Jesus Flashcards
Jesus’ authority
He is a fundamental Christian source of authority. But how, and in what way? It has been discussed and debated for years. All the gospels record the challenges given to his authority and even Jesus’ own question of the contemporary authorities. His authority comes in three areas:
As a teacher of wisdom and morality: His moral example and teaching has authority because he enlightened people with his developments of Jewish ethics, giving them better ways of living morally and spiritually
As a liberator: His actions challenged the political and religious authorities and he took on the mantle of old prophets, using his skills as a reformer to tackle social issues
As the son of God: His relationship with God was so intimate that it gave him authority to carry out God’s will on earth and ultimately bring salvation
Jesus’ affirmation of life
Wittgenstein read Tolstoy’s gospel in brief and was won over by the representation of Christ. He felt spiritually alive and gained clarity. For Wittgenstein, Jesus’ authority came from his role as a teacher of wisdom living life as honestly as possible, not his promises of afterlife and redemption. He admired Jesus for his affirmation of authentic human living. He read about Jesus while writing his first great book, the Tractatus, which aimed to test basic propositions. Wittgenstein argued that unless an idea can be lived, practiced and experienced, it has no value.
He was impressed most of all by Jesus’ commitment to truth, courage to speak against hypocrisy, simple lifestyle and acceptance of death. For Wittgenstein Jesus is the living word; the embodiment of the external moral and inner spiritual life.
Jesus’ moral teaching
In the sermon on the mount Jesus is presented deliberately as the new Moses, going up the mountain to receive the law. He says: ‘Do not think that i have come to abolish the law or the prophets; i have some not to abolish them but to fulfi’. The ambiguity of the word fulfil is obvious. Did Jesus think the law was not being practiced right and came to reform it and return it to its original purpose? Or did the arrival of the kingdom of God mean the torah would be replaced, so his teaching was a preparation and radical departure from the old moral order? He does not give any other long discussions, but teaches through parables, sayings, examples and actions. It covers a wide range.
Forgiveness and repentance
At the heart of Jesus’ announcement of the coming of the kingdom was the call to repentance, or metanoia, meaning a radical change of mindset. It is more than saying sorry but a desire to change a whole way of life. His most striking example of this mindset was given in the parable of the lost son, which describes the spiritual and psychological effort required. The parable describes how hard it is to truly forgive, but Jesus emphasises that a sin should be forgiven seventy times seven times, or however many times it takes. Forgiving is at the heart of Jesus’ prayer, especially in the lord’s prayer where it is associated with cancellation of debts, meaning that a forgiven person is set free to start again.
Motive and inner purity
Jesus was critical of many pharisees, but respected those genuinely seeking righteousness. He taught that the aim was to exceed the righteousness of the pharisees and that morality is about developing character and requires deep analysis of motive. this may include:
Checking anger means one is not led to commit murder
By resisting lust, one does not commit adultery
By resisting oaths, one’s language and intentions are pure
This sets a high standard but perfection is the aim of moral life.
Personal responsibility
The sabbath day is a central religious and social law because it is commanded and because it is the basis for social justice. But Jesus argued people were using the sabbath to avoid social responsibility. In practice, the pharisees were hiding behind their religious duties and failing in it, as ‘the sabbath was made for humankind, not human kind for the sabbath.’ He pointed out the hypocrisy of the leaders for allowing an ox to be fed, but not for the sick to be treated. Jesus cured the sick on the sabbath when it was required. He focused on the sabbath rules because:
Morality requires personal responsibility, not blind obedience
Religious practices serve human needs
Being holy does not come from carrying out external rituals but having purity of mind
Is Jesus just a teacher of wisdom?
For many, Jesus being a teacher of wisdom is compatible with a belief in his resurrection, but for others all the supernatural elements of his life as to be rejected as unscientific superstition to explain his divinity. Once this is stripped away Jesus is just a moral teacher. For some, this is right because Christianity is not then competitive for a truth claim, but recognises wisdoms in other religions.
John Hick describes them as gifts to the world, arguing that once the supernatural of Jesus life is interpreted as symbolic of his close relationship with God, Christianity will finally be able to enter into a full dialogue with other religions. This can be an attractive option for those who find the divinity aspect difficult, and for some the power in Jesus’ teaching is that is does not require abstraction, but a real engagement with life. But if these scholars are right, what authority does Jesus really have? There is no apparent reason to uphold it above other wisdoms.
