Jesus and God in Paul’s Eschatology 9781474213363, 9781850750666

Citation preview

PREFACE This book is a slightly revised form of my PhD work completed at King's College, London, in 1985. I was fortunate to have been awarded a Tutorial Studentship within the Department of Biblical Studies at King's and count it a special privilege to have combined the roles of student and teacher of New Testament during the Qourse of my study there. I have no doubts that this arrangement did much to make the time one of the most fulfilling and enriching of my life. I wish to record my thanks to Professor Graham Stanton, who served as my supervisor at King's. He remains an inexhaustible source of inspiration and encouragement, not only as far as academic work is concerned, but also for his conviction of integrating his immense learning with an abiding commitment to the Body of Christ. One could not find a better representative for the motto of King's as an institution dedicated to both "Sancte et Sapienta". I gratefully acknowledge how fortunate I have been to have worked alongside and studied under him. Much of the inspiration for the book can be attributed to Graham; I claim the errors and shortcomings for myself. There are many others on the staff at King's who deserve special thanks as well. Michael Knibb played an especially important role in that he encouraged and nurtured my interest in Jewish pseudepigraphal literature. Leslie Houlden, Colin Hickling, Francis Watson, Richard Coggins, Ronald Clements, Grace Jantzen, Stewart Sutherland, Colin Gunton, Terry Tastard, and many others all helped to create an atmosphere which made study a pleasure and a joy. Their constant supportive interest in my work spurred me to produce that which I could not have otherwise achieved. I also owe an immense debt to all the friends at the two Baptist churches with which I was in membership while in London, Northcote Road and Battersea Chapel. They will never know how much I relied upon them during those years. Theological study at the graduate level can be a lonely and isolating experience. I thank them that they helped to make it otherwise for me.

10

Jesus and God in Paul's Eschatology

Many others have contributed to the production of this book and have been more important than they could ever possibly imagine. Prudence does not allow me the luxury of listing names, but they can rest assured that in my heart of hearts I know of their contribution and shall be ever grateful. Most importantly, mention must be made of Linda, without whom I never could have finished, nor even begun, this project. A more loving and understanding companion could not be found; a more charitable and supportive partner could not be desired. I count it my supreme privilege in life to call her my wife. I dedicate the study to her. Regent's Park College, Oxford June 1987

ABBREVIATIONS In connection with the nomenclature of the Dead Sea Scrolls material I have adopted the system of abbreviations suggested by Joseph A. Fitzmyer, The Dead Sea Scrolls: Major Publications and Tools for Study (1977), pp. 3-8. AMWNE

ANRW AOT APOT BASOR BCE BibTr BibZ BIOSCS BTB CBQ CE CP CTR EQ EvT ExpT FS HJ HTR IDB IEJ JAAR

Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East: Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Apocalypticism, Uppsala, August 12-17, 1979, edited by David Hellholm (J.C.B. Mohr: Tubingen, 1983). Aufstieg und Niedergang der Romischen Welt, edited by Wolfgang Haase (1979- ). The Apocryphal Old Testament, edited by H.F.D. Sparks (1984). Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, in 2 vols., edited by R.H. Charles (1913). Bulletin of the American School of Oriental Research Before the Common Era The Bible Translator Biblische Zeitschrift Bulletin of the International Organization of Septuagint and Cognate Studies Biblical Theology Bulletin Catholic Biblical Quarterly Common Era Classical Philology Calvin Theological Review The Evangelical Quarterly Evangelische Theologie The Expository Times Festschrift Heythrop Journal Harvard Theological Review The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible Israel Exploration Journal Journal of the American Academy of Religion

