Theo 2 - CHRISTOLOGY (Jesus' Ministry)

JESUS’ MINISTRY
Introduction
• The earthly Jesus is the origin of Christology of the Church if we are to take seriously the Incarnation which is the Word taking on a human history, with consideration to the continuity in the discontinuity between the implicit and the explicit Christology.
• Our knowledge of Jesus' earthly life and work is limited, and there is controversy about many sayings and deeds of Jesus recorded in the Gospels as being the reflections of the early Church, yet multiple attestation of the evangelists do allow us to reconstruct something of the message, activity, claim of Jesus at least during the last few years of his life. Something which biblical scholars commonly agree that we can be certain about are:
 Jesus' preaching of the Kingdom of God
 His self-designation as the Son of man
 His consciousness of God as Abba.

1. The Teaching of His Kingdom
 There is hardly anything more certain about the ministry of Jesus than his proclamation of God's Kingdom / reign.
 In the time of Jesus, there were different ways of conceiving the Kingdom of God which is the definitive saving act of God, but Jesus gave it a new meaning:
◘ It is the loving rule of God over the world that began to manifest itself with the mission of Jesus. Jesus himself was inseparably connected with the inbreaking of the divine kingdom in both his preaching and his miraculous deeds. Jesus announced the Kgdom of God and made it present in His own Person (JS=Kgdm) “Jesus is the Kingdom of God realized in himself” (Origin). He is the Kingdom of God present in the world∴ the way people related to him would decide their definitive before God
◘ It came not as a reward achieved through human merits but as sheer gratuitous gift from the divine goodness. Men and women were invited to enter this kingdom of heaven. What they could do was to accept it as pure gift with childlike simplicity.
◘ Unlike John the Baptist who preached the Kingdom was imminent, Jesus taught that it was already present though not yet consummated.
◘ The Kingdom is addressed to the poor (anawin). What counts for Jesus is their trust in God.
 Kingdom centered= God centered

2. His Self-designation as Son of man
 This term also appears in Ezk (the prophet is called “Son of Man” to mean being human, limited, weak, not a transcendental figure.
 But in Daniel 7, it is a transcendental figure
 Jesus' self-designation: neither his contemporaries nor the succeeding generations use the title of Him. It was Jesus’ characteristic way of referring to Himself. He also gave it an innovative interpretation to sum up much of the thrust of His message.
 Jesus used it in 3 senses
◘ Being in the midst of man, having an earthly life with a human quality and humble condition
 Mt 11:19 “The Son of Man came eating and drinking and they said, 'Look, he is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners.' But wisdom is vindicated by her works."
 Mk 2:10 “But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority to forgive sins on earth”
 Lk 9:58 Jesus answered him, "Foxes have dens and birds of the sky have nests, but the Son of
◘ A mortal being to refer to his coming suffering, death and resurrection
 Mk 9:12 “He told them, "Elijah will indeed come first and restore all things, yet how is it written regarding the Son of Man that he must suffer greatly and be treated with contempt?”
◘ As a glorious figure coming at the end like the mysterious redeemer-judge of Dan 7
 Js was relating himself to a figure who delivers his people and receives kingly dominion. In this context, an appeal to Dn 7 meant that Js made a messianic use of the self-designation Son of Man.
 Point: Only God can judge; only God can destroy evil; only God can require the sacrifice of self.
Conclusion:
• Thus the use of this term respectively portrary this figure as a human being serving others, being rejected and killed and coming in future glory to judge them
Theological Dimension
• Title "Son of Man" unites true God and true man.
 “Son of God made man” (Galot: The divine powers that are his are effective through his humanity, communicated through his flesh and blood. As Son of Man he can represent all men to the Father.
 The term suggests that the richness of the divine person lies hidden and is revealed through the human nature.
 The ontological and the functional: Jesus does not identify himself with a function (e.g., "Messiah"); his personal reality as "Son" comes before his mission. Mission follows his identity.
O’Collins remarks
• Jesus used “Son of Man” in such a way as not to bring his own person into prominence, while maintaining his Father’s reign (and not self-witness) at the center of his public proclamation.
• As Jesus went on to speak more directly to the inner group of his disciples about his impending suffering and future vindication, he presented himself as the Son of man who represented the new Israel in obediently suffering and trusting that he would be vindicated beyond death and thus bring God’s judgment and kingdom

