Summary: Jesus and the God of Israel is a remarkable collection of works that expounds

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Summary: Jesus and the God of Israel is a remarkable collection of works that expounds"

Chastity Jacobs
5 years ago
Views:

1 William A. Ross November 2011 Richard Bauckham: Jesus and the God of Israel: God Crucified and Other Studies on the New Testament s Christology of Divine Identity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, pp. Summary: Jesus and the God of Israel is a remarkable collection of works that expounds upon a central thesis, initially published in a smaller work. 1 Bauckham s states that much of scholarly methodology for assessing early Christology is based erroneously upon Hellenistic categories, namely functional and ontic metaphysics. Christology, Bauckham says, should build instead on the Jewish mindset, which he contends is primarily and consistently concerned with divine identity. 2 Bauckham says Second Temple Judaism (STJ) set the theological stage for early Christianity s inclusion of Christ into this divine identity without any reformulations of divine metaphysics. As a result, says Bauckham, the earliest Christology was already the highest Christology. 3 The first chapter is Bauckham s original essay with slight modifications, and the following chapters cover various supporting arguments. Since each essay is a standalone work, a short review of each will be undertaken prior to critical evaluation of the work as a whole. In chapter one, two views of STJ s view of God are challenged: first, strict monotheism such that divinity is limited to YHWH and thus Christology departs therefrom by adding divinity to God; second, a focus on intermediary figures who bridge God and reality. 4 Bauckham, however, maintains that STJ was self-consciously monotheistic, maintaining God as distinct from reality, yet also identifiable since [he] has a name and a character, since [he can 1 God Crucified: Monotheism and Christology in the New Testament. Carlisle: Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, x. Meaning how God is differentiated from and unique in regards to all other created reality. 3 ibid William A. Ross - 1

2 be,] in some sense, known. 5 STJ noted two features of God s uniqueness: his relationship with Israel as covenant Lord, and his relationship to reality as Creator and Ruler. 6 STJ practiced monolatry as the primary means of recognizing the unique identity of God, since no created thing deserves worship. 7 Bauckham shows that whenever intermediary figures are be identified with God s identity it is in a way that affirms God s uniqueness and Oneness and leaves room for multiplicity. 8 Bauckham states that NT Christology thus aims to include Christ in the divine identity as both Creator and Ruler, worthy of worship as is God. 9 Bauckham considers Deutero- Isaiah, and Phil. 2:6-12 with this hermeneutic in mind, 10 saying that for God to come down in Christ s form to suffer is surprising in STJ categories, yet God proves to be the same but in unexpected ways. He is both free and faithful. 11 Chapter two deals with the idea of monotheism, and walks through various views of the concept, most of which leave Bauckham with questions. 12 He critiques these views, saying a history-of-religions approach cannot answer theological questions. 13 For Bauckham scholarship based on considerable ideological suspicion creates a clear danger of historiography. 14 Bauckham calls Jewish monotheism one of transcendent uniqueness, wherein YHWH is wholly other than his creation. The OT does not universally deny the existence of other divine beings, only their status, namely as subordinate creations. 15 Thus, polytheistic ANE parallels in 5 From this Bauckham takes his queue for human personality, or divine identity, to be the best category to synthesize an understanding of God Bauckham carefully distinguishes that God was not worshipped and thus unique, but vice versa, and that there was no concept of degrees of divinity in STJ. God was God; everything else was creation (12) , William A. Ross - 2

