The study of Christology is like climbing a towering mountain, or perhaps better, a long line of mountain ranges. To make a trek like this, we have to do some preliminary planning and mark our route on a methodological map. With the proper coordinates locked in place, we are ready to venture into deep theological territory.
So, where do we start?
In this post, I want to explore some of the 10k foot choices that affect how we see the landscape of this area of theology. When thinking about possible starting points for studying Christ, there are a few angles that we can consider. While there are goldmines of information that are involved in looking along each of these angles, here I want to just sketch the outlines of these lines of sight.
Christology from Above:
This approach starts with the idea that Jesus is divine and then works toward his humanity: Jesus was God, so how can he be a human? This angle starts by presupposing Jesus’ deity.
In historical-critical circles, this approach is rejected already before leaving base camp. Historians pursuing a secular historiography of the ancient world typically make a distinction between the “Christ of faith” and the “Jesus of history.” The savior who claimed to be God, they say, is “the Christ of faith” and is rooted not in historical reality but in the preaching of the early church. For this historical-critical approach, the assertions of the NT and the early church cannot be proved but only believed.
For evangelicals who believe in the authority of the Scriptures, the Christology from Above angle is just that, an angle that you can use to begin your study of Jesus. You begin with an emphasis on his deity. You might begin thinking of Jesus as the Word who was with God before the world began (John 1:1).
Christology from Below:
Instead of beginning with a focus on his deity, this approach begins by presupposing Christ’s humanity: Jesus was a human man, so how could he be God?
For historical-critical scholars, this approach focuses only on the events in Jesus’ life that can be verified historically (e.g., “Jesus taught his disciples by the sea”). Here, the “Jesus of history” is prioritized over against the “Christ of faith.” The Gospels and the NT are then excavated for information that might be used to reconstruct "what really happened" during Jesus's ministry and the history of early Christianity.
Again, for evangelicals, the Christology from Below angle is a way of emphasizing that Jesus was indeed human as well as divine. You might begin thinking here of the narratives of Jesus’ birth and the accounts of his human activity and ministry (he grew tired, he slept, he was hungry, etc).
Both of these angles can be helpful in our study of Christology, and we should consider both of these ways of emphasizing different aspects of Jesus’ person. However, one of the features of both of these “angles” is that they typically begin their study of Jesus with the events depicted in the NT and the proclamation of those events in the preaching of the apostles.
In this post, I want to explore some of the 10k foot choices that affect how we see the landscape of this area of theology. When thinking about possible starting points for studying Christ, there are a few angles that we can consider. While there are goldmines of information that are involved in looking along each of these angles, here I want to just sketch the outlines of these lines of sight.
Christology from Above:
This approach starts with the idea that Jesus is divine and then works toward his humanity: Jesus was God, so how can he be a human? This angle starts by presupposing Jesus’ deity.
In historical-critical circles, this approach is rejected already before leaving base camp. Historians pursuing a secular historiography of the ancient world typically make a distinction between the “Christ of faith” and the “Jesus of history.” The savior who claimed to be God, they say, is “the Christ of faith” and is rooted not in historical reality but in the preaching of the early church. For this historical-critical approach, the assertions of the NT and the early church cannot be proved but only believed.
For evangelicals who believe in the authority of the Scriptures, the Christology from Above angle is just that, an angle that you can use to begin your study of Jesus. You begin with an emphasis on his deity. You might begin thinking of Jesus as the Word who was with God before the world began (John 1:1).
Christology from Below:
Instead of beginning with a focus on his deity, this approach begins by presupposing Christ’s humanity: Jesus was a human man, so how could he be God?
For historical-critical scholars, this approach focuses only on the events in Jesus’ life that can be verified historically (e.g., “Jesus taught his disciples by the sea”). Here, the “Jesus of history” is prioritized over against the “Christ of faith.” The Gospels and the NT are then excavated for information that might be used to reconstruct "what really happened" during Jesus's ministry and the history of early Christianity.
Again, for evangelicals, the Christology from Below angle is a way of emphasizing that Jesus was indeed human as well as divine. You might begin thinking here of the narratives of Jesus’ birth and the accounts of his human activity and ministry (he grew tired, he slept, he was hungry, etc).
Both of these angles can be helpful in our study of Christology, and we should consider both of these ways of emphasizing different aspects of Jesus’ person. However, one of the features of both of these “angles” is that they typically begin their study of Jesus with the events depicted in the NT and the proclamation of those events in the preaching of the apostles.
