Christological Titles Research Articles

The Cross as a Central Christian Symbol of Injustice

The Cross as a Central Christian Symbol of Injustice

Irenaeus as Logos Theologian

Abstract Despite the prevalence of “Logos” as a christological title in his works, Irenaeus of Lyons has not been considered a Logos theologian due to an untenable presupposition that the Greek doctrine of the Logos has no place in the biblical thought of Irenaeus. The purpose of this article is to study Irenaeus’ use of “Logos” in explaining the nature and work of the Second Person, particularly in his pre-incarnational state. Furthermore, I read Irenaeus in conjunction with Justin’s Logos theology to demonstrate that Irenaeus alters the dominant understanding of Logos theology in the second century. In Irenaeus’ works, the title “Logos” functions to unite the Father and Son in one, equal divine nature, allowing the Son to work on behalf of the Father in creation as an agent of creation and revelation.

‘Word of God’ and ‘Spirit of God’ in Christian and Islamic Christologies: A Starting Point for Interreligious Dialogue?

The article discusses whether the seemingly similar notions of Jesus as ‘word’ of God and the role of the spirit in relations between Jesus and God might serve as a starting point for dialogue and deeper appreciation between Christianity and Islam. The article briefly reviews the biblical and qur'anic material on these concepts as they have been interpreted in Christian and Islamic theological traditions. This brief review is needed in order to present the Christological reflection among a group of so-called Īsā imandars, a syncretistic Christian–Islamic group in Bangladesh, and to evaluate their claim that there is a similarity between Christian and Islamic concepts. The presentation focuses on how they interpret Jesus as ‘Word of God’ and ‘Spirit of God’ in the borderland between Islam and Christianity. In conclusion, the article discusses how the clear systematic-theological incompatibility and the simultaneous lived compatibility of Christological titles and descriptions should be evaluated in answering the initial question of whether or not common concepts are helpful for dialogue and understanding between Christianity and Islam.

Healing and the "Son of David": Matthew's Warrant

AbstractThis article examines Matthew's warrant for linking the christological title "Son of David" with Jesus' healing activity, arguing that the Evangelist based this connection on the Davidic Shepherd of Ezekiel 34. The study will seek to demonstrate this premise by sketching a composite of the Matthean "Son of David" and comparing this composite to Ezekiel's Davidic Shepherd, bringing to light the contextual, verbal and thematic links between Matthew's Son of David motif and Ezekiel 34, and by pointing out the inadequacies of other competing theories.

Janowe wyznania wiary w ujęciu Prospera Grecha

Confessions of faith in the New Testament are the Early Church’s reply to the apostolic kerygma, which centre was Jesus and His saving work. The John’s Tradition includes many texts, which in their literature structure and theological content unmistakably indicate the confession of faith. In the Fourth Gospel and John’s Epistels, Prosper Grech has distinguished thirty-two text groups, which can be called formulae of faith in strict sense. The author has classified the formulae according to the following criteria:– verbs that introduce confessions,– Christological titles,– Jesus’ work,– Sitz im Leben of formulae.The Johannine Tradition does not include the formulae on Jesus’ Passion and Death which are so frequent in St. Paul and the Acts of the Apostles because the fourth evangelist represents the high Christology. His ideas are focusing on Incarnation, Revelation and Salvation with a universal dimension. Presence of so many homologies in the Writings of John proves that in the Early Christian era the Christological ideas were developing. In the future, the formulae of faith will contribute to the Credo of the Church.

Christianity with an Asian face: Asian-American theology in the making

Drawing on the twin themes of liberation and inculturation, Peter Phan explicates a new theology forged in the cauldron of the encounter between two vastly different cultures. He devotes particular attention to the meaning of Christ for Asian Americans, and new christological titles emerge?Jesus as Eldest Son and Ancestor. Phan also explores his personal roots to sketch the contours of Vietnamese-American theology, an expression of faith caught between the Dragon and the Eagle.