3 scripture are re-functioned to identify YHWH s uniqueness. 16 Moreover, the monotheism in the OT is not merely intellectual, but oriented in obedient devotion to YHWH. Bauckham concludes the entire OT may be read in concord with STJ monotheism, with no evolutionary dynamic present. 17 Bauckham then observes that the NT writers assume Jewish monotheism, often reinterpreting OT passages towards their Christology (cf. Rom. 3:28-30; 1 Cor. 8:1-6). Chapter three examines the use of the title the Most High God, or Elyon, in early Jewish literature, which Bauckham defends as exclusively monotheistic. 18 Given the connotation of the phrase/word Elyon, one might expect inclusive monotheism, but after examining biblical and extra-biblical texts, Bauckham shows there is no evidence for any such reading. Instead, Elyon indicates God as sovereign over all creation. Citing W. Randall Garr, Bauckham says the superlative sense of Elyon is not morphological, but semantic; height imagery portrayed God as supreme creator and ruler. 19 In chapter four Bauckham considers early worship of Christ as a key to NT Christology. He notes doxological language in various literature, such as maranatha, cultic OT vocabulary pertaining to worship ( calling on the name of the Lord ), as well as the use of the LXX s kurios as a referent to Christ. 20 Bauckham notes the transition from reverencing Christ to worshiping him shows no evidentially substantial resistance, and says it is because Christolatry did not neglect Jewish monotheism, but originated and was accommodated within it. 21 Christology was thus a new yet essentially internal development in Jewish monotheism. Christians strongly Bauckham says that ANE literature also contains some monotheizing language. There, however, multiple gods are yet acknowledged, and the tone is more of conquering emperor than an eternally supreme God. ANE monotheizing tendencies never relate exclusively to one god over time, and such a position, Bauckham observes, is not, apparently, inconsistent (94) Bauckham denies any inclusive monotheism, wherein there is a gradient/evolutionary view of God or monotheism present in Judaism. STJ instead uniformly held a hard-and-fast distinction of God and reality William A. Ross - 3

4 identified their religion as in the tradition of Jewish monolatry; Jewish monotheism and Christolatry were mutually conditioning factors. 22 Early martyrs even denied polytheism using thoroughly Jewish forms of refuting idols, yet acknowledging Christ as divine with no sense of incongruity. 23 Bauckham has a small section on patristic Christological development wherein God s metaphysics began to be considered, though he states this was a posterior development to Christolatry. Early Christology thus recognized Christ such that he could be worshipped (as part of God s divine identity), and God such that Jesus could be worshipped. 24 Chapter five examines the theme of the throne of God. Bauckham discusses intermediary figures, saying they are either portrayed as serving God in creation and rule, or, like Christ, are identified within God s identity, thus participate in creation and rule. Intermediary figure texts are usually concerned with God s uniqueness, not unitariness. 25 The heavenly throne is the symbol of the sovereignty and creatorship of God and Bauckham states that the idea necessarily belongs to the logic of [STJ] monotheism. 26 Given the throne s status, he says, being seated on it implies inclusion into God s unique identity. After considering examples, 27 Bauckham concludes that no enthroned figure other than Christ entails any question of participation in the unique divine identity, nor do they receive worship. 28 Bauckham then turns to Psalm 110:1 as a key text for early Christology; against otherwise normal Jewish monotheistic expectations, novel NT exegesis said about the psalm what no Jew had ever wished to say about any figure. This Wisdom is enthroned in 1 Enoch 84:2-3, which Bauckham says shows Wisdom to be that of God himself, part of his intrinsic identity (166). He also speaks to Ezekiel the Tragedian s tale of Moses dream wherein he himself is enthroned. Bauckham says Raguel s interpretation of the dream is the key, as interpretation implies the figurative nature of the dream, which is a reference to Exo. 4:16 (168). Others are enthroned in The Parables of Enoch, all identified as part of God s identity further by their participation in eschatological judgment (170) William A. Ross - 4

