Systematic Theology 2 Final Part 2 Flashcards
after what did they begin separating Jesus of history vs. Jesus of faith?
Enlightenment (Immanuel Kant) Ernest Renan Rudolf Bultmann John Hick - the Myth of God Incarnate Jesus Seminars - 5 gospels, 1 Jesus
Both the authors of Myth and the members of ‘Jesus Seminar’ are committed to either
philosophical naturalism or panentheism (=both which are methodological naturalism)
This is what happens to Christology within the above framework – both the person and work of Christ are lost.
- Here the idea is that Jesus is only one possible mediator of salvation, but there are others as well (see John Hick – editor of Myth; Paul Knitter; Don Cupitt; process thought; Maurice Wiles). Each religion expresses the religiosity of a given culture, so each religion is relative to that culture. We might say that each religion is ‘true’ for that culture (Ernst Troeltsch).
- On this position, it is a transcendent value that is mediated by the various saviors (i.e. love), but this value is universal while the mediators are historical and particular (cf. Lessing’s ugly ditch). It is held that God has acted for all people, but in various ways and through different religions.
- Atonement: Jesus is a moral example–nothing substitutionary/unique about it.
Pluralistic Christology:
This is the traditional affirmation of the church.
Jesus is the God-man, the eternal Word made flesh, our only Lord and Savior who laid down his life for sinners and as a result is our only hope of salvation.
Thus, Jesus is not only the final revelation of God (Jn 14:6; Heb 1:1-2), he is also the only hope of salvation for fallen mankind (Acts 4:12). Unless there is a self-conscious faith in Jesus Christ, there is no salvation.
Exclusivist Christology:
In recent days, even within evangelicalism (Clark Pinnock, John Sanders, et al.), there has been a rise of inclusivist Christology. It is seen as a mediating position between pluralism and exclusivism. There are a variety of views within this overall category. On the ‘evangelical’ side of the spectrum, the view is argued that the cross work of Christ is the basis for salvation, but that one does not necessarily have to have faith in Jesus to experience salvation (ontological vs. epistemological basis for salvation).
Inclusivistic Christology
the position that historians qua historians must never admit a supernatural explanation for anything
methodological naturalism
how does the Bible’s story link give us a high Christology?
In Creation?
Creation identifies that 1. God is Lord. God is the source of all there is, sovereign & absolute, establishes a Creator-creature distinction 2. God is the Covenant Lord.. living and active personal and such moral 3. God is holy. creation is the beg of the story God created the world good theistic universe moral universe
how does the Bible’s story link give us a high Christology?
the fall?
humans
- Creation establishes the proper place and interpretation of human beings.
1. We are made in God’s image, to reflect him and to be like him.
2. Human beings are made to know God
3. we cannot escape God; we are without excuse (Rom 1-2). We are responsible creatures. We have a Lord. - Creation establishes the first Adam—Last (2nd) Adam typological connection
1. anticipates the new adam
federal head… adam the first.. christ the second. does not fail
But Christ is the Last (2nd) Adam.
A new creation begins under his headship.
His obedience – his life of obedience and act of obedience in laying down his life for us on the cross – brings salvation. His work is a representative and substitutionary work.
Result: he secures for us eternal life, righteousness, justification. We participate ‘in Christ,’ not by the course of nature, but by new birth (Jn 3:6) wrought by the Spirit and the Word, through faith.
‘In Christ’ (union with Christ) we receive all the benefits of God’s saving grace – justification, adoption, sanctification, and glorification (including resurrection bodies – cf. 1 Corinthians 15).
Christ work becomes our work
The Fall (Genesis 3). Without the historic Fall, we could not make sense of the Bible’s story and the person and work of Christ.
the Bible’s story and the person and work of Christ.
how does the Bible’s story link give us a high Christology?
3rd: God’s Promise of a Coming Salvation for His People in the ‘Last Days’.
