Incubator escapee wiki

Christology

Article Discussion
(Redirected from Christological)

Template:Short description Template:Use dmy dates

File:La Résurrection du Christ 1560 Véronèse.jpg
Paolo Veronese, The Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Template:C.)

Template:Christianity Template:Christology

In Christianity, ChristologyTemplate:Efn is a branch of theology that concerns Jesus. Different denominations have different opinions on questions such as whether Jesus was human, divine, or both, and as a messiah what his role would be in the freeing of the Jewish people from foreign rulers or in the prophesied Kingdom of God, and in the salvation from what would otherwise be the consequences of sin.Template:SfnTemplate:SfnTemplate:SfnTemplate:SfnTemplate:Sfn

The earliest Christian writings gave several titles to Jesus, such as Son of Man, Son of God, Messiah, and Template:Transliteration, which were all derived from Hebrew scripture. These terms centered around two opposing themes, namely "Jesus as a preexistent figure who becomes human and then returns to God", versus adoptionism – that Jesus was a human who was "adopted" by God at his baptism, crucifixion, or resurrection.<ref group=web name="EB_Christology"/> Prior to 2007, the scholarly consensus was that the divinity of Christ was a later development,<ref name="gerd">Gerd Lüdemann, "An Embarrassing Misrepresentation" Template:Webarchive, Free Inquiry, October / November 2007: "the broad consensus of modern New Testament scholars that the proclamation of Jesus's exalted nature was in large measure the creation of the earliest Christian communities."</ref> though most scholars now argue that a high Christology existed prior to Paul.Template:Sfn<ref name="Pitre" />

From the second to the fifth centuries, the relation of the human and divine nature of Christ was a major focus of debates in the early church and at the first seven ecumenical councils. The Council of Chalcedon in 451 issued a formulation of the hypostatic union of the two natures of Christ, one human and one divine, "united with neither confusion nor division",Template:Sfn affirmed by most of the major branches of Western Christianity and Eastern Orthodoxy,Template:Sfn<ref name="Olson1999" /> and rejected by the [[Oriental Orthodox Churches|Oriental Orthodox ChurchesTemplate:SfnTemplate:SfnTemplate:Sfn]] which subscribe to Miaphysitism as articulated by Second Council of Ephesus, where it affirmed the first Council of Ephesus's doctrine of one composite divine-human nature after the union.<ref name="Gros_etal_2000">Template:Cite book</ref><ref>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref>

Definition and approachesEdit

Christology (from the Greek Template:Langx and Template:Langx), literally 'the understanding of Christ',Template:Sfn is the study of the nature (person) and work (role in salvation)Template:Efn-la of Jesus Christ.Template:SfnTemplate:SfnTemplate:Sfn<ref group="web" name="EB_Christology"> {{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }} </ref><ref group="web" name="CathEncycl_Christology"> {{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }} </ref>Template:Efn-la It studies Jesus Christ's humanity and divinity, and the relationship between these two aspects;Template:Sfn as well as the role he plays in salvation.

Ontological Christology analyzes the nature or being<ref group="web" name="thinkapologetics.christology"> {{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }} </ref> of Jesus Christ. Functional Christology analyzes the works of Jesus Christ, while soteriological Christology analyzes the "salvific" standpoints of Christology.<ref> Template:Cite book</ref>

Theologians may take several different approaches to Christology.Template:Efn-la For example:

Template:AnchorPerson of ChristEdit

Template:See also

File:Christ Pantocrator niche Holy Trinity Meteora.jpg
Christ Pantocrator, Holy Trinity's monastery, Meteora, Greece

A fundamental Christological teaching describes Jesus Christ as possessing two natures: human and divine; debates have emerged regarding the unity of these natures. According to post-Chalcedonian definitions, the human and divine natures of Jesus Christ apparently (prosopic) form a duality, as they coexist within one person (hypostasis).<ref name=Erickson >Introducing Christian Doctrine by Millard J. Erickson, L. Arnold Hustad 2001, p. 234</ref> In the Oriental Orthodox paradigm, these two natures unite to create one composite nature that is fully human and fully divine. There are no direct discussions in the New Testament regarding the dual nature of Christ as both divine and human,<ref name=Erickson /> and since the early days of Christianity, theologians have debated various approaches to the understanding of these natures, at times resulting in ecumenical councils, and in schisms.<ref name=Erickson />

Some historical christological doctrines gained broad support:

Influential Christologies broadly condemned as hereticalTemplate:Efn-la include:

  • Docetism (3rd–4th centuries) claimed the human form of Jesus was mere semblance without any true reality.
  • Arianism (4th century) viewed the divine nature of Jesus, the Son of God, as distinct and inferior to God the Father, e.g., by having a beginning in time.
  • Nestorianism (5th century) considers the two natures (human and divine) of Jesus Christ to subsist separately.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref>
  • Monothelitism (7th century), considered Christ to have only one will.