5 developed reading remained within Jewish monotheism, placing the enthroned Christ decisively on the divine side of the distinction between divine identity and all other reality. In chapter six Bauckham considers Paul s Christology of divine identity as creational, eschatological, and cultic. Early Christian interest was on the latter two, although attention was given to creational identity of Christ in order to avoid adoptionism. Paul employs Christological reading of scriptural YHWH texts, taking the LXX s kurios as Christ in certain exegetical situations. 29 Bauckham then considers Pauline texts that speak to each of the three aspects of divine identity, focusing on Phil. 2:6-11 as the climactic example. 30 Two intermediary figures, Melchizedek and Yahoel, are then considered as precedents for Pauline Christology, but Bauckham states that they offer no help at all, since in Paul we find broader attribution of divine prerogatives to Christ in comparison to these figures. 31 Chapter seven looks at the book of Hebrews Christology, especially as a commentary on Psalm 110. Hebrews gives Christ three categories of divine and human identity: Son, Lord, 32 and High Priest. Most of the chapter is focused on the high priest function, since the divinehuman nature is crucial for it and since it is not an aspect of God s unique identity. Bauckham sates that 7:3 uses Hellenistic true-god-language to differentiate Christ from a deified hero, and to point out the unoriginatedness of Melchizedek to the same end. The author is saying both figures are eternally true God. 33 As God endures while creation perishes, the Melchizedekian priest endures while the Levites perish, thus Christ qualifies for his never-ending priesthood because he shares the fully eternal being, the indestructible life, of God Son meaning coeternality with the Father yet human sonship like mankind, and Lord meaning Christ s seat on the throne and the same title for him as human (7:14) William A. Ross - 5

6 In the eighth and final chapter Bauckham considers Christ s cry from the cross. Focusing on Mark, Bauckham points out the multiple allusions to the lament psalms throughout that gospel, which he believes validates reading Christ s cry in the full context of Ps Reading Christ s words in light of the lament psalm genre, which was seen by early Christians as prophesies of the Messiah s suffering, Bauckham identifies Christ s passion (at least in part) with all who wrote and used [lament] psalms, those who [also] cried out to God. 36 The lament psalms are thus collective, and Christ s inclusive 37 use of Ps. 22 gives it new meaning while presupposing the old meaning, namely expression of god-forsakenness. The chapter is then closed with several theological reflections, wherein Bauckham states that the cross is God s identification with the sufferer such that it reveals God s unique and particular act of self-giving love for the godforsaken. 38 Review: Overall Bauckham s work is thorough and persuasive, and though the essays stand alone, they also hang together remarkably well as a book. The central thesis from chapter one is diligently and luminously applied throughout the pieces, each of which substantiates Bauckham s presentations of STJ monotheism as well as early Christology in helpful ways. The exegesis of biblical passages is careful, and Bauckham takes a respectful approach to scripture as cohesive, at least theologically. When dealing with differing scholarly opinions, mostly undertaken in his second chapter, Bauckham presents a fair treatment of others arguments before departing from their methodology or conclusions ibid. Bauckham does not deny the use of Ps. 22:1 as personally applied by Christ. 37 Bauckham means this to refer to the way in which the experience of the Messiah gathers up into itself the experiences of all whose sufferings find expression in those psalms, rather than being exclusively messianically applied (ibid) William A. Ross - 6

7 One often gets the favorable impression that much more could be said by Bauckham, even though this volume is a set of supporting arguments to his initial thesis. Even so, Bauckham prudently opts for economy of words for the sake of a more manageable, yet coherent read. Bauckham s prose is usually precise, although he does at times get caught in a sentence that is too clunky or that changes tense midway. Few typographical errors were found, and even fewer grammatical mix-ups. Some repetition is extant due to the stand-alone nature of the essays. Indeed, the essays autonomy may help explain some of the ambiguities considered below. Some of Bauckham s assumptions come out most strongly in chapter two, where he spends comparatively significant space interacting with and pointing out poor methodology. In so doing, his own approach to the literature becomes more apparent. Bauckham wants to use monotheism only insofar as the text itself defines such an idea, which he concludes is indeed a more nuanced definition than even that of the presuppositionally aware scholars with whom he interacts. Bauckham questions the need for biblical theology to locate texts in speciously historical contexts in relation to other OT texts, concluding that a history-of-religions approach is unhelpful for developing either an OT or a pan-biblical theology, which he stresses should be canonical and synchronic. 39 Historical study cannot answer theological questions, and Bauckham sees this as a category mistake in other scholars approach to monotheism. For Bauckham, monotheism is a theology primarily observable by attention to the canonical and contextual relationship of texts, formed and edited by those who held to that theology in early Judaism. 40 A rather surface level problem is that while Bauckham calls for a clearer definition of terms and more attention to the texts, one is at times left unsure of certain terms he employs. Second Temple Judaism and early Judaism, terms germane to his argument, are nowhere William A. Ross - 7