Liberator of the poor
in SGF Brandon‘s work, Jesus and the zealots, he argued that Jesus was historically a politically driven freedom fighter, but the Bible toned him down and made him a pacifist. This has been severely criticised, but it is an attractive idea in parts of the world where class wars and exploitation are rife. In latin america during the civil unrest this was true, and liberation theologians found inspiration in Jesus as a zealot. He had always been seen as politically neutral, but the liberation theologians saw him as having a bias to the poor and exploited; those who occupied the underside of history. But thinking of Jesus in this way, the church is engaged with the affairs of the world. If this is not the case, Gustavo Gutierrez claimed, all the characters become fictional in the gospels, rather than real people engaged with social issues.
This bias is described by liberation theologians as a preferential option for the poor, as read in the NT. This historical example is set for every age since his life. Some even saw Jesus as a zealot, such as Camilo Torres Restrepo, a priest who joined a guerrilla army against the government troops in the name of Jesus as this fighter. Gutierrez argues that although Jesus may have been seen as a zealot, he was much more. He did not set himself up as a national leader, and he told people at the time not to think of him in political terms. Jesus’ mission also went beyond his own society to the whole world.
Liberator of the marginalised
Some of the most memorable of Jesus’ parables focus on the considered to be on the outside of society, sinners such as tax collectors, prostitutes, religious heretics like the Samaritans. They were considered unclean and contact with them required washing ceremonies to remove contamination. Jesus frequently mixed with them and others who were less educated in the torah, such as farmers, fishermen and servants. His teaching was revolutionary because it involved sinners as examples of moral life.
The Samaritan is the focus of the parable of the good Samaritan, illustrating true love of ones neighbour, mercy and generosity. The Samaritan is the one who disregards religious rules and loved his neighbour, saving the beggar and caring for him. Liberation is not necessarily political revolution but a shift in mindset.
Jesus touches an unclean woman and in doing so challenges deep seated body prejudices and attitudes to women of his time. He also frequently dines with sinners, rejecting rituals of table-fellowship as a symbol of ‘the last shall be first and the first last’ in the kingdom of God.
Is Jesus just a liberator?
Many find this depiction of Jesus powerful because it shows us how to challenge an unjust world. Others argue that his authority was not just political but spiritual. Gospel evidence to show Jesus never advocated political revolution:
At the garden of Gethsemane Jesus scolded a disciple for drawing his sword
The authorities did not consider him a revolutionary leader, otherwise they would have arrested his followers too
He resists being called king or messiah
Christology
The nature of Jesus’ relationship with god is called christology. There are two main kinds:
Christology from above: Focuses on Jesus’ divinity and God’s act of bringing humanity back into a relationship with him. It relies on faith and has no proof.
Christology from below: Focuses on Jesus’ message, example and teaching. Salvation focuses on people’s response to Jesus and how it helps to develop their relationship with God.
Knowledge of God
Even those who believe in christology from above realise the difficulty in claiming Jesus knew he was the son of God if he as also thought of as fully human. He makes many statements starting with ‘I am’, reminiscent of how God described himself to Moses. Jesus makes clear his relationship with God through statements like ‘the father and I are one’. But for some theologians these statements how that Jesus was fully conscious of God’s will and desired to fulfil it. As a human he could not have been all knowing or all powerful.
Miracles
‘Who then is this that even the wind and sea obey him?’ What is the answer to this question from his disciples? Jesus had just calmed a great storm and brought them to safety but they don’t know what kind of a person could have this power. They would have known that OT prophets had performed wonders, but they were attributed to God, not the prophet. Jesus performed miracles at every stage of his life. Here the disciples realise the miracles are of his own commands and divinity, showing his status as the son of God.
For other theologians however miracles are not indicators of divinity, but moments of insight into his teachings on the nature of the kingdom of God. The NT, they argue, only has a words for ‘mighty works’, ‘wonders’ or ‘signs’. these do not show defying the laws of nature but moments of deep insight about the nature of God and reality. The miracles would be regarded the same as parables.