3. His Understanding of God as Father
• ABBA Experience
 A term of endearment.
 In OT it was used a few time but in Hebrew (=Father) , not in Aramaic
 (Mk. 14:36—Jesus in Gethsemane), Gal 4: Rom 8—Holy Spirit cries in us.
 Jesus never called himself Son of God (the term certainly belongs to the Creed of the Church). Yet He did characteristically refer to God as Father, most strikingly in his address to God as Abba.
 A distinctive and unusual term expressing simple, deep intimacy with God (this seems to capture the essential self-understanding of Jesus). This is unique or something highly unusual in Palestinian Judaism.
 In OT the special relationship to God enjoyed by angels, the king and the Jewish nation allowed them to be called sons of God.
 He consistently made a distinction between "my father" and "your father" except in the Pater Noster.
 All these show that he clearly experienced God in a special way and he thought of his sonship as a unique relatonship with God the Father
 It is not easier to find knockdown evidence that he experienced and claimed a unique identity as divine Son of God which others could not share. But certainly there were hints of such a claim in the way Jesus acted with an authority and a compassion which can only be called divine.
 He was apparently conscious of a qualitative distinction between his sonship and the sonship of the disciples which derived from and depended on his.
 John and Paul maintained this distinction. Paul expressed our new relationship with God as taking place through an adoption (Gal 4:5; Rom 8:15), which makes us children of God.
 When Js was crucified he was already the Son of God, but this divine sonship was confirmed and given clearer definition by resurrection.
 Certainly its use in Gethsemene reveals Jesus consciousness that his filial identity is linked to his redemptive mission.
Theological Consequence
 ABBA experience reveals Jesus as the true Son of God the Father. We, as adopted sons, can call Abba for Christ has extended the intimacy of his unique relationship with the Father to us (without lessening the uniqueness of being God's only begotten).

4. Jesus’ intentions in the face of his own death;
 The intention of Jesus facing his death may be important, but does not affect the validity of its salvific values. Yet normally we expect the value of human actions to stem from the conscious intentions of the agent.
 To deny any purpose on Js' part will make him into a totally passive or even unwilling victim. It will be both historically correct and theologically sound to acknowledge that at some point Js could imagine his violent death, and he went willingly and knowingly to it.
◘ He willed his death by accepting it rather than by deliberately and directly planning and courting it.
 But more important is that he has conferred a specific meaning to his death.
 There may be an exegetical discernment of finding the post-Paschal formulation about his death, The pressure to establish what Js said or intended regarding his death can be eased by:
1) Recalling his characteristic attitude
2) Pointing to contemporary ideas
3) Noting an implication of early Christian convictions of Jesus’ atoning death (Early Church would not have said so if Jesus had not implicitly at least hinted that.)
 Jesus understood it as salvific (implicit soteriological) because:
◘ It is within the Jewish conviction that the righteous with suffer, but God would vindicate him. We can conclude that Jesus announced (at least to his core group of disciples) his imminent death and affirmed that his Father would quickly vindicate him through resurrection.
◘ There was the idea of vicarious atonement through the suffering and violent death of the just persons
 (But death on a cross signified being cursed by God, so Judaism was not prepared for the atoning meaning of the cross).
 At the time of JS, the popular messianic hopes did not include a suffering / crucified Messiah (blasphemy)--> Christians are defending something very offensive, they could hardly have done so unless the earthly Js had aready in some way claimed to Messiah and indicated that his coming death would have sunch an atoning value.
◘ It is also within the Jewish belief that the Kingdom was to come through a time of ordeal. Jesus saw suffering and persecution as characterizing the coming of that kingdom which he insistently preached (linked his imminent death with the Kingdom) since he interpreted his death in terms of the coming kingdom, he saw his death as a saving event; for he had consistently presented that the kingdom = human salvation.
 At the Last Supper, the words of institution, if taken at face value, show Js defining his death as a sacrifice which will not only representatively atone for sins but also initiate a new and lasting covenant.
 The general attitude of self-giving has led Jesus to accept his role as victim.
◘ His ministry is always stamped with the prospect of love and service (pro-existence), so he accepts his violent death as an ultimate expression of his service of love, a man for others right to the end.
◘ He sees in his death the culmination of his own mission and explained its salvific meaning in the Last Supper, the living parable of his handing over his life. He did not passively submit himself to death, but out of himself lay down his life in conformity to the divine plan for man.
◘ Mk 10:45—For the Son of man himself came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.