Earthly Jesus Research Articles

On Docetic Christology in Early Christianity. Part 3.2

The so-called docetic Christology was based on the idea that the earthly Jesus and the heavenly Christ were two different persons; it was Jesus who suffered on the cross, whereas Christ just entered Jesus’ body for a while and abandoned it before his death on the cross; consequently, the suffering of Christ was mere appearance. Based on some passages from Gnostic texts containing examples of docetic Christology, the author attempts here to trace the life of that concept, starting with the New Testament (Pt. 1: Synoptic Gospels). In previous parts of the article (Pt. 2.1; 2.2; 2.3; 2.4), he analyzed such Paul’s passages as Rom. 1.3–4, Gal. 4. 4–7, 1Cor 8.4–6, Phlp. 2.5–11, Col 1.15–20; in Pt. 3.1, the subject of research was 1John 4.2–3; 2John 7 and some related sayings from the Letters of Ignatius. In this part, the author discusses some (antidocetic) problems of the Gospel of John. To be continued.

On Docetic Christology in Early Christianity. Pt. 3.1

According to the doctrine of the so-called docetic Christology, the earthly Jesus and the heavenly Christ were two different persons; it was Jesus who suffered on the cross, whereas Christ just entered Jesus body for a while and abandoned it before his death on the cross; consequently, the suffering of Christ was mere appearance. Based on some passages from Gnostic texts containing examples of docetic Christology, the author attempts here to trace the origin of that concept, starting with the New Testament (Pt. 1: Synoptic Gospels); in previous parts of the article (Pt. 2.1; 2.2; 2.3; 2.4), he analyzed such Pauls passages as Rom. 1.34, Gal. 4.47, 1Cor 8.46, Phlp. 2.511, Col 1.1520; in this part he is dealing with the writings of the so-called Johannine corpus, i.e., John and 12 John. To be continued.

On Docetic Christology in Early Christianity. Part 2.4

According to the doctrine of the so-called docetic Christology, the earthly Jesus and the heavenly Christ were two different persons; it was Jesus who suffered on the cross, whereas Christ just entered Jesus body for a while and abandoned it before his death on the cross; consequently, the suffering of Christ was mere appearance. On the basis of some passages from Gnostic texts containing examples of docetic Christology, the author attempts here to trace the origin of that concept, starting with the New Testament (Pt. 1: Synoptic Gospels); in the previous parts of the article (Pts. 2.1; 2.2; 2.3), he analyzed such Pauls passages as Rom. 1.34, Gal. 4.47, 1Cor 8.46, Phlp. 2.511; in this part, he is dealing with Col 1.1520. To be continued.

On Docetic Christology in Early Christianity. Pt. 2.3

According to the doctrine of the so-called docetic Christology, the earthly Jesus and the heavenly Christ were two different persons; it was Jesus who suffered on the cross, Christ just entered Jesus body for a while and abandoned it before his death on the cross; consequently, the suffering of Christ was mere appearance. On the basis of some passages from Gnostic texts containing examples of docetic Chrstology, the author attempts here to trace the origin of that concept, starting with the New Testament (Pt. 1: Synoptic Gospels); in the previous parts of the article (Pt. 2.1; 2.2) he analyzed such Pauls passages as Rom. 1.34, Gal. 4.47 and 1Cor 8.46; in this part he deals with Phlp. 2.511. To be continued.

The insignificant impact of the historical Jesus

There is a natural tendency in the church to idealise the historical Jesus. This may lead to believers turning Jesus into an ideal moral or religious exemplar or lead to a prosperity gospel by predominantly focusing on the miraculous power and accomplishments of the earthly Jesus. This depiction of Jesus is in sharp contrast to the rejected and crucified Lord. This article follows a systematic theological methodology by challenging the theological framework which leads to the idealised perception of Jesus as a super-hero. The article does so, by reconsidering the interpretive framework employed to understand the inter-relationship between the person and actions of the historical Jesus, and the kingdom of God breaking through. I argue that the eschatological hermeneutical approach to salvation history best accommodate the tension between ‘consistent’ and ‘realised eschatology’, and help the church overcome the temptation to turn Jesus into a universal spiritual symbol or moral exemplar. The eschatological hermeneutical approadch to salvation history often focuses on the death and resurrection of Jesus, but I contend, should be expanded to include the life and ministry of Jesus. In this article it is argued that Jesus came to share in our human weakness and fallibility. Jesus fully experienced the ‘not yet’ of the Kingdom, by identifying and sharing in our lack of success. The unique character of Jesus as ‘God who became human’, sets him radically apart from all other humans and nullifies any attempt to idealise him. The resurrected and glorified Jesus whom the church worships, is and remains the crucified and rejected Messiah.Contribution: The implications of the research will radicalise the believers’ understanding of the significance of the incarnation. It challenges some of the assumptions regarding Jesus’ power to help believers be successful in life. The article also holds pastoral implications for all those who experience the pain of failure, rejection and insignificance.