As councils were convened, some theological positions were rejected as heresies, yet the acceptance of these councils remains partial. Notably, certain Christological views reemerged in later centuries, such as the beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses, which reflect elements of Arianism.

SalvationEdit

{{#invoke:Labelled list hatnote|labelledList|Main article|Main articles|Main page|Main pages}}

In Christian theology, atonement is the method by which human beings can be reconciled to God through Christ's sacrificial suffering and death.<ref>"Atonement". Cross, F. L., ed. The Oxford dictionary of the Christian church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005</ref> Atonement is the forgiving or pardoning of sin in general and original sin in particular through the suffering, death and resurrection of Jesus,<ref group=web name="CED">Collins English Dictionary, Complete & Unabridged 11th Edition, atonement Template:Webarchive, retrieved 3 October 2012: "2. (often capital) Christian theol

a. the reconciliation of man with God through the life, sufferings, and sacrificial death of Christ

b. the sufferings and death of Christ" </ref> enabling the reconciliation between God and his creation. Due to the influence of Gustaf Aulén (1879–1978), whose book {{#invoke:Lang|lang}} came out in English translation in 1931, the various theories or Template:Linktext of atonement are often grouped under the headings of the "classical paradigm", the "objective paradigm", and the "subjective paradigm":Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn<ref name=Aulen>Gustaf Aulen, Christus Victor: An Historical Study of the Three Main Types of the Idea of Atonement, E.T. London: SPCK; New York: Macmillan, 1931</ref><ref>Vincent Taylor, The Cross of Christ (London: Macmillan & Co, 1956), pp. 71–77

2</ref>

Other theories are the "embracement theory" and the "shared atonement" theory.<ref>Jeremiah, David. 2009. Living With Confidence in a Chaotic World, pp. 96 & 124. Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson, Inc.</ref><ref>Massengale, Jamey. 2013.Renegade Gospel, The Jesus Manifold</ref>

Early Christologies (1st century)Edit

Template:See also

Early notions of ChristEdit

The earliest christological reflections were shaped by both the Jewish background of the earliest Christians, and by the Greek world of the eastern Mediterranean in which they operated.Template:Sfn<ref group=web name="EB_Christology"/>Template:Efn-la The earliest Christian writings give several titles to Jesus, such as Son of Man, Son of God, Messiah, and Kyrios, which were all derived from Hebrew scripture.<ref group=web name="EB_Christology"/>Template:Sfn According to Matt Stefon and Hans J. Hillerbrand:

<templatestyles src="Template:Blockquote/styles.css" />

Template:ErrorTemplate:Main other{{#if:|{{#if:|}}

— {{#if:|, in }}Template:Comma separated entries

}}

{{#invoke:Check for unknown parameters|check|unknown=Template:Main other|preview=Page using Template:Blockquote with unknown parameter "_VALUE_"|ignoreblank=y| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | author | by | char | character | cite | class | content | multiline | personquoted | publication | quote | quotesource | quotetext | sign | source | style | text | title | ts }}

Historically in the Alexandrian school of thought (fashioned on the Gospel of John), Jesus Christ is the eternal Logos who already possesses unity with the Father before the act of Incarnation.<ref name=Waldrop >Charles T. Waldrop (1985). Karl Barth's christology Template:ISBN pp. 19–23</ref> In contrast, the Antiochian school viewed Christ as a single, unified human person apart from his relationship to the divine.<ref name=Waldrop />Template:Efn-la

Pre-existenceEdit

The notion of pre-existence is deeply rooted in Jewish thought, and can be found in apocalyptic thought and among the rabbis of Paul's time,Template:Sfn but Paul was most influenced by Jewish-Hellenistic wisdom literature, where Template:"'Wisdom' is extolled as something existing before the world and already working in creation.Template:Sfn According to Witherington, Paul "subscribed to the christological notion that Christ existed prior to taking on human flesh[,] founding the story of ChristTemplate:Nbsp[...] on the story of divine Wisdom".Template:SfnTemplate:Efn-la

KyriosEdit

The title Kyrios for Jesus is central to the development of New Testament Christology.<ref name="MiniJohnson"/> In the Septuagint it translates the Tetragrammaton, the holy Name of God. As such, it closely links Jesus with God – in the same way a verse such as Matthew 28:19, "The Name (singular) of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit".<ref>Template:Bibleverse</ref>