Narrative Christology and the Son of Man: What the Markan Jesus Says Instead

AbstractFrom the point of view of "narrative christology," not only does the Markan Jesus attempt to deflect attention and honor away from himself and toward God, but he also refracts—or bends—the "christologies" of other characters and the narrator. The image comes from the way a prism refracts "white" light and thus shows its spectral colors. When a thing is bent and looked at from another angle, something different appears. The most obvious way in which the Markan Jesus bends the "christologies" of others is by his statements about the "Son of Man," especially in juxtaposition with "christological titles" offered by other characters and the narrator. No other character or the narrator speaks of the "Son of Man," thus "Son of Man" depicts the Markan Jesus' distinctive point of view. The implied author of Mark challenges the implied audience to deal with the tension between an assertive narrator who proclaims "Jesus Christ, the Son of God" and a reticent Jesus who deflects attention and honor, challenges traditional views, and insistently proclaims not himself but God. To resolve the tension in favor of the narrator (as does Kingsbury) or in favor of the Markan Jesus (as does Naluparyil) would be to flatten the implied author's multi-dimensional narrative and its multi-layered "christology." The implied author of Mark sets up this tension to draw in the implied audienc —not to resolve the tension but to enable hearing of the story of Jesus in its full complexity and mystery.

At the Origins of Christian Worship: The Context and Character of Earliest Christian Devotion

This volume makes a valuable contribution to the debate about the origins and development of Christianity. Larry Hurtado argues that understanding the nature of Christianity in the first century requires taking full account of the first Christians' devotional practices because worship was the context in which christological titles and other expressions of faith were given their specific meaning--a fact that has largely been ignored. Hurtado focuses on two distinguishing characteristics of earliest Christian worship: its exclusivity (rejecting the worship of other deities) and its binitarian shape (the veneration of Christ alongside God the Father). Setting early Christianity within the religious environment of the Roman era, Hurtado describes the features of Christianity that attracted followers and led them to renounce other religions. He then turns his attention to a more detailed discussion of the place of Christ in the monotheistic worship of the earliest Christians, showing that Christ figured in their public and corporate devotional life at a surprisingly early stage. The book concludes with some reflections for Christian worship today based on the historical features of early Christian devotional practices. Clear, illuminating, and relevant to the modern church, this volume will be of interest to scholars, pastors, students, and general readers seeking insight into the origins of Christian faith and practice.

The institutionalization of Jesus' charismatic authority, Part 1: Indirect Christology - direct Christology<Sup>1<Sup>

This study concerns an investigation of the evolution of the Jesus tradition. Christological titles are studied in terms of the social theory of the institutionalization of charismatic authority. It makes use of Anthony Thiselton's and Bengt Holmberg's application of Max Weber's social theory. It is argued that the followers of Jesus acknowledged and expressed his authority by means of naming. These "names" developed into "titles" when the post-Easter followers of Jesus allocated power to him. The process of the institutionalization of Jesus' charismatic authority relates to the transmission from the oral tradition of Jesus' sayings and deeds to the written evidence. The article emphasizes the work done by the Jesus Seminar. The following "rules of written evidence" are considered: clustering and contexting; revision and commentary; false attribution; difficult sayings and the process of christianising. In Part 2 of the study, Weber,s social theory is applied to the Christological title "Son of Man".