What Jesus Did, Does and May Do in Future: Gospel Miracles, Human Augmentation, Transhumanism and the Future of New Testament Studies

The quest of New Testament studies for a well-resourced future would be substantially aided by its explicit abandonment of a narrow methodological focus in favour of building links with other disciplines and by its acknowledgment that exegetical insights may arise from examining the impact of biblical texts down the centuries. In the potential appropriation of Jesus by Christian transhumanists interested in human bodily enhancement, for example, the healings of his earthly ministry are ignored because they are understood to restore human bodies to a previous form (a position recognizable in much of New Testament scholarship) rather than augment them to a new one. Building on deaf nineteenth-century interpretations which see the mental abilities of the deaf man in Mk 7.32-37 as being enhanced beyond human norms by Jesus, this article examines the healings of three blind men (Mk 8.22-26, Mk 10.46-52 and Jn 9.1-41). While the Johannine blind man is explicitly said to be blind from birth (whatever New Testament translations have often been made to say!), this article proposes that Blind Bartimaeus in Mk 10 should also be viewed this way. While their becoming sighted restores them to a common human pattern, their lack of prior sighted-experience means that it is their ability to see instantly that strongly implies the presence of an augmentative element to their healings. A postscript notes the different attitudes to the permission required to transform the human body within these narratives and suggests transhumanists consider the ethical implications of each story carefully before they incorporate the earthly Jesus into their arguments.

“En Christō” as Pauline Argument against Synoptic Demonology: Implications for the Church in Africa

There is no doubt that exorcism of demons is a central feature in the synoptic presentation of the works of the earthly Jesus. This central issue among the synoptic writers is absent in the gospel according to John and in the writings of St Paul. This article argues that a plausible explanation of this absence is that the issue of demonic possession was not important to the communities founded among the Hellenistic Christians of Asia Minor. Instead of presenting the encounters between Jesus and the demons, Paul presents the incorporation into Christ as a definitive victory over the forces of sin and evil. The Christian incorporated “in Christ” has won the battle over the devil. Understanding and implementing this Pauline vision among African Christians is a better missionary approach than the current chasing after demons that characterize contemporary Christianity in Africa.

Having ‘Ears to Hear’: Jesus, Gethsemane, and Epistemology

The New Testament synoptic Gospels suggest an epistemology exemplified by Jesus in Gethsemane and in his use of parables. This article explains the epistemology in terms of reconciliatory evidence and knowledge of God as sought by Jesus. The synoptic Gospels use Jesus’s kind of obedience in Gethsemane to characterize a receptive human mode for God to self-manifest and thus to anchor reconciliatory knowledge. This mode includes Gethsemane-style acquaintance with and conviction by God’s perfect will in conscience. The article proposes that a non-cooperative human response can prompt divine hiding for good redemptive reasons. In illuminating what it is to have ‘ears to hear’ God’s word, the article reveals a unity between knowledge of the earthly Jesus and knowledge of the risen Jesus. The article draws from the apostle Paul for some helpful elucidation.