Kyrios is also conjectured to be the Greek translation of Aramaic Template:Transliteration, which in everyday Aramaic usage was a very respectful form of polite address, which means more than just 'teacher' and was somewhat similar to 'rabbi'. While the term Template:Transliteration expressed the relationship between Jesus and his disciples during his life, the Greek Kyrios came to represent his lordship over the world.<ref name="Cullmann2">Template:Cite book</ref>

The early Christians placed Kyrios at the center of their understanding, and from that center attempted to understand the other issues related to the Christian mysteries.<ref name="MiniJohnson">Template:Cite book</ref> The question of the deity of Christ in the New Testament is inherently related to the Kyrios title of Jesus used in the early Christian writings and its implications for the absolute lordship of Jesus. In early Christian belief, the concept of Kyrios included the pre-existence of Christ, for they believed if Christ is one with God, he must have been united with God from the very beginning.<ref name=MiniJohnson /><ref name="Cullmann">Template:Cite book</ref>

Development of "low Christology" and "high Christology"Edit

{{#invoke:Labelled list hatnote|labelledList|Main article|Main articles|Main page|Main pages}}

Two fundamentally different Christologies developed in the early Church, namely a "low" or adoptionist Christology, and a "high" or "incarnation" Christology.Template:Sfn The chronology of the development of these early Christologies is a matter of debate within contemporary scholarship.Template:SfnTemplate:SfnTemplate:Sfn<ref group=web name="Hurtado.2017"/> There is no consensus on the continuity or discontinuity of earthly Jesus and post-Easter christology.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref>

The "low Christology" or "adoptionist Christology" is the belief "that God exalted Jesus to be his Son by raising him from the dead",Template:Sfn thereby raising him to "divine status".<ref group=web name=BE_2013.02.14>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref> According to the "evolutionary model"Template:Sfn or evolutionary theories,Template:Sfn the Christological understanding of Jesus developed over time,Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn<ref name="Ehrman_HJBG_CG">Bart Ehrman, How Jesus became God, Course Guide</ref> as witnessed in the Gospels,Template:Sfn with the earliest Christians believing that Jesus was a human who was exalted, or else adopted as God's Son,Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn when he was resurrected.<ref name="Ehrman_HJBG_CG"/><ref>Geza Vermez (2008), The Resurrection, pp. 138–139</ref> Later beliefs shifted the exaltation to his baptism, birth, and subsequently to the idea of his pre-existence, as witnessed in the Gospel of John.<ref name="Ehrman_HJBG_CG"/> This "evolutionary model" was proposed by proponents of the {{#invoke:Lang|lang}}, especially Wilhelm Bousset's influential Kyrios Christos (1913).Template:Sfn This evolutionary model was very influential, and the "low Christology" has long been regarded as the oldest Christology.Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn<ref group=web name=BE_2013.02.14/>Template:Efn-la

The other early Christology is "high Christology", which is "the view that Jesus was a pre-existent divine being who became a human, did the Father's will on earth, and then was taken back up into heaven whence he had originally come",<ref group=web name=BE_2013.02.14/>Template:Sfn and from where he appeared on earth.Template:Efn-la According to Bousset, this "high Christology" developed at the time of Paul's writing, under the influence of Gentile Christians, who brought their pagan Hellenistic traditions to the early Christian communities, introducing divine honours to Jesus.Template:Sfn According to Casey and Dunn, this "high Christology" developed after the time of Paul, at the end of the first century CE when the Gospel of John was written.Template:Sfn

Since the 1970s, these late datings for the development of a "high Christology" have been contested,Template:Sfn and a majority of scholars argue that this "high Christology" existed already before the writings of Paul.Template:SfnTemplate:Efn-la According to the "New {{#invoke:Lang|lang}}",Template:Sfn<ref group="web">{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref> or the Early High Christology Club,<ref group=web name="Bouma.2014"/> which includes Martin Hengel, Larry Hurtado, N. T. Wright, and Richard Bauckham,Template:Sfn<ref group=web name="Bouma.2014"/> this "incarnation Christology" or "high Christology" did not evolve over a longer time, but was a "big bang" of ideas which were already present at the start of Christianity, and took further shape in the first few decades of the church, as witnessed in the writings of Paul.Template:Sfn<ref group=web name="Bouma.2014">{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref><ref group=web name=BE_2013.02.14/>Template:Efn-laTemplate:Efn-la