Birth and incarnation
Traditionally Jesus’ birth to mary is a miracle. The conception of Jesus was to a virgin girl by the power of the holy spirit. This is more than just biologically special. This is incarnation, God becoming flesh and becoming fully human. Mary conceives God, not just another human. But theologians have also been divided over what this incarnation means. The following examples were dismissed as heresy but had influence:
Nestorius: Argued that the two natures of Christ we completely separate, divine and human. They only came together when the human Jesus became one with God’s will.
Apollinarius: Argued the incarnation of the divine will replaced Jesus’ ordinary human reason. Jesus was a complete person with body and soul and would have felt suffering in the flesh, but could not have sinned because he possessed godly reason and would never have questioned how to act.
Docetic christians: They taught that God only appeared to take on human form, when Jesus couldn’t have been fully human. As the son of God he was fully divine and brought salvation from God.
Nestorius’ theology still finds favour with those who believe in a christology from below because it gives a psychological explanation of Jesus’ nature, not a scientific one. it is more convincing to think that Jesus’ relationship to God was one of an obedient son than having part of him be God.
Miracles as signs of salvation
Both types of christology agree that miracles are signs of salvation. They indicate what it would be like to live in the restored world. Healing in particular shows Isaiah’s vision of a society in which seeing, hearing and walking are symbols of insight, understanding and acting in the world. So the story of the healing of a man born blind is less about he received sight but more about his faith of seeing and understanding Jesus as the bringer of salvation, and highlighting those with physical sight but who are blind to Jesus.
A contrast is sometimes made between Jesus’ healing and nature miracles, because salvation does not only apply to humans but to nature as a whole. Jesus’ miracle of walking on water shows how God’s spirit hovered over the waters of chaos in the creation. Even the gospels to do regard Jesus’ mighty works as conclusive proof that he was the son of God.
Resurrection
If Jesus’ death on the cross marked the end of his life as a teacher, then he may never have been considered the divine son of God. The resurrection is vital, but Jesus’ resurrection differed from the teaching that resurrection was a time when the righteous would be resurrected to live in G od’s kingdom at the end of time. The differences are that Jesus’ resurrection was witnessed by hundreds of people over a long period of time, not just immediately after his death, and that his followers experienced a decisive difference in their relationship with God. Jesus’ resurrection marked the start of a new era.
Confirmation of divinity
When St Paul described Jesus’ resurrection as the ‘first fruits’ of the harvest, he expresses metaphorically the possibility of a new reality for all humanity and creation, that God brings everything to completion.
But even scholars who see Jesus as no more than an ordinary human being in his lifetime agree that the resurrection reveals Jesus as the son of God.
Authority to worship and proclaim
The story of the doubting Thomas is a powerful example of how the resurrection was more than just the transformation of the body of Jesus into a spiritual state, but an experience of God’s presence. It is a religious experience which confirms Jesus as Lord who can be worshipped as God without it being blasphemy. The story goes on to commend those who did not witness it but still believed it. This is important because the resurrection is what gives christians the authority to proclaim that Christ is the son of God.
History and faith
New testament scholar E.P. Sanders commented in his investigation of the historical Jesus, that there is no way the christian claims of Jesus’ uniqueness can be substantiated from history alone. This is because faith and history are not the same. Sanders argues that Jesus’ miracles, teaching on non-violence, hope for outcasts and eschatological hope makes him substantially different from others at the time but they are not enough to make him unique. On the other hand, Sanders does not take into account the significance of the resurrection because it belongs in the subcategory of faith, not history. For other scholars though, the resurrection is the decisive moment
The Christ event
As the question of uniqueness is ambiguous, it is unhelpful. That is the conclusion of John MacQuarrie, who argues that every life is unique in some respect, so in that way Jesus is no different. MacQuarrie rejects the idea that one moment makes jesus the son of God. What makes him special is his place in history, the events lead into his birth, his life, the effects of it on human history thereafter. Viewing the whole of Jesus’ life and its place in history is called the christ-event. The meaning of his life is not in any one event, but the part it plays in understanding human existence. MacQuarrie defines Jesus’ life as a defining moment in the relationship with God, but not exclusively so. Other non christians religious figures have been defining moments of human existence in world history. For Christians, however, it matters because of the effect that Jesus had on their lives.
In summary, although MacQuarrie rejects the presentation of Jesus being claimed to be unique, he does not think Christ is just one amongst many because he defined what it means to exist as a human. In an existential way, Christ becomes ‘the way the truth and the life’.