Exalted Above the Heavens: The Risen and Ascended Christ

Peter C. Orr is lecturer in New Testament at Moore College, Sydney, Australia. In his new book, Orr attends to what he considers a neglected topic in NT studies—the ascension and exaltation of Christ. Portions of the text are new material, while other parts are condensed versions of Orr’s earlier work in Christ Absent and Present published by Mohr Siebeck in WUNT. It is important to note that Orr is not examining the ascension as simply a past event but, rather, in terms of Christ as he is currently seated at God’s right hand. To these ends, the volume unfolds with an examination of the exalted Christ through the lens of his identity, location, and activity.After a brief introduction in ch. 1, Orr launches into the identity of the exalted Christ through the lens of the earthly Jesus (ch. 2). Chapters 3 and 4 pursue the same ends, but from the perspective of the Spirit and church, respectively. Chapter 5 transitions to the location of Christ. This chapter and the three that follow analyze Christ’s location from the perspective of his absence. Orr begins his analysis with attention to the Gospels and the book of Hebrews. Chapter 6 discusses the body of the exalted Christ, focusing on the aspects of the physical, heavenly, spiritual, discrete, and glorified. Chapter 7 resumes the emphasis on the location of Christ but from the perspective of Paul. Orr masterfully dissects Paul’s emphasis on union with Christ with the seemingly contradictory teaching in the Gospels that Christ is bodily absent from the earth—a teaching that Paul also affirms. Chapter 8 continues to explore the synthesis of Christ’s presence and absence. Orr argues that these aspects of Christ’s location are not contradictions but mutually informing. In the last two chapters, Orr summarizes his findings and explores their consequences for Christ’s activity on earth (ch. 9) and in heaven (ch. 10). Chapter 11 offers some theological and pastoral reflections. The arrangement of the chapters is fascinating. In some cases, Orr starts with the Gospels and sequentially moves to Paul’s epistles. In other cases, Orr takes a more systematic approach by grouping various strands of evidence together under a specific theological topic.Overall, Orr’s treatment of the material is careful and balanced. Some of his scholarly interaction is with the seminal scholar of a particular controversy, while other interactions delve into the most current literature. This diversity in discussion is testimony to the breadth of the volume’s research while still being only 200 pages. One question that lingered was the placement of the sixth chapter. In chs. 5, 7, and 8, Orr addresses the location of Christ. On the one hand, ch. 6 appears to be a digression because of its focus on the body of Christ, but on the other hand, the body of Christ is Paul’s starting point for discussing the location of Christ, which is the subject of ch. 7. Unexpected delights include Orr’s attention to the absence of Christ. By exploring this aspect of Christ’s existence, Orr is able to make a substantive case for Christ’s location by where he was not. Also, Orr’s discussion of the differences in Christ and Spirit were illuminating for a deeper understanding of Trinitarian theology. This volume is a welcome addition to the literature on the ascension and exaltation of Christ. Hopefully, its presence will spur on more attention to this ignored subject.

The radical embodiment of God for a Christology of a new era

The research focussed on the embodiment of God and approached this theme through a discussion on the deep incarnation of God in Christ. This article provides an overview of the existing literature on incarnation. Jesus Christ made God human and understandable. Theology is placed in the sphere of humanity by the humanness of Jesus. This positioning of theology in the sphere of humanity attended to the humanness of Jesus as a biological and social being, on par with human nature, in direct contact with other human beings. Jesus’ bodily existence makes his life and living inevitably fragile and vulnerable, but also one in solidarity with the ongoing misery of humans. Special attention was given to the Gospel of John and John 1:14 as an influential expression of the incarnation, and also to the concept of logos. The research attended to the implications of the embodiment of God and the way in which humans participate in the mystery of God’s revelation in Jesus Christ. This mutual participation implies that the relationship with God and the call to reflect God is done as embodied beings and not apart from human bodies. The discussion of deep incarnation and God’s radical presence in flesh motivated the conclusion that God is part and parcel of nature’s vulnerability, pain and suffering. Jesus’ powerlessness accentuated the dignity of all bodies, and that there are actually no marginal cases of being ‘human’. The radical embodiment of God, the body of the earthly Jesus, reminds followers of Jesus of the significance of leading creative lives, resulting in authentic Christian spirituality that is embodied and vulnerable.

