religion
163
7 Who Jesus Was: Bringer of the Reign of God John 1:14
The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the
Father full of grace and truth.
John 14:9
Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father
John 8:12; 11:25-26; Hebrews 1:1-3 Deuteronomy 18:18
Micah 5:2 14:6-9 Hebrews 2:17-18; 4:15
Matthew 16:15-16 Acts 2:22-24 2 Peter 1:16
Luke 2:52 Romans 1:4 1 John 1:1-3
John 1:1-18 1 Corinthians 15:3-5;
John 3:16 13-17
John 6:35 Philippians 2:5-8
764
Judaism and Islam, as well as from other religions. For Christianity, o
CHRISTIANITY AND JESUS
salvation is not the result of prodi. gious self-discipline, as with religions
Christianity and other religions
Every religion contains two essential
elements. One is an analysis of our
fundamental problem as human
beings. The other is a description of its solution. All religions agree that there is something deeply wrong with us, that our lives are not what they were meant to be. We are alienated
of the East, nor is it our reward for living a good moral life, as with Judaism and Islam. In Christianity salvation is entirely the gift of God. It is something God does for us, not something we achieve or deserve,2 from the source of meaning and value. Every religion also describes a
way of overcoming this separation and achieving our destiny.
For the great religions of the East, such as Hinduism and Buddhism, the basic human problem is finitude, or finiteness. As finite individuals, we are distinct from ultimate reality. Salvation therefore consists in transcending the conditions of creatureliness and
Jesus more than a founder Another distinguishing feature of Christianity is the role which the founder plays in its doctrines. Almost every great religion traces its origin to the experience of some
outstanding personality. For Buddhism, it is Gotama; for Judaism, Moses; and for Islam, Muhammad. But in each case, the identity of the founder is incidental to the content of his teachings. The teachings deserve
to be believed because they are true, it is held, not because this particular person happened to discover or
proclaim them for the first time. The founder is important because of his teachings. Their significance is primary; his is secondary.
With Christianity, however, Jesus is not simply the one who first discovered or proclaimed its beliefs. He is himself the basic object of its beliefs, the essential content of its doctrines. The heart of Christian taitn Consists in certain claims about the significance of Jesus.3 For Christianity, then, it is the founder that makes his teachings important.
achieving undifferentiated unity with the divine. Our destiny is to merge our lives with the all-inclusive One. Religions of this kind typically prescribe courses of self-discipline to assist us in losing self-consciousness in our consciousness of the Eternal. For the great religions of Semitic origin-Judaism, Christianity, and Islam-the basic human problem is moral, not metaphysical. It is what human beings have done, not what they are. Salvation therefore consists in overcoming the consequences of sin, not in transcending the conditions of creatureliness. But at this point Christianity differs from
JESUS WAS: BRINGER OF THE REIGN OF GQn
165
We need to hear what Jesus said,
Christians believe, because of who Testament belief about Jesus, rather than departures from or distortions of it. and what he was. At the center of
Christianity lies a particular
understanding of Jesus; and in the final analysis, the Christian doctrine
of salvation is nothing other than the JESUS AND GOD
interpretation of Jesus' significance the
From the perspective of Christian faith, God and Jesus are inseparable, and each is the key to comprehending the other. As we saw in an earlier
for human existence. Soteriology is christology, we might say.
The person and the work of Christ
Christian theology traditionally divides the doctrine of Christ into
two parts. The first concerns the
nature, or person, of Christ; and the
other discusses his work, or what he
chapter, Jesus is basic to our understanding of God. God reveals himself to us more fully in the life and ministry of Jesus than anywhere
else in human history. The revelation of God in Jesus is so important that it
defines God. For Christians, God is
thus the one who sent Jesus, the accomplished. Recent Christian
thought places a priority on the work
of Christ.4 Many scholars believe that
this is closer to the spirit of the
earliest Christians, whose primary
reality who comes to expression in Jesus. Indeed, so close are God and
Jesus that we can say "God is Jesus."
interest was in what Jesus did, rather
than who he was. A preoccupation
with the person of Christ developed
later, they argue, in response to
various Christian heresies.
The identification of God with
Jesus has important implications for
Jesus as well. It means that wve
cannot think of Jesus without
thinking of God. Jesus came as one
sent to us, and the meaning of his life
depends entirely on his relation to the
One who sent him. So, it is equally
In some ways this is a healthy
emphasis. It prevents us from
slighting the work of Christ because
of an interest in his person. In reality,
however, it is impossible to separate the two. It would be unfaithful to the
New Testament to ignore the question of his identity; its writers were
appropriate to say, *"Jesus is God."
But what led the earliest
believers to this remarkable view of
Jesus? How could people whose
conviction that God is one was
Certainly concerned with the question
of who Jesus was. It is also possible to view the "christological formulas
absolutely basic to their taith ever
come to identify God with a
particular human being?
The belief that Jesus uniquely
nat came several centuries later as
CXpressions of the basic New represents
God arose from the
REIGN OF GOD
166
powerful manifestation of God's
presence in his life, combined with
his own testimony and that of the Old
Testament scriptures about his
identity. Its most compelling
component was his resurrection from
the dead.5 Some of the most familiar and
"Lord," "Savior," "Word," and SOn of God" all point to Jesus as the one who brings human beings and God together. The most comprehensive of these expressions is probably Messiah." Its Greek equivalent Christ," became another name for Jesus early in Christian history.
The basic meaning of the words most important statements in the New Testament express the unique relation between Jesus and God. "In
"Messiah" and "Christ" is anointed." From ancient times, Hebrew kings and priests were anointed as an indication that they were set aside for a special work. In the last couple of centuries before Jesus lived, the expectation developed among the Jewish people that a special leader would arise, an
the beginning was the Word, and the
Word was with God, and the Word was God .. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us...
"
(John 1:1, 14). "In Christ God was reconciling the world to himself.." (2 Cor 5:19). "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me" (John 14:6). As these and similar verses indicate, the earliest Christians found that God
anointed one, wh0 would restore the fortunes of Israel. With his leader-
came incredibly close to them in Jesus-so close, in fact, that the only way they could adequately express their experience was to speak of Jesus as the personal presence of God himself.
ship, Israel would gain her indepen-dence and the prophetic promises of national greatness would be fulfilled. In short, the Messiah would inaugurate the kingdom of God.
