Cross Of Jesus Research Articles

김수환 추기경과 몰트만의 고통의 신학 비교 고찰

[Objective] The purpose of this study is to compare and examine three topics related to the problem of suffering, focusing on the theology of suffering developed by Cardinal Kim Sou-hwan and Jürgen Moltmann. [Contents] While Cardinal Kim believed that those who suffer innocently can hope even in their suffering because of the reward of eternal life, Moltmann found the basis of this hope in the eschatological perspective confirmed by the resurrection of Jesus Christ who died on the cross. Cardinal Kim emphasized that God’s omnipotence is a concept that respects the natural order and guarantees the freedom for humans to respond to God’s love. Moltmann believed that by theologically examining the identity of the Trinity God in the ‘cross of Jesus,’ we can see that God reveals himself as ‘the One who suffers in our suffering.’ Both of them emphasized the importance of practicing love toward marginalized neighbors. But Moltmann insisted that the experience of God’s presence in suffering must precede the practice of love. [Conclusions] First, the theology of suffering developed by Cardinal Kim and Moltmann discovers the possibility of hope even in suffering through the eschatological perspective of the completion of the kingdom of God. Second, through the event of the cross that clearly revealed the unconditional love of Jesus Christ for humanity, we can now understand God as the One who suffers with us in suffering. Third, the hope for a future eschatology and the experience of God’s love in suffering enable us to anticipate the kingdom of God by solidarizing with social suffering, and to testify to God’s love experienced in suffering.

The God of the cross is One: Engaging the theology of Bram van de Beek

The Dutch theologian, Bram van de Beek, has a radical Christological emphasis in his theology. In this world, we see the cross of Jesus. Essentially, God is One. The Father is the Father of the Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ. The Holy Spirit works primarily in the church and is not a general spirit or a spirit of goodwill. By participating in Jesus’ death and resurrection, the believer receives salvation. Van de Beek is of the opinion that understanding evolution is necessary and that evil in this world should also be regarded in the light of the cross. He is open to criticism in the light of his position on God and the creation regarding the view that death and evil are present from the beginning. One must, however, accept his Christological stance and his view that God is One, as highly acceptable.Intradisciplinary and/or interdisciplinary implications: This article is largely in the field of systematic theology, but mission studies is also relevant in interdisciplinary interaction.

Fabricating the Fall of Satan: Revelation 12:7–9 and its Interpretation in Early Christianity

Abstract Some interpreters understand Rev. 12:7–9 as a depiction of (1) a primeval literal war between Michael and Satan that resulted in the subsequent expulsion of Satan from heaven or (2) Satan’s defeat (represented metaphorically as an expulsion) at Jesus’ death. Although these interpretations are common in contemporary exegetical works, early interpreters of Revelation explained these verses differently. This prompts the question of who were the innovative interpreters who first read the texts as we do today? Accordingly, tracing a history of interpretation of the passage, in this article I will argue that (1) Oecumenius was the first interpreter who understood Rev. 12:7–9 as a portrayal of a primeval war between Michael and Satan which resulted in the expulsion of the devil from heaven because of his pride and apostasy. (2) Oecumenius did not reach this conclusion by exegeting Rev. 12:7–9. Rather, he connected traditional patristic exegesis and reflection on Satan—condensed mainly from interpretations of texts like Ezek. 28:11–19, Isa. 14:12–15, and Luke 10:18—with Revelation 12. (3) Andrew of Caesarea not only replicated Oecumenius’ exegesis of the pericope but argued that this passage also portrayed Satan’s defeat at the cross of Jesus, due to the influence of the patristic exegesis of John 12:31. (4) Given that Andrew’s commentary was widely copied (whereas Oecumenius’ was not), Andrew is ultimately the catalyst for the dissemination of Oecumenius’ exegesis of this pericope as well as his own. (5) Therefore, Oecumenius and Andrew are the originators of the explanations of Rev. 12:7–9 present in many contemporary exegetical works.

Ratzinger on Evolution and Evil: A Christological and Mariological Answer to the Problem of Suffering and Death in Creation

This article argues that a compelling way to address the presence of suffering and death across evolutionary history lies in the thought of Joseph Ratzinger/Pope Benedict XVI. By situating human evolution within the broader divine plan for man’s salvation through the cross of Jesus, Ratzinger is able to show that the presence of natural evils in this world is not incompatible with God’s goodness but on the contrary is an eminent means by which the love of God is made manifest. Exploring Christ’s kenosis and the sinless suffering of the Blessed Virgin, it is argued that suffering properly embraced is the raw material for love and thus essential for true human flourishing in this life. The real problem for man, it is contended, is not having to suffer and die, but how to suffer and die well. Finally, it is suggested that the full Christian answer to the problem of suffering connected with evolution nevertheless lies in the eschatogical hope for a new heaven and new earth, where man—and all creation with him—will undergo a definitive “evolutionary leap” of “transubstantiation” in Christ.

