| Theological Studies: Christology
Alvin Shaul Oord, Theology II Christology January 29, 2006 What Christology Is Most Adequate? Why? Is it possible to believe in a Jesus who meets all my specific needs and expectations and yet does not conflict with the Jesus of others� faith? Not only is it possible, it is integral! The Jesus of the Bible was always concerned with the individual as well as corporate. No matter what the person�s lifestyle, whether a widow, a prostitute, a dead man, a leaper or one of his own disciples, Jesus was always able to meet each person individually to address their needs. At the same time, Jesus constantly reached out to the entire Jewish community and the entire Gentile community. He preached a single message to huge crowds of people. It is thus fair to conclude that although their may be a single set of truths that Jesus portrayed, those truths apply in various ways for each individual. This is the heart of my Christology. Perhaps the most important topic within Christology is that of the Atonement. Up until now the Atonement had always meant the death and resurrection of Christ to save us from our sins. Although that has not changed completely, it is now obvious that there are much more to consider when discussing just how exactly we have been atoned. According to Inbody, atonement theories are based on problems with creation and human beings, and are formed to show how God in Christ conquered those problems. Dunning is also correct to note that �Every doctrine of the Atonement is an expression of a particular understanding of God� (360, Grace, Faith, and Holiness). I grew up with the Penal Satisfaction Theory of Atonement being taught. That is, God gives moral laws. Humans have broken those laws (sin) and require punishment. However, Jesus took that punishment for humans so that God�s justice can be maintained. Of course, it was never that literally spoken. In fact, although the differences are slim, the Substitutionary Theory of Atonement was mixed in with what I was taught. That is, Christ died for our sins so that we wouldn�t have to die for them. Although I am still inclined to believe this as truth, there seems to be much more to the atonement as provided by Christ. While I do see his death and subsequent resurrection as that which somehow holds the power to freeing us from the inevitable bondage of sin, I am also inclined to look at the life of Jesus and the example he left behind. For some, Jesus� teachings, moral example, and influence are the direct means of atonement. For me, these gifts of Christ are what help us to gain a realistic grasp on what Christ did through his death and Resurrection. Christ did not atone for our sins so that we could keep on living as we were, always in sin with no escape. I will not claim that expected us to be without sin completely, but I do believe it was his goal to provide a means by which to accomplish such a feat. If it was only his death and resurrection that are of any necessity, then God could have beamed Jesus down to earth and had him crucified in a matter of days. Thus, there must be some alternative value to the life that Jesus led while on earth. Jesus� lifestyle provides an example of the divine, a goal or aspiration to which we should reach. Part of the doctrine of Atonement is the doctrine of Soteriology. How do we actually receive salvation? How do we know if we are truly saved? We have biblical statements like �believe and you will be saved,� and �everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved� and �unless you become like a little child, you will not �be saved.�� These all refer to a future action. If we will believe, or will call, or will become, then we will be saved. What I want to suggest, is although we can gain a fairly reasonable insight on the status of our future salvation, I do believe that we are only finally saved at the Day of Judgment, when the unforgiven actions of our lives are held accountable. In no way, however, do I mean to imply that there is some impenetrable separation between God and man until that day. This is where my belief of a relational Christ is integral. If we had no connection with Christ until we were held accountable by him, then our lives would be fairly miserable and without motivation. However, we have a Christ who is relational. As I alluded to above, Jesus Christ was a friend to a great diversity of people. I won�t claim that he had an equal relationship with the prostitute at the well as he did with his disciples, but I will say that his love enabled him to each out to everyone and simply be a friend. We of course get the common name of �friend of sinners� from such relationships. How do we now relate the resurrected Jesus? The simple answer is that it doesn�t take much. Why? Because Christ is relationship focused. He is always seeking us out, drawing us to relationship with him. Therefore, we have a two-fold attempt by Christ to lead us to salvation. We have his earthly life and example and we have his relational pull on our lives now, guiding us in reaching toward that example. Let us expand on the life of Jesus in terms of historical context. Dr. Swanson, a professor a Nazarene Theological College in Manchester, England, believes that in order to understand Jesus we have to understand the context in which Jesus lived. Just as important is acknowledging our own context and how it differs from that of others. Jesus lived and related to people in a world much different that than in which we live today. There were no cars, no electricity or plumbing, and the literacy rate was extremely low. They didn�t have extravagant homes and businesses or a park down the road with a swing set, slide, and jungle gym. My point is that their world was very different from our own. Expanding on the diversity, our world here in rural Idaho is quite different than that of Manchester or Mexico City, Taipei or the Bahamas. Lifestyles and cultures are immensely different from each other even though they exist at the same time in history. All of these places carry a vastly different culture than that of Jesus� in first century Palestine. With such differing lifestyles in tact, it is only reasonable that interpretations and reactions to the teachings of Jesus will differ from culture to culture. We can to some degree gain a decent grasp on Jesus� true intentions by understanding his own culture. This idea is parallel to that of the individual versus corporate idea I spoke of earlier. While Jesus was speaking to individuals and groups of his own time, he knew that his teachings would be passed down. He must have known also that they would be interpreted differently among cultures as well. It is thus our responsibility, (that is, all Christians) to be faithful to the text and context when reasoning through and applying the teachings of Christ into our lives. Let us review my theories of Christology. First, Jesus meets with both individual and the corporate body of believers. Second, I affirm a Penal Satisfaction theory-Substitionary theory of Atonement. Christ died to take our place and give us hope for the future. Third, the life and teachings of Jesus give us a guide on how to live our lives now. Fourth, Christ is a relational God. He is always seeking to be in relationship with each individual. Finally, the context of Jesus as well as our context must be taken into account when responsibly applying Jesus� teachings to our lives. |