Christology around the Blogosphere

Christology around the Blogosphere January 7, 2016

There have been quite a few blog posts of interest, related to Christology, which are worth sharing and, where possible, commenting on.

Matthew Malcolm listed the “threeness of God” as one of the things the Corinthians got right. I must object. Paul is emphatic about the oneness of God. He cannot then be subtly introducing divine threeness. Mentioning Christ and the Spirit does not mean that he is using those terms the way later Trinitarian theology would. The threeness of God is not something that one can find in 1 Corinthians, and it is read into the letter over Paul's objections.

Dustin Smith has been reviewing Jimmy Dunn's latest monumental tome, with particular focus on Christology. Dustin is also interviewed by Dale Tuggy, as are co-authors Lee Irons and Danny Andre Dixon, about the book The Son of God: Three Views of the Identity of Jesus.

Matthew Ferguson has been blogging about his experience attending SBL in November. In discussing Greco-Roman parallels to Jewish and Christian literature, he also mentions my book The Burial of Jesus: What Does History Have to Do with Faith?. He also blogged about the Markan Christology session, and has been blogging a review of Craig Keener's book on miracles, too.

Ronald Huggins blogged about Hebrews as an alleged example of very early high Christology. That is one possible way of understanding it, but it may also be an anachronistic reading back of later ideas into this relatively early text. See Caird and Hurst for the arguments for this.

 

 


Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • John MacDonald

    I do not think the historical Jesus thought he would be resurrected after dying on the cross. I think Jesus believed God would divinely intervene and save him from dying on the cross, thereby demonstrating Jesus’ victory over the Romans. When it becomes clear to Jesus that God is not going to save him, Jesus cries out in terror: “My God, My God, why have you abandoned me?”. The cry from the cross in Mark makes no sense if Jesus always expected to be resurrected. The relating of Jesus’ messiahship to his resurrection must have happened after he died.

    • Johannes Richter

      On the contrary, why would Jesus go to the effort of quoting Psalm 22 with his dying breath if he did not in fact have its conclusion in mind?

      • John MacDonald

        I think by the time he uttered the cry of dereliction he realized God would not save him from the cross. But there would have been no reason to utter that cry if he believed God was going to ressurect him. Going into the whole thing, Jesus probably thought the Romans were going to crucify him, but that God would intervene in human history and bring him down from the cross and bring him victory over the Romans, making Jesus a traditional messiah. As a bit of an aside, the cry of dereliction shows that Jesus was not God, since it makes no sense to suppose Jesus was crying out to himself. The difference between Jesus and God is also showed by Jesus’ prayer in the garden of Gethsemane, because Jesus obviously wasn’t praying to himself.