La muerte de Jesús y su exaltación

The death of Jesus finds in the New Testament various interpretations. For Paul, the cross of Jesus and his death on the cross constitute the center of his theology. The Power of God reveals itself in the humiliation of Jesus and his death on the cross. In Mark, not the death of Jesus leads to salvation, but the response to the call of Jesus to follow him on the way of the cross. In John, the death of Jesus as such does not seem to have a theological significance. Instead of the three announcements of the coming passion, death and resurrection of Jesus in the Synoptics we find a threefold announcement of Jesus’ coming “exaltation” in John (3,14; 8,28; 12,32.34). Jesus is for the fourth evangelist the Suffering Servant of Is 52,13 LXX who must be “exalted and glorified”. Here we are at the heart of Johannine Christology.

Notes Toward a Theology of Cross/ing

Born from the ethical imperative of two sets of wounds, the open sores on the feet of a migrant who crosses the desert and the crucified feet of the One on the cross, this essay compares the U.S.-Mexico border wall and the cross of Jesus through the lives of undocumented migrants crossing into the U.S. From the “third space” of the desert, this essay develops a theology of cross/ing in which the crucified Christ challenges the status quo of state policies that promote injustice, suffering, exploitation, and poverty.

ISLAMIC CHRISTOLOGY ACCORDING TO MAHMOUD MUSTAFA AYOUB AND IT'S MEETING POINT WITH CHRISTIAN CHRISTOPRAXIS

The polemic around the concept of Christian deity can be diluted by efforts to develop an orthopraxis (Christo-Praxis) embracing more the diversity of divinity understanding in Christianity and Islam. One of such efforts is Mahmoud Mustafa Ayoub’s, who approached the depiction of Jesus from His humanity aspect. Ayoub's effort is a legitimate Christology from the Islamic perspective. What Ayoub has been done spurs the reinterpretation of tradition among Christians by develop a mediating paradigm to seek common ground with the Islamic theology. Both Christianity and Islam emphasize monotheism by orthodoxy and orthopraxis. Orthodoxically, it means let God be God, and orthopraxically it is monotheism is connected with anthropology. Islam realizes efforts towards social justice, and Christian realizes the coming of the Kingdom of God. Here the image of Jesus Christ walking down the path of misery, the cross of Jesus, has represented God's identification with the suffering of the world, as well as an appreciation of spirituality, the spirituality centered on creation, that which means a cosmic Trinitarian spirituality for Christian, requiring justice and peace, truth and love, and the brotherhood of all people and all creations.

Jesus and Lu Du: Correlation

Today Myanmar is a multi-racial and multi-religious country and has an estimated population of 60 million people. The population is comprised of some 135 ethnic groups speaking 106 languages and living together under the generic name, the Republic of the Union of Myanmar. The civil war in Myanmar has lasted for 64 years, from 1949 until now. Today the people (Lu Du) of Myanmar are powerless and cry for justice and peace. This paper proposes a theology appropriate for the Lu Du by tracing the correlation between Jesus and the Lu Du. It builds on the work of Minjung and Dalit theologians to emphasize the importance of the historical event of the cross of Jesus for interpreting the suffering of the Lu Du. It also stresses the place of a theology of the Holy Spirit in the context of Myanmar. Finally, it describes the significance of the resurrection of Jesus as a historical event which gives motivation and hope to Lu Du to work for and claim the promise of their special place in the Reign of God. The imagery of God’s Reign provides a concrete aspiration for an ecumenical journey towards justice, unity and peace. Building a peaceful community in Myanmar is not the sole responsibility of Christians, Buddhists, Muslims or people of other faiths. In fact, the Holy Spirit is a primary force in the movements of Lu Du from the beginning. The Holy Spirit motivates and persuades the Lu Du for freedom as it is the ultimate Will of God. It should be the product of peaceful transformation of the poor - empowering individuals and building relationships.

Die groep vroue by die kruis van Jesus (Johannes 19:25): 'n Narratologiese perspektief

The group of women at the cross of Jesus (John 19:25): A narratological perspective. The women portrayed at the cross of Jesus in the Fourth Gospel (John 19:25) are often discussed in commentaries and studies on this part of the Gospel. However, as far as can be determined, they have not yet been studied from a narratological perspective. This matter is therefore addressed in the current study. In narratological terms, the women function as a group character, and they are introduced into the narrative world of the Gospel in 19:25 as standing at the cross of Jesus. After a brief overview of the issues that are normally addressed by Johannine scholars when these women are discussed (the number of women, how the list of women mentioned in the Fourth Gospel should be related to the lists in the Synoptic Gospels and the function fulfilled by the women), they are analysed from a narratological perspective. Amongst the issues that are investigated are the composition of the group character, the layers of contrast that may be detected by the reader between the group character and the four soldiers and the defamiliarising effect that ambiguity concerning the number of women may have on the reading process.