‘IN THE BEGINNING’: A CHRISTOLOGICAL TRANSPARENCY

In an earlier article, ‘The Johannine Origins of the Johannine Logos’, I proposed that the prevailing explanations of the background and origin of the celebrated Logos concept/title of the Gospel of John are misguided in their attempts to trace the title to some extraneous source. I argued, rather, that the development of the christological title Logos had a beginning, middle, and end, and that this may be demonstrated from the Gospel and First Epistle themselves. Crucial to my argument was the chronological ordering of the three documents: the Gospel of John ‘proper’ (John 1.19–20.31), the First Epistle, and then the substance of the Prologue (John 1.1–18). The thesis itself, more specifically, was that (1) λóγoς and ρημα were employed in the Gospel ‘proper’ with a demonstrably ‘christological transparency’, (2) λóγoς was employed with a quasi-titular force in the first verses of 1 John, and (3) λóγoς reflects a full-fledged christological title in the Prologue material, which was composed still later. At the end of that article I suggested that a similar development could be traced in the case of the Johannine term αρχη´ – immediately related to λóγoς in the very first line of the Gospel – and that, if so, this would surely enhance my argument concerning λóγoς. Here I attempt to make the argument for a similar christological development of the Johannine αρχη´. Even aside from its relevance for my thesis about λóγoς, the prominent and recurring αρχη´ justifies the attention. And it does confront us, after all, with the majestic phrase with which the Gospel opens: ‘In the beginning’.

THE THEOLOGICAL INTERPRETATION OF THE FIGURE OF JESUS IN THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW: SOME PRINCIPAL FEATURES IN MATTHEAN CHRISTOLOGY

In the wake of redaction-criticism it has become customary to treat the evangelists as theologians. This study is an attempt to elucidate how the Gospel of Matthew defines the impact of Jesus on salvation in a reinterpretation of tradition. Following a new trend in christological studies, emphasis has been laid not so much on the different christological titles as on the way the Jesus story is told as articulating the writer's christology. A special trait in Matthew is its meeknes Christology, and great importance is also given to Jesus as the Teacher par excellence. God being the real actor in the gospel story, the Christology of Matthew turns out to be theology in the sense of soteriology.

Idiom and Translation: Some Aspects of the Son of Man Problem

The Gospel expression ό υίὸς τοῦ άνθρώπου has been a major Christological title for centuries. There is however widespread agreement that it is a translation of the Aramaic termand this is a normal expression for ‘man’. One way of viewing the Son of man problem is to suppose that we must account for the transition fromin the teaching of Jesus to the title ό υίὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου in the Gospels.

A Separate God: The Christian Origins of Gnosticism (review)