The Spirit in Luke-Acts by Odette Mainville

Reviewed by: The Spirit in Luke-Acts by Odette Mainville Luke Macnamara OSB odette mainville. The Spirit in Luke-Acts (trans. Suzanne Spolarich; Woodstock, GA: Foundation for Pentecostal Scholarship, 2016). Pp. 322. $21.99. Following the publication of Gonzalo Haya-Prats’s monograph Empowered Believers: The Holy Spirit in the Book of Acts (Eugene, OR: Foundation for Pentecostal Scholarship, 2011), this is the second important work on the Spirit in Luke-Acts to be translated into English under the auspices of the Foundation for Pentecostal Scholarship (FFPS). As noted by Robert Menzies in his foreword, the intention is to make this work, which itself developed independently of Pentecostal scholarship, available to a wider scholarly (and Pentecostal) audience. The original French edition, L’Esprit dans l’œuvre de Luc (Montréal: Fides, 1991), was a revision of Mainville’s thesis under André Myre defended at the Université de Montréal in 1989. The translator is to be commended for preserving the dynamic and engaging style of the original. Mainville proposes to read the pneumatology of Luke-Acts in the light of a key statement of Peter’s Pentecost speech: “Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from God the promise of the Holy Spirit, he [Jesus] has poured out this that you both see and hear” (Acts 2:33). Working within Hans Conzelmann’s framework of three epochs in salvation history according to Luke—that of the OT, that of Jesus’s ministry, and that of the church—M. situates the key verse (Acts 2:33) at the junction of the latter two periods (see p. 3) and views it as a hinge upon which the pneumatology of Luke-Acts is articulated. The conception, baptism, and prophetic ministry of the earthly Jesus lead to his resurrection, exaltation, and reception of the Spirit as summarized in the first half of this verse, while the prophetic ministry of the disciples originates with Jesus’s outpouring of the Spirit that he received from God, as summarized in the latter half of the verse. The Spirit is understood as “the unifying principle between the two eras” (p. 176). [End Page 532] Mainville adopts a literary and redactional approach to interpret the key verse (Acts 2:33) in its proximate (with particular attention to the period between the resurrection and Pentecost), and wider (the lead-up of Jesus to his exaltation and the events subsequent to the outpouring of the Spirit) contexts. The promised Spirit (Luke 24:49; Acts 1:4–5, 8) is conspicuously (seen and heard) received at Pentecost (Acts 2:1–4) and explained in Peter’s speech to the observers. The emphasis on the OT background, the redactional choices of Luke and the literary parallels (now commonplace) constitute highlights that may reward even contemporary readers. There is extensive and fruitful engagement with European scholarship but no interaction with the emerging Pentecostal scholars of the period. At times, Conzelmann’s three-epoch temporal framework (reflective of the original date of M.’s work), appears to overly influence the analysis. Characters’ possession of the Spirit (being filled with the Spirit) is often interpreted within this framework. Jesus is perceived both as unique in relation to the other Spirit-filled characters of Luke 1–2 and also, especially through his baptism, as a model for the Pentecost experience of the apostles. The examination of the earthly Jesus’s divine identity would have been more balanced by a closer examination of his relationship to God as well as to the Spirit. While scholars might propose other verses as key to Lucan pneumatology, the study has built a convincing case for the importance of Acts 2:33 for understanding the pneumatology of Luke-Acts, and indeed its christology and ecclesiology. Given this theological focus, it is surprising that God (the Father) is only cursorily mentioned in the analysis, in view of God’s central role in both Jesus’s exaltation and the bestowal of the Spirit in the specific key verse, but also in the wider narrative. Despite the fact that it is over a quarter of a century since this work was published, it marked the beginning of M.’s distinguished...

Jesus’ Philoi vs. Jesus’ Douloi: Conflicts over the Paraclete’s Function and Authority in the Johannine Community

This study discusses the Paraclete-related texts in the Fourth Gospel concerning the competition for authority between the Beloved Disciple’s written testimony and the Paraclete’s prophetic messages. The Johannine community experienced an internal conflict between the two groups, i.e., Jesus’ friends and Jesus’ slaves. Each group held its view on the function and authority of the Paraclete. The former understood the Paraclete as a reminder to the disciples of what Jesus already taught during his earthly ministry, as well as an interpreter of such teachings; it promoted the authority of the written tradition through the Beloved Disciple’s testimony. The latter, nevertheless, viewed the Paraclete as intending to reveal new teachings beyond those of the earthly Jesus; it advocated the authority of prophetic activities in the community, relying on the Paraclete. The evangelist supported the friend group, contending for the reliability and authority of Jesus’ tradition via the Beloved Disciple’s tradition preserved in the Gospel.

