Jesus

Bauckham’s Jesus and The God of Israel (pt. 2): Other Studies in NT Christology

/ davidsschrock

Bauckham, Richard. Jesus and the God of Israel: God Crucified and Other Studies on the New Testament’s Christology of Divine Identity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008.

Chapters 2-8

Chapter 2 was first published in Out of Egypt, volume 5 in the Scripture and Hermeneutics series, and addresses the “problems of monotheism” in recent interpretation. Bauckham spends over twenty pages addressing current opponents of biblical monotheism (i.e. Nathan McDonald: monotheism as an organizing principle (Enlightenment); Robert Gnuse: monotheism as evolutionary model (history of religions)), and then appeals to early sources and the biblical canon to show how monotheism is understood biblically. Scripture reserves unique and unparalleled language for God. Moving from Old to New, Bauckham shows how NT texts like Rom. 28-30; 1 Cor. 8:1-6; John 10:30 use monotheistic texts from the OT in ways that preserve the singular nature of God and yet expand the application to include the identity of Jesus.

Chapters 3-5 consider three biblical concepts or themes that relate to the topic of monotheism and Jesus identity. Chapter 3 makes the case that El Elyon is not akin to the gods of Greek mythology, who exist in some kind of pantheon or divine council. Rather in the biblical witness, El Elyon refers to the God who is utterly transcendent, unique, and solely Divine. Bauckham distinguishes between ‘exclusive’ and ‘inclusive’ monotheism (108), and proves from texts like Deuteronomy 32:8-9 and other Jewish literature that the God of Israel is exclusively God. Moving from uniqueness in name and identity to uniqueness in worship, Bauckham considers the worship of Jesus in chapter 4. Since worship is absolutely reserved for God alone (cf. Ex. 20:1-3), it would be forbidden for Jesus to receive worship unless he was God. Bauckham points this out and then describes the historical records to prove how the early church unanimously worshiped Christ, proving again the mutual identification of Jesus and God. Finally, in chapter 5, Bauckham considers the “throne of God and the worship of Jesus.” Like in the last chapter, worship of Jesus proves his identification with God, but now Bauckham goes a step further highlighting the way Jesus shares in God’s throne. Speaking of Daniel 7, he writes, “the Son of Man participates in God’s unique sovereignty, and accordingly portrays him seated on the divine throne” (170). This OT vision is corroborated by the New Testament’s unique use of Psalm 110 and John’s apocalypse, where both indicate a kind of shared throne. Bauckham’s conclusion is that this again proves his thesis.

Finally, chapters 6-8 each look at a different NT author and the way they worked out Jesus divine identity. Chapter 6 looks at the apostle Paul; chapter 7 examines Hebrews; and chapter 8 finishes with a study of Mark. With Paul, Bauckham finds that his interpretations are unique and unprecedented in antecedent Jewish literature. Therefore, the kind of exegetical method he employed is not appropriated from his culture, but was revealed to him—probably on the road to Damascus, certainly by the Spirit of Christ. This interpretive novelty resulted in theological formulations of Christ’s divine Sonship that transcend Jewish contemporaries. The book of Hebrews is no different. From the “full divinity of the Lord” described in the opening chapters, to the heavenly mediation of his priesthood, to the simple ascription of Jesus unchanging nature (13:8), all of Hebrews points to Jesus identity as God. In chapter 8, Bauckham concludes with a brief exegetical consideration of Mark’s portrayal of the passion. He concludes once more that Jesus is identified with God in the book and that this theme reaches its zenith at the cross, where ironically as God fades in view, God’s son is revealing the very heart of God—“self-giving love.”[1]

In the end, there are points where Bauckham overstates his case and the steady drum he beats becomes drone-like.  Yet, this weakness only complements his greatest strength, which is convincingly proving his point and expounding his thesis—“the inclusion of Jesus in the unique divine identity” (19).  The reader, this one at least, comes away from the book feeling very compelled by his argument–Jesus shares the Divine Identity with the Father.  (I must insert here that Andrew Chester, in his book Messiah and Exaltation, is less convinced than this reader by some of Bauckham’s handling of Jewish literature–no doubt because he knows this material much better than I.  See Jim Hamilton’s book review, especially his notes on chapter 2, for a synopsis–or take out a loan and buy the book, $200+).

In all his biblical research, his arguments touch on many systematic doctrines—Christology, Theology Proper, and Theological Hermeneutics, being a few—yet, staying in his field of expertise, he has not interfaced his conclusions with doctrinal formulation. In this way, his conclusions seem to be most directed toward the biblical exegete. Therefore, there is much that can and should be done with this data to integrate it with other more philosophical and theoretical Christologies. Applications for Trinitarian research and theological method are only two possibilities. Moreover, how does the Holy Spirit fit into the paradigm?  And, how does this Christology of identity interface or improve functional and ontic Christologies?  Bauckham wants to dismiss these categories, I would prefer to reform/inform with more biblical data.

On the whole, Bauckham’s book is a fine work. He is a meticulous scholar, whose biblical theological insights are well-researched and spiritually-enriching. I look forward to the completion of his project on this subject.