12 JAOS JBL JETS JJS JourRel JQR JSJ JSNT JSOT JTC JTS JWSTP

KTR LXX MT NIDNTT NovT NTS OTS PMRS RB RevExp RHPR RQ SBL SJT SO SPCIC 61 TB TDNT

Jesus and God in Paul's Eschatology Journal of the American Oriental Society Journal of Biblical Literature Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society Journal of Jewish Studies The Journal of Religion The Jewish Quarterly Review The Journal for the Study of Judaism The Journal for the Study of the New Testament The Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Journal for Theology and the Church Journal of Theological Studies Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period, (Compendia Rerum Iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum, Section Two: The Literature of the Jewish People in the Period of the Second Temple and the Talmud), edited by Michael Stone (1984). King's Theological Review The Septuagint The Masoretic Text The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, edited by Colin Brown, 3 vols. (197578). Novum Testamentum New Testament Studies Oudtestamentische Studien The Pseudepigrapha and Modern Research with a Supplement, compiled by James H. Charlesworth (1981). Revue Biblique The Review and Expositor Revue d'Historie et de Philosophic Religieuses Revue de Qumran The Society of Biblical Literature The Scottish Journal of Theology The Sibylline Oracles Studiorum Paulinorum Congressus Internationalis Tyndale Bulletin Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, edited by G. Kittel and G. Friedrich, translated by G. Bromiley, 10 vols. (1964-74).

Abbreviations TOTP TOTPNT TS TZ VT ZAW ZNW

13

The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha^ edited by James H. Charlesworth, 2 vols. (1983-85). The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha and the New Testament, by James H. Charlesworth (1985). Theological Studies Theologische Literaturzeitung Vetus Testamentum Zeitschrift ftir die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft Zeitschrift fur die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft

INTRODUCTION Do any of the New Testament writers call Jesus 'God' or identify Jesus with God ontologically? This question has often provoked scholars to reconsider their theological presuppositions, open their New Testaments afresh, and take up their pens.1 The Pauline epistles2 have an important part in the ensuing debate,3 Rom. 9.54, Phil. 2.6-115 and Col. 1.15-206 being particular areas of controversy. It has not gone unnoticed that most of the Pauline passages examined in this regard are liturgical hymns of pre-Pauline origin.7 Yet another category of Paul's teaching, just as much a part of the earliest Christian tradition, also needs to be examined in connection with this question. I speak of his eschatological teaching.8 To what extent does Paul's thought have God as its focal point and to what extent does it have Christ as that focal point? Is it possible for us to determine where the primary concentration of attention lies for Paul as he expounds his understanding of the Christian faith? In short, how does Paul relate theocentricity and christocentricity within his thinking? This study proposes to examine Paul's eschatological teaching in an effort to come to a better understanding of his christological thought, especially as it revolves around this central issue of the interrelationship between the respective roles of God and Christ. We shall have opportunity to compare and contrast Paul's ideas on this important subject with those embodied in selected Jewish pseudepigraphal documents of roughly the same period. Such a comparison will highlight the contribution a specifically Christian ingredient has to make within eschatological texts of the period 200 BCE to 100 CE and enable us to understand more fully how Paul conceived of Jesus' relationship to God. Precisely how Paul, and other early Christians, conceived of Jesus' relationship to God is a matter at the heart of much christological discussion. The whole issue, more than anything else, displays the limitations of language as a means of expressing, with any degree of exactitude, the significance ofJesus and his relationship to God. Karl Rahner remarks: how hesitant and groping the religious language of the NT authors

16

Jesus and God in Paul's Eschatology is, when they try to speak of the unity and distinction of God as Father... (and) Son.9

In attempting to summarize Paul's formulation of this relationship, I would like to suggest that he stops short of actually asserting absolute equality between Jesus the Messiah and God. Yet at the same time, for Paul, Jesus' identification with God is such that he cannot be fully explained or comprehended via human categories alone. Nor can Jesus' significance be assessed as simply another expression of the phenomenon of intermediary figures populating Jewish apocalyptic literature of the time. Within Paul's thought, Jesus transcends the boundaries of such categories without, at the same time, entirely usurping the position of God himself.10 We do not think that such a paradoxical formulation is restricted to the Pauline material. Worth noting is the classic article by C.K. Barrett 11 in which the paradoxical claims of John's Gospel are explored and an important clarifying point interjected. Barrett's cautious summary should help to guide our exploration of the Pauline passages: It is further to be observed that those notable Johannine passages that seem at first sight to proclaim most unambiguously the unity and equality of the Son with the Father are often set in contexts which if they do not deny at least qualify this theme, and place alongside it the theme of dependence, and indeed of subordination.12 As we shall see, the Pauline materials demonstrate a striking parallel to this assessment of Johannine theology. The early Christians' understanding ofJesus' unique identification with God, as it is expressed within the New Testament documents, has long been recognized as an essential feature of their faith. Such identification has been explored from a number of angles by scholars and the resultant christological picture which has emerged is multilayered and extremely complex. Several approaches have been used with great effect in recent years. Let us broadly outline four of these approaches and thereby help to set the context for our own study. Occasionally, a single theological theme or motif has been employed to analyze the christological material of the New Testament documents. For instance, 'Wisdom theology' has made a very significant contribution to our understanding of christology, especially as it involves the question of the relationship of theocentricity and christocentricity.