Jesus began his work surrounded with these messianic expectations. They provided a receptive atmosphere for his ministry, but they also generated widespread
The titles of Jesus The New Testament does not develop this idea at length in any one place, even though certain passages have the elements of a christological treatise. For the most part, its view of Jesus emerges from the numerous titles which it applies to him. In their distinctive way, the expressions "prophet," "suffering servant," "high priest," "Messiah," "Son of man,"
preconceptions as to what his mission involved. The content of Jesus teaching and the events of his life both fulfilled and disappointed the messianic hopes of his contemporaries. The four Gospels were written to demonstrate that he was indeed the Messiah (see John 20:30-31).
o JESUS WAS: BRINGER OF THE Rr
167
lesus and the kingdom of God
According to the first three
Gospels, the kingdom of God was the
theme of Jesus ministry. It was the
central topic of his preaching (Mark
1:14-15), as the Sermon on the
Mount indicates (Matt 5-7), and it
was the subject of many of his
famous parables. As we noted in
Chapter 1, the biblical expression
kingdom of God" refers primarily to
God's ruling activity rather than the
territory over which he rules. So, it
would be more accurate to translate it
deserve attention. Through Jesus'
ministry, the reign of God became a
present reality. And, the reign of God
became a present reality through Jesus. The reign of God is an
eschatological idea. It refers to
something that people associated
with the end of time. But Jesus
brought this eschatological reality into the present. Even though the full
establishment of God's reign lies yet
in the future, Jesus demonstrated that
it has nevertheless begun. Jesus' miracles, in particular, are
signs of God's kingdom. They show
that the kingdom is near, and they
illustrate the nature of life in the
"kingship of God," or "reign of
God." The burden of Jesus' ministry
was to make God's reign a living
reality for people and urge them to
welcome it into their lives.
The topic of God's reign has
stimulated a great deal of scholarly
discussion. One question it raises
kingdom. When the kingdom fully arrives, the miracles reveal, there will
be no hunger or disease. The forces
of nature, like the wind and waves,
will cease to threaten us. The forces
of darkness, the devil and his agents,
will have no power over us. And concerns the establishment of the
kingdom. Is it present or future? Was
it fully realized or only partially realized in Jesus' ministry? Another
question concerns the precise relation
of Jesus himself to the kingdom. The
kingdom was clearly important to
him, but how important was he to the
kingdom? It is clear that he pointed
people to the kingdom, but to what
extent did the kingdom depend on
him?
most important of all, death will no
longer tyrannize us, casting its long
shadow over human happiness. In
short, all the consequences of sin will
be removed, and human life will be
liberated to reach its full potential.
So, Jesus revealed that the reign of
God is not entirely future; it is a
dynamic present reality as well.
We observed above that for
Without pretending to grasp the
Complexity of these issues, we can
offer summary answers to these
questions by saying that Jesus both
promised and produced the reign of God. Both aspects of this claim
Christians Jesus not only inspires
faith; he is himself the central object
of faith. Similarly, Jesus not only
represents the kingdom of God; he is
the supreme agent of the kingdom.
God's reign comes about in and
REIGN OF GOD
168
God's kingdom is fundamentally a through his ministry. This is what makes the figure of Jesus so
important in human history. Since the
reign of God becomes a dynamic reality in the person of Jesus, people determine their relation to God's
a matter of values and attitu rather than power and position. The kingdom belongs not to the rich and powerful, not to the talented and intelligent, but to the poor and the meek, people the world views as losers, people who know howw dependent they are on God.
By far the greatest obstacle to believing that Jesus was the Messiah was the manner ot his death. His crucifixion initially shattered the hopes of his closest followers, and then made it extremely difficult for
kingdom by the way they respond to him.
The so-called "crisis in Galilee"
came shortly after Jesus fed the five thousand, one of the few miracles recorded in all four Gospels. Enthusiasm for his mission abounded, and large numbers of people were ready to proclaim him king. But Jesus frustrated their plans people to accept him, particularly if
they were Jews. None of their
expectations prepared them for a suffering Messiah. In fact, the very idea seemed a contradiction in terms.
when he insisted that their relation to the kingdom depended entirely on their personal response to him. Only if people accepted him as the source
of spiritual life could they enter the kingdom of God (John 6:26-59). Faced with such remarkable personal claims, many people lost hope that Jesus was the Messiah.
After all, the law of Moses places the curse of God on those who are
hanged (Deut 21:23). The crucifixion was indeed a stumbling block to the
Jews (1 Cor 1:23). Although much of what Jesus
said and did encouraged the belief that he was the hoped-for Messiah, other factors led to widespread disillusionment. Besides the close
JESUS' RESURRECTION
The importance of Jesus' connection he claimed between resurrection himself and the reign of God, people were also put off by Jesus' insistence that the kingdom of God has spiritual, as well as material and political, dimensions. God's reign reverses conventional political wisdom and overturns worldly schemes of power. As the Sermon on the Mount reveals, citizenship in
The strongest evidence of Jesus special relation to God was his
resurrection from the dead (e.g, Rom
1:4). The claim that Jesus had risen
lay at the very heart of apostolic faith. In one of his letters, Pau Summarizes early Christian preaching
by listing four items: Jesus' death,
burial, resurrection, and subsequen
WHO JESUS WAS: BRINGER OF THE REIGN OF GOD
169
appearances (1 Cor 15:3-5). The
apostles described themselves as
tnesses to the resurrection (Acts
2:23). It is impossible to overemphasize
the importance of the resurrection.
The event transformed the apostles
perspective on Jesus. It corrected
their earlier misunderstanding of his
mission and gave them courage to
fulfill the gospel commission. The
resurrection overturned the verdict
disciples, for example (John 20:19; Luke 24:31).
The evidence for Jesus' resurrection Over the years there have been many
questions about history's greatest miracle. The recovery of life after
death is so out of harmony with
ordinary experience that many people
doubt that it really happened. After
all, the only reports we have of the
event come from Jesus' ardent which human authorities had
rendered against Jesus, vindicating him and showing instead that his
executioners were lawless men (Acts
2:23). Besides confirming his identity,
Jesus' resurrection is significant for
every human being. It proves that
death is not the last word about
followers, and their stories of the
resurrection could be accounted for in
other ways. There are two major sources of
evidence that Jesus rose from the
dead. One is the empty tomb; the
other is the fact that he was seen. We
can see how they form a strong case
for the resurrection by examining some of the other explanationsof
each phenomenon.
human existence, that there is a
future beyond death (1 Cor 15:12-
20). His resurrection gives substance
to our hope for resurrection.
Jesus' resurrection also
illuminates the nature of the future
life, as we mentioned in the previous
chapter. It shows that its relation to
our present life is one of both
continuity and change. After his
resurrection, Jesus continued to exist
in a physical, or corporeal, form. He
still had a body. People could see
him, hear him, and touch him. He
still bore the marks of his crucifixion.
The empty tomb
To account for the empty tomb,
people have suggested three different
theories. One is that the women went
to the wrong tomb. Grief-stricken,
they lost their way in the early
morning, found an empty tomb, and
jumped to the conclusion that Jesus
was not dead, but alive.
