The Historical Jesus
On the other hand, “Christology from below” takes the opposite view. It “attempts to demonstrate the supernatural character of Christ from historical evidences” giving priority to historical reason over faith as the authority.[4] Another way to look at this view is that “faith precedes but does not remain permanently independent of reason; it is a starting point for reason to enable understanding.”[5] The findings of this approach were called “Jesusologies,” but were saturated with anti-supernatural biases and methodical inadequacies.[6] The problem is, that this strategy not only denies faith, it attempts to eliminate the subjective experience of the believer, which is evidenced by dismissing the witness of the early church fathers (ignoring the kerygma).
To counteract these two views (above and below), Erickson advocates an alternative approach that integrates both historical reason and faith; “an intertwined, mutually dependent, simultaneously progressing approach.”[7]. This is a more balanced approach. Christ’s dual nature (human and divine) presupposes a mix of natural and supernatural acts. The historical Jesus is God (Jn.1:1; 1 Tim. 3:16; Col. 2:9). The very foundation of the Christian faith is based upon the acts and witness of Jesus (1 Cor. 15:14). Understandably, the world will continue to deny the miraculous and the supernatural, preferring instead to attribute the supernatural acts of “Christ in the flesh” (and the prophets and apostles) to natural laws. Still, there is great value in understanding the historical Jesus, as this is a means of coming to faith. Some will need concrete evidence (reassurance) to believe (Lk. 7:19,22). But as Erickson argued, even in light of the facts some will not believe (Mat. 12:22-32).[8] Interestingly, the incarnation of Christ suggests a God who is willing to make all necessary sacrifices and provisions to meet people where they are, to accomplish his purpose and will. What matters is “the effect of Jesus’ life upon those who believe in him,” and history has shown that God delights in revealing himself in diverse methods with the intent to redeem a people back to covenant relationship (Heb.1:1-2).[9] Erickson’s alternative approach then, posits “familiarity with the kerygmatic Christ, and the understanding and integration of historical research of Jesus” as a helpful means of assurance for faith in Christ.[10]
References:
[1] Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2013), 617.
[2] Ibid., 614.
[3] Ibid., 608-9.
[4] Ibid., 614.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Ibid., 609.
[7] Ibid., 614.
[8] Ibid., 615.
[9] Ibid. 612.
[10] Ibid., 614-15
Written by Dr. Kevin A. Hall