There is a controversy regarding whether Jesus himself claimed to be divine. In Honest to God (1963), then-Bishop of Woolwich, John A. T. Robinson, questioned the idea.<ref>Robinson, John A. T. (1963), Honest to God, p. 72.</ref> John Hick, writing in 1993, mentioned changes in New Testament studies, citing "broad agreement" that scholars do not today support the view that Jesus claimed to be God, quoting as examples Michael Ramsey (1980), C. F. D. Moule (1977), James Dunn (1980), Brian Hebblethwaite (1985) and David Brown (1985).<ref>Hick, John, The Metaphor of God Incarnate, page 27 Template:Webarchive. "A further point of broad agreement among New Testament scholarsTemplate:Nbsp[...] is that the historical Jesus did not make the claim to deity that later Christian thought was to make for him: he did not understand himself to be God, or God the Son, incarnate.Template:Nbsp[...] such evidence as there is has led the historians of the period to conclude, with an impressive degree of unanimity, that Jesus did not claim to be God incarnate."</ref> Larry Hurtado, who argues that the followers of Jesus within a very short period developed an exceedingly high level of devotional reverence to Jesus.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref> According to Gerd Lüdemann, the broad consensus among modern New Testament scholars is that the proclamation of the divinity of Jesus was a development within the earliest Christian communities.<ref name="gerd"/> N. T. Wright points out that arguments over the claims of Jesus regarding divinity have been passed over by more recent scholarship, which sees a more complex understanding of the idea of God in first century Judaism.<ref name=Wright1999>Template:Cite book</ref>Template:Efn-la

New Testament writingsEdit

The study of the various Christologies of the Apostolic Age is based on early Christian documents.Template:Sfn

PaulEdit

File:V&A - Raphael, St Paul Preaching in Athens (1515).jpg
Saint Paul delivering the Areopagus sermon in Athens, by Raphael, 1515

The oldest Christian sources are the writings of Paul.Template:Sfn The central Christology of Paul conveys the notion of Christ's pre-existenceTemplate:SfnTemplate:Sfn and the identification of Christ as Kyrios.Template:Sfn Both notions already existed before him in the early Christian communities, and Paul deepened them and used them for preaching in the Hellenistic communities.Template:Sfn

What exactly Paul believed about the nature of Jesus cannot be determined decisively. In Philippians 2, Paul states that Jesus was preexistent and came to Earth "by taking the form of a servant, being made in human likeness". This sounds like an incarnation Christology. In Romans 1:4, however, Paul states that Jesus "was declared with power to be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead", which sounds like an adoptionistic Christology, where Jesus was a human being who was "adopted" after his death. Different views would be debated for centuries by Christians and finally settled on the idea that he was both fully human and fully divine by the middle of the 5th century in the Council of Ephesus. Paul's thoughts on Jesus' teachings, versus his nature and being, are more defined, in that Paul believed Jesus was sent as an atonement for the sins of everyone.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref name="Britannica">{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref>

The Pauline epistles use Kyrios to identify Jesus almost 230 times, and express the theme that the true mark of a Christian is the confession of Jesus as the true Lord.Template:Sfn Paul viewed the superiority of the Christian revelation over all other divine manifestations as a consequence of the fact that Christ is the Son of God.<ref group=web name="CathEncycl_Christology" />

The Pauline epistles also advanced the "cosmic Christology"Template:Efn-la later developed in the Gospel of John,<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> elaborating the cosmic implications of Jesus' existence as the Son of God: "Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come."<ref>Template:Bibleverse</ref> In the Epistle to the Colossians, which purports to be written by Paul (though this is disputed), relevant claims are made: "Through him God was pleased to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven";<ref>Template:Bibleverse</ref><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation".<ref>Template:Bibleverse</ref>Template:Sfn<ref name="Jesus page 282"/>

The GospelsEdit

File:The Four Evangelists.jpg
The Four Evangelists, by Pieter Soutman, 17th century

The synoptic Gospels date from after the writings of Paul. They provide episodes from the life of Jesus and some of his works, but the authors of the New Testament show little interest in an absolute chronology of Jesus or in synchronizing the episodes of his life,<ref name=Rahner731 >Karl Rahner (2004). Encyclopedia of theology: a concise Sacramentum mundi Template:ISBN p. 731</ref> and as in John 21:25, the Gospels do not claim to be an exhaustive list of his works.Template:Sfn

Christologies that can be gleaned from the three synoptic Gospels generally emphasize the humanity of Jesus, his sayings, his parables, and his miracles. The Gospel of John provides a different perspective that focuses on his divinity.<ref group=web name="CathEncycl_Christology" /> The first 14 verses of the Gospel of John are devoted to the divinity of Jesus as the Logos, usually translated as "Word", along with his pre-existence, and they emphasize the cosmic significance of Christ, e.g.: "All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made."<ref>Template:Bibleverse</ref> In the context of these verses, the Word made flesh is identical with the Word who was in the beginning with God, being exegetically equated with Jesus.<ref group=web name="CathEncycl_Christology" />

