Christ – Jesus in the Bible: Son of God and Messiah, killed by Crucifixion – (Jesus Factors in Islam & Christianity Series 2)


Table of Contents

In series 1, ‘Isa – Jesus in the Qur’an: A Messenger and a Prophet, not crucified nor killed (Jesus Factors in Islam and Christianity)’, the argument was that there are two different narratives of the person of Jesus as noted in both the Qur’an and the Bible contributed to their different assumptions. In series 1, the term ‘factor’ was defined based on mathematical and some algebraic expressions. Factors are one of two or more numbers, or the like when multiplied together result in a given product. For example, 8 and 5 are factors of 40. In this light, therefore, viewed the Islamic interpretation of the person of Jesus as one factor, and the Christian interpretation of the person of Jesus as another factor.

This series is tasked with examining the characterization of Jesus in the Bible, namely: the Son of God and Messiah, who was killed by crucifixion. We will start by examining his person and work, in essence, Christology and soteriology.

Christology/Soteriology

The section of Christian theology that deals with the person of Jesus Christ is known as Christology. In older works (John Damascene’s Faith, Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologiae) of Christian theology, a distinction was made between the ‘person of Christ’, Christology and ‘the work of Christ’, Soteriology. Theologically, according to McGrath (1999), there is a strong “realization of the affinities between functional and ontological Christologies,” [i] and as Wolfhart Pannenberg contends that they are viewed today as two sides of the same coin:

The divinity of Jesus and his freeing and redeeming significance for us are related in the closest possible way. To this extent, Melanchthon’s famous sentence is appropriate: “Who Jesus Christ is, becomes known in his saving action.” ... Since Schleiermacher, the close tie between Christology and Soteriology has won general acceptance in theology. This is particularly to be seen in one characteristic feature of modern Christology. One no longer separates the divine-human person and the redemptive work of Jesus Christ, as was done in medieval Scholastic theology and, in its wake, in the dogmatics of sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Protestant orthodoxy, but rather, with Schleiermacher, both are conceived as two sides of the same thing. [ii]

The reference to Christology as including Jesus’ Soteriology is to point out the Christian departure of the person of Jesus as different from the way Islam and the Qur’an portray Jesus: a prophet and messenger of Allah. Jesus’ redemptive work of salvation was the reason for Christology.

There is one clear difference when the term revelation is used or referred to in Christian theology. The mystery surrounding revelation in Christianity is different from the mystery surrounding revelation in Islam.

For Islam, the revelation came through Prophet Muhammad.

But for Christianity:

The mystery of the revelation of God in Jesus Christ consists in the fact that the eternal Word of God chose, sanctified, and assumed human nature and existence into oneness with Himself, in order thus, as very God and very man, to become the Word of reconciliation spoken by God to man. [iii]

To this claim, Barth (1956) argues for a Christology that is based on God's self-revelation in Jesus Christ:

A church dogmatics must determine as a whole and in all its parts, as surely as the revealed Word of God, attested by Holy Scripture and proclaimed by the Church is its one and only criterion, and as surely as this revealed Word is identical with Jesus Christ. If dogmatics cannot regard itself and cause itself to be regarded as fundamentally Christology, it has assuredly succumbed to some alien sway and is already on the verge of losing its character as church dogmatics. [iv] 

For Pannenberg (1990, 1991), [v] Christology is the reason Christianity’s faith in the Trinity serves as the “resource for the common search for the truth.” 

Pannenberg arguing from the perspective of Rahner (1965) [vi] imagines “how the trinitarian persons come to appearance and relate to each other in the event of revelation as presented in the life and message of Jesus.” Rahner argues that “it is only on the basis of this triune God that Christian statement about the one God and God’s essence and attributes can be discussed.”[vii]

With this brief commentary on Christology/Soteriology, let’s examine the many names and attributes associated with Jesus by Christianity and indeed, the Bible. The idea is to draw a contrast between the Christian understanding of the nature or person of Jesus from that of Islamic understanding as noted in series 1.     

Jesus – Son of God

Among the Christological titles (son of David, Prophet, Rabbi, Lamb of God, King of Israel, Messiah, Son of Man, Lord, son of Mary, and Son of God) of Jesus, the most influential and controversial is Son of God. What does this mean? The assessment of the title Son of God arguably should not come from exegetical, historical, or chronological perspectives but from its biblical narration, especially as in the