Jesus and the Spirit in Paul’s Theology: The Earthly Jesus

A comprehensive understanding of Paul’s christological monotheism must account for what Paul says about God’s Spirit in Jesus’ earthly life. Based on an analysis of relevant Pauline passages, I argue that Paul knows and affirms the tradition of Jesus’ Spirit-anointing as God’s Son and also understands Christ as having been raised through the Spirit. But Paul does not draw particular attention to these things. He draws attention to the risen Lord, who, together with God the Father, is the source of the Spirit to believers (Rom 8:9; Gal 4:6). Although Paul does not have a Spirit christology, he does see Jesus’ Spirit-anointing as integral to Jesus’ sonship and messianic mission, and he sees Jesus in some respects as a pattern for God’s people in their experience of the Spirit. Finally, I propose how the humanity and divinity of Christ can be seen in relation to the Spirit within Paul’s christology.

Skąd Kościół? Od teologii liberalnej do Antona Vögtle

The article presents the evolution of the discussion about the origins of the Church from liberal theology to Anton Vogtle. Authors of the “first consensus” of the historical-liberal school (Harnack, Loisy) questioned the presence of any form of organised Church in the life and teaching of Jesus. The “new consensus” of the eschatological New Testament school (Cullmann, Oepke, Beetz) described the Church as God's People of the ultimate times, whose foundations are the life and teaching of earthly Jesus. The ultimate foundation of the Church occurred during Jesus' death and resurrection. It was confirmed by an eschatological gift of pouring of the Holy Spirit on the day of the Pentecost. The success of the “new consensus”, which is also linked to traditional Catholic ecclesiology, was seriously undermined by Bultmann. Later theological writing (Petersen, Vogtle) excludes earthly Jesus (or at least some of His actions) from the formative period of the Church and point to the post-Paschal period. The resurrected Lord, through pouring of the Holy Spirit and cooperation (synergy) with His disciples, establishes and builds up His Church. In this respect the Church is not as much a ready-made establishment but a process (“permanent ecclesiogenesis”). Its origins are found in the relationship between Jesus and the idea of God's Kingdom, His disciples, and in the mystery of His death and Resurrection.

Søren Kierkegaard’s Historical Jesus as the Christ of Faith

Abstract In The Concept of Irony (1841) Kierkegaard employs tendency criticism in his analysis, showing how the picture of Socrates is highly dependent upon the perception of the authors describing him: Xenophon, Plato and Aristophanes. Further, in Philosophical Fragments (1844) and the Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), following up on Lessing’s problem, if anything historical is capable of offering a point of departure for an eternal consciousness, he develops his paradoxical Christology claiming the divine not to be directly recognizable. Accordingly, one could imagine that Kierkegaard could accept the result of historical critical scholarship claiming the dependence of the gospel stories, on their authors’ perception of Jesus. However, Kierkegaard reads the gospels as if biblical criticism did not exist. The earthly Jesus of the gospels not only is the Christ, but he also has become so without the confession to him as the resurrected Lord. Thus Kierkegaard totally eliminates the “fact” that we have access to the historical Jesus through the reception of his believers alone

JESUS AND HIS APOSTLES AS PROPHETS PAR EXCELLENCE IN LUKE-ACTS

In Luke-Acts, Jesus and his Apostles are characterized by language that is reminiscent of the Old Testament prophets, particularly Moses and Elijah. This article atttempts to understand the meaning of such characterization in the narrative world of Luke-Acts. This world includes the frameworks of Judaism of the first century as a hierocratic symbolic empire, the perception of the prophet par excellence like Moses in Judaism, and the plot and geographical movement of Luke-Acts. This article argues that the earthly Jesus (Lk. 4:16-30) and the Twelve Apostles after the Pentecost (Acts 2) are characterized in Luke-Acts as prophets par excellence who confront the current hierocratic symbolic empire, participating in the making and renewal of the Covenant, which underlies the identity of God’s people.