Controversies and ecumenical councils (2nd–8th century)Edit

{{#invoke:Labelled list hatnote|labelledList|Main article|Main articles|Main page|Main pages}}

Post-Apostolic controversiesEdit

Following the Apostolic Age, from the second century onwards, a number of controversies developed about how the human and divine are related within the person of Jesus.Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn As of the second century, a number of different and opposing approaches developed among various groups. In contrast to prevailing monoprosopic views on the Person of Christ, alternative dyoprosopic notions were also promoted by some theologians, but such views were rejected by the ecumenical councils. For example, Arianism did not endorse divinity, Ebionism argued Jesus was an ordinary mortal, while Gnosticism held docetic views which argued Christ was a spiritual being who only appeared to have a physical body.Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn The resulting tensions led to schisms within the church in the second and third centuries, and ecumenical councils were convened in the fourth and fifth centuries to deal with the issues.Template:Citation needed

Although some of the debates may seem to various modern students to be over a theological iota, they took place in controversial political circumstances, reflecting the relations of temporal powers and divine authority, and certainly resulted in schisms, among others that separated the Church of the East from the Church of the Roman Empire.<ref>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref><ref>The Seven Ecumenical Councils of the Undivided Church, trans H. R. Percival, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 2nd Series, ed. P. Schaff and H. Wace, (repr. Grand Rapids MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1955), XIV, pp. 192–142</ref>

First Council of Nicaea (325) and First Council of Constantinople (381)Edit

In 325, the First Council of Nicaea defined the persons of the Godhead and their relationship with one another, decisions which were ratified at the First Council of Constantinople in 381. The language used was that the one God exists in three persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit); in particular, it was affirmed that the Son was homoousios (of the same being) as the Father. The Nicene Creed declared the full divinity and full humanity of Jesus.<ref>Jonathan Kirsch, God Against the Gods: The History of the War Between Monotheism and Polytheism (2004)</ref><ref>Charles Freeman, The Closing of the Western Mind: The Rise of Faith and the Fall of Reason (2002)</ref><ref>Edward Gibbon, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (1776–1788), p. 21</ref> After the First Council of Nicaea in 325 the Logos and the second Person of the Trinity were being used interchangeably.<ref>A concise dictionary of theology by Gerald O'Collins 2004 Template:ISBN pp. 144–145</ref>

First Council of Ephesus (431)Edit

In 431, the First Council of Ephesus was initially called to address the views of Nestorius on Mariology, but the problems soon extended to Christology, and schisms followed. The 431 council was called because in defense of his loyal priest Anastasius, Nestorius had preferred that the title Christokos (Christ-bearer) be used over Theotokos (God-bearer) for Mary and later contradicted Proclus during a sermon in Constantinople. Pope Celestine I (who was already upset with Nestorius due to other matters) wrote about this to Cyril of Alexandria, who orchestrated the council. During the council, Nestorius defended his position by arguing that there are two distinct and separate natures of Christ, one human and the other divine, hence Mary gave birth only to the human nature, suggesting that the title Theotokos (God-bearer) is insufficient to fully describe the Incarnation, as it does not encompass Christ's humanity. The debate about the single or dual nature of Christ ensued in Ephesus.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref>

The First Council of Ephesus debated miaphysitism (two natures united as one after the hypostatic union) versus dyophysitism (coexisting natures after the hypostatic union) versus monophysitism (only one nature) versus Nestorianism (two hypostases). From the Christological viewpoint, the council adopted Template:Transliteration ('but being made one', {{#invoke:Lang|lang}}) – Council of Ephesus, Epistle of Cyril to Nestorius, i.e. 'one nature of the Word of God incarnate' ({{#invoke:Lang|lang}}, Template:Transliteration). In 451, the Council of Chalcedon affirmed dyophysitism. The Oriental Orthodox rejected this and subsequent councils and continued to consider themselves as miaphysite according to the faith put forth at the Councils of Nicaea and Ephesus.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref name="parry">Template:Cite book</ref> The council also confirmed the Theotokos title and excommunicated Nestorius.<ref name="KBaker">Template:Cite book</ref><ref name=Ephesus >Mary, Mother of God by Carl E. Braaten and Robert W. Jenson 2004 Template:ISBN p. 84</ref>

Council of Chalcedon (451)Edit

File:Christological spectrum.svg
Christological spectrum during the 5th–7th centuries showing the views of the Church of the East (light blue), the Eastern Orthodox and Catholic Churches (light purple), and the Miaphysite Churches (pink)

The 451 Council of Chalcedon was highly influential, and marked a key turning point in the christological debates.Template:Sfn It is the last council which many Lutherans, Anglicans and other Protestants consider ecumenical.<ref name="Olson1999">Template:Cite book</ref>Template:Sfn