Another explanation is that Jesus
never really died. Sometimes called
the "swoon theory, it proposes that
Jesus entered a coma on the cross and But at the same time, his body was
transformed in certain ways. He
mysteriously appeared and
aisappeared from the presence of his
was taken down as dead. In the cool
of the night he revived and made his
REIGN OF GOD
170
escape from the tomb.
The oldest explanation of the
empty tomb is that someone removed
the body. The embarassed guards
blamed his disciples. Other
possibilities include the Roman or
Jewish authorities, who
Jesus' death dashed their hopes and
left them fearful for their own safety There is no reason to believe that the Roman or Jewish authorities had the body in their possession. If so, thev could have squelched the rumors of his resurrection by putting it on
public display. The gospel could never have been preached in
Jerusalem if Jesus' body had been in the hands of those who put him to
understandably wanted to prevent a
theft by Jesus' followers. None of these theories stands up
under scrutiny. It is unlikely that the
women found the wrong tomb, for
several reasons. First, some of them
were present when Jesus' body was
first interred. Second, sorrowful as
they must have been on that Sunday
morning, they were not disoriented
by grief. They were in a practical frame of mind, as their concern about
having the stone removed indicates.
Third, their testimony alone would
not have been taken seriously in a
male-dominated society. As soon as
they heard of the empty tomb, Jesus'
disciples rushed to examine it for
themselves.
death. Consequently we are left with the
simplest, most convincing
explanation of the empty tomb. It is
the one first given to Jesus'
followers: "He is not here; for he has
risen" (Matt 28:6). The empty tomb is important
evidence for Jesus' resurrection, but
by itself it would never have convinced his skeptical and
disillusioned disciples. They believed
he was alive not merely because his
tomb was empty, but because they
saw him with their own eyes.
The idea that Jesus left the cross
alive is even more implausible. Pilate
was startled to hear that he had died
within a few hours of his crucifixion, and he confimed these reports before
releasing the body to Jesus' friends
(Mark 15:44-45). Moreover, the Roman soldiers surely knew their business well and would not have let
The resurrection appearances There are other ways to account for
the repots of Jesus' resurrection
appearances. One is the possibility that Jesus followers were simply
lying. Embarrassed by the failure of
their expectations, or unwilling to return to a life of toil, they decided to
tell people that Jesus was really alive
after all.
him escape alive.
The idea that Jesus' body was
removed is equally unconvincing. The disciples were certainly in noo condition to attempt such a feat.
Practically no one finds this
explanation plausible. Jesus'
JESUS WAS: BRINGER OF THE REIGN OF GOD
171
followers fully believed that they saw him after his death. "Their accounts of
the story certainly appear to be straightforward and uncontrived.
More important, many of them
suffered persecution, imprisonment, and death for maintaining that Jesus had come to life from the dead. It is
highly unlikely that a sizable group
of people would face death fora
claim they knew to be false. The
suggestion that the disciples were
deliberately lying is absurd. A more popular suggestion is
that the disciples were hallucinating
when they thought they saw Jesus.
They experienced something, but
they mistakenly interpreted their
experiences as encounters with the
risen Christ. They were
psychologically disoriented.
This explanation, too, is seriously
flawed. The reports of Jesus
appearances. There were several appearances, with days or weeks between them. Then, after about six weeks, they abruptly stopped, with the exception of Paul's vision on the
road to Damascus (1 Cor 15:8; Acts
9:4-5). If the appearances arose from Overactive imaginations, we would
expect a different pattern: either one
dramatic experience by itself, or a
rapid succession of appearances--a
kind of "chain reaction"-propelled
by the rumor that Jesus was alive, or
a continuation of appearances well
into the future. But none of these
Occurred.
Here again, the clearest, most
satisfactory explanation is the one
offered by the New Testament. After
his crucifixion Jesus came back to
life and during the next forty days
appeared to his followers form time
to time in different locations. Then he
ascended to heaven from the Mount
appearances fail to conform to
hallucinatory experiences. For one
thing, the mental outlook of the
disciples was not conducive to
hallucinations. They were devastated
by Jesus' crucifixion and never
expected to see him again. They were
skeptical of accounts that he was
alive. Thomas' attitude was typical:
of Olives (Acts 1:9), and his disciples
turned to the work he had given them
to do. Although the resurrection
appearances are strong evidence that
Jesus broke the power of death, we
must be careful in the way we think
about them. As the New Testament
describes the resurrected Jesus, he
Unless I see in his hands the print of
the nails, and place my finger in the mark of the nails, and place my hand
in his side, I will not believe" (John
20:25). This mentality would not lead
to hallucinations.
was not an object of ordinary sense
perception. So far as we know, he
appeared only to his followers, to
those who believed in him. Moreover,
he did not resume a conventional
Another important factor is the
frequency and duration of the
human existence. He no longer went
about with his disciples or ministered
REIGN OF GOD
172
the framework for most conservative publicly as he had before. Some
scholars suggest that the encounters
his followers had with him were
christologies.
more in the nature of "visions." Paul, THE DEVELOPMENT OF
for example, claims that the risen
Lord appeared to him (1 Cor 15:8).
But during his experience on the road
to Damascus, the event he probably
had in mind, Jesus appeared to him
from heaven, and he was the only
one in his traveling party who saw
him (Acts 9:3-7). Did Jesus really rise from the
dead? No amount of argument will
convince someone who rejects such a
thing as utterly impossible, but the
evidence of the empty tomb and the
resurrection appearances obliges us
to consider the question carefully.
Together, these phenomena support the conviction that Jesus is alive.
CHRISTOLOGY
Christological heresies
Christian theology often develops in reaction to heresy, just as you and I often discover what we believe by
responding to views we disagree
with. This was certainly true with the doctrine of Christ. The orthodox
formula, "two natures in one person,"
emerged as early Christians reacted
to views that would have weakened
the fabric of Christian faith.6
Slighting humanity Several heretical tendenciies
threatened the faith of the early
church in Jesus. One of the first was They show that believing in Jesus
resurrection is an intelligent,
responsible position. The resurrection has an important
bearing on the identity of Jesus, as
we mentioned above. It provided the
strongest evidence of his unique relation to God. It supported thee
conviction of those who knew him
that God was personally present in his life and ministry. This basic Christian claim emerges from the New Testament; but it was not fully
elaborated until many years later in the doctrine that Jesus had two
the tendency to slight the humanity
of Jesus in favor of his divinity. A
version of this heresy is called
"docetism," from the Greek word
meaning "to seem," or "to appear.