Reviewed by: A Separate God: The Christian Origins of Gnosticism Richard Valantasis Simone Pétrement . A Separate God: The Christian Origins of Gnosticism. Translated by Carol Harrison. San Francisco: Harper SanFrancisco, 1990 Pp. 486. $35.00. In this book, originally published as Dieu séparé: les origines du gnosticisme (Paris: Cerf, 1984), Pétrement argues, contrary to the current scholarly consensus, that gnosticism originated in Christianity, and that therefore gnosticism properly [End Page 468] speaking is a Christian heresy. She argues this position from two perspectives (constituting the two parts of the book): the first explores the principal gnostic myths and doctrines and their foundation in Christian writings, and the second delineates a development of Christian gnosticism. The cornerstone to Pétrement's discussion involves the "gnosticizing" tendencies of both the Pauline and the Johannine writings which contain the elements of the gnostic myth, the basic components of gnostic theology, and the theology of "grace" which prepared the way for the separation of the God of the Old Testament from the Father of Jesus Christ. Gnosticism, it is claimed, emerged from the creative interpretative reflection upon these texts. Pétrement explores four myths of gnosticism in this context: the demiurge who emerges as the creator from the radical separation of Judaism and Christianity; the seven creator angels who are personifications of the seven days of creation; the Mother who is the Spirit; and the god "Man" which (to my mind quite peculiarly) devolved from the Christological title "Son of Man." Similarly, Pétrement discusses six gnostic doctrines which also derive from Christian writings: salvation by "knowledge," which is little distinguished from salvation by faith among early Christians and early gnostics; the revealer who, as the Christian savior depicted in the Gospel of John, saves by teaching; a wide variety of gnostic docetisms about which the gnostics were not consistent (that Christ only appeared to suffer, or that Christ only appeared to be a man, or that the human Jesus was to be distinguished from the divine Christ, or that the God Christ did not have a material body); realized eschatology, a primary characteristic of gnosticism which is found also in Paul, the fourth gospel and the synoptic gospels, and which is understood as the belief that the resurrection has already happened in the life of the believer; dualism, which is the separation of God from the world into what appear as separate spheres; and freedom by grace (to my mind the most eloquent argument in the book) which refers to the liberating effect of the new revelation and the new nature bestowed on believers by the savior. Having established the possibility of finding the origins of gnostic theology and mythology in early Christian writings, Pétrement proceeds to an exposition of the development of gnosticism within Christianity. Beginning in the gnosticizing tendencies of Pauline Christianity, gnosticism developed through a number of phases. After dismissing the argument about the origin of gnosticism in Simon Magus (Simon Magus in Acts 8.9-24 was actually looking to become a bishop in a Samaritan church not aligned with Jerusalem, and his offer of money was parallel to Paul's collection for Jerusalem!), and rewriting the conflict at Corinth between Paul and Apollo as mere gnosticizing "tendency," Pétrement identifies the second phase of gnosticism in the Gospel of John which, although not itself a gnostic document, created the pool of ideas for emergent Christian gnosticism because it appears to deny the humanity of Christ. The next phase is that of the Simonian School of Antioch under the leadership of Menander who relies heavily on Johannine themes. Menander's disciples, the Christians Satumilus and Basilides, develop the first fully articulated gnostic theologies with all the themes and doctrines present. From Basilides emerges the Christian gnosticism of Valentinus, who is portrayed [End Page 469] as a theologian conciliating Platonic philosophy with Christian gnosticism, using the images and metaphors of the Old Testament as a field of speculation. And finally, Valentinianism explains the subsequent development from Christian gnosticism of Barbelognostic, Sethian, Ophite and other brands of gnosticism whose speculative systems only make sense in light of the removal of Christian references from Christian Valentinian gnosticism and...

Kultuurimperialisme as ’n hermeneutiese dilemma: Eerste-wêreldse en Derde-wêreldse perspektiewe op Jesus as die Seun van God

The hermeneutical dilemma of cultural imperialism: First-World and the Third-World perspectives on Jesus as the Son of God In this essay the hermeneutical dilemma of cultural imperialism in the engagement of First-World theology with Third-World theology is addressed by means of a hermeneutics of conversation. The Christological title ‘Son of God’ serves as a case study. Western ontological Christology is compared with the christological perspective in African theology of the Son of God as elder brother and as ancestor. Both these perspectives are interpreted in the light of the evidence in the New Testament.

The Origin of the Title ‘King of Kings and Lord of Lords’ in Revelation 17. 14

The purpose of this note is to discuss the christological title ‘King of kings and Lord of lords’ in Rev 17. 14. Most commentators have generally understood the title to have its broad background in intertestamental Judaism and the Old Testament. The title is also attested in Babylonian and Egyptian tradition, but such an influence is unlikely here since John usually limits his sphere of reference to the Old Testament and its related literature and traditions. Among the possible above-mentioned references in Judaism and the Old Testament, 1 En 9. 4 bears closest resemblance to Rev 17. 14. The 1 En reference could be in mind, not only because of its similarity of wording, but also because its context concerns eschatological judgment (i.e. of the fallen Watchers), as does that of Rev 17.

A Sociologia do Movimento de Jesus e a Figura de Cristo no Novo Testamento

The author goes around the various sources of the Jesus movement and compares the Christological titles favored by the source Q, the source logy and the apostle Paul. The comparison considers specially the impact of each accent on the situation of the poor and the impact of the situation of the poor on the formulation of their Christologies.