- By way of enigmatic prediction – the protoevangelion (Gen 3:15). a promise - old creation not completely destroyed ….Jesus will crush satan…. typology
- By way of typology and foreshadowing. This picks up the redemptive-historical and progressive unfolding of Scripture. This is tied to the promise-fulfillment theme. One way of presenting promise-fulfillment is via typology.
(Adam, Moses, Isreal, Leaders, David, Insituations, Events) - By way of covenant and covenantal themes.
- By way of explicit prophetic announcement.
covenants
- Creation/Edenic Covenant
- Noahic Covenant - new creation promise
- Abrahamic Covenant - unconditional convenant
- Covenant with Israel.
Obedience was the means to experience covenant blessing in their daily lives - Davidic Covenant
- New everlasting covenant
how does the Bible’s story link give us a high Christology?
Fulfillment of the Promise in Messiah Jesus.
And in light of Jesus’ coming, what was anticipated, has now come, and things have slightly (even dramatically) changed as a result.
This term describes the theme of ‘fulfillment.’ Because the NT sees itself as the fulfillment of the OT, it modifies the structure of the redemptive-historical time line. The NT proclaims that what was predicted in the old has now arrived in the new, even though there is still more to come. This is what is meant by the ‘already’ ‘not yet’ tension.
Inaugurated Eschatology
Jesus is..
- He is the new temple (Jn 2).
- The great High Priest (Heb 7).
- David’s greater Son (Mt 1; Lk 2).
- OT references to Yhwh are applied to Jesus, and in Revelation, “the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb” are repeatedly linked. Jesus is nothing less than the great “I am” (Jn 8:58; cf. 5:23).
the persona and work of Christ
Jesus, the Christ is seen as the only solution to evil, sin, and death. In this, the gospels unite in driving the story of Jesus to the cross
Christology
Jesus is the possessor of divine attributes.
- Omniscience (Jn 21:17 (Jesus knows all; Acts 1:24- Jesus knows all things) - all knowing ( Jesus doesn’t know the end of times only God… mark)
- Omnipresent (Eph 4:10) - everywhere
- Immutability (Heb 13:8) - unchanging
Jesus is eternally existent.
contrary to arianism
- Pre-existence. Two texts speak of Christ’s existence or activity prior to his incarnation (Jn 12:41 – see Isa 6:1-3; 1 Cor 10:4)
- Eternal pre-existence. Other texts affirm Christ’s existence prior to creation (Jn 1:1; 17:5; Heb 1:2).
Jesus is equal in dignity
The divine name (Mt 28:19)
Specific names.
Lord (Ex 6:2; Isa 45:5; Acts 2:36; 1 Cor 12:3)
Lord of lords (Dt 10:17; Ps 136:3; Rev 17:14; 19:16)
Shepherd (Ps 23:1; Ezk 34:11-31; Jn 10:11-16; Hb 13:20; 1 Pt 5:4)
Alpha and Omega (Rev 1:8; 21:6; 22:13; cf. 1:17)
The Spirit (Rom 8:9)
The Kingdom (Eph 5:5; Rev 11:15)
The Throne (Rev 22:1,3)
In relation to human beings…
Jesus is the recipient of praise and worship. Jesus is the addressee in prayer. Jesus is the object of saving faith. Jesus is the joint source of blessing. Jesus is the object of doxologies
Jesus’ divine functions.. in relation to the universe
Jesus the creator and sustainer
Jesus’ divine functions.. in relation relation to human beings..
- Jesus taught and healed with authority.
- Jesus dispensed the Spirit
- Jesus raises the dead
- Jesus forgives sins
- Jesus grants salvation or eternal life.
- Jesus exercises judgment
List the 7 texts which explicit state that the Son is ‘God’ (theos). Why is this important?
John 1:18:
John 20:28: my Lord and my God / / Because you have seen me you beleive.. blessed are those who have not seen me and believe in me…
Romans 9:5 attributed theos to Jesus
Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1: God & Savior
Hebrews 1:8a:
psalm 45 -
List the 7 texts which explicit state that the Son is ‘God’ (theos). Why is this important?
John 1:1-2.
