The Historical Jesus
Wednesday, September 5, 2018
Christ and his work are inseparable. This presupposition has fueled Christological debates for centuries and was held as dogma by the early church. A shift occurred during the medieval period when “scholastic theology separated the doctrine of the person of Christ from the offices and work of Christ, making it more difficult for the average Christian to appreciate how this plays into their everyday living.”[1] The quest of the historical Jesus was a means of making sense of all this.
Erickson considers the “Christology from above” approach as fideistic.[2] Understandably so as Scripture went mostly unquestioned during the early years of church history. It makes three assumptions: (1) foundational to the Christian faith is the witness of Christ and his word proclaimed (the kerygma); (2) there is a preference for the “explicit theological interpretations of the apostle Paul and the Synoptic Gospels (especially John) and the witness of the prophets and apostles; (3) faith in “the Christ in the flesh” as foundational; “he or she will accept historical statements by being rationally persuaded.”[3]