The Council of Chalcedon fully promulgated the Western dyophysite understanding put forth by Pope Leo I of Rome of the hypostatic union, the proposition that Christ has one human nature (physis) and one divine nature (physis), each distinct and complete, and united with neither confusion nor division.Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn Most of the major branches of Western Christianity (Roman Catholicism, Anglicanism, Lutheranism, and Reformed), Church of the East,Template:Sfn Eastern Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy subscribe to the Chalcedonian Christological formulation, while Oriental Orthodoxy (in Antioch, Alexandria, Ethiopia, Eritrea, and Armenia) reject it.Template:SfnTemplate:SfnTemplate:Sfn

Although the Chalcedonian Creed did not put an end to all christological debate, it did clarify the terms used and became a point of reference for many future Christologies.Template:SfnTemplate:SfnTemplate:Sfn But it also broke apart the church of the Eastern Roman Empire in the fifth century,Template:Sfn and unquestionably established the primacy of Rome in the East over those who accepted the Council of Chalcedon. This was reaffirmed in 519, when the Eastern Chalcedonians accepted the Formula of Hormisdas, anathematizing all of their own Eastern Chalcedonian hierarchy, who died out of communion with Rome from 482 to 519.

Fifth–Seventh Ecumenical Council (553, 681, 787)Edit

The Second Council of Constantinople in 553 interpreted the decrees of Chalcedon, and further explained the relationship of the two natures of Jesus. It also condemned the alleged teachings of Origen on the pre-existence of the soul, and other topics.<ref group=web>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref>

The Third Council of Constantinople in 681 declared that Christ has two wills of his two natures, human and divine, contrary to the teachings of the Monothelites,<ref group=web>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref> with the divine will having precedence, leading and guiding the human will.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref>

The Second Council of Nicaea was called under the Empress Regent Irene of Athens in 787. It affirmed the veneration of icons while forbidding their worship. It is often referred to as "The Triumph of Orthodoxy".<ref group=web>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref>

9th–11th centuryEdit

Template:Empty section

Eastern ChristianityEdit

{{#invoke:Labelled list hatnote|labelledList|Main article|Main articles|Main page|Main pages}} Template:Empty section

Western medieval ChristologyEdit

The Franciscan piety of the 12th and 13th centuries led to "popular Christology". Systematic approaches by theologians, such as Thomas Aquinas, are called "scholastic Christology".<ref name="mini7">Template:Cite book</ref>

In the 13th century, Thomas Aquinas provided the first systematic Christology that consistently resolved a number of the existing issues.<ref name="GilsonC">Template:Citation</ref> In his Christology from above, Aquinas also championed the principle of perfection of Christ's human attributes.<ref name="mini76">Template:Cite book</ref>Template:Sfn<ref name="Geest">Template:Cite book</ref>

The Middle Ages also witnessed the emergence of the "tender image of Jesus" as a friend and a living source of love and comfort, rather than just the Kyrios image.<ref name=Astley >Christology: Key Readings in Christian Thought by Jeff Astley, David Brown, Ann Loades 2009 Template:ISBN p. 106</ref>

ReformationEdit

Article 10 of the Belgic Confession, a confessional standard of the Reformed faith, subscribes to Nicene orthodoxy regarding the deity of Christ. The article places emphasis on the eternal generation of the Son and the eternal divine nature of Christ as Creator.

We believe that Jesus Christ, according to his divine nature, is the only begotten Son of God, begotten from eternity, not made nor created (for then He should be a creature), but co-essential and co-eternal with the Father, "the express image of His person, and the brightness of His glory" (Template:Bibleref), equal unto him in all things. He is the Son of God, not only from the time that He assumed our nature, but from all eternity, as these testimonies, when compared together, teach us. Moses says that God created the world; and John saith that "all things were made by that Word" (Template:Bibleref), which he calls God. And the apostle says that God made the worlds by His Son (Template:Bibleref); likewise, that "God created all things by Jesus Christ" (Template:Bibleref). Therefore, it must needs follow, that he who is called God, the Word, the Son, and Jesus Christ did exist at that time, when all things were created by him. Therefore, the prophet Micah says, "His goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting" (Template:Bibleref). And the apostle: "He has neither beginning of days, nor end of life" (Template:Bibleref). He therefore is that true, eternal, and almighty God, whom we invoke, worship and serve.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref>

John Calvin maintained there was no human element in the Person of Christ which could be separated from the Person of the Word.<ref>Calvin's Christology by Stephen Edmondson 2004 Template:ISBN p. 217</ref> Calvin also emphasized the importance of the "Work of Christ" in any attempt at understanding the Person of Christ and cautioned against ignoring the works of Jesus during his ministry.<ref>Calvin's First Catechism by I. John Hesselink 1997 Template:ISBN p. 217</ref>