John 1:18:
John 20:28: my Lord and my God / / Because you have seen me you beleive.. blessed are those who have not seen me and believe in me…
Romans 9:5 attributed theos to Jesus
Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1: God & Savior
Hebrews 1:8a:
psalm 45 -
Why is the title not used more often?
- In the NT, theos has virtually become a proper name for God the Father. If Christ was everywhere called ‘God’ so that in reference to him the term was not a title but a proper noun, linguistic ambiguity would be everywhere present. See 2 Cor 5:19.
- Theos, denoting the Father and rarely the Son, helps protect the personal distinction between Son and Father, which is everywhere in the NT.
- there is a role difference. It is the role of the Father to direct, of the Son to obey.
Theos is often reserved for the Father to safeguard
the humanity of Jesus.
This theory argues that Christ gave up some of his divine attributes while he was on earth as a man. The word kenosis is taken from the Greek verb kenoō which means “to empty” and is translated “emptied himself” in Philippians 2:7. Thus, according to this theory, Christ “emptied himself” of some of his divine attributes such as omniscience, omnipresence, and omnipotence, while he was on earth as a man. This was viewed as a voluntary self-limitation on Christ’s part, which he carried out in order to do his work.
“kenosis theory”
“kenosis theory” phil 2:5 response..
he humbles himself, not by loosing his attributes, but by being a human.. affirms God’s attributes.. greatness is not from clingy to ones rights, but giving them up
Theological importance of the virgin birth.
- It demonstrates that salvation ultimately must come from the Lord.
- Virgin birth allows us to assert the uniqueness of Jesus.
- Virgin birth made possible the uniting of full deity/humanity in one person.
- What is the relationship between the virgin birth and the sinlessness of Jesus? This is a difficult question. Some have argued that the virgin conception makes possible Christ’s true humanity without inherited sin. But we must be careful at this point. Does this then mean that the transmission of sin comes only through the father? Scripture nowhere teaches this. But then why did he not inherit a sinful nature from Mary? Should we affirm with the Roman Catholic church the immaculate conception of Mary? Note: The immaculate conception was made dogma on Dec 8, 1854 (Pius IX). No, since there is no scriptural warrant for this position. What should we then say?
In the 1st century, Jews recited Dt 6:4 twice daily. This confession affirms that there is only one God and that he is unique in the universe. It also implies that God alone is the proper object of worship; to worship the creature rather than the Creator is blasphemy. The first Christians also shared this same sense of utter repulsion at the idea that a human being should be worshipped (cf. Acts 14:14-15; Rev 19:10). Against this background we must take seriously two astounding points.
When Jesus was on earth he received the praise and worship given to him without ever rebuking the persons who acted in this way (Mt 14:33; 21:15-16; 28:9,17; Jn 20:28; cf. 5:22-23).
After Jesus’ return to heaven as the exalted Lord, praise and worship of him intensified (Eph 5:19; Phil 2:9-11; Rev 5:8-9, 12-14). Also see Hebrews 1:6 and its quotation of Dt 32:43 (LXX).
In relation to human beings…
Jesus is the recipient of praise and worship.
Creator and Sustainer Verses
In relation to the universe.…
Jesus is the creator (Jn 1:3; Col 1:16; Heb 1:3).
Jesus is the sustainer (Col 1:17; Heb 1:2-3).
How is the virgin birth presented in Scripture?
Luke asserts that the Holy Spirit “overshadowed” Mary (Lk 1:35; cf. Mt 1:20). This same word (episkiazō) used here is again used in his account of the Transfiguration (Lk 9:34). Why is this significant? To Jewish minds, this is significant for 2 reasons: (1) Genesis 1:2 where the Spirit is said to hover over the face of the waters. This would be appropriate especially if Jesus were considered the head of a ‘new creation.’ Thus, what emerges from the Spirit’s creative work in the beginning was called ‘good;’ what emerges from this work in Mary is called ‘holy;’ (2) Divine cloud that covered the Israelites’ camp in the desert. This cloud was the mysterious presence of God visually presented.