Docetists held that Jesus was really a
divine being who merely seemed or
appeared to be human. Some
evidently held such views during the
days of the apostles themselves, tor
we find them rejected in the writings
of the New Testament: "Every spirit
which confesses that Jesus Christ has
come in the flesh is of God, and natures, human and divine. This
doctrine deserves our attention, because it influences the way most of us think about Jesus, and it provides
every spirit which does not confess
Jesus is not of God" (1 John 4:2-3).
People with a background in
WHO JESUS WAS: BRINGER OF THE REIGN OF GOD
173
Greek thought might have found that there was never a time when he docetism attractive. Greek philosophy did not exist.8 typically drew a sharp distinction between spirit and matter, regarding
the former as vastly superior. With
such a view, the incanation-the idea of God taking on human nature,
with its physical, material qualities-
is repulsive. Hence, the conclusion that Jesus only seemed to be human;
he was really nothing but divine the
Confusing the natures Instead of slighting one nature in favor of the other, some heresies combined, or confused, the two natures so that one or the other was
effectively distorted. It was typically the human nature that suffered more.
According to one such view, the divine nature replaced the human will in Jesus and made his decisions. Such
whole time.
Slighting divinity There were also tendencies to slight the divinity of Jesus. One, called
"adoptionism," held that Jesus was
merely human to begin with, but at
some point he was elevated, or
adopted, to the status of God's Son.
Another extremely influential
view was called "Arianism," after its
leading proponent, Arius, a fourth-
century church leader in Egypt. This
was probably the most widespread
christological heresy in the history of
the church, and there are those today who hold similar views.7 Arians
believe that Jesus was the incarnation
a theory not only denies that Jesus
was fully human and fully divine; it
leaves us with a Christ who is really neither. Like the centaur of classical
mythology, who, as half man and half
horse, was neither one nor the other, this view portrays Jesus as an amal-
gamation of humanity and divinity.
Dividing the person
Another kind of christological heresy seemed to divide the divine and the
human into separate individuals. The
result was a kind of schizophrenia, in
which the consciousness of Jesus was
controlled by his divinity at certain
times, and by his humanity at others.
In reaction, the view that prevailed
insisted on the unity of Christ's
person. It held that Jesus was a single
of the Logos, a pre-existent, divine
eing, but they deny that this being existed forever with the Father. In
other words, they deny his eternity. They believe that he began to exist
sometime in the distant past, long before the creation of the world.
The Council of Nicea rejected Arianism in A.D. 325. Its participants nsisted that the Son was of "one
Substance" with God the Father and
center of consciousness, or a well-
integrated ego, to use contemporary
language.
The church's consensus
It is tempting to dismiss the ancient
christological controversies as so
REIGN OF GOD
drank (Mark 14:22-23; cf. Matt 11:19), and slept (Mark 4:38). He
much theological hair-splitting, but this overlooks the enormity of the
issue. The question of the person of Christ is not just a topic for rarefied
technical debate. It touches the very
also exhibited human emotions. On one memorable occasion, he wept out of sympathy for his friends (John 11:35). He appreciated human companionship and was hurt when people rejected him (see John 6:66 67). In short, although he was an extraordinary personality, there is nothing about the picture of Jesus which emerges from the Gospels that would lead us to describe him as
abnormal," or "'unhuman." We also see the humanity of
Jesus in the Gospel accounts of his childhood and youth, brief though they are. According to two of the Gospels, his mother did not become pregnant in the normal manner (Matt
1:18; Luke 1:30-35), and unusual circumstances accompanied his birth
(Matt 2:1-12; Luke 2:8-13). But we
know who his family was (Matt 1:1- 16; Luke 3:23-38) and where he grew up (Matt 2:32), and we are told that his growth followed the pattern of normal human development.
Perhaps the best summary of his
youth is this statement: "And Jesus
increased in wisdom and in stature,
heart of Christian experience.
Nothing less than the survival of Christian faith was at stake in these discussions. By turming away from one misconception after another, the
church sought a way to describe Jesus that would faithfully express its experience of him as the personal presence of God. It concluded that he is at once fully divine and fully human, and that he is a single person.
THE BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF CHRIST
It is certainly appropriate to ask if this doctrine is biblical. The
terminology and sometimes the pattern of thought seem different from what we find in the New Testament. We need to see if we can locate any precedents for these ideas in the biblical descriptions of Jesus.
Jesus was human and in favor with God and man
(Luke 2:52). It indicates that Jesus
matured symmetrically in all the
essential dimensions of human
For the most part, the humanity of Jesus was not an issue for the writers of the New Testament. The Gospels all portray Jesus with typically human characteristics. He had a
physical form, with familiar human needs. On occasion, he grew weary (John 4:6), hungry (Matt 21:18), and thirsty (John 19:28). He ate, and
existence: mental, physical, spiritual, and social. Equally important, it
implies that he did not possess
Superhuman powers, physically or
mentally. As a first-century Jew, he
WHO JESUS WAS: BRINGER OF THE REIGN OF GOD
175
shared the world view of his time. He
acquired a sense of his unique mission in life gradually, over a
period of years; it wasn't something
along with its various descriptions of im, put him in a class all by himself. He was every bit a human being, but he was more than a human as well.
he was bom with.
No doubt the most significant
aspect of Jesus' humanity was his
moral experience. He was susceptible to temptation and underwent severe
spiritual struggles. The Gospels
describe these experiences in graphic terms (Matt 4:1-12; 26:36-44; Mark
14:32-39; Luke 4:1-13; 22:39-42), and the book of Hebrews refers to the
For one thing, Jesus did things that no ordinary human could do. He
not only healed the sick, raised the
dead, and subdued the forces of nature; more significantly, he forgave sin, a prerogative of God alone (Mark
2:7, 10). The things he said also
distinguished Jesus from other human
beings. The title "prophet" fit him
naturally (see John 4:19), yet his
manner was unlike that of the reality of his temptations as a source
of encouragement to us (2:18; 4:15). As our high priest, Jesus can help us
in facing temptation, because he him-
self knows what it is like to be tested.
prophets before him. He spoke on
God's behalf with unprecedented
power and immediacy. Jesus never
said things like, "The Word of the The book of Hebrews develops the theological significance of Jesus
humanity at considerable length. His
humanity qualifies him to serve as
our high priest. To represent us
before God, he must be one of us,
and he is. He submitted to all the
Lord came to me." What he said was
the word of the Lord.