At first, this seems entirely reasonable. After all, it is in the Gospels that we hear about Christ for the first time.
Or is it?
Christology from the Beginning: Recovering a Canonical Christology
While both the Christology from Above angle and the Christology from Below angles are important, there is also another angle worth considering as a primary starting point for our study of Christ, call it a Christology from the Beginning.
This approach begins the study of Christ not necessarily with the Gospels but where the Gospels themselves point. A “canonical” Christology begins where the gospel itself begins, “In the Beginning.” The grammar and syntax of the NT’s assertions and discussions about Jesus are drawn from the texts, theology, and grand storyline of the OT.
The OT is the most important background for the study of Jesus in the NT (and is thus critically significant for a study of Christology). When thinking about who Jesus was, we should include the whole of the OT in our investigation.
Much of the NT would be inexplicable without the narratives, theology, and overall textual context of the OT. The whole of the NT seeks to understand the life and ministry of Jesus in relation to the textual world of the promises, stories, and theology of the OT. In the NT, there are many phrases and styles of writing that are reflections of a deep saturation in the writings and promises of the OT.
In other words, when the NT writers want to say something new about Jesus, they use very old words.
Even if we decided to begin only with the NT, we realize that the NT writers themselves do not start there. How far can you get into the NT without a working knowledge of the OT?
Christology from the Beginning: Recovering a Canonical Christology
While both the Christology from Above angle and the Christology from Below angles are important, there is also another angle worth considering as a primary starting point for our study of Christ, call it a Christology from the Beginning.
This approach begins the study of Christ not necessarily with the Gospels but where the Gospels themselves point. A “canonical” Christology begins where the gospel itself begins, “In the Beginning.” The grammar and syntax of the NT’s assertions and discussions about Jesus are drawn from the texts, theology, and grand storyline of the OT.
The OT is the most important background for the study of Jesus in the NT (and is thus critically significant for a study of Christology). When thinking about who Jesus was, we should include the whole of the OT in our investigation.
Much of the NT would be inexplicable without the narratives, theology, and overall textual context of the OT. The whole of the NT seeks to understand the life and ministry of Jesus in relation to the textual world of the promises, stories, and theology of the OT. In the NT, there are many phrases and styles of writing that are reflections of a deep saturation in the writings and promises of the OT.
In other words, when the NT writers want to say something new about Jesus, they use very old words.
Even if we decided to begin only with the NT, we realize that the NT writers themselves do not start there. How far can you get into the NT without a working knowledge of the OT?
“The book of the genealogies of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham” (Matt 1:1).
The first sentence of the NT canon is inscrutable apart from the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings:
The first sentence of the NT canon is inscrutable apart from the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings:
- The “book of the genealogies of Jesus” reminds us of the “book of the generations of Adam” from Gen 5:1.
- The term “Christ” draws on the Messianic tapestry found in texts like Psalm 2 and Daniel 7-9.
- The “son of David” taps into a host of expectations that are concentrated in the Prophets.
- And the “son of Abraham” refers to the earliest stream of covenant promises that begin early in the book of Genesis!
When you start to read the Gospels, you realize that you’re starting in the middle of the story. You’ve been dropped into the middle of the action! The NT story about Jesus begins “in the beginning” (Jn 1:1).
This emphasis is not simply a vague appeal to the OT. The NT writers believe that the OT is in fact about Jesus, the Christ. When you are examining the anticipation of the person and work of the Messiah in OT texts, you are not engaging in some sort of provisional prolegomena. Rather, you're already doing Christology. Thinking carefully about the claims of Moses and the Prophets is in fact at the core of NT Christological reflection.
After his resurrection on the Road to Emmaus, Jesus begins “with Moses and all the Prophets” as he explains to them “the things concerning himself in all the Scriptures” (Lk 24:27). Later, Jesus again says to his other disciples, “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled” (Lk 24:44). Jesus had already put forth this teaching when he told the Jews, “If you believed Moses, you would believe Me, for he wrote about Me” (Jn 5:46).
Jesus himself taught that the best way to do Christology is from the beginning!
Benefits of a Canonical Christology
In a canonical Christology, you allow the OT witness to the “coming one” to inform your understanding of the NT witness to Jesus (Christology from the Beginning). In your study of the NT, you then emphasize both the humanity (Christology from Below) and deity (Christology from Above) of the God-Man Jesus Christ.
