Prayer Tents Bible References - Prayer Tents

CHRISTOLOGY

In the broadest sense, Christology attempts to answer the question Jesus poses to his disciples in Mark 8:27-29: “Who do people say that I am?” In a narrower sense, Christology is a study of the titles the early Church ascribed to the historical Jesus insofar as those titles (e.g., Son of Man, Christ, Son of God, Messiah, Teacher) reflect Jesus’ own self-understanding. Still more narrowly, Christology refers to the theological doctrine concerning the person and nature of Christ and the extent to which the humanity and divinity are united in his person. While the NT writings raise questions about the identity of Christ, explicit christological statements do not appear until well into the 1st century when the early Church is striving for self-definition and orthodoxy.

Even though the creeds of the 4th and 5th centuries are the earliest documents to define the union of Christ’s humanity and divinity, early christological confessions in the NT identify God’s divine nature with Christ’s human nature, particularly in the act of creation. Paul declares that “there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist” (1 Cor. 8:6). In Col. 1:15-20 Christ is “the image of the invisible God . . . in him all things were created . . . in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell.” Heb. 1:10 proclaims that Christ not only created the earth but also that “the heavens are the work of his hands.” Even the early Christian writer and martyr Polycarp boldly testifies that God is the “Father of Jesus Christ,” i.e., God’s activity is known only through Christ’s activity.

Such early christological confessions enabled the early Church to demonstrate its distinctive self-identity to Jewish and Hellenistic religious movements of the 1st century. As the Church grew, however, there were great debates between various Christian parties about the person and nature of Christ.

Within the 1st century the Docetists considered Christ’s humanity and suffering to be apparent rather than real. For the Docetists, who believed that the body was evil, God could not have entered into a corrupt human body. Some Docetists claimed that Jesus escaped death, and Judas Iscariot or Simon of Cyrene took his place on the cross. In contrast, the Ebionites denied Jesus’ divinity, claiming that he was the human son of Joseph and Mary upon whom God bestowed divine power at his baptism.

In the 4th century a presbyter named Arius argued that there were not two natures present in Christ. He went on to deny that Christ is truly God. At the Council of Nicea in 325 Athanasius and a number of other bishops condemned Arius’ ideas and declared that Jesus was fully divine and equal with the Father. Later in the 4th century Apollinarius, bishop of Laodicea, argued that the deity of Christ was so dominant that Christ’s divine nature replaced his human nature. In 381 the Council of Constantinople ratified the work of the Council of Nicea and declared that Christ was fully human and fully divine. During the 5th century Nestorius, an Antiochene monk, claimed that there were two distinct persons, one human and one divine, in Christ. Nestorius also asserted that the title ascribed to the Virgin Mary, “Theotokos,” or God-bearer, contradicted the full humanity of Christ. The Council of Ephesus (431) condemned Nestorius and affirmed the Nicene formula of Christ’s full humanity and divinity. Nearly 20 years later Eutychus, the head of a monastery at Constantinople, maintained that Christ had two natures “before the Incarnation” but Christ had only one nature “after the Incarnation.” The Council of Chalcedon (451) condemned the heresies of Nestorius and Eutychus and established what has become the orthodox christological formula by declaring that there is “one . . . Christ . . . in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation.”

Although the Chalcedonian definition has dominated Christian theological self-understanding for centuries, new currents in biblical criticism continue to raise important questions about the ways that the NT writings portray Jesus’ self-understanding as well as the early Church’s understanding of Jesus. Focusing on the picture of Jesus in Q and extracanonical sources, John Dominic Crossan, Leif Vaage, Burton Mack, Gregory Riley, and the Jesus Seminar have challenged the portrait of Jesus as an apocalyptic prophet (Son of Man) ushering in the imminent kingdom of God. In these writings, Jesus is less messianic Son of God than a Mediterranean Jewish peasant (Crossan) who identifies with the marginalized sectors of Palestinian society and who espouses wise moral sayings (Mack) in the fashion of a Cynic philosopher (Vaage). Such debates demonstrate the centrality of Christology to the Christian faith as well as its dynamic nature.

Bibliography. O. Cullmann, Christology of the New Testament, rev. ed. (Philadelphia, 1964).

Henry L. Carrigan, Jr.

Prayer Tents Bible References - Prayer Tents

CHRISTOLOGY

Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible (2000)