His unique relation to God also
appears in some of the titles the New
Testament applies to him: "Lord"
(Acts 2:36); "God" (John 20:28);: "I
am" (John 8:58; cf. Exod 3:14). Finally, and most prominently,
there are references to his
essential conditions of human
existence. Consequently, his priestly
ministry opens up "the new and
living way" that gives us access to
the presence of God (Heb 10:20).
preexistence as a divine being. The
most familiar appears in the opening
verses of the fourth Gospel. This
passage applies several significant
qualities to the Word (logos in
Greek): eternity ("in the beginning"); closeness to God ("with God");
divinity ("was God"); creative power
("all things were made through
him"); and life, or self-existence ("in him was life").
Jesus was more than human Jesus was unquestionably a human
being, as far as the New Testament is
concerned. But he was also an
exceptional human being; there were
things that distinguished him fromn
everyone else. The New Testament
records of things he said and did,
REIGN OF GOD
indicates what the incarnation Other passages also mention
preexistence, such as John 8:58:
"Before Abraham was, I am" (cf. Exod 3:14). Some of them describe Christ as the agent of creation. According to Col 1:16, "All things were created through him and for him." Similarly, the author of
According to these verses, which
involved for Christ's divinity (2:5-8). some scholars describe as a hymn9 Christ Jesus was originally in the form of God and enjoyed equality with God. But he emptied himself in taking human form, humbled himself and became obedient to the point of accepting death by crucifixion.
He did not cease to be divine when he became human, as we have seen, but something happened to his divinity, all the same. Even though God was in Christ, we might say, not all of God was in him,10
Some things clearly had to
change. Among them were certain qualities that are incompatible with genuine human experience. Because human existence is essentially bodily, or corporeal, Jesus could not retain the divine attribute of omnipresence. Similarly, human knowledge is essentially finite, or limited; so Jesus could not have been omniscient, or
Hebrews states that God created the world through the Son (Heb 1:2).
The idea of the incarnation
presupposes Christ's preexistence. It affirms that God the Son, coexistent and coeternal with the Father, assumed human nature, or became a human being, at a specific point in time. Furthermore, he remains divine during his earthly life. He also continues to exist as a human being after his resurrection and ascension, so the incarnation is forever. When God gave his Son to the world, it was a permanent gift.
JESUS' DIVINITY
all-knowing, and genuinely human at The idea that Jesus was (and is) both human and divine raises two obvious
the same time.
The emphasis in Philippians is on questions: What was the condition/status/function of his
the enormous condescension
involved in the incarnation. It calls divinity? And what was the condition/status/function of his attention to the dramatic change in
status which Christ underwent in humanity? Put another way, what did the Son give up when he assumed humanity? And what did he take on?
becoming human, rather than to divine qualities he left behind. He
descended from a position of
Supreme sovereignty to one ol complete submission; he went from Lord of all to servant of all. Instead
The Son's condescension A famous passage in Philippians or giving orders, he received them.
wHO JESUs WAS: BRINGER OF THE REIGN OF GOD
177
He submitted his will to the direction
of his Father, to the point of
accepting death in, the most
humiliating manner.
So complete was this change in
position that Paul says he emptied
himself in the process. He became
completely subservient to his Father's will. Throughout his lite, Jesus acted
only with a divine mandate, consistently refusing to take matters
into his own hands. As he said on
have removed him from servant
status and defeated one of the
purposes of the incarnation. Instead of giving him an
advantage, Jesus' possession of divine power was really a liability:It
provided an avenue for temptation. In
fact, it was precisely at this point that Jesus was first tested in the
wilderness. "If you are the Son of God," the tempter said, "command these stones to become loaves of
one occasion, "I can do nothing on
my own authority" (John 5:30). Jesus exercised tremendous authority, of course-in fact it was the mark of his
teaching (Matt 7:29)-but he
evidently did so only with his
Father's direction.
bread " (Matt 4:3). The suggestion
was pointless unless Jesus had the
power to do what he said. Its
objective was to entice Jesus to take
matters into his own hands and
abandon the position of a servant.
We can thus draw the following conclusions in answer to the
question, What did the Son give up in becoming human? He gave up the status and prerogatives of divinity, along with certain qualities that are
Divine power Jesus also possessed divine power. Otherwise, he could never have said
such things as "I am the resurrection and the life" (John 11:25) and "I have incompatible with genuine human
the power to lay [my life] down and I
have power to take it up again" (John
10:18). If Jesus had divine power, many
people believe, then he enjoyed an advantage over other human beings. He could escape from any difficulty and easily resist temptation. This Would be true if Jesus used his power for personal benefit or relied on it to
transcend his human limitations. In
experience. Divine power was available to him, but he never used it on his own.
The incarnation and the reign of God
The manifestation of divinity in Jesus' ministry tells us a great deal
about the reign of God. It indicates
that God wants to serve us, rather than rule us; and he wants love from us, not mere submission. He wants us to respond to him from an appreciation of his character. For this reason God's glory was "veiled" in
Tact, however, he did neither. He never performed a miracle to benefit himself or merely to satisfy curiosity (see Luke 23:8,9). To do so would
REIGN OF COD
is to do the will ofi him who sent and to accomplish his work" (John
178 me,
the person of Jesus, as Ellen G.
White often said. Instead of over-
powering our
senses with a display of 4:34); and, "The ruler of thien
his glory, Jesus manifested the true
character of God by a life of service
and sacrifice. "The Son of man also
4:34); and, "The ruler of this world has no power over me (John 14:30).
Such statements suggest that Jesus fundamental orientation to God was
one of obedience. He was naturally
inclined to do God's will. This
doesn't mean he couldn't sin, of
course, but it means that he would
have departed from his natural bent of mind in doing so.
Another reason to attribute
came not to be served but to serve,"
he said, "and to give his life as a
ransom for many" (Mark 10:45).
JESUS' HUMANITY
The status, or condition, of Jesus
humanity is also an object of wides-
pread discussion. Among Seventh-
day Adventists, for example, there is
a strong difference of views as to
whether he assumed a sinless or a
sinlessness to Jesus is his relation to
the human race. Paul compares Jesus
with Adam in an important passage
in Romans (5:12-21). The effects of
their actions are sharply different, of course. Adam brought us condem-
nation and death, while Christ brings us acquittal and life. But their rela-
tion to humanity is the same: What
they accomplished affects the entire race. It is therefore reasonable to con-
sinful human nature. The issue turns
on the question of how much like us
Jesus must be in order to be our
savior. Here we face an apparent dilemma. On the one hand, it seems,
clude that they began with the same moral posture. They were naturally loyal to God, and this loyalty was tested for both. Adam failed the test,
he must be one of us in order to save
us; but on the other, he must be dif- ferent, or he himself will need salva- tion.11 Those who emphas1ze the importance of similarity attribute a sinful humanity to Jesus; those im- pressed with the necessity for differ- ence maintain that his humanity was sinless.
and Christ passed it. A strong indication of Jesus
sinlessness is the content of his temp- tations. A spiritual nature dulled by the effects of sin often blunders into disobedience without realizing it. But Jesus had the spiritual sensitivity ot unfallen humanity. Only a superior moral character could discern the issues involved in his great temptations.