A definite predicate nominative has the article when it follows the verb; it does not have the article when it precedes the verb. [I shall abbreviate it “Colrule.”]
Colwell’s Rule
Sinlessness of Christ (verses)
- Jesus’ self-consciousness: Jesus recognized sin in others but not in himself. He charges others to repent but never repents himself. In fact, he even calls on his enemies to try to find fault with him (Jn 8:46).
- Hebrews 4:15; 7:26; 9:14.
- 1 Peter 1:19: Peter refers to Jesus as a “lamb without blemish or spot.” Of course, Peter is picking up OT imagery to affirm Jesus’ freedom from any moral defilement. Peter directly states “He committed no sin; no guile was found on his lips” (1 Pet 2:22). When Jesus died, it was “the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God” (1 Pet 3:18).
- John calls Jesus in his epistle, “Jesus Christ the righteous” (1 Jn 2:1) and says that “in him there was no sin” (1 Jn 3:5).
- 2 Corinthians 5:21: Paul states that Jesus knew no sin. When Paul speaks of Jesus coming to live as a man he is careful not to say that he took on “sinful flesh,” but rather says that God sent his own Son “in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin” (Romans 8:3).
- John 15:10: Jesus claimed to have kept all of the Father’s commands.
- John 18:38: Pilate could find no fault with Jesus (cf. Lk 23:4,14-15,22,41,47).
Acts 2:27; 3:14; 4:30; 7:52; 13:35: Over and over again Jesus is referred to as “the righteous or holy one.”
Colwell’s Rule with John 1:1-2. hows the jehovah witness’s got it wrong?
- jehovah witnesses say that the Word was A God
- emphasizing more of a qualitative nature… this word is the second person of the God head - Jesus… God the unique one…THEOS doesn’t have the article.. use colonel’s rule to see the JW are wrong
From dokew = “to seem”. This was one of the first full-fledged heresies. it denied the reality of Jesus’ body as well as his sufferings and death. In other words, Jesus only seemed to be human.
Docetism.
(a Gnostic): According to Irenaeus, “Cerinthus taught… that Jesus was born not of a virgin but was the son of Joseph and Mary, like other men, but superior to all others in justice, prudence, and wisdom. And that after his baptism Christ descended upon him in the form of a dove… but that in the end Christ flew back, leaving Jesus, and Jesus suffered and rose again but Christ remained impassible, being by nature spiritual.”
Cerinthus
(offshoot of the Judaizers): They denied the ontological deity of Jesus. They were strongly monotheistic. They argued that Jesus was born to Joseph and Mary in a normal way. Jesus was an ordinary man possessed of unusual (but not supernatural) gifts. Christ descended on Jesus at his baptism. This meant that God’s presence and power was real. God was in Jesus influentially. Near the end of Jesus’ life, Christ withdrew from him, thus cry of abandonment on the cross.
Ebionism
they were concerned with the transcendence of God and monotheism. God cannot share his being with anyone else. If he did then we could no longer speak of monotheism. Only God is eternal and everything else is created. However, the Father did not create the world directly (because then he would have had to come into contact with it). Instead he used an agent – the ‘Word’. This Word had a beginning.
They based their beliefs on passages that indicate that the Son is a creature. They referred to such texts as Col 1:15 – ‘firstborn.’ They also referred to texts in which the Father is represented as the only true God (Jn 17:3), and hence not the Son, as well as texts that seem to imply that Christ is inferior to the Father (Jn 14:28; Mk 13:32-33; cf. Prov 8:22)
Arianism
homoousios vs. homoiousios
Nicea/Constantinople affirmed that Jesus Christ was truly God – homoousios, i.e. same substance, not homoiousios, i.e. similar substance – and truly man. It left unanswered as to how Christ is both God and man.
body, soul, and spirit coexisting in a union (trichotomy), in Christ were only the human body and soul, the divine Logos having displaced the human spirit (nous).
