Christ: According to Paul, and Jesus

[John Reece]

Jaltus has informed me of two facets of New Testament Theology:

• Christology is a visible and specific act by God in the world.

• Christology is the study of the Christ, the Christ being defined as Jesus while living on the earth, dying, being raised again, and now ascended.

I am neither a scholar nor a New Testament theologian, so I am not competent to question that information in terms of New Testament Theology.

However, having read the Greek New Testament through many times over a period of many years, and having experienced and observed something of the reality of Christ during these many years, those definitions seem to me to be rather truncated.

But I have been retired with declining health for a decade, during which time I have forgotten more than I remember, so I’d like to do a fresh survey of what Paul said about Christ, and what Jesus said about himself.

I propose to skip over all the many, many references to Christ that conform to the definitions presented above, because what I wish to refresh in my memory is what Paul says about Christ, and Jesus says about himself, that one would not know if his only source of information were a textbook in which Christ and Christology are presented in terms of the above definitions.

This is not intended to be a debate thread, so I would want to do serial posts of comments by Paul and Jesus, with comments from others welcomed and invited.

[Abigail]

[Jaltus]

Go for it, John. My "definitions" were intentionally truncated. Mind you, I was also going by what the academy says and not what I think until my post about God.

Do you think the Son of Man/humanity of Jesus fits into "Christology" or not? I know some people define Christology as only the more exalted part of Jesus and others as ONLY His human side. Neat bifurcation, huh?

[John Reece]

Go for it, John. My "definitions" were intentionally truncated. Mind you, I was also going by what the academy says and not what I think until my post about God.

Do you think the Son of Man/humanity of Jesus fits into "Christology" or not? I know some people define Christology as only the more exalted part of Jesus and others as ONLY His human side. Neat bifurcation, huh?

I thought your "definitions" sounded like "the academy", and I guessed you were expressing an academic consensus.

Yes, I think the Son of Man/humanity of Jesus fits into "Christology". I have never thought in terms of a separation of the two natures.

I remember being in a church meeting about 20 years ago when people were asking questions about the relationship between Jesus' divine nature and his human nature. I raised both hands and said, "Consider my left hand to represent Jesus human nature, and my right hand to represent his divine nature." Then I put my right hand behind by back and said, "Prior to his Resurrection, Jesus went through life with his right hand tied behind his back."

[John Reece]

I presuppose the truth of this New Testament scripture:

Now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit. -- Matthew 1:18 (ESV)

Not having a natural biological father, from the time of Jesus’ conception in Mary’s womb there was inherent within him both a natural and a divine nature.

[John Reece]

Please remember the narrow focus of this thread: the scope of Christology.

What I am interested in searching out is the question of whether or not Christology should include not only what Jesus was and did as an individual, but also what he has done, is doing, and will do in and through what Paul referred to as his Body, the Church.

With that in mind, consider the text of John 15:1-11, followed by the commentary of an eminent scholar:

John 15

I Am the True Vine

1 "I am the true vine, and my Father is the vinedresser. 2 Every branch of mine that does not bear fruit he takes away, and every branch that does bear fruit he prunes, that it may bear more fruit. 3 Already you are clean because of the word that I have spoken to you. 4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit by itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in me. 5 I am the vine; you are the branches. Whoever abides in me and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing. 6 If anyone does not abide in me he is thrown away like a branch and withers; and the branches are gathered, thrown into the fire, and burned. 7 If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you. 8 By this my Father is glorified, that you bear much fruit and so prove to be my disciples. 9 As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Abide in my love. 10 If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father's commandments and abide in his love. 11 These things I have spoken to you, that my joy may be in you, and that your joy may be full. (ESV)

From The Gospel According to St. John: An Introduction with Commentary and Notes on the Greek Text (Second Edition), by C. K. Barrett:

. . . The truth is that John is speaking of the union of believers with Christ, apart from whom they can do nothing. This union, originating in his initiative and sealed by his death on their behalf, is completed by the believers’ responsive love and obedience, and is the essence of Christianity. . . . the theme is no longer coming but abiding. . . .

. . . But his theme is the union between the believers and Christ as manifested in his whole work in life, death, and resurrection. This union is the theme of the present and of the next section. Only in Christ can Christians live. In him there is the fruitfulness of true service of God, of answered prayer, and of obedience in love. All who are in him are his friends, and they are necessarily united with each other in love.