[1] Here again, I hesitate, because I am not sure what Bauckham is saying about God (i.e. Theology Proper). Much of his language does not distinguish God the Father and God the Son; it only speaks of God and Jesus. This kind of generic language for the cross is unhelpful, because it was God the Son, alone, who died on the cross. Ironically, while Bauckham, in his whole presentation, is comparing Jesus to God, I recall little Trinitarian notions of Son and Father. It is primarily Jesus (the man) and God (the divine).  But I will not fault him greatly, because his work is intentionally exegetical, not systematic.

Worship Tests Truth :: Doctrine Determines Doxology

/ davidsschrock / 1 Comment

In Richard Bauckham’s book Jesus and the God of Israel (2008), the British NT scholar quotes John MacIntrye to make his final appeal that the worship of Jesus in the early church signifies a first-century consensus that Jesus was God, and that the notion of Jewish monotheism included Jesus.  Though Bauckham’s presentation deals with the history of theology, his point bears personal inquiry and application for those in the church today.  Here is the illuminating quote:

[We] shall not be satisfied with any christological analysis which eliminates from its conception of who he [Jesus Christ] is all valid basis for an attitude of worship to him.  It is on this very score that humanistic interpretations [read: the Jesus Seminar, Protestant liberalism, and strands of the emergent church] of the person of Jesus Christ fail, that they present to us someone who cannot sustain human worship; admiration, perhaps, even a sense of wonder at the courage he had in the face of danger and death, but never worship.  That is given only to God.

Theology that does not purify and empower doxology is false!  For worship is a telling litmus test for doctrine; and the veracity of any truth-claim must always generate worship.  Remember, believers worship in spirit and truth (John 4:24), and if our worship is weak, the cause may be the truths we believe.

Sadly, this worship-doctrine connection is often overlooked.  Many Christians have substandard beliefs about God and wonder why they struggle to have a quiet time.  They assume that their failing worship requires a newer and more sensational experience, but in truth, their hunger for God lags, because they have tasted vaporous imitations and turn again to empty substitutes.  Moreover, they, we, buy into the latest fads in evangelicalism, without considering how these new spiritualities of theological notions might impact their worship.  But as we are created to worship, surely, true truth must convince the mind and move the heart. 

So, the next time you encounter something about Jesus the Christ, ask yourself, is this a vision of God that will fuel my worship.  If the answer cannot be quickly affirmed, reconsidered the matter, and take pause before buying into the speaker, the system, or the soundbite.  Instead, return to the Scriptures to see the inspired revelation of God, Jesus Christ, who is the glorious Son of God, the eternal lamb, the desire of the nations, and the only one who can sustain a lifetime of white-hot worship.  Fill your heart with truths about Jesus, for nothing else will satisfy (cf. John 10:10).

May our worship purify our theology, and may all of our theology fuel worship.

Sola Deo Gloria, dss

Colossians 1:24: Suffering for the Sake of the Body (pt. 2)

/ davidsschrock / 4 Comments

My Final Answer:

The “lack” that Paul’s sufferings are filling up is the representative absence of Christ’s redemptive sufferings. Let me expound: What Christ did on the cross was a singular event in space and time, yet it was for all time and for all people. The distance between the singular event and the fullness of humanity is the lack. The application of reconciliation needs to be extended to all people. That is where Paul’s suffering, and your suffering and my suffering come in. We suffer to fill up the lack of proclamation of Christ’s propitiation. Therefore, what Christ propitiated, we proclaim. What he did, we declare. The redemption he accomplished we make known through declaration, and as the Lord ordains our sufferings for his sake, we demonstrate his death and resurrection in our bodily afflictions.

Commenting on this, John Piper writes:

Christ has prepared a love offering for the world by suffering and dying for sinners. It is full and lacking nothing—except one thing, a personal presentation by Christ himself to the nations of the world. God’s answer to this lack is to call the people of Christ (people like Paul) to make a personal presentation of the afflictions of Christ to the world…In [our] sufferings they see Christ’s sufferings. Here is the astounding upshot: God intends for the afflictions of Christ to be presented to the world through the afflictions of his people (Desiring God, 225).

In short, Paul’s suffering validated and attested to the life-giving power of the message he proclaimed, so that in his life he demonstrated Christ’s sacrificial death and resurrection power (cf. Phil. 3:9-10).  In the church, the world is able to see the body of Christ. In the suffering of Christ’s body, they are given a living, breathing, suffering testimony of the savior who bled and died to make reconciliation with God possible. This was God’s design for his church from the beginning.  Reflecting on this call to suffer, Romanian pastor Joseph Tson comments:

[Speaking in first person, in the life of Paul, he says]: If I had remained in Antioch…nobody in Asia Minor or Europe would have been saved. In order for them to be saved, I have had t accept being beaten with rods, scourged, stoned, treated as the scum of the earth, becoming a walking death. But when I walk like this, wounded and bleeding, people see the love of God, people hear the message of the cross, and they are saved. If we stay in the safety of our affluent churches and we do not accept the cross, others may not be saved. How many are not saved because we don’t accept the cross? (Quoted by John Piper in Desiring God, 230).