Resurrection-Faith and the ‘Historical’ Jesus

It is clear that a remarkable Jesus-devotion, in which Jesus was accorded unprecedented kinds of reverence, was central in early Christian faith from its earliest extant expressions, and represents a significant escalation from the kinds of reverence that followers expressed during Jesus’ earthly ministry. This devotion seems to have been prompted by the conviction that God had raised Jesus from death and given him heavenly glory. The impact of Jesus’ own activities was certainly a factor, but experiences of the risen Jesus were crucial in generating this belief. Moreover, Jesus’ resurrection meant a resounding vindication of the earthly Jesus. Belief in Jesus’ personal resurrection, thus, contributed strongly to interest in Jesus’ own activities and teaching, the formation and circulation of Jesus-tradition, and the composition of narrative accounts of his career. In short, the earliest ‘quest for the historical Jesus’ was prompted by the conviction that he had been resurrected.

Mk 16,1-8 als ursprünglicher Schluß des Markusevangeliums – ein neuer Blick auf ein altes Problem

In his Gospel Mark extends the idea of the sonship of God and its related authority to the earthly Jesus and his deeds and words. Against this background the gospel can be interpreted as a new aspect, which complements and emphasises the kerygma of Christ already found within Mark’s community. In this respect the Gospel of Mark provides a theological interpretation of the life of Jesus by integrating a kerygma of the risen Christ as υἱὸς θεοῦ that amongst his recipients already existed. Mark finished his Gospel in 16:8 without providing accounts of the Epiphany of Christ for two reasons. Firstly, in order to avoid impact on the integration and readjustment of the kerygma of Christ he intended to achieve with his gospel; secondly, he assumed that his readers both believed in the risen Christ to be the υἱὸς θεοῦ and already knew about his return to his disciples. The evangelist intended 16:1-8 to be a connecting passage between the new aspect of the kerygma of Christ as implied by his work and the kerygma known by the community receiving the gospel because he was not able or did not wish to display the latter explicitly in his work due to the fact that by doing so would have run contrary to his actual theological and literary intentions.

The pacifist Jesus and the violent Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew

The Gospel of Matthew presents two starkly different depictions of Jesus. The earthly Jesus of the past is a pacifist who teaches non-violence, compassion, non-retaliation, forgiveness and love of enemies, and he lives his life according to these ideals. The other Jesus is the eschatological figure of judgement who is the antithesis of the earthly Jesus. This Jesus is violent, merciless and vengeful in his treatment of the wicked. The evangelist constructed and promoted this terrible figure of judgement to assist his readers to cope with certain situations of crisis, but in doing so he paid a steep christological price by presenting Jesus in contradictory terms.

The Jesus of Paul: A contribution from the social sciences

The letters of Paul speak more frequently of the resurrected and exalted Jesus than they do of the earthly Jesus. Nonetheless, this does not mean that the apostle and his addressees did not know the teachings and main events of Jesus’ life. Their insistence as to the heavenly identity of Jesus is as likely to have been motivated by contextual factors which guided the development of the primitive Christological confessions which Paul received in the years after his conversion. This article will focus on two of these factors: the configuration of the Christian communities of the Diaspora as foreign cults in a context of religious plurality and the new revelatory experiences which triggered the formation of a binitarian faith.Determining the relationship between Jesus and Paul is one of the fundamental tasks of those who, like Prof. Andries van Aarde, study the origins of Christianity and the beginnings of Christian theology. The basic question in this regard, at least as it has been formulated recently by David Wenham (1995), is whether Paul was a follower of Jesus or the founder of Christianity (see also Wedderburn [1989] and Barbaglio [2006]). In this brief article, I would like to consider one aspect of this general topic and to offer a few suggestions that might contribute to a better understanding of the peculiar vision of Jesus that we find in the letters of Paul. In them, in fact, the apostle moves from the incarnation to the death and resurrection, leaving in the shadows the activity and teaching of Jesus to which the gospels subsequently give so much importance.This contrast raises some questions concerning the knowledge which Paul had of the Jesus tradition and the value he accorded to it: What did he know about Jesus? Did he know the traditions which the evangelists later collected? Why does he not refer to them in his letters more frequently? By contrast, why does he give so much importance to the death and resurrection of Jesus and to Jesus’ divine condition?