. . . What must be noted here is the twofold transformation of the traditional material which John has effected, and which is visible in both the form and the substance of the parable, (a) John withdraws the point of the parable from the eschatological crisis in the ministry of Jesus and applies it to the continuous life of the church. (b) The vine in his handling of the material ceases to represent Israel and becomes a Christological definition applied to Jesus himself. The change in the form of the parabolic material appears in the facts (a) that no clear story is told; we do not hear the fate of a particular vine or vineyard, but rather certain general observations on viticulture; (b) that the whole symbolism is governed by the opening words [greek]egw eimi[/greek]; Jesus is all that the vine truly symbolizes.

[John Reece]

The text to be considered in this post is Ephesians 4:11-16.

Ephesians 4

11 And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, 12 to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, 13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood [[greek]eiV andra teleion[/greek]^*], to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, 14 so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes. 15 Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, 16 from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love.

^* Greek to a full-grown man (ESV)

In years past, I spent rather many hours pondering correspondences between the Greek texts of 1 Corinthians and Ephesians.

I have no interest in trying to persuade anyone of what became clear to me; however, in a subsequent post, I may quote a Greek scholar from a prior generation who elucidates a crucial facet of my view.

For now, it will suffice to cite a consensus of competent exegetical scholars who share a similar view with regard to the narrow focus of this thread.

I confess to selective quoting; judge for yourselves the trustworthiness of the scholars quoted, and the merit of their comments.

[. . . ] It cannot be denied that individual believers require to grow and mature in their faith; Col 1:28 uses [greek]teleioV[/greek] in this way but there it is associated with [greek]anqrwpoV[/greek]; however the main drive in our context is corporate, relating to the building of the church (vv. 12, 16). But if the individualistic interpretation is preferred, the implication of AE’s [AE = Author of Ephesians – the author of this commentary is not convinced AE = Paul –JR] use of [greek]anhr[/greek] would then be that he was thinking only of male believers and 4:22-24 shows he is not. More importantly, if a contrast is being drawn with [greek]nhpioi[/greek] in v. 14, we ought to have a plural here. The individualistic interpretation is then unsatisfactory; any other must lie in the area of corporate understanding. Could the ‘man’ be Christ? Schlier, Christus, 27-37, provides a considerable number of references to the use of the term ‘man’ for the heavenly saviour and in some of these we actually have the phrase, ‘perfect (mature) man’ [. . .]. Unfortunately most of the references are late and while the general idea may be early the actual occurrences of the phrase may be derived from Christian usage. Yet it cannot be denied that the heavenly saviour is often seen as corporate; this also seems to be true of Christ in the Pauline literature; as the first Adam contains all humanity within himself so the second Adam contains all believers; it may not then be necessary to depend here on later texts. While [greek]anqrwpoV[/greek] would have been normal in the corporate sense, [greek]anhr[/greek] can also carry this sense (cf 2 Esdras 3:1; 18:1). However, a corporate solution like this has its own difficulties for it would have been normal for the phrase to have been introduced with the definite article. This also militates against a single equation of the phrase with the church through the parallel of 2:15, ‘one new human being’; it is not in any case certain that the phrase of 2:15 refers to the church [. . .]; moreover 2:15 uses [greek]anqrwpoV[/greek] and not [greek]anhr[/greek], and in 5:22f the church is [greek]gunh[/greek]. There is no easy solution to these difficulties and commentators offer both individualistic, referring to Christ, and corporate, referring to the church, solutions. Even if no easy solution is possible a corporate accords better with the context, and with very great hesitation we must accept this and view the ‘man’ as the corporate Christ (he is thus referred to in all three phrases) who is the church. – Ernest Best, Ephesians (ICC), pages 401-402; (T&T Clark Ltd., 1998).

Ernest Best (quoted above from the updated publication of the International Critical Commentary on Ephesians) raised questions about the last part of the following comment, but it’s worth quoting from the original ICC commentary on Ephesians:

[greek]eiV andra teleion[/greek], a perfect, mature man, to which the following [greek]nhpioi[/greek] is opposed. [. . .] The singular is used because it refers to the Church as a whole ; it corresponds to the [greek]eiV kainoV anqrwpoV[/greek]. – T. K. Abbott, Ephesians and Colossians (ICC), page 120; (T&T Clark Ltd., 1985).

It is interesting to note that the author of the following commentary has this on the dedication page:

FOR DAVID AND PAUL
[greek]eiV andra teleion[/greek] (Eph 4:13)

[greek]eiV andra teleion, eiV metron hlukiaV tou plhrwmatoV tou Cristou[/greek], “to the mature person, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ.” These last two goals to which all believers are to attain are expressed in terms which describe the Church in the completed state. The Church in this state is seen as a corporate entity, not as disparate individuals. – Andrew T. Lincoln, Ephesians (WBC), page 256.