Introduction

Yl

It is possible to demonstrate that 'Wisdom' ideas and categories, which are generally descriptions of the work and activity of God, become christologically re-applied and serve as descriptions of the work and activity of Christ. In the midst of such reapplication rises the question of precisely how the roles of God and Messiah interrelate. As an example, it is quite easy to demonstrate the associations that a 'Wisdom theology' has with the doctrine of the creation of the world (as in Prov. 8.22ff.). To what extent, however, does the description of Christ as the 'Wisdom of God' encroach upon the prerogative of God in this matter? In what way does the association of 'Wisdom theology' with a human agent, Jesus, alter it from being properly described as 'theocentric' in character? More specifically, to take but one text which emphasizes Christ's role in creation, to what extent can Col. 1.16-17 still be described as maintaining a balance of theocentricity and christocentricity when the focus of concentration is so obviously Jesus Christ himself? Wisdom which is described as the personification of an attribute or quality of God is easy enough to understand within the context of first-century Jewish thought; but Wisdom which is so firmly and absolutely equated with the life and ministry of a known, individual person is much more difficult to comprehend, and to a certain degree is without precedent. The addition of this 'personal' factor within discussions of 'Wisdom theology' has tremendous christological implications. As the late G.B. Caird once commented: Jewish antecedents adequately explain all the terminology used in the New Testament to describe the pre-existent Christ, but they cannot explain how Christians came to belief in his pre-existence as a person; for the Jews had believed only in the pre-existence of a personification. Wisdom was a personification, either of a divine attribute or of a divine purpose, but never a person.13 These are by no means easy concepts to understand, but their discussion is essential if we wish to gain a clearer picture of the christological expression among the first generations of Christians. In any case, the importance of 'Wisdom theology' as a crucial, even monumental, means of christological expression for those first Christian thinkers and writers is without doubt. The same sort of phenomenon of expression occurs with respect to 'Logos theology', and, to a lesser degree, with respect to 'Adamic theology'.14 The Pauline materials have an important role to play in many such theological discussions. We could note, for example, the

18

Jesus and God in Paul's Eschatology

place that 1 Cor. 8.6-7 and Col. 1.15-20 have within 'Wisdom' studies or the role that Rom. 5.12-21; 1 Cor. 15.20-22, 44-49; and Phil. 2.611 all have within 'Adamic' studies.15 Another approach to the larger christological issue has been one which focuses on the hermeneutical use of Old Testament scriptures within the Christian tradition. Paul's epistles have a primary place in this specialized area of study with about one third of all Old Testament quotations or allusions found within the New Testament occurring in his letters. The importance of christology as the hermeneutical key to understanding these quotations is emphasized by E.E. Ellis:16 the significance of the OT for Paul's theology can hardly be overestimated. His experience on the Damascus road radically altered his understanding of the Book, but it in no way lessened its importance for the apostle to the Gentiles. Rather, his knowledge of Christ opened to him a New Way in which he found the true meaning of the Scriptures. At the same time there is little doubt that such Old Testament quotations and allusions contained within the New Testament reveal a great deal about the way Jesus' relationship to God was conceived by Paul and other early Christians. Richard Longenecker,17 while emphasizing the Christian's reliance upon the Jewish scriptures, hits upon a crucial point: the Jewish context in which the New Testament came to birth, significant though it was, is not what was distinctive or formative in the exegesis of the earliest believers. At the heart of their Biblical interpretation is a Christology and a Christocentric perspective. Such an assessment is widely recognized and accepted by Biblical scholars. Indeed, it would be possible to describe the hermeneutical use of Old Testament scriptures within the New Testament documents as essentially 'christological' in character. Yet, one specialized feature of the Christian's use of Old Testament texts has not been as thoroughly explored as perhaps it ought to be. This involves the way in which an outright substitution of christocentrism for theocentrism occurs within many of the Old Testament quotations or allusions. Certainly the meaning of many of these Old Testament texts has been considerably expanded and enriched by the interjection of a new christological element, but in many cases the central theological message itself has undergone a decisive change of

