Tags
Every Jew knew there was only One God – I am who I am. He was not to be named and He certainly had no progeny. It was little wonder that they thought the followers of Christ blasphemers. They thought they had rid themselves of these heretics when Jesus was crucified; instead His followers made some ridiculous claim that He had risen from the dead. Not all the attempts to crush them managed to quell the threat they posed. These men remained members of the synagogue, but they consorted with Gentiles and, so it was said, even ate with them. But of all the things which the early Church taught, the thing which challenged Judaism most is the idea of the Logos of God being made flesh (sarx, in Greek). St. John’s Gospel does not tell us how the Word became flesh, or what the relationship between the Logos and the sarx was, or how the flesh and the logos coexisted; but he does tell us that the Word became flesh.
The author of Hebrews makes the same claim:
but ‘in these last days he has spoken to us by a [or the] Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom he also created the worlds. 3 He is the reflection of God’s glory and the exact imprint of God’s very being, and he sustains [or bears along] all things by his powerful word.’
In one of the very earliest Christian documents, Paul’s letter to the Philippians, we see just the same ‘high’ Christology we see in John. Of Christ he writes:
who, though he was in the form of God,
did not regard equality with God
as something to be exploited,
7 but emptied himself,
taking the form of a slave,
being born in human likeness.
And being found in human form,
Paul saw no conflict with monotheism. As he told the Corinthians: ‘yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.’
St John told the followers of Christ that ‘the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us’ (John 1:14) – kai ho logos sarx egeneto kai eskhnwsen – as the Greek has it. This is the critical verse. It embodies the most startling claim ever made. Pagan mythology was full of gods copulating with human females, pagan culture was used to ‘sons of god’ in that sense, and in the sense of divine emperors. But the Jews stood against this tide of polytheism. Here, at the beginning of the Gospel according to St John was have the claim that the ‘logos’ of God, who superintended creation, and who had spoken to the prophets, became ‘flesh’ (sarx). The claim is not that the logos ceased to be the logos, but that whilst remaining logos, became sarx.
But how could the Eternal Word of God become flesh? What did that mean? And worse, these Christians claimed Jesus was the ‘Son’ of God? How could God have a Son? More than that, how could God have a Son and be one God? Such blasphemies were behind the expulsion of the Christians from the Temple and the Synagogues. They were also, as we shall now see, the subject of a great deal of debate among Christians.
Great post C, and one of my favourite topics of conversation. 🙂 John’s use of εσκηνωσεν is if course consistent with the Temple = body motif found not only in his writings, but also in Paul’s – both of them drawing on Ezekiel 40-48 and other prophetic passages. This also explains the Fathers’ interest in theosis, since what is said of Jesus is applied by Paul to individual believers and the corporate Church, the Body of Christ.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Glad you liked it Nicholas
LikeLiked by 1 person
At a friend’s home planning some teaching sessions for those we had evangelized and who were converted, we were called on by JWs.
I had been evangelizing since my conversion at the age of 11 but at that time I did not have a name for what I was doing. At 18 I was now working out how to teach and encourage the first batch of converts.
But these JW knew selected text well. I do not say they understood them and as they threw me into so much confusion and worry it was clear I did not understand those texts either.
In a state of near panic, I called on an older Christian brother to get answers to my dilemma. We went over each issue raised by the JW and I went away with some of my brother’s notes which covered most of the NT material. But I was particularly impressed by how much was contained in his OT notes, topics like ‘The Angel of The Lord’, Christophany and OT text about YHWH applied to Jesus in the NT. Some time later we worked through the theological history of the Trinity the Church Fathers involved various orthodox explanations and the heresies.
Since that time I have added to those notes each relevant texts I have found and everything I have continued to learn on the Trinity.
Thank you, Nicholas, for a couple more references – the notes continue to grow.
I have passed these notes onto a number of JWs and I think most profitably to an ex-JW in South Africa where we conducted an evangelistic mission together. Though now a Christian he was helped immensely by the additional information. With a friend of his we sought out and visited the leading JW in the township (He could not talk to him as he was banned from all contact with JWs) and had a prolonged conversation again leaving the notes, I had prepared.
I think this illustrates a process of evangelism – just get on obeying Christ command for the ‘Great Commission’ and meet your difficulties as they arise. The Lord has commissioned us as ‘Fishers of Men’ and ultimately it is He who will equip us for the task.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m glad they were useful to you Rob 🙂 I find the thread of Jesus running through both Testaments helps to stabilize my faith – it destroys the lie that you have the “angry God” of the OT and the “loving God” of the NT, and it also dispels a lot of confusion when reading the Gospels. I think a lot of us were introduced to the Gospels first and then the OT, but the Gospels come on the scene part way through the story as it were, so we lose some context that way.
Another one you might find interesting if you haven’t looked at it before is Malachi 3. Jesus is the Lord who comes to His temple, but He is also the Messenger of the Covenant (the two are in what is a called a “Hebrew parallelism”, which comes up a lot in the OT). I think some people think John the Baptist was the Messenger of the Covenant, but that strains the passage.
LikeLiked by 2 people