Reasons for the sinless view Several factors favor the view that Jesus' humanity was sinless, rather than sinful. One is Jesus' account of his own disposition. According to the fourth Gospel, Jesus said, "My food The force of his temptations also
WHO JESUS HAS: BRINGER OF THE REIGN OF GoD
179
indicates an unfallen nature. On tuwo
Occasions his spiritual struggles were
en severe that they actually threatened Jesus were to start exactly where we his life. He would have died after his
temptation in the wildemess without
the ministry of angels (Matt 4:11), and sinning. But in that case he could not his experience in Gethsemane left him be our savior, for he, too, would need similarly weakened (Mark 14:33-34).
Jesus' capacity to exhaust the
tempter's power reveals superior
moral strength and also makes him the Another problem is the idea that only human being to feel the full force Jesus' achievement is within our
of temptation. Only an athlete who completes a marathon knows what it takes to run the distance, not one who conceivably have several examples to quits after five, ten, or even twenty
miles. Only Jesus, who never yielded, knows what it really takes to withstand temptation. There are several reasons, then, to believe that Jesus' humanity was sinless.
habitually do so. We are afflicted by established patterns of sinning. So, if
do in his struggle with temptation, he would have to be not only sinful but
salvation. Not even the most ardent supporter of Jesus' sinful humanity would find this acceptable.
reach; for if others could duplicate what he did, then we could
follow, rather than one. In fact, their examples would be even better, because they have more in common with us than he does.
In short, the notion of a sinful
savior creates more problems than it
solves. If we make Jesus entirely one
of us, then he needs salvation as much as we do. If we place his achievements within our reach, then others could save as well as he.
Problems with the sinful view It is also significant that attributing a sinful human nature to Jesus fails to achieve its purpose. Many who advocate this position feel that the major purpose of Jesus' mission was to provide us an example in
overcoming sin. Only if he had a
sinful nature like ours, they believe, could he be our example. His moral struggle must begin where ours does if can help us, and only someone vastly his achievement is to be within our
We need to recognize that there is
much more to Christ's work than giving us an example. A drowning man needs more than swimming
lessons; he needs a lifesaver. Lost as we are in sin, only a dramatic rescue
superior to us can etfect it.
Although Jesus shared the moral reach. One difficulty with this position is posture of our original parents, in
that we can never put Jesus entirely on other respects he did experience the
our level. Our spiritual condition is
Such that we are not only inherently inclined to disobey God, but we
consequences of sin. Physically, his condition was similar to those around him. And his general mental outlook
REIGN OF GOD
the ones we encounter every day. The Socially, of course, he could not avoid fundamental issues are trust and obedience. Will we trust God? Wil
was typical of people of his time.
the effects of sin. He was surrounded we believe what he says? Will we obey him? Will we accept his sovereignty over our lives? Every temptation presents us with one cr both of these issues, and the fundamental issues of Jesus
Will by negative influences.
Jesus' temptations We have mentioned two ways in which Jesus' temptations were different from ours. Some of them
or
focused on his unique access to divine temptations were the same, even though the avenues of temptation power, and they were much more
intense than anything we shall ever have to face. But his temptations were also similar to ours in several
were different.
Perhaps the most important similarity between Jesus' moral experience and ours is the potential source of victory over temptation. As
important ways. In fact, according to the book of Hebrews, he is able to
help us as we face temptation, because we have seen, neither his inherent "in every respect [he] has been
tempted as we are, yet without sin"
(4:15). These words require careful
interpretation. Clearly, they cannot mean that Jesus faced literally every temptation that ever afflicted other human beings. Living when he did, he to all of us. was never tempted to watch the wrong things on television or drive a car recklessly. These words must refer, not to the occasion of Jesus'
divinity nor his sinless humanity assisted him in meeting temptation. If anything, they intensify the experience. What enabled him to overcome was implicit trust in the power of God. Jesus gained the victory by faith, something available
A sumnmary of the doctrine of
Christ We need to summarize our reflections
temptations, but to the underlying issues involved.
on the nature of Christ. It is important
for us to find the fundamental theme,
The occasion, or avenue, of
temptation varies from person to person. It depends on opportunity and personality. But when it comes to the underlying issues, all temptations are the same-from the ones facing Adam and Eve in the garden, through the ones Jesus met in the wilderness, to
or guiding thread, that runs through
the many questions this topic raises.
The characteristic Christian tendeney
to identify Jesus with God originated
With the experience of the earliest
believers. It arose from their own
encounter with Jesus. They found in
the life and ministry of Jesus a
ccos IS: RRINGER QF THE REIGN OF GOD
181
lear that nothing could conceivably
qual or surpass it. As Jesus himself
once claimed, "He who has seen me
evelation of God so complete and so to undermine this experience, either explicitly or implicitly. It is true that the classic christological formulas employed terms and concepts drawn from the context of Greek thought, but their fundamental claims are
clea
has seen the Father" (John 14:9). As
a result, they found that the only way
to sDeak of God himself. Jesus was
they could adequately, faithfully describe what they saw in Jesus was
faithful to the biblical perspective. They have served the church well ever since their formulation in its
not merely God's representative; he
was God himself in human form. With this fimly in mind, we can
perpetual attempt to describe who Jesus is.
Important as it is, the question of Jesus' identity is not the only element in the doctrine of Christ. As it is
put the long history of discussions about the nature of Christ into
perspective. All christology is an
endeavor to safeguard the essential Christian experience of Jesus. It
seeks to express his identity in ways
that are faithful to this basic
generally formulated, this doctrine considers what he did, as well as who he was. And in the thinking of many people, as we noted, the question of his work is even more important than
that of his person. experience. In doing so, it reacts to, and rejects, descriptions that threaten
STUDY HELPS
Questions for review
What is unique about Jesus' relation to the religion he founded?
2. What evidence supports the reality of Jesus' resurrection?
What is the orthodox Christian view of the person of Christ? What factors
led to its formulation?
3.
How does the New Testament attest to both Jesus' humanity and his
divinity?
5. ow did the incarnation affect the divinity of the Son of God?
REIGN OF GOD
182
6 What was the condition of Jesus' humanity? 6.
7. How were Jesus temptations similar to those of other human beins.
how were they different? and
Questions for further study
What is the significance of the fact that the four Gospels stand at the 8. beginning of the New Testament? Why do you suppose Matthew comes
first?
9. The Gospels, it is often said, are not true biographies, but testimonies of faith 9. (see John 20:31). Why are the Gospels silent about so much of Jesus life
10. What are the benefits and the liabilities of emphasizing Jesus' role as o
example?
