Reframing the Historical Jesus

Marc Goodacre summarizing Scot McKnight raises for me the question again - just who do I believe 'in'? I used to think that Historical was the important adjective and it is. I tried to understand the differing flavours of eschatology and apocalpyse - but though all the images of the time as researched by others have led me into a fuller view of the ancient centuries, such a view can never be convincing or unconvincing by itself. I imagine myself in the shoes of a first century character and piece together parts of the history - but how little I know even of my own time let alone the time 2000 years ago.

There is for the record one main reason I 'believe'. It is a passionate reason. So if I were looking for a Historical Jesus, would I see in the well only the image of my own passion? The short answer is no. The reason for the short answer is that I have learned my passion through faith in the death of this man. That faith grew me. I expect I would not have grown otherwise. Like the weaned child of Psalm 131, I am subject to who I am, but I am also subject to a greater than I. That greater than I is one who has taught me to use the agony of Christ to consecrate myself as one who has died in his death. I did not expect any response. But I received a life in return for my death in him.

What then was he - for it is from the Risen Christ that I have this gift - what was he in his human life? Not superman! Like me in all respects, but not like me in some ways - for my energy can be given to violence (note John Hobbin's recent posts on human nature). This risen Human is a new creation - and he is life-giving Spirit. And the Spirit gives life to our mortal bodies in the present even as He gave life to the disciples gathered at Pentecost.

The next chapter in Frymer-Kensky is Incarnation - so this little self-revelation is important background.

I have to admit I am not a fan of total-depravity as doctrine. The doctrine of original sin is often misunderstood also. The essay by John Cavadini has a very good summary of Augustine that I should have mentioned in my post on suffering. I am probably more in sympathy with Augustine than I might have thought. I also disagree with Jim West over recent decisions and fears about homosexuality. What I have learned from Christ in the Spirit does not lead me to the blanket condemnations I seem to hear from some quarters.

What is Real to me is the presence of God through the Risen Christ by a Spirit I had not known but by whom I am now known. The experience of new life reframes all my understanding of doctrine. My guide to this state has been largely Paul - particularly Romans, but also all the testimonies I have seen in the Scripture both old and new. In singling out Paul, I honor his priestly service to the Gentiles, gathering us to worship the God of Abraham, the fear of Isaac, who is with Jacob.

I would welcome feedback and criticism - but not with reasonless diatribe - rather with the reason that comes from the experience of the Presence of God in the world today - the Presence that creates the Historical with us.