Modern developmentsEdit

Template:See also

Liberal Protestant theologyEdit

The 19th century saw the rise of Liberal Protestant theology, which questioned the dogmatic foundations of Christianity, and approached the Bible with critical-historical tools.<ref group="web" name="EB.Christology.mCt">{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref> The divinity of Jesus became of less emphasis or importance, and was replaced with a focus on the ethical aspects of his teachings.Template:SfnTemplate:Efn-la

Roman CatholicismEdit

Catholic theologian Karl Rahner sees the purpose of modern Christology as to formulate the Christian belief that "God became man and that God-made-man is the individual Jesus Christ" in a manner that this statement can be understood consistently, without the confusions of past debates and mythologies.Template:SfnTemplate:Efn-la Rahner pointed out the coincidence between the Person of Christ and the Word of God, referring to Mark 8:38 and Luke 9:26 which state whoever is ashamed of the words of Jesus is ashamed of the Lord himself.<ref>Encyclopedia of Theology: a concise Sacramentum mundi by Karl Rahner 2004 Template:ISBN p. 1822</ref>

Hans von Balthasar argued the union of the human and divine natures of Christ was achieved not by the "absorption" of human attributes, but by their "assumption". Thus, in his view, the divine nature of Christ was not affected by the human attributes and remained forever divine.<ref>The eschatology of Hans Urs von Balthasar by Nicholas J. Healy 2005 Template:ISBN pp. 22–23</ref> The same distinction is recorded in the Second Vatican Council's pastoral constitution, Gaudium et spes: "in Him, human nature was assumed, not absorbed".<ref>Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spec, 22, version quoted by Neuner, J. and Dupuis, J., The Christian Faith in the Doctrinal Documents of the Catholic Church, Revised Edition (1983), Collins: London, Template:ISBN p. 191</ref>

Pope Francis, in his 2024 encyclical letter Dilexit nos, refers to the "divinity and plenary humanity" of Jesus.<ref>Pope Francis, Dilexit nos, paragraph 49, published on 24 October 2024, accessed on 11 December 2024</ref>

TopicsEdit

Nativity and the Holy NameEdit

Template:See also

The Nativity of Jesus impacted the Christological issues about his person from the earliest days of Christianity. Luke's Christology centers on the dialectics of the dual natures of the earthly and heavenly manifestations of existence of the Christ, while Matthew's Christology focuses on the mission of Jesus and his role as the savior.<ref>Theology of the New Testament by Georg Strecker 2000 Template:ISBN pp. 401–403</ref><ref>Matthew by Grant R. Osborne 2010 Template:ISBN p. lxxix</ref> The salvific emphasis of Matthew 1:21 later impacted the theological issues and the devotions to Holy Name of Jesus.<ref>Matthew 1–13 by Manlio Simonetti 2001 Template:ISBN p. 17</ref><ref>Matthew 1-2/ Luke 1–2 by Louise Perrotta 2004 Template:ISBN p. 19</ref><ref>All the Doctrines of the Bible by Herbert Lockyer 1988 Template:ISBN p. 159</ref>

Matthew 1:23 provides a key to the "Emmanuel Christology" of Matthew. Beginning with 1:23, the Gospel of Matthew shows a clear interest in identifying Jesus as "God with us" and in later developing the Emmanuel characterization of Jesus at key points throughout the rest of the Gospel.<ref name=Kupp >Matthew's Emmanuel by David D. Kupp 1997 Template:ISBN pp. 220–224</ref> The name 'Emmanuel' does not appear elsewhere in the New Testament, but Matthew builds on it in Matthew 28:20 ("I am with you always, even unto the end of the world") to indicate Jesus will be with the faithful to the end of the age.<ref name=Kupp /><ref name=Kingsbury17 >Who do you say that I am?: essays on Christology by Jack Dean Kingsbury, Mark Allan Powell, David R. Bauer 1999 Template:ISBN p. 17</ref> According to Ulrich Luz, the Emmanuel motif brackets the entire Gospel of Matthew between 1:23 and 28:20, appearing explicitly and implicitly in several other passages.<ref>The theology of the Gospel of Matthew by Ulrich Luz 1995 Template:ISBN p. 31</ref>

Crucifixion and resurrectionEdit

{{#invoke:Labelled list hatnote|labelledList|Main article|Main articles|Main page|Main pages}} The accounts of the crucifixion and subsequent resurrection of Jesus provides a rich background for christological analysis, from the canonical Gospels to the Pauline Epistles.<ref>Who do you say that I am? Essays on Christology by Jack Dean Kingsbury, Mark Allan Powell, David R. Bauer 1999 Template:ISBN p. 106</ref>