The Son of Man in the First Gospel

Perhaps it is foolhardy at present to attempt to understand what the first evangelist means when he uses the term Ό υίòς το άνωρώπου. Scholars are divided about the significance of the term both in Jewish eschatological speculation and as an Aramaic idiom. They are divided over the contribution of Jesus and of the early church to the Son of man sayings in the synoptics. Did Jesus preach about a future Son of man who would play a role in the eschatological drama and the church identify Jesus with that figure? Did Jesus use an Aramaic idiom which was misunderstood by a church interpreting their experience of the resurrection in the light of Daniel 7? Is ‘the Son of man’ a title, and is it a Christological title or a symbol for the saints? It is not surprising that articles are appearing with titles like: Can the Son of man problem be solved?

THE VISION OF THE RISEN CHRIST IN REV. i. 13 ff.: THE DEBT OF AN EARLY CHRISTOLOGY TO AN ASPECT OF JEWISH ANGELOLOGY

τ: 1ΗE impact which Jesus of Nazareth made upon his followers was such that various ideas derived from contemporary religious and philosophical usage were employed to convey the significance of his person and work. All these ideas, in one way or another, were intended to impress upon readers and hearers the significant, indeed unique, status of Jesus in the relationship between God and man. Very quickly titles such as Messiah (Mark viii. 29; John xx. 31; and Acts iii. 20) and even divine attributes like creative power (Col. i. 15 ff.; Heb. i. 2) were bestowed upon Jesus, in order to express the importance of his life, death, and resurrection. The study of New Testament Christology has concentrated on the titles used as a reasonably accessible means of ascertaining the character of the earliest beliefs about Jesus.1 Yet the use of titles was but one way of speaking about Jesus' relationship with God. Investigation of the way in which the first Christians expressed their convictions about Jesus' unique mediatorial function need not be confined to the study of Christological titles. In this respect the Christo phany which functions as the commission to John of Patmos in Rev. i. 13 ff. offers us a Christology of some sophistication, whose importance does not depend on the presence of exalted Christological titles. In this passage it is the language used in describing the appearance of the Risen Christ which particularly demands our comment and attention.2 Many elements in the Christophany are taken from the description of the angelophany in Dan. x. 5 ff. This is particularly apparent in Rev. i. 13 {όνδίδυμίνον ποδήρη και πΐρΐΐζωσμίνον προς τοΐς μαστοΐς ζωνηνζωνην χρυσάνχρυσάν cf. όνδΐδυμόνος βύσσινα καί την όσφύν πΐρΐΐζωσμίνος βυσσίνω) and 14 f· {καί οί οφθαλμοί αύτοΰ (lis φλόξ πυρός, και 01 πόδΐς αύτοϋ όμοιοι όμοιοι χαλκολιβάνω ώς iv καμίνω πΐπυρωμίνης, cf. και 01 οφθαλμοί αύτοΰ ώσΐΐ λαμπάδΐς πυρός . . . και 01 πόδΐς ώσeι χαλκόs iijaστράπτων). But

A Neglected Feature of the Christology of the Fourth Gospel

Because the term θεóς is used so infrequently of Jesus in the New Testament, it is not surprising to find that there are relatively few discussions of it as a christological title. However, it may be of value to investigate the way in which the Fourth Gospel speaks of Jesus as ‘God’ since its usage differs somewhat from that of the rest of the New Testament. First, the extent to which the New Testament describes Jesus as God will be surveyed, and this will be contrasted in general terms with the approach of the Fourth Evangelist. Then the passages in the Fourth Gospel which may call Jesus ‘God’ will be examined in more detail, and an attempt will be made to establish the way in which this designation is used by the evangelist. Next it will be asked how the distinctive usage of the Fourth Gospel came to be adopted. Finally the view that the word θεóς expresses a functional christology will be considered.

Where Christology Is Real

The one way to overcome the dilemma confronting New Testament Christology is to understand the christological titles as ways in which primitive Christianity tried to express who Jesus was as a response to the claim which was already implicit in his message and activity.