The final quote for this post is by a commentator that I regard, when considering his entire oeuvre, as the best of the best. His comment originated in a publication that is now out of print, but fortunately is cited by Peter T. O’Brien in a footnote on page 308 of The Letter to the Ephesians (Pillar NT Commentary):

’When the goal is ultimately reached, and the body of Christ has grown sufficiently to match the Head Himself, then will be seen the full-grown Man which is Christ together with His members. That spectacle will not fully appear until the day when they are glorified together with Him; but the expectation of that day will act as a powerful incentive to spiritual development in the present time’. – F. F. Bruce, The Epistles to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Ephesians, pages 351-51 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984); F. F. Bruce, Ephesians, pages 87-88 (London: Pickering and Inglis, 1961).

[John Reece]

The scripture under consideration in this post is 1 Corinthians 12:12 :

For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. (ESV)

Scholarly comments:

From one point of view Christ is the Head, but that is not the thought here. Here He is the whole Body, as being that which unites the members and makes them an organic whole. – Archibald Robertson, The First Epistle of St Paul to the Corinthians, (ICC), page 271; T&T Clark, 1911.

Christ exists as a body, the parts of which are the Christians. – William F. Orr and James Arthur Walther, 1 Corinthians (The Anchor Bible), page 285; Doubleday, 1976.

It has been said that the Church is the continuation of the incarnation. It is nearer the truth to say that the Church is the express image and [greek]plhrwma[/greek] of the glorified Lord – Thomas Charles Edwards, Commentary on First Corinthians, 325; Hamilton, Adams & Co., 1885.

Paul, moreover, thought of believers in Christ as sharing his risen life; they were ‘in Christ’ as Christ lived in them. He could thus more readily think of them as members of ‘Christ corporate’. – F. F. Bruce, 1 and 2 Corinthians (NCB), page 120; Reprint: Marshall, Morgan, and Scott, 1971.

[John Reece]

Colossian 1:24-29

24 Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church, 25 of which I became a minister according to the stewardship from God that was given to me for you, to make the word of God fully known, 26 the mystery hidden for ages and generations but now revealed to his saints. 27 To them God chose to make known how great among the Gentiles are the riches of the glory of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory. 28 Him we proclaim, warning everyone and teaching everyone with all wisdom, that we may present everyone mature in Christ. 29 For this I toil, struggling with all his energy that he powerfully works within me. (ESV)

N. T. Wright comments:

26-27 God’s secret plan is not, for Paul, a timetable of events, but a person. We see here the outworking of the Christology of 1:15-20. All that God has from the beginning planned to do he has done, and is doing, in Christ, for the sake of his people: to them God has chosen to make known among the Gentiles the glorious riches of this mystery.

[. . .]

This hope of glory is a certainty because of the mystery itself, which is Christ in you. This could be taken as ‘Christ among you’ (the ‘you’ is plural), its emphasis being that of the immediately preceding phrase, ‘among the Gentiles’. The fact that the Jewish Messiah has made his abode among the nations of the world shows that God intends their ultimate glorification. But, though this sense is thoroughly Pauline, it is probably better to take the phrase in the sense of Romans 8:10, where the indwelling of Christ in believers is their guarantee of resurrection. – The Epistles of Paul to the Colossians and to Philemon, pages 91-92 (TNTC); Eerdmans, 1986.

The phrase rendered "in you" is ambiguous in the Greek text. The following scholarly comments are added in support of Wright's exegesis:

At any rate the idea is simply that the personal aspect of “this mystery” is “Christ in you the hope of glory” ([greek]CristoV en umin h elpiV thV doxhV[/greek]). He is addressing Gentiles, but the idea of [greek]en[/greek] here is in, not among. It is the personal experience and presence of Christ in the individual life of all believers that Paul has in mind, the indwelling Christ in the heart as in Eph. 3:17. – A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, page 485

[greek]o estin CristoV en umin.[/greek] [. . .] the content of this mystery Paul assures his readers is “Christ is in you, [Colossians], the hope of glory” These words add to what has previously been asserted: (a) Christ is at the center of God’s mystery. The [greek]musthrion[/greek] focuses on him as its content. (b) While the mystery has been proclaimed or made known among the Gentiles ([greek]en toiV eqnesin[/greek]) it has been believed by the Colossians (cf. 1 Tim 3:16 where the “mystery” refers to Christ not only preached among the Gentiles but also “believed in the world” ). Christ had been preached to them by Epaphras and they had received him as Lord (2:6). Christ therefore was “in them” (not simply “among them” which is an appropriate translation of the preposition [greek]en[/greek] in the clause [greek]gnwrisai . . . en toiV eqnesin[/greek]; but here the [greek]en umin[/greek] is more specific than [greek]en toiV eqnesin[/greek], having particular reference to the Colossian readers, and with the verb [greek]estin[/greek] points to Christ’s indwelling them as Gentile believers (Bruce, 219, against Lohse, 76) – Peter T. O’Brien, Colossians, Philemon (WBC), page 87; Word, 1982.