CROSS-PURPOSES IN PAUL? VIOLENCE OF THE CROSS, GALATIANS, AND HUMAN DIGNITY

The cross of Jesus is an important theme in Paul’s letters, identified by him as the focus and content of his message: Christ crucified (e.g. 1 Cor 1:23; 2:5). In Paul’s understanding the death of Jesus was the result of victimisation and violence (e.g. Gal 3:13), complete with its accompanying terror and ultimate destruction of human life and dignity. Moreover, and beyond his candid treatment of the cross, it became in Paul’s writings on the one hand the unmasking of imperial (and other) powers and terror, and on the other hand the subversion (disruption) of prevailing perceptions and structures – particularly in the simultaneous association of Jesus with cross and slavery. The emphasis on the cross with slavery as the backdrop is as suggestive of the implicit socio-political context of Pauline letters like Galatians, as the continued use of the symbols of cross and slavery in modern times require further consideration for their impact on the perception and construction of human dignity.

Three More Fish Stories (John 21:11)

(ProQuest: ... denotes formulae omitted.) The perennially interesting conundrum of the 153 fish finds its most complete recent treatment in the commentary of Craig Keener.1 Of the approximately dozen suggestions that are highlighted there, it is probably fair to say that the one holding sway at this moment sees the number as gematrical sum alluding to the Hebrew for children of God. In this critical note, I wish to add three suggestions to the hopper. 1. Peter when old. This is perhaps the simplest of the three suggestions, based on an inter-Greek exercise of gematria. The number 153 is the sum of the digits of the following Greek letters: gamma, rho, nu. γ = 3 ρ = 100 v = 50 These letters form the consonantal spine of the word for old, in verbal form applied by Jesus to Peter in John 21:18.2 2. Justice. As described by the neo-Pythagorean Iamblichus, justice is a power of rendering what is equal and fitting comprehended by the of an odd square number.3 This fourth-century C.E. definition, preserving earlier tradition, is relevant to the Fourth Gospel in the following way: The first odd number is 3; its square is 9.4 The of 9 is 5. Five is the mean of the number of fish 1, 5, 3. There are also five places in the farewell discourse, each buffered by different theme, where the disciples are commanded to ask (...).5 Further, according to one recent commentator, five provides the numerical substructure of the whole text.6 By his having returned to the Father, Jesus has demonstrated the justice of God (16:10), and that justice is here adumbrated in the 153 fish. 3. Providence. The sum of the digits in 153 is 9,7 and it occurs following portion of the text in which eight people are present at the cross of Jesus.8 This 8, 9 sequence is used as structuring principle in Sirach's panegyric in honor of Simeon the high priest, according to recent article by Jeremy Corley.9 He links this pattern to statements in Sir 18:6 and 42:21 and Qoh 3:14 and suggests that the numerical pattern alludes to the exact providence of God's action in history, where nothing needs to be added and nothing subtracted.10 John's attention to 8 and 9 may have similar intention of praising God's providence in the history of its preeminent high priest, Jesus. Moreover, the sum of 8 and 9 is 17,11 and 153 is the result of multiplying 9 × 17. This increase and multiply dynamic may be playing with Gen 1:28 LXX, whose ... is directed to the man and woman. The double command echoes the identical command to the sea creatures in Gen 1:22, though 1:28 goes on to give the couple dominion over the fish of the sea. Therefore, the providential reading of 153 is grounded in the lifting up of Jesus as well as in the initial creative and sustaining will of God. Conclusion. Each of these three options presents itself against horizon-ofnine. Nine is present in option 2's square of 3, as well as in the sum of the digits and use of 9 as multiple in option 3. Nine is remote horizon for option 1 as well: The high point of Peter's confession, that which acts as immediate pretext for the Peter-as-old saying, contains nine words in the Greek: ..., , Lord, know everything, know that I love you (21:17). We cannot be certain about the evangelist's motivation in utilizing 9 as background horizon. Perhaps the fact that the last items in the Hebrew lexicon build on the nine stem, JJWn, suggested the root as fitting one for the conclusion of the text. We know, after all, that Daniel's 1,290 days (Dan 12:11) constitute the penultimate statement ofthat apocalyptic presentation. The Johannine editor may have chosen this numerical frame as suitable one for the text's final reflection on Jesus' coming (21:23). …

O Reino É de Deus: Aspectos para Uma Cristologia Não-Sacrificialista

This article brings to one’s attention aspect of the life of Jesus—such as his spirituality, his eschatological conceptions, and the conflicts he lived through—with a view to questioning the sacrificialist emphases which are present in Christianity. It also highlights the sovereignty of God which is expressed in Jesus’ message, the preaching of the future as a relativization of intra-historic projects, and the relation between the message of the Kingdom of God and the death of Jesus. In this aspect, the cross is emphasized as the result of a process of politico-religious positioning on the part of Jesus throughout his life—in a manner different from the sacrificialist intepretations which have arisen throughout the history of the Church. The cross of Jesus, the Christ, gives a possible meaning to human renunciation, self-giving, solidarity, and a life of service and joy.