A central element in the christology presented in the Acts of the Apostles is the affirmation of the belief that the death of Jesus by crucifixion happened "with the foreknowledge of God, according to a definite plan".<ref name=Matera67>New Testament christology by Frank J. Matera 1999 Template:ISBN p. 67</ref> In this view, as in Acts 2:23, the cross is not viewed as a scandal, for the crucifixion of Jesus "at the hands of the lawless" is viewed as the fulfilment of the plan of God.<ref name=Matera67 /><ref>The speeches in Acts: their content, context, and concerns by Marion L. Soards 1994 Template:ISBN p. 34</ref>

Paul's Christology has a specific focus on the death and resurrection of Jesus. For Paul, the crucifixion of Jesus is directly related to his resurrection and the term "the cross of Christ" used in Galatians 6:12 may be viewed as his abbreviation of the message of the Gospels.<ref name=Schwarz132 >Christology by Hans Schwarz 1998 Template:ISBN pp 132–134</ref> For Paul, the crucifixion of Jesus was not an isolated event in history, but a cosmic event with significant eschatological consequences, as in 1 Corinthians 2:8.<ref name=Schwarz132 /> In the Pauline view, Jesus, obedient to the point of death (Philippians 2:8), died "at the right time" (Romans 5:6) based on the plan of God.<ref name=Schwarz132 /> For Paul, the "power of the cross" is not separable from the resurrection of Jesus.<ref name=Schwarz132 />

Threefold officeEdit

{{#invoke:Labelled list hatnote|labelledList|Main article|Main articles|Main page|Main pages}}

The threefold office (Latin {{#invoke:Lang|lang}}) of Jesus Christ is a Christian doctrine based upon the teachings of the Old Testament. It was described by Eusebius and more fully developed by John Calvin. It states that Jesus Christ performed three functions (or "offices") in his earthly ministry – those of prophet, priest, and king. In the Old Testament, the appointment of someone to any of these three positions could be indicated by anointing him or her by pouring oil over the head. Thus, the term messiah, meaning "anointed one", is associated with the concept of the threefold office. While the office of king is that most frequently associated with the Messiah, the role of Jesus as priest is also prominent in the New Testament, being most fully explained in chapters 7 to 10 of the Book of Hebrews.

MariologyEdit

{{#invoke:Labelled list hatnote|labelledList|Main article|Main articles|Main page|Main pages}} Some Christians, notably Roman Catholics, view Mariology as a key component of Christology.<ref group="web">"Mariology Is Christology", in Vittorio Messori, The Mary Hypothesis, Rome: 2005. [1] Template:Webarchive</ref> In this view, not only is Mariology a logical and necessary consequence of Christology, but without it, Christology is incomplete, since the figure of Mary contributes to a fuller understanding of who Christ is and what he did.<ref>Paul Haffner, 2004 The mystery of Mary Gracewing Press Template:ISBN p. 17</ref>

Protestants have criticized Mariology because many of its assertions lack any Biblical foundation.<ref>Walter A. Elwell, Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Second Edition (Grand Rapids, Michigan, United States: Baker Academic, 2001), p. 736.</ref> Strong Protestant reaction against Roman Catholic Marian devotion and teaching has been a significant issue for ecumenical dialogue.<ref>Erwin Fahlbusch et al., "Mariology", The Encyclopedia of Christianity (Grand Rapids, Michigan, United States; Leiden, Netherlands: Wm. B. Eerdmans; Brill, 1999–2003), p. 409.</ref>

Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict XVI) expressed this sentiment about Roman Catholic Mariology when in two separate occasions he stated, "The appearance of a truly Marian awareness serves as the touchstone indicating whether or not the christological substance is fully present"<ref>Communio, 1996, Volume 23, p. 175</ref> and "It is necessary to go back to Mary, if we want to return to the truth about Jesus Christ."<ref>Raymond Burke, 2008 Mariology: A Guide for Priests, Deacons, seminarians, and Consecrated Persons Template:ISBN p. xxi</ref>

See alsoEdit

Template:Div col

Template:Div col end

NotesEdit

Template:Notelist

ReferencesEdit

Template:Reflist

SourcesEdit

Printed sources

Template:Refbegin

Template:Refend

Web-sources

Template:Reflist

Further readingEdit

Overview
Early high Christology
Atonement

External linksEdit

Template:Christian theology Template:Christianity footer Template:Jesus footer Template:Authority control

Retrieved from "https://zalansite.site/mediawiki/index.php?title=Christology&oldid=4490"