esus had a human body and a divine soul. Problem: the divine swallowed up the human. human.. but not fully human.. he cannot fully save us if he is not fully human..if this was true then you would have a savior who could not save… must no tho to the ditch off the road…
Apollinarianism
the view that there were two separate persons in Christ, a human person and a divine person. This view was rejected because nowhere in Scripture do we see that the human nature of Christ is an independent person, deciding to do something contrary to the divine nature of Christ. Rather, we have a consistent picture of a single person acting in wholeness and unity. That is why the church insisted that Jesus was one person, although possessing both a human nature and a divine nature. Nestorianism was condemned at the Council of Ephesus in 431 AD).
Nestorianism
This is the view that Christ had one nature only (monos: ‘one,’ and physis: ‘nature’). Proponent: Eutyches (c. 378-454). Eutyches taught that the human nature of Christ was taken up and absorbed into the divine nature, so that both natures were changed, and thus a 3rd kind of nature resulted. Jesus, then, according to this view, was a mixture of divine and human elements in which both were somewhat modified to form one new nature. Problem: Christ was neither truly God nor truly man.
Monophysitism (Eutychianism).
What did the Council of Nicea decide Christologically?
Nicea/Constantinople affirmed that Jesus Christ was truly God – homoousios, i.e. same substance, not homoiousios, i.e. similar substance – and truly man. It left unanswered as to how Christ is both God and man.
What did the Council of Chalcseon decide Christologically?
fully God fully man
The Chalcedonian formulation sought to summarize and address every problem that had plagued the church with regard to the person of Christ. It argued against:
Docetism: the Lord Jesus was perfect in manness, truly man, consubstantial with us according to his manness, and born of Mary.
Adoptionism: it argued for the personal subsistence of the Logos ‘begotten of the Father before the ages.’
Modalism: it distinguished the Son from the Father both by the titles of ‘Father’ and ‘Son’ and by its reference to the Father having begotten the Son before the ages.
Arianism: it affirmed that the Lord Jesus was perfect in deity, truly God.
Apollinarianism: it confessed that the Lord Jesus Christ was ‘truly man of a reasonable soul [spirit] and body… consubstantial with us according to his manhood; in all things like unto us.’
Nestorianism: it affirmed Mary as theotokos, not in order to exalt Mary, but in order to affirm Jesus’ true deity and the fact of a real incarnation. It also spoke throughout of one and the same Son and one person and one subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons and whose natures are in union without division and without separation.
Eutychianism: it confessed that in Christ there were two natures without confusion and without change, the property of each nature being preserved and concurring in the one person.
Chalcedonian understanding of ‘person’ and ‘nature’ as applied to Christ
1 person
2 natures
what is the hypostatic union (Enhypostatic Union.)?
Chalcedon argues that Christ is ‘one person with two natures’ with the ‘person’ being that of the Son of the intra-Trinitarian unity. Some have complained that Chalcedon has not escaped the charge of docetism in that it denies to the human nature a human personality.
This explanation of the personality of the human nature of Jesus has come to be known as the doctrine of the
enhypostatic union.
It is true that the statement denies that the Son of God, already a person within the Trinity, took into union with himself a human person. Instead, the creed insisted that the Son took into union with himself a full complex of human attributes without its own person (‘anhypostasia,’ literally ‘no person’). However, these early church fathers would never have thought of Jesus, as a man, as being an impersonal human being. Jesus was personal, as a man, by virtue of the union of his manness in the person of the eternal Son. In other words, as a person, the Son of God gave personal identity to the human nature that he had assumed without losing or compromising his divine nature. Never for a moment did the man Jesus exist apart from the union of natures in the one divine person. This implies, then, that the man Jesus from the moment of conception was personal by virtue of the union of the human nature in the divine Son.
hypostatic union (Enhypostatic Union.)?
The enhypostatic union means that Christ’s humanity is that of .