Holy Families? Religion, Sacrifice and Family Violence

This essay examines how family violence, the divinization of the family and the religious call to sacrifice are interrelated. Could a Christian-theological perspective on the meaning of the cross in some way prevent religion from being a legitimization of family violence? Drawing on René Girard's thought, the author shows how the cross of Jesus can be liberating for people in the light of the danger of family violence.

Dankzij of ondanks de dood van Jezus?

For various theological, moral and particularly exegetical reasons the interpretation of the death of Jesus as a sacrificial death is nowadays seriously criticized. According to a widely shared opinion salvation takes place ‘in spite of’ the cross of Jesus in stead of ‘due to’ his death on the cross. In this article some of the common objections made against the sacrificial model are discussed, and an attempt is made to reinterpret the concept of the atonement.

Trinity and Eschatology: The Historical being of God in Jürgen Moltmann and Wolfhart Pannenberg

Whether or not one may wish to call it a renaissance in the doctrine of the Trinity, there has been a notable resurgence of interest in trinitarian thinking in recent theology. Some of the most suggestive contributions have been made by two theologians whose works are generally regarded as ‘eschatologically’ oriented. In a volume recently published in English asThe Trinity and the Kingdom of God, Jürgen Moltmann attempts to develop a comprehensive doctrine of the trinitarian being of God taking up and expanding themes already set forth in such earlier works asThe Crucified God, The Church in the Power of the Spirit, and several journal articles dealing with the ‘trinitarian history of God’. Throughout these works Moltmann was concerned to demonstrate the openness of the being of God for man and history and toward the future. The trinitarian differentiation and unity of God, he argued in various ways, is to be closely identified with the events of salvation history, especially the cross of Jesus. In his most recent book, he attempts to systematise this approach to the doctrine of God through a ‘salvation historical’ and ‘social’ doctrine of the Trinity. This work represents a major contribution to trinitarian thought and is both complex and wide-ranging in its treatment of the subject. It will be our concern here simply to investigate some of the major themes related to the problem of God's relationship to history, that is, God's ‘historicality’.

Teilhard De Chardin's Spirituality of the Cross

AbstractThis article studies the spiritual theology of the cross in the writings of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. In Teilhard's books and articles the accent falls on the cross as a symbol of progress. The cross stands for Jesus' positive act of saving the world through his death; it represents, too, Christian life as a sharing in the cross of Jesus through the labor and pain of human progress. In his spiritual notes, however, Teilhard takes a different perspective. His own meditations on the cross center not on the cross as a positive symbol of personal and collective progress through struggle, but rather on death as the ultimate fragmentation, and as an apparent dead end that is the final passage to Jesus Christ.

The Love of God and The Cross of Jesus by R. Garrigou-Lagrange, O. P.

The Love of God and The Cross of Jesus by R. Garrigou-Lagrange, O. P.

The Love of God and the Cross of Jesus by Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O. P., The Three Ages of the Interior Life by Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O. P.

The Love of God and the Cross of Jesus by Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O. P., The Three Ages of the Interior Life by Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O. P.

Book Review: The Love of God and the Cross of Jesus

Book Review: The Love of God and the Cross of Jesus

Servant of the Servants of God

In words familiar to us all St. Paul observes that in Christ there is “neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free.” This is usually, and I think correctly, not taken to mean that the Apostle's ideal is the abolition of human distinctions in a blank uniformity. His own love for the figure of the Body with its various members suggests rather the maintenance of differences, freed from the stigma of inferiority, in the harmony of corporate life. We were reminded last year of the importance of the Barbarian, that is the non-Greek element in the Christian tradition. My subject this address is one of the chief representatives of another element—the Roman. Neither in the passage just quoted nor in the similar one in Galatians does the Roman appear in St. Paul's listing of the differences capable of being united in Christ. But St. John tells us that the titulus upon the cross of Jesus was written in Latin as well as in Hebrew and Greek. Pious as well as scholarly comment has seen in his emphasis on this point a reference to the place of Roman along with Greek and Jew in the Christian body, and in so doing has probably sensed correctly the intent of the Evangelist. Certainly the Roman striving for liberty under law is of great concern for us today, when the alternative to law appears to be not anarchy but despotism.