[greek]CristoV en umin[/greek]] 'Christ in you,' i.e. 'you Gentiles.' [. . .] With [greek]CristoV en umin[/greek] compare [greek]meq' hmwn qeoV[/greek] Matt. 1:23. It may be a question however, whether [greek]en umin[/greek] means 'within you' or 'among you.' The former is perhaps the more probable interpretation, as suggested by Rom. 8:10; 2 Cor. 8:5; Gal. 4:19; compare Ephes. 3:17 [greek]katoikhsai ton Criston dia thV pistewV en taiV kardiaiV umon[/greek]. – J. B. Lightfoot, Saint Paul's Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, page 169; MacMillan, 1879.

The specific description of the mystery here as “Christ in you” is a shift in focus from the goal (reconciliation of Jew and Gentile) to the means (“Christ”). In Galatians and Ephesians the means is expressed rather by the “in Christ” formula (Gal. 3:14, 26 , 28; Eph. 2:13, 15-16, 21-22). But the reverse formula as appropriate here in the light of 1:15-20: as Stoicism in the particular saw an identity between individual rationality and the rationality pervading the cosmos, so this divine Wisdom now identified with Christ can be seen as an immanent power within the personality. I a similar was in Galatians Paul had personalized the devotional talk of Christ’s self-giving and the apocalyptic idea of rescue from the present evil age (1:4): “Christ lives in me . . . , who loved me and gave himself for me” (2:20). So here the mystery of how the cosmos was created and holds together is personalized: “Christ in (each of) you” (cf. also Rom. 8:10; 2 Cor. 13:5; Eph. 3:17). Strictly speaking the divine presence indwelling individual humanity should be expressed in terms of the Spirit of God; hence the more typical Pauline balance between “us in Christ” (see on 1:2) and “the Spirit in us” (e.g., Rom. 8:9; 11, 15-16, 23, 26)> But given the overlap between Wisdom and Spirit as ways of speaking of divine immanence, a degree of interchange between “in Christ” and “Spirit in” formulations is no problem. That a person should be spoken of as indwelling another no doubt poses something of a conceptual difficulty, but the idea of divine immanence in an individual is simply an aspect of the larger concept of divine immanence (see on 1:19), and generations of Christian believers have evidently found no problem in using such language to describe the experience of personal communion with God understood in terms of Jesus Christ and the inner strengthening which comes through it. All this tells against the common assumption that the phrase must mean “Christ among you,”^* which weakens the train of thought and makes the phrase add hardly anything to the preceding “among the nations.”

This mystery of “Christ in you” is further defined as “the hope of glory” (cf. Ignatius, Ephesians 21:2 and Magnesians 11: “Jesus Christ, our [common] hope”). It is striking that for the third time in these opening paragraphs the theme of hope is given central place in the gospel (1:5, 23, 27; see on 1:5)> This is an appropriate note on which to wind up this brief reference to the mystery of God’s purpose shaped from before the ages and generation and now moving toward its eschatological climax. “Christ in you” spans the full sweep of time, God's creative power in Christ determining end as well as beginning and blending the individual into the divine composition. The hoped-for “glory” again ties the whole process into God: such glory can only be God’s (“the wealth of his glory”). It is the radiant energy which first accomplished creation and which will accomplish its consummation. It is the glory which Adam first shared and then lost (Rom. 3:23) and to which it is the divine intention to restore humanity (Rom. 8:17-21). “Christ in you” is “the hope” and that “glory” because retransformation into the divine image and glory is a lifelong process already underway in the person of faith (see also on 1:11; 3:4, 10).

^* Particularly Lohse, Colossians and Philemon 76; Gnilka Kolosserbrief 102; Wolter 105; and Aletti, Epitre aux Colossiens 141-42; otherwise Dibelius, Kolosser, Epheser, Philemon 15; Lohmeyer 85; Conzelmann 142; and Lindemann, Kolosserbrief 34; In contrast, the English language tradition tends to favor “in you” (exceptions are Abbott 235; Moule, Colossians and Philemon 83; Yates, Colossians 335; JB/NJB).

– James D. G. Dunn, The Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon (NIGTC), pages 122-123; Eerdmans, 1996.