11. In the fourth and fifth centuries A.D., the Christian church expressed its understanding of the nature of Christ by using terms and concepts drawn from Greek thought. Was this development necessary? Were its consequences for the church positive or negative?
11.
12. In recent years a number of films and musicals have appeared portraying the life of Jesus. Is your reaction to such productions positive or negative? Why?
13. Officially, Seventh-day Adventists do not attach religious significance to the traditional Christian holidays of Christmas and Easter. Why is this so? In your view, is this attitude toward these holidays good or bad?
Suggestions for Bible study 14. Examine the two genealogies of Jesus which appear in the Gospels (Matt 1:2-17 and Luke 3:23-38). Notice the similarities and differences betweci them. What do they tell us about Jesus' identity? What background to nis ministry do the other Gospels provide? 15. 15. The virgin birth is specifically mentioned only twice in the New Testi (Matt 1:18-21; Luke 1:26-35). What does the concept of the virgin bir contribute to our understanding of Jesus? Is the virgin birth essential to u
ent
WHO JESUS WAS: BRINGER OF THE REIGN OF GOD
183
Christian doctrine of the incarnation?
Acco ccording to some scholars, the Gospel according to John is an extended
16. response nse to the question, Who is Jesus? The author answers this question by enting a series of "signs" and recording a number of Jesus' claims about himself. What do we learn about Jesus' identity from each of the following
passages?
a. John 2:1-12; 4:46-54; 5:1-16; 6:5-13;9:1-41; 11:1-44; 12:32 b. John 6:35; 8:12; 10:7; 10:11; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1
17. The writers of the New Testament also establish Jesus' identity by applying
various titles and offices to him, many of them drawn from the Old Testament. What does each of the following expressions tell us about Jesus?
a. Deut 18:15, 18; Matt 16:14; 21:11, 46; Luke 7:16; John 6:14 b. Gen 49:10-12; 2 Sam 7:8-17; Ps 2:7-9 (Heb 1:5); Ps 110:1 (Heb 1:13);
Mic 5:2-4; Matt 22:43; Matt 16:13-20 c. Matt 1:21; Luke 2:11; John 4:42; 1 John 4:14; Titus 2:13
d. Mark 2:10; 2:28; 13:26; 8:31;9:31; John 3:13; 5:27; 8:28 e. Luke 1:35; Matt 4:3, 4; 8:29; 14:33; 26:63-64; John 5:25; 9:35; 11:4 f. Rom 5:12; 1 Cor 15:21-22, 45-49
Jesus is identified as the creator in the "high christology" presented in such
passages as Col 1:15-20, Heb 1:1-3, and John 1:1-5. Study these verses
carefully. What are the reasons for assigning this divine work to Jesus? How do statements like this relate to such Old Testament texts as Gen 1:1 and Ps
18.
33:6,9?
SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER READING
From Adventist writers For Seventh-day Adventists, the most influential book on Jesus Christ is undoubledly Ellen G. White, The Desire of Ages (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1898), probably the most cherished of her writings.
A number of other Adventists have also written on the nature of Christ. For an
Adventist version of orthodox christology, see Edward Heppenstal, The Man Who Is God: A fudy of the Person and Nature of Jesus, Son of God and Son of Man (Washington, DC: eview and Herald, 1977). Ralph Larson defends the notion that Jesus possessed a fallen numan nature in The Word Was Made Flesh: One Hundred Years of Seventh-day Adventist
oristologyl852-1952 (Cherry Valley, CA: Cherrystone Press, 1986). In The Nature of nrist: Help for a Church Divided over Perfection (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald,
REIGN OF GOD
184
1994), Roy Adams examines the current controversy within Adventism concern: humanity of Jesus and related issues, such as the nature of sin and the possibilitthe
perfection. f
Not surprisingly, the person of Christ has been the object of extensive theolopical. throughout the history of the church, beginning with the New Testament itself lection Cullman, The Christology of the New Testament, trans. Shirley C. Guthrie and Charlo Hall (rev. ed.; Philadelphia: The Westminster, 1959), analyzes the various christolaoi that appear in the New Testament. Aloys Grillmeier, Christ in Christian Tradition les Apostolic Age to Chalcedon, trans. John Bowden (2d ed., rev.: Atlanta: John Knox, 1976 provides the definitive account of christological developments up to the mid-fifth ccniur more accessible account of the same period appears in various chapters of J. N. D. Kcllv Early Christian Doctrines (rev. ed.; San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1960). John Macauariat extensive overview of christology emphasizes modern views (Jesus Christ in Modern Thought [London: SCM Press, 1990]). Jaroslav Pelikan examines popular perceptions of Jesus in Jesus Through the Centuries: His Place in the History of Culture (New York: Harper & Row, 1985).
Influential contemporary proposals include D. M. Baillie, God Was in Christ: An Essav on Incarnation and Atonement (New York: Scribner's, 1949), which is still influential alicr many years; Emil Brunner, The Mediator: A Study of the Central Doctrine of the Christian Faith, trans. Olive Wyon (Philadelphia: Westuminster, 1947), considered one of the theologian's most important works; and more recently, Wolfhart Pannenberg, Jesus-God and Man, trans. Lewis L. Wilkins and Duane A. Pricbe (2d ed.; Philadelphia: West1minster, 1977), which reaffirms the priority of the person to the work of Christ and argucs for the historicity of Jesus' resurrection. Conservative interpretations of the doctrine include Douglas D. Webster, A Passion for
Christ: An Evangelical Christology (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1987); Millard J. Erickson, The Word Became Flesh: A Contemporary Incarnational Christology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1991); and Thomas C. Oden, The Word of Life, Systematic TheologY Volume Two (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1989), which strives to be "unoriginalin discussing the person and work of Christ. At the liberal end of the theological spectrum, one finds the following works: Rudo Bultmann, Jesus Christ and Mythology (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1958), wn explains the author's famous concept of "demythologizing"; Schubert M. Ogden, n of Christology (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1982), which insists that Christian iad Jesus has everything to do with his work and really nothing to do with his persou, hu tots
Hick, ed., The Myth of God Incarnate (Philadelphia: Westminster maintain that the incarnation is appropriately understood as "myth," rather than The topic of Jesus' resurrection deserves special mention. There are mau
of the evidence that Jesus came to life from the dead. Various scholars debarc nt the
of the resurrection in Gary R. Habermas and Antony G. N. Fle Dead? The Resurrection Debate, ed. Terry L. Miethe (San Francisco: Harpe Stephen T. Davis discusses the historicity and the significance of Jesus' resu conservative perspective in Risen Indeed: A Christian Philosophy of Resurre Rapids, M1: Eerdmans, 1993).
