Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, vol. 1

Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, vol. 1 Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, vol. 1

khazarzar.skeptik.net
from khazarzar.skeptik.net More from this publisher
09.02.2013 Views

§16.2 How Did Jesus See His Own Role? ready noted that such an eschatological reading of 2 Sam. 7.12-14 provides a plausible rationale for the High Priest's question in Mark 14.61. 22 Alternatively, had Jesus been linked to the Wisdom tradition of the suffering righteous, the term might equally have been regarded as appropriate. A point of some significance, however, is that in the Wisdom tradition the term seems to have been more selfchosen by the righteous, expressive of his or her own confidence in God, than a description applied by others. Is this a pointer towards what we might expect? The common denominator in all these cases is that 'son of God' denoted someone specially related to or favoured by God. With the king, the status was more formal; he represented God to his people. But in its broader reference the phrase seems to have denoted someone who was intimate with God, who closely reflected God's character, who fully did God's will. The theological logic is clear from Sir. 4.10 and Matt. 5.45/Luke 6.35: 23 to be compassionate to the orphan and widow is to be like a son of God; to act with uncalculating generosity and love even to the enemy is to model oneself on God, is to be(come) a son of God. Is this the context of meaning which would have informed any initial usage of the phrase in reference to Jesus? If so, we should simply note that initially to call Jesus God's son was a far cry from the subsequent Christian usage — Christ as the 'onlybegotten' . It is true that in the earliest post-Easter phase, Christians were thought to share in Christ's sonship. 24 But even then, the divine sonship of Jesus was seen to be quite distinct and unique, with Christian sonship dependent on and derivative from Christ's. So the question still remains when this sense of Jesus' sonship as something quite distinctive first emerged and whether it has pre-Easter roots. As usual we must look to the Jesus tradition for any answers that might be forthcoming. And as with 'Messiah', the task is difficult, since the term is not bandied about (like 'teacher') or repeatedly evoked (like 'prophet'). But one feature of the tradition has captivated questers and provided amazingly positive results. b. Jesus' Abba Prayer The Jesus tradition is quite clear that Jesus addressed God as 'Father' in his prayers. Jeremias pointed out that all five strata of the Gospel material are unanimous on the point. 25 But the case hangs primarily on two instances — Matt. 11.25-26/Luke 10.21 and Mark 14.36 pars. 22. See above, § 15.3a. 23. Sir. 4.10: 'Be a father to orphans, and be like a husband to their mother; you will then be like a son of the Most High, and he will love you more than does your mother'; Matt. 5.45/Luke 6.35 has already been cited in § 14.5b. 24. Rom. 8.14-17, 29; Gal. 4.6-7. 25. Mark 14.36/Matt. 26.39/Luke 22.42; Matt. 11.25-26/Luke 10.21; Matt. 26.42; Luke 23.34, 46; John 11.41; 12.27-28; 17.1, 5, 11, 21, 24-25 (Jeremias, Proclamation 62). 711

§16.2 How Did <strong>Jesus</strong> See His Own Role?<br />

ready noted that such an eschatological read<strong>in</strong>g of 2 Sam. 7.12-14 provides a<br />

plausible rationale for <strong>the</strong> High Priest's question <strong>in</strong> Mark 14.61. 22 Alternatively,<br />

had <strong>Jesus</strong> been l<strong>in</strong>ked to <strong>the</strong> Wisdom tradition of <strong>the</strong> suffer<strong>in</strong>g righteous, <strong>the</strong> term<br />

might equally have been regarded as appropriate. A po<strong>in</strong>t of some significance,<br />

however, is that <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> Wisdom tradition <strong>the</strong> term seems to have been more selfchosen<br />

by <strong>the</strong> righteous, expressive of his or her own confidence <strong>in</strong> God, than a<br />

description applied by o<strong>the</strong>rs. Is this a po<strong>in</strong>ter towards what we might expect?<br />