8 defined, and even seem flexible in range. Perhaps such lack of precision is related to Bauckham s methodological approach addressed above, since proposing hard dates for these eras would employ at least some historical reconstruction. One is left wondering, however, what sort of continuity Bauckham sees between OT texts and early Judaism, and between early Judaism and STJ, either historically or textually considered? Bauckham does not speak to this question in much detail. This methodology seems to come back to bite him, since Bauckham presumes our theological deductions may be made from the text, even though that text s own theology is apparently to be located historically in the Second Temple context, where, again, Bauckham sees the formation and editing of the canon to have occurred. 41 The reader is left wondering what Bauckham would say is the precise relationship of (biblical) history to biblical theology given such a conclusion. 42 Other unclear assumptions appear in the book where Bauckham speaks to NT authors exegesis of OT texts. Bauckham states that Christological monotheism was developed exegetically for NT writers, 43 although the exact exegetical method is left unclear in various places. On the one hand, NT exegesis is described as novel or innovatory in comparison with the Second Temple Jewish exegesis from which it developed, focused on interpreting the decisive eschatological acts of Israel s God that did not easily fit into to existing Jewish expectations. 44 NT exegesis was thus not a mere continuation of the Jewish messianic exegetical 41 ibid 42 This problematical assumption is evident on p where Bauckham states that Despite our modern problems of understanding precisely what the Shema and the first commandment of the Decalogue originally meant, we need have no doubt of how they were understood in the late ST period (emphasis mine). Later, Bauckham states that Jewish monotheism was a historical phenomenon fashioned out of older or non-jewish material that lacked the typically sharper STJ understanding of divine uniqueness, further bisecting the OT s history and theology from its historically-located theology in the Second Temple Period (157, emphasis mine) , 232 William A. Ross - 8

9 practice. 45 But on the other hand, Bauckham states that for the early Jewish Christians, the primary medium of theological development was meticulous and disciplined exegesis deployed with the sophisticated exegetical techniques of contemporary Jewish scholarship. 46 The reader is thus left wondering what exactly Bauckham would say is the extent of methodological similarity between NT and STJ exegesis. Was NT exegesis primarily novel, or primarily contiguous with STJ exegesis? Bauckham does not give much to work with in answering such questions, even though this seems to be a crucial question for NT Christology. Coupled with the unclear link between STJ monotheism and the OT s own theology, that these NT-use-of-the-OT exegetical questions remain unanswered is unfortunate. Indeed, Bauckham s statements seem to imply a circular conclusion that theological milieu of STJ or NT writers was the primary means by which theologically innovatory Christological exegesis was done. Overall, Richard Bauckham makes a persuasive case for the continuity of NT Christology with the monotheism consistently and contemporaneously present in the Second Temple period. His treatment of the texts, both biblical and otherwise, is careful and respectful, aiming ultimately at construction, rather than destruction. Bauckham is clearly a top tier scholar in his field who could write at much greater length on each of the topics addressed in this volume, thus his economy and clarity ought to be highly admired. Still, it would seem prudent to address the apparent vagaries considered above in order that the relationships between history, theology(ies), and exegetical methodology(ies) are clearer William A. Ross - 9

Bauckham, Richard. Nick Norelli Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth New Jersey

Bauckham, Richard. Nick Norelli Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth New Jersey Bauckham, Richard. Jesus and the God of Israel: God Crucified and Other Studies on the New Testament s Christology of Divine Identity Grand Rapids, MI:Eerdmans, 2008. Pp. xii + 285. Paper. $34.00. ISBN