. Messianic Christology. San Antonio: Ariel Ministries, 1998. ISBN 091486307X
• Gathercole, Simon J. The Pre-existent Son: Recovering the Christologies of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing, 2006. ISBN 0802829015
• Greene, Colin J.D. Christology in Cultural Perspective: Marking Out the Horizons. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing, 2004. ISBN 0802827926
• Grillmeier, Aloys, Christ in Christian Tradition, London & Oxford: Mowbrays, 1975. ISBN 026460161
• Haight, Roger. The Future of Christology. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group, 2005. ISBN 0826417647
• Hick, John. The Metaphor of God Incarnate: Christology in a Pluralistic Age. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006. ISBN 0664230377
• Johnson, Elizabeth. Consider Jesus: Waves of Renewal in Christology. New York: Herder & Herder, 1992. ISBN 0824511611
• Karkkainen, Veli-Matti. Christology: A Global Introduction. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2003. ISBN 0801026210
• Kraus, C. Norman. Jesus Christ Our Lord: Christology from a Disciple’s Perspective. Eugene: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 2004. ISBN 1592447899
• Letham, Robert. The Work of Christ. Contours of Christian Theology. Downer Grove: IVP, 1993, ISBN 0830815325
• MacLeod, Donald. The Person Of Christ: Contours of Christian Theology. Downer Grove: IVP. 1998, ISBN 0830815376
• Marchesi S.J., Giovanni. Gesu di Nazaret:Chi Sei? Lineamenti di cristologia. San Paolo Edizioni. 2004. ISBN 8821552187
• Matera, Frank J. New Testament Christology. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1999. ISBN 0664256945
• Moule, C.F.D. The Origin of Christology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978. ISBN 0521293634
• Neuman, Matthias and Thomas P. Walters. Christology: True God, True Man (Catholic Basics). Chicago: Loyola Press, 2001. ISBN 0829417192
• Neville, Robert Cummings. Symbols of Jesus: A Christology of Symbolic Engagement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. ISBN 0521003539
• Norris, Richard A. and William G. Rusch. The Christological Controversy. Sources of Early Christian Thought Series. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1980. ISBN 0800614119
• O'Collins, Gerald. Christology: A Biblical, Historical, and Systematic Study of Jesus Christ. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995. ISBN 0198755023
• Outler, Albert C. Christology. Bristol House, 1996. ISBN 1885224087
• Ratzinger, Cardinal Joseph. Introduction to Christianity. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1969. ISBN I586170295
• Rausch, Thomas P. Who is Jesus?: An Introduction to Christology (Michael Glazier Books). Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 2003 ISBN 0814650783
• Scaer, David P. Christology Confessional Lutheran Dogmatics Vol. VI. Northville: The Luther Academy, 1989. ISBN 0-9622791-6-1
• Schwarz, Hans. Christology. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing, 1998. ISBN 0802844634
• Skurja, Katie. Living in the Intersection. Imago Dei Ministries, Portland, OR. (1/06), pp. 82.
• Sobrino, Jon. Christology at the Crossroads. Eugene: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 2002. ISBN 1592440959
• Torrance, Iain R. Christology After Chalcedon. Eugene: Wipf & Stock Publishers, 1998. ISBN 1579101100
• Witherington, Ben. The Christology of Jesus. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 1997. ISBN 0800631080

External links

• [Christology: Beliefs about the Nature of Christ] - ReligionFacts.com
• [What is Christology?]
• [Christology Part One] by Gregory S. Neal
• [Christology Part Two] by Gregory S. Neal
• [Why Was Jesus Born?] by Gregory S. Neal
• [Rosicrucians: Jesus and Christ Jesus] (esoteric Christian view)

Approaches to Christology: Methodologies

Theologians like Jurgen Moltmann and Walter Kasper have characterized Christologies as anthropological or cosmological. These are also termed 'Christology from below' and 'Christology from above' respectively. An anthropological Christology starts with the human person of Jesus and works from his life and ministry toward what it means for him to be divine; whereas, a cosmological Christology works in the opposite direction. Starting from the eternal Logos, a cosmological Christology works toward his humanity. Theologians typically begin on one side or the other and their choice inevitably colors their resultant Christology. As a starting point these options represent "diverse yet complementary" approaches; each poses its own difficulties. Both Christologies 'from above' and 'from below' must come to terms with the two natures of Christ: human and divine. Just as light can be perceived as a wave or as a particle, so Jesus must be thought in terms of both his divinity and humanity. You cannot talk about “either or” but must talk about "both and".

• Colin J. D. Greene, Christology in Cultural Perspective: Marking Out The Horizons, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2003: 30.

Cosmological Approaches

Christologies from above start with the Logos, the second Person of the Trinity, establish his eternality, his agency in creation, and his economic Sonship. Jesus' unity with God is established by the Incarnation as the divine Logos assumes a human nature. This approach was common in the early church. The Achilles’ heal of this approach is attributing full humanity to Jesus, which is resolved by the two natures sharing their properties (termed communicatio idiomatum).

• Colin J. D. Greene, Christology in Cultural Perspective: Marking Out The Horizons, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2003: 31-43, 324.

Anthropological Approaches

Christologies from below start with the human being Jesus as the representative of the new humanity, not with the pre-existent Logos. Jesus lives an exemplary life, one to which we aspire in religious experience. This form of Christology lends itself to mysticism, and some of its roots go back to immergence of Christ mysticism in the sixth century East, but in the West it flourished between the 11th and 14th centuries. A recent theologian Wolfhart Pannenberg contends that the resurrected Jesus is the “eschatological fulfillment of human destiny to live in nearness to God.”

• Colin J. D. Greene, Christology in Cultural Perspective: Marking Out The Horizons, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2003: 43-51.

Political Approaches

The Christian faith is inherently political because allegiance to Jesus as risen Lord relativises all earthly rule and authority. Jesus is called "Lord" over 230 times in Paul’s epistles alone, and is thus the principle confession of faith in the Pauline epistles. Further, N.T. Wright argues that this Pauline confession is the core of the gospel of salvation. The Achille’s heal of this approach is the loss of eschatological tension between this present age and the future divine rule that is yet to come. This can happen when the state coops Christ’s authority as was often the case in imperial Christology. Modern political Christologies seek to overcome imperialist ideologies.

• Colin J. D. Greene, Christology in Cultural Perspective: Marking Out The Horizons, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2003: 51-71, 325.

Other Approaches

Jesus and Social Doctrines of the Trinity

The doctrine of Perichoresis is the doctrine of how the three Persons of the Trinity are one in their threeness. Perichoresis is the mutual indwelling or mutual relatedness within the Trinity. Recently Perichoresis has been applied to the two natures, human and divine, of Jesus to help explain how they remain in perfect union yet unconfused, inseparable but not commingled. Further, “perichoretic realities” are considered to be somehow brought down into the world by the Incarnation. Jesus characterizes his relation to his Father in terms of mutual indwelling, "believe Me that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me" (John 14:11). Jesus also suggested that people can participate in these perichoretic realities - "I do not ask in behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word; that they may all be one; even as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be in Us” (John 17:20-21).

• Wilson, Douglas. “Indwelling.” Credenda/Agenda: Husbandry. Vol. 16. No. 3. 2005. http://www.credenda.org/issues/16-3husbandry.php. Accessed on 24 June 2006.

 

---

From Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Original article here. Support Wikipedia by contributing or donating.
All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License See Wikipedia Copyrights for details.

---