Everyman, but it does not mean that he is Everyman. He is the man, Christ Jesus; and the only humanity united to him hypostatically is his own
‘anhypostasia,’ literally
‘no person’
The Chalcedon definition requires us to argue that there were not two ‘
self-consciousnesses’ within Jesus, even though each nature has its own will, mind, and consciousness.
Communicatio idiomatum?
The Lutheran vs. Calvinistic Controversy.
Communicatio idiomatum? about what for lutherans?
Lutherans argued for a ‘communication of attributes’ whereby our Lord’s divine nature at his virgin conception virtually ‘divinized’ his human nature by ‘communicating’ its attributes to the human nature – e.g. omnipresence. Cf.
Communicatio idiomatum? about what for Consubstantiation?
On the other hand, John Calvin and the Calvinist tradition denied the Lutheran viewpoint. This denial and understanding of the integrity of the two natures of Christ has been called extra-Calvinisticum.
Consubstantiation - This denial and understanding of the integrity of the two natures of Christ has been called
extra-Calvinisticum.
Chalcedon affirms that Jesus Christ possesses “two natures without confusion, without change, without division, without separation, the distinction of the natures being by no means removed by the union, but rather the properties of each nature being preserved.” Implication: we should not hesitate to distinguish between things …………………….
In other words, one nature does some things that
done by Christ’s human nature but not by his divine nature, and vice versa.
the other nature does not do.
It is also important to stress, within this context, that anything either nature does, ……..
Anything that is true of the human or the divine nature is true of ………….
Thus, Jesus can say, “Before Abraham was, I am” (Jn 8:58). He does not say, “Before Abraham was, my divine nature existed.”
the person of Christ does.
the person of Christ.
some roman catholics believe that Mary was sinless.. in order to have a sinless Jesus, must have a sinless mother… where would her sinlessness come from.. it doesn’t….
immaculate conception
Adoptionism: Chalcedonian stated…
it argued for the personal subsistence of the Logos ‘begotten of the Father before the ages.’
Monergism vs . Synergism
Monergism, which comes from a compound Greek word that means “to work alone,” is the view that God alone effects our salvation. This view is held primarily by Calvinistic and Reformed traditions and is closely tied to what is known as the “doctrines of grace.” Synergism, which also comes from a compound Greek word meaning “to work together,” is the view that God works together with us in effecting salvation. While monergism is closely associated with John Calvin, synergism is associated with Jacob Arminius, and his views have greatly shaped the modern evangelical landscape
Employing the concept of Christ’s 3-fold messianic office …
munus triplex – of prophet, priest, and king.
what does the 3 fold do for us?
It helps connect us to the Bible’s story line.
It helps keep together the person and work of Jesus the Messiah.
It helps us grasp the comprehensive nature of what Jesus has won for us.
It helps us see the Adam-Christ typological relation, the new creation motif.
Why is a prophet important?
Because a prophet speaks God’s word to us. A prophet gives us truth. Without the voice of God through the prophet, we would not have truth.
Jesus Christ as the final prophet and revelation of God, but not merely a prophet.
- those who call Jesus a ‘prophet’ know very little about him (see Mt 16:14; cf. Lk 9:8; Lk 7:16; Jn 4:19; 9:17)
- Jesus is presented as a prophet, indeed, the prophet that Moses anticipated (Acts 3:22-24)
- far greater proper
Jesus far greater prophet how?
- Jesus is the one about whom the prophecies in the OT were made. See Lk 24:24-27, 4-47; Jn 5:45-47; 1 Pet 1:10-12).
- Jesus was not merely a messenger of revelation from God but was himself the source of revelation from God. Rather than saying, as all the OT prophets did, “Thus says the Lord,” Jesus could begin divinely authoritative teaching with the amazing statement, “But I say unto you” (Mt 5:22). The word of the Lord came to the OT prophets, but Jesus spoke on his own authority as the eternal Word of God (Jn 1:1), who perfectly revealed the Father to us (Jn 1:14, 18; 14:9). In other words, Jesus is in a category all by himself.