There are several benefits of adopting this multi-pronged approach:
Makes use of the Entire Canon: Understanding Christology “from the beginning” intentionally makes use of the entire canon. It highlights in particular the critical importance of the OT. In this way, we can see Jesus in canonical perspective, from the beginning to the end of the Bible’s grand storyline. Christ is the unifying element in the relationship between the Testaments. Taking this approach allows us to have a “whole Bible” understanding of who Jesus is and what he does.
Starts with Biblical Categories: Taking this approach allows us to begin our thinking about Jesus in biblical terms and with categories that the biblical authors themselves are using when they describe Jesus’ person and work. In the early years after the writing of the NT, it becomes clear that we still need to reflect on these matters further. We continue to think about the nature of what the Bible claims, but it is helpful to begin with a conceptual framework drawn from the biblical texts themselves.
Holds Together Humanity and Deity of Christ: Canonical Christology holds together the humanity and deity of Christ. In this sense, it holds together the “Christology from above” angle and the “Christology from below” angle. Contrary to the claims of historical-critical scholarship, canonical Christology demonstrates that the “Jesus of History” is the “Christ of Faith!” The God-Man is truly human and truly divine. The Jesus we see in the Gospels is the God-Man and the God-Man.
Affirming these realities is an example of “faith seeking understanding.” These are the things we affirm about Jesus based on our reading of the Scriptures. We must also continue to think carefully about these things.
Holds Together the Person and Work of Christ: Canonical Christology also holds together the person and work of Christ. In a way, this is a corollary of the union of Jesus’ humanity and deity. Who Jesus is has an integral relationship to what he does. This is one of the crucial affirmations of Christian theology: His being is connected to his doing. To know Christ is to know his benefits. There is an organic connection here that must never be severed when we study Christology.
To reflect further on the coherence of these connections, we can consider a few scenes in the Gospels. For example, when John the Baptist asks, “Are you the one who is to come, or should we look for another?”(Matt 11:3), Jesus responds by talking about things he had done: “Go tell John what you hear and see: The blind see, the lame walk, lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the poor have good news proclaimed to them. Blessed is anyone who takes no offense at me” (Matt 11:4-6).
What he does as healer is connected to who he is as “the one who is to come.”
Jesus makes this clear connection again in John 10:31-39 during a confrontation with the Jewish leaders. As they pick up stones to stone him, Jesus asks, “I have shown you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you going to stone me?” They answer, “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God.”
After quoting a Psalm, Jesus reasons, “If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me; but if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father” (10:37-38).
Here Jesus insists that to recognize his works are from the Father is to recognize that he himself is from the Father. Only one sent from the Father could do the Father’s works in this manner. Jesus himself connects his being to his doing.
These benefits of a canonical Christology are central to a biblically faithful understanding of Jesus. They can also serve as a guide through the terrain of formal and informal study of Jesus's person and work in the academic world and among the churches.
Holds Together the Person and Work of Christ: Canonical Christology also holds together the person and work of Christ. In a way, this is a corollary of the union of Jesus’ humanity and deity. Who Jesus is has an integral relationship to what he does. This is one of the crucial affirmations of Christian theology: His being is connected to his doing. To know Christ is to know his benefits. There is an organic connection here that must never be severed when we study Christology.
To reflect further on the coherence of these connections, we can consider a few scenes in the Gospels. For example, when John the Baptist asks, “Are you the one who is to come, or should we look for another?”(Matt 11:3), Jesus responds by talking about things he had done: “Go tell John what you hear and see: The blind see, the lame walk, lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the poor have good news proclaimed to them. Blessed is anyone who takes no offense at me” (Matt 11:4-6).
What he does as healer is connected to who he is as “the one who is to come.”
Jesus makes this clear connection again in John 10:31-39 during a confrontation with the Jewish leaders. As they pick up stones to stone him, Jesus asks, “I have shown you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you going to stone me?” They answer, “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God.”
After quoting a Psalm, Jesus reasons, “If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me; but if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father” (10:37-38).
Here Jesus insists that to recognize his works are from the Father is to recognize that he himself is from the Father. Only one sent from the Father could do the Father’s works in this manner. Jesus himself connects his being to his doing.
These benefits of a canonical Christology are central to a biblically faithful understanding of Jesus. They can also serve as a guide through the terrain of formal and informal study of Jesus's person and work in the academic world and among the churches.
Notes:
- In a previous post, I reflected upon the relationship between Christology (the study of Christ) and Soteriology (the study of Salvation).
- This also appears on my Substack (sign up there for further posts like this)
- If you've read this far, you might also be interested in One Grand Story: How the Bible Tells its Story and Why it Matters
related posts
Christology
January 28, 2025
0