From other writers
relc . M.
the
A
Point
n
ohn
ter, 1977), whose contribu al truth.
are many discussions
the historic ew, Did Jesus Rise .
& Row, 1987)
rrection lrom
on (Grand
wHO JESUS WAS: BRINGER OF THE REIGN OF GOD
185
NOTES
1 See William.
ion in the broade fold analysis of religion: "Were one asked to characterize the life adest and most general terms possible, one might say that it consists of of ren shat there is an unseen order, and that our supreme good lies in harmoniously adjusting ourselves the bel rselves thereto. This belief and this adjustment are the religious attitude in the
soul" (The ieties of Rer
New American
Religious Experience: A Study in Human Nature [New York: The Library, 1958 A Mentor Book]D. p. 58.
2 The tudy of religion has e
many introductio ntroductions to the world's major religions and many textbooks for introductory classes in religion. in religion. The authoritative work in the field is The Encyclopedia of Religion, ed.
developed dramatically sincc the mid-twentieth century. There are
Mircea ade (16 vols. New York: Macmillan, 1987). Huston Smith gives a helpful review
fs of some of the world's great religions in The World 's Religions (San of the major beliefs
Erancisco: HarperSanFrancisco, l1994). J. N. D. Anderson examines the divergent concepts f salvation among the world's prominent religions in Christianity and World Religions
Downers Grove, 1L: InterVarsity, 1984), pp. 82-111.
Besides examining the specific beliefs and practices of the world's various religions,
scholars have devoted increasing attention to religion as a characteristic human activity or
experience. Two of Mircea Eliade's influential works are The Myth of the Eternal Return, or
Cosmos and Historr, trans. Willard R. Trask (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press,
1971; New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1959), and 7he Sacred and the Profane: The Nature of
Religion, trans. Willard R. Trask (New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1961). Other examinations
of religion as a distinctive human phenomenon include Ninian Smart, The Phenomenon of
Religion (New York: The Seabury Press, 1973), Wilfred Cantwell Smith, The Meaning and
End of Religion (New York: Macmillan, 1962), and John Hick, An Interpretation of Religion:
Human Responses to the Transcendent (New Haven, Yale University Press, 1989).
3 Rudolf Bultmann puts it this way: "Jesus was more than [a teacher and prophet] to the
Church: He was also the Messiah; hence [the carliest] Church also proclaimed him,
himselfand that is the essential thing to see. He who formerly had been the bearer of the
message was drawn into it and became its essential content. The proclaimer became the
proclaimed ..." (Theology of the New Testament; trans. Kendrick Grobel {2 vols.; New York:
Charles Scribner's Sons, 1951, 1955], 1:33; italics original). J. N. D. Anderson makes a
Similar observation concerning the unique proclamation characteristic of Christianity in
Christianity and Comparative Religion, pp. 31-51.
Schubert M. Ogden, for example, a contemporary Protestant theologian, describes Jesus as
re-presenting" to human beings the possibility for authentic existence that God's grace
ways makes available (The Point of Christology [San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1982). In
s View, Jesus' significance is entirely a matter of his function in human experience and has
ning to do with his nature or person. In contrast, another contemporary Protestant
cologian, Wolfhart Pannenberg, reasserts the traditional priority of the person to the work
he lived on earth in the time of Emperor Tiberius, must remain Soteriology prior to all must questions tollow about irom
his significance, to all soteriology [the doctrine of salvation}. Soteriolo8y
must
foundation" follow from of C n his words, "Christology, the question about Jesus himselt, aboul his person, as
Vesu Christology, "
not vice versa. Otherwise, faith in salvation itself loses any real
foundation"
Wa ou ana Man, trans. Lewis L. Wilkins and Duane A. Pricbe [2d ed., Philadelphia:
Westminster, 1977), p. 48). REIGN OF
186
SA recent statement of Christian faith expresses the point this way: ". . .[TIhe N.
Testament's answer to the question "Who is Jesus?" 1s that he is the man in wh
himself and his love have come unbelievably close to men (The Common Cate od
Book of Christian Faith [New York: Seabury, 1975J, p. 221). "The conclusion whi the
4
New Testament writers drew from the Easter event runs as follows: The nearmese which believers experience in Jesus Christ, transcends all previous experience men Od, had
of God" (ibid., p. 232).
ks, Doctrine from the Bible to the Present, ed. John H. Leith (Garden Cty, NY: Anchor Rool...
m
6See "The Definition of Chalcedon," in Creeds of the Churches: A Reader in Chrict
Doubleday, 1963), pp. 35-36. An understanding of the nature of Christ was the chure h's important theological achievement during the first few centuries following apostolic tim nes. And this development has received enormous scholarly attention. A reliable and readak
San lable
account of the major issues appears in J.N.D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines (rev, edc
Francisco: Harper & Row, 1960), pp. 138-62; 280-343.
There is evidence of Arianism among early Seventh-day Adventist writers. In the followino description of Christ's origin, E. J. Waggoner implies the Arian view that there was a tiime when Christ was not: "There was a time when Christ proceeded forth and came from God from the bosom of the Father (John 8:42, 1:18), but that time was so far back in the days of
ing
etenity that to finite comprehension it is practically without beginning" (Christ and His Righteousness [Oakland, Calif.: Pacific Press, 1890; reprinted, Nashville, Tenn: Southcrn Publishing Association, 1972]. pp. 21-22). 8The Creed of Nicea," in Leith, Creeds of the Churches, pp. 30-31. 9Emest F. Scott mentions the arguments for and against this view in his exegesis of the Epistle to the Philippians in The Interpreter s Bible (12 vols.; Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1951-1957), 11:46-47. 10Russell F. Aldwinckle gives this answer to the question, "Is all of God in Jesus?": "Some self-limitation of God in His act of incarnation in Jesus Christ seems to be required both by Scripture and reason. The difficulties of ascribing omnipotence, omniscience, and omnipresence to Jesus of Nazareth are so enormous that no satisfactory doctrine of the incarnation can be built on this basis" (More Than Man: A Study in Christology [Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1976). p. 88). "Jesus of Nazareth does not exercise all the functions of deity, nor was He in His historical actuality in the full possession and cxercise of what we have called the metaphysical attributes" (ibid., p. 192).
11John Knox states "the dilemma of early Christian thought about the humanity of Jesus, and indeed our dilemma still," in this way: "How could Christ have saved us if he was not a human being like ourselves? How could a human being like ourselves have saved us?(ne Humanity and Divinity of Christ: A Study of Pattern in Christology [London: Cambridge University Press, 1967], p. 52).
wHO JESUS WAS: BRINGER OF THE REIGN OF GOD