Let me summarize: Christ’s sufferings redeemed; Paul’s sufferings reveal. They do not add to Christ’s all-sufficient work, but they do extend its all-sufficient power and message (cf. 2 Cor. 4:7-11). The purpose of God in Christ’s sufferings was to redeemed a people dead in trespasses and sins; the purpose of God in Paul’s sufferings was to bear witness to the sufferings of another, and amazingly Paul’s bodily afflictions were designed by God to advance that message.  So then, Paul’s sufferings for the gospel, and ours, are not supplementary, but complementary.  They are essential, not optional.

Jesus promised his followers a cross. He said that if the world hated the master, they would also hate his servants. Therefore, in telling the world about his saving work, we can expect to suffer. Yet, in that suffering we demonstrate in our flesh the power of God’s love and the very cross that we declare. When the world sees suffering, bleeding, dying Christians telling of their suffering, bleeding, dying savior with joy (“I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake,” Col. 1:24a), they are filling up what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions—namely the representative witness of the savior’s redemption. And in so doing, we follow in the faithful footsteps of Paul and we fill up what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions.

Lord Jesus, give us more grace to move towards the suffering you have designed for us to embrace in our bodies, and may the world know that while we suffer, we do it joyfully, looking forward to the resurrection of the body in the age to come.

Sola Deo Gloria, dss

The Bible in 3-D: Miles Van Pelt’s Biblical Theology

/ davidsschrock / 2 Comments

“From morning till evening [Paul] expounded to them, testifying of the kingdom of God and trying to convince them about Jesus from the Law of Moses and from the Prophets (Acts 28:23).

In the last week, responsibilities at work have entailed a great amount of computer-related number crunching and data entry/processing. This is the kind of computer work that leaves your eyes bleary and your brain numb. But it is also a time when I can close the door, get the work done, and listen to some very edifying audio resources. This week’s choice has been Dr. Miles Van Pelt’s “hermeneutical” introduction to the Old Testament . A PhD graduate from SBTS and now a professor of Old Testament at RTS, Dr. Van Pelt, joins Craig Blomberg, and Thomas Schreiner in presenting 19 classroom lectures on the subject biblical theology.

To put it mildly, I have immensely enjoyed the rich canonical treatment of the Hebrew Scriptures and the intelligent pedagogical devises Dr. Van Pelt has employed to teach the subject clearly and faithfully. In fact, apart from a two-minute egalitarian-esque rant on Ruth as a “woman of power,” I commend this treatment very highly.

The most helpful section may have come in his second lecture, which Van Pelt calls “The Purpose Driven Bible.” In this lecture, Van Pelt takes extra time to unpack Acts 28:23 showing how the kingdom of God, the person of Jesus Christ, and the Law and the Prophets make up the three-dimensional center of the whole Scriptures. This approach is very compelling because it offers a singular vision of the Bible’s storyline while retaining the Bible’s vivid diversity and development. He offers a number of helpful illustrations to explain his biblical theology. One of them he frames bodily, that the central message is liken unto skin, a heart, and a skeleton. Let me explain.

Van Pelt likens the Kingdom of God to the skin of a person. In other words, you cannot know, see, touch, or come in contact with a person in any way in which you are not making encountering their skin. In the same way, nowhere in the Bible can you escape the the kingdom of God. It is the skin that holds everything together. The law is the law of the kingdom, the psalms are the songs of the kingdom, the history is the royal lineage to David, through David, to Christ the King, and so.

Next, he associates Jesus Christ with the heart. Jesus is the life-giving centerpiece of the Scriptures in whom all things find their life and meaning (cf. Luke 24:27; John 5:39). Take away the heart and you have a frigid, dead corpse. Take away Jesus Christ and the Bible becomes a lifeless book of antiquity.

Last, the OT is comprised of the Law and Prophets. Just like the skeletone gives shape to the body, these Old Testament books provide structure, support, and shape. Just as the skin takes on the shape of the skeleton, so the Kingdom of God is shaped by the canonical shape of the law and the prophets. Furthermore, as the heart fills the flesh and bones of the body, so Jesus Christ fills the Old Testament Scriptures.

Perhaps this description is a little visceral, but as Russell Moore has reminded us many times, the Son of God has hair, eyelashes, and fingernails. The Bible is an incarnational revelation of God, and I think Miles Van Pelt’s faithfully depicts this reality. Moreover, his whole argument is exegetical. Drawing his three-dimensional biblical theology from Luke’s account of Paul’s ministry in Acts 28:23: “From morning till evening he [Paul] expounded to them, testifying of the kingdom of God and trying to convince them about Jesus from the Law of Moses and from the Prophets.

Today, I go back to work and face many more computer operations, but I go knowing that I will get to hear more great biblical theology. Better than that, though, is the reality that the heart of the Scriptures, the one who reigns in the flesh and whose shadow is seen in all the Law and the Prophets, the man Jesus Christ, will go with me. That is good news and I pray in the spirit of Acts 28:23, that I too may from morning to evening tell others about the kingdom of God and persuade them that Jesus is the Christ.

Sola Deo Gloria, dss