A few weeks ago, I posted a summary of Van Drunen’s argument against depictions of Jesus. I wrote: “Christology, he argues, does not support the conclusion that we may make pictures of Jesus, but the opposite. Because Jesus is still the Incarnate Son, because He is still fully human, He . . . . Continue Reading »
Over the centuries, Christians have invented all sorts of lore about Satan, hell, and the underworld. Most of it is pure fancy. Dante is instructive in many ways; he is not instructive in giving us a map of hell. This may seem harmless speculation, but at a fundamental level it is a denial of the . . . . Continue Reading »
David VanDrunen of Westminster West offered an interesting Christological defense of iconoclasm in an article several years ago published in the International Journal of Systematic Theology . Christology, he argues, does not support the conclusion that we may make pictures of Jesus, but the . . . . Continue Reading »
“They pierced my hands and my feet.” The words are the words of David, but we know that the voice is the voice of David’s Son, Jesus. They are the hands of the last Adam. The first Adam stretched out his hand to take the fruit of the tree of knowledge, and Yahweh sent him from the . . . . Continue Reading »
“They pierced my hands and my feet.” The voice is the voice of David, but we know from the gospels that the words describe Jesus on the cross. Jesus is fixed to the cross by nails through his feet. Feet are associated with strength and dominion. A conqueror tramples his enemies under . . . . Continue Reading »
Several times in her Sacred Power, Sacred Space (Oxford), Jeanne Halgren Kilde makes odd comments about the gnostic emphasis on Jesus’ humanity. Like this: “Although Gnostics had struggled mightily to emphasize Jesus’ humanity, the concept of the holy Trinity, and with it the . . . . Continue Reading »
The following is a Christological speculation, not a Christological affirmation. My student, Brad Littlejohn, has suggested, based on a study of the theology of “life” in the gospel, that the divine-human relation in Christ changes after the death and resurrection of Jesus. The humanity . . . . Continue Reading »
John’s talk of the “only-begotten” has been taken as a reference to an “eternal begetting” of the Son. I agree. But the specific “begetting” spoken of in the Old Testament is the begetting of the “Son,” the Davidic king (Psalm 2:7 with 2 Samuel . . . . Continue Reading »
Paul (Colossians 1:18) and John (Revelation 1:5) both describe Jesus as the “firstborn from the dead.” The firstborn is the heir, and so the firstborn of the dead is the heir of the world of death. He has the keys to death and hades. Death holds no fear, no dangers; it belongs to Jesus . . . . Continue Reading »
Meyendorff ( Christ in Eastern Christian Thought ) does a good job of showing not only the compatibility of Chalcedon with Cyrillian Christology, but that Chalcedon is essentially Cyrillian. The logic is this: Chalcedon insisted on a single hypostasis in Christ. The humanity has no separate . . . . Continue Reading »
Subscribe
Latest Issue
Support First Things