Introduction

19

emphasis by such a substitutionary process. In such cases the focus of concentration shifts dramatically from God to Christ. A good example is 1 Cor. 2.6-16, where Paul's discussion of spiritual gifts and Wisdom culminates in his quotation of Isa. 40.13, focusing on 'the mind of the Lord'. He goes on to further amplify this reference, and christocentrically redirect it, by emphasizing that the Christian has 'the mind of Christ' (f||j£i eyco, Xeyei Kupioq derived from Isa. 49.18. This quotation has no direct connection with the judgment theme but the context of Isaiah 49 itself does lend itself to application to the idea of the Christian's resurrection via its discussion of the restoration of Israel. It is possibly this capacity which has served to link the quotation to the more specific issue of judgment itself. We see this judgment motif more clearly expressed in the second quotation of Rom. 14.11 taken from Isa. 45.23. The relevant section from the LXX reads: "Ori ejaoi Kd|iV|/8i ndv yovu, Kai ojaercai ndoa yAxoaaa rov Geov. We need to examine the larger context of both the Old Testament text and the New Testament quotation to extract their full significance for our study, always keeping in mind the difficulties inherent in such examinations with respect to their original context. Did Paul intend his reader to keep in mind the context of any given Old Testament quote or not? And if so, how wide do we need to cast our contextual net in order to retrieve the intended meaning? To a

108

Jesus and God in Paul's Eschatology

certain degree these problems can be overcome, at least with respect to Isa. 45.23, owing to the fuller treatment this verse receives in the Pauline epistles. That is to say that the meaning Paul assigns to the quote is to some degree clarified by the expanded treatment it receives elsewhere in his letters.46 Isaiah 45 is, of course, a messianic passage which brings together God and his anointed servant Cyrus (45.1,13) in accomplishing the deliverance of the nation Israel. In the midst of an exalted messianic description of Cyrus, the Lord God is spoken of as Savior (45.15,21). This description is done in very monotheistic terms which emphasize the Lord God as the 'only Righteous God and Savior'.47 This theistic sense of Isa. 45.23 is to a certain degree maintained in the quotation of Rom. 14.10 itself; but as the larger context of 14.9-11 demonstrates, God and Messiah are more closely united than is sometimes recognized. We note, for instance, that v. 9 clearly associates Christ's death and resurrection with his Lordship (and his resultant role as Judge!). In v. 10 we have the specific mention of the judgment of God (i(p (3f)jiaTi TOU 0eoi)); while in v. 11 the Isaiah passages are quoted. We must not overlook the fact that 'Lord' most probably refers to God himself (via the force of rou Geou in v. 10), and that this, while quite natural, does represent a referential shift from the preceding christological use of the verb Kupieuor) in v. 9.48 We should at this point consider the thesis of George Howard regarding the replacement of the Hebrew tetragram mm by surrogates as the basis for confusion about the relationship between 'Lord God' and 'Lord Christ'.49 Howard specifically discusses this passage from Romans 14 in some depth. He quite rightly points out that the textual evidence seems to indicate that in pre-Christian biblical texts the Hebrew tetragram was usually written regardless of the language of the text concerned. Most copies of the LXX, however, replace the tetragram with KUpioc; or an abbreviation of it, such as K