The common denom<strong>in</strong>ator <strong>in</strong> all <strong>the</strong>se cases is that 'son of God' denoted<br />

someone specially related to or favoured by God. With <strong>the</strong> k<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>the</strong> status was<br />

more formal; he represented God to his people. But <strong>in</strong> its broader reference <strong>the</strong><br />

phrase seems to have denoted someone who was <strong>in</strong>timate with God, who closely<br />

reflected God's character, who fully did God's will. The <strong>the</strong>ological logic is clear<br />

from Sir. 4.10 and Matt. 5.45/Luke 6.35: 23 to be compassionate to <strong>the</strong> orphan and<br />

widow is to be like a son of God; to act with uncalculat<strong>in</strong>g generosity and love<br />

even to <strong>the</strong> enemy is to model oneself on God, is to be(come) a son of God. Is this<br />

<strong>the</strong> context of mean<strong>in</strong>g which would have <strong>in</strong>formed any <strong>in</strong>itial usage of <strong>the</strong> phrase<br />

<strong>in</strong> reference to <strong>Jesus</strong>? If so, we should simply note that <strong>in</strong>itially to call <strong>Jesus</strong> God's<br />

son was a far cry from <strong>the</strong> subsequent Christian usage — Christ as <strong>the</strong> 'onlybegotten'<br />

. It is true that <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> earliest post-Easter phase, Christians were thought<br />

to share <strong>in</strong> Christ's sonship. 24 But even <strong>the</strong>n, <strong>the</strong> div<strong>in</strong>e sonship of <strong>Jesus</strong> was seen<br />

to be quite dist<strong>in</strong>ct and unique, with Christian sonship dependent on and derivative<br />

from Christ's. So <strong>the</strong> question still rema<strong>in</strong>s when this sense of <strong>Jesus</strong>' sonship<br />

as someth<strong>in</strong>g quite dist<strong>in</strong>ctive first emerged and whe<strong>the</strong>r it has pre-Easter roots.<br />

As usual we must look to <strong>the</strong> <strong>Jesus</strong> tradition for any answers that might be<br />

forthcom<strong>in</strong>g. And as with 'Messiah', <strong>the</strong> task is difficult, s<strong>in</strong>ce <strong>the</strong> term is not bandied<br />

about (like 'teacher') or repeatedly evoked (like 'prophet'). But one feature<br />

of <strong>the</strong> tradition has captivated questers and provided amaz<strong>in</strong>gly positive results.<br />

b. <strong>Jesus</strong>' Abba Prayer<br />

The <strong>Jesus</strong> tradition is quite clear that <strong>Jesus</strong> addressed God as 'Fa<strong>the</strong>r' <strong>in</strong> his<br />

prayers. Jeremias po<strong>in</strong>ted out that all five strata of <strong>the</strong> Gospel material are unanimous<br />

on <strong>the</strong> po<strong>in</strong>t. 25 But <strong>the</strong> case hangs primarily on two <strong>in</strong>stances — Matt.<br />

11.25-26/Luke 10.21 and Mark 14.36 pars.<br />

22. See above, § 15.3a.<br />

23. Sir. 4.10: 'Be a fa<strong>the</strong>r to orphans, and be like a husband to <strong>the</strong>ir mo<strong>the</strong>r; you will<br />

<strong>the</strong>n be like a son of <strong>the</strong> Most High, and he will love you more than does your mo<strong>the</strong>r'; Matt.<br />

5.45/Luke 6.35 has already been cited <strong>in</strong> § 14.5b.<br />

24. Rom. 8.14-17, 29; Gal. 4.6-7.<br />

25. Mark 14.36/Matt. 26.39/Luke 22.42; Matt. 11.25-26/Luke 10.21; Matt. 26.42; Luke<br />

23.34, 46; John 11.41; 12.27-28; 17.1, 5, 11, 21, 24-25 (Jeremias, Proclamation 62).<br />

711

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!