Explicit testimony to the prophetic work of Christ
(Heb 1:1-3; Jn 1:1-18; Mt 28:18-20; Lk 9:26-36; Jn 5:24-27; 12:47-50; Heb 3:1-6).
3 char. to be an apostle
- They needed to be called and appointed by Christ himself.
- Apostles were associated with the ministry of Jesus from the beginning.
- The apostles were witnesses to Christ’s resurrection.
He continues to exercise his prophetic ministry through the giving of Scripture.
- The risen Christ has sent the Holy Spirit to his church.
- Holy Spirit is the original author of Scripture (2 Tim 3:16; 2 Pet 1:20-21).
- Scripture as the word of God is consequently the word of Christ.
While the prophet is supremely the mouthpiece of God to the people, the priest is
humanity’s representative before God.
Jesus as high price.. temple?
Jesus laid claim to a special relationship to the temple, where the High Priest worked, which enabled him to transcend it and all that it stood for (Mt 12:6; Mk 14:57-58; Jn 2:19, 21). In fact, Jesus saw himself as fulfilling the temple and its ritual (Jn 2:13-22). Thus, he placed himself and his task in a priestly context. He also assumed a place of centrality at religious feasts (Jn 7-8).
Jesus as high priest.. interceding?
Jesus’ intercession is a prominent feature of his entire ministry. He prays for Peter (Lk 22:31-32). He promises to intercede with the Father on behalf of his disciples so that the Paraclete will be sent (Jn 14:16f). John 17 is an entire chapter devoted to Christ’s intercession.
Jesus as high priest… passover lamb?
Jesus regarded his impending death as the shedding of new covenant blood and so parallel to the death of the Passover lamb. By viewing his death as a sacrificial blood-shedding, he put it squarely in a priestly context. In addition, in the rest of the NT, Jesus’ death was also regarded as a sacrifice (see Jn 1:29,36; 1 Cor 5:7; Eph 5:2; 1 Pet 1:19; Rev 5:6-6:5; 12:11; 14:1f; 19:6-10; 21:9-14; 22:1-5).
Jesus high priest…
When Jesus finally departed from his disciples it was with benedictions (Lk 24:51; Jn 20:19). This picks up the work of a priest (see above).
In the rest of the NT, Jesus’ sinlessness is stressed clearly and consistently (2 Cor 5:21; 1 Pet 2:21-25; 3:18; 1 Jn 3:5, 7). The reason why this is so is because Christ’s sinlessness is linked to his sacrificial death (see 1 Pet 1:19).
How is Jesus Christ a true priest?
- In Israel the office of priest was reserved for Aaron and his direct descendants. Even other members of the tribe of Levi were excluded from the priestly office (Num 3:10). The high priesthood was given to the eldest representative of the family of Aaron’s son, Eleazer.
- But if this is the case, then how is the priesthood that Jesus ushers in, the fulfillment of the Levitical priesthood? Jesus was not a member of the tribe of Levi, still less of the family of Aaron. Therefore, he simply was not qualified. In addition, a specific divine appointment was necessary for the assumption of priesthood, which Aaron received from the Lord. How, then, is Jesus Christ the great and final High Priest?
A Biblical-Theological Justification of Jesus Christ as Our Great High Priest. See
Hebrews 7:1-28 and Hebrews 8.
Further Priestly Qualifications in Hebrews.
- Jesus has taken upon a human nature, thus identifying with us, qualifying himself as our representative (Hebrews 2:11-18).
- Jesus is one with us in human weakness – yet without sin (Hebrews 5:1-10). Thus he is able to sympathize with out struggles (Hebrews 4:14-15).
- Jesus is able to discharge the duties of high priest perfectly since he faced temptation successfully, emerging sinless from the ordeal (Hebrew 4:14-16; 7:26-27; 10:5-10).
- Jesus continues to make intercession for us (Hebrews 2:18; 4:16; 7:25).
- Jesus, as a priest, offered a sacrifice for sins. Crucial difference with OT priest: he offered himself, not an animal. Hence, Jesus is both priest and victim; offerer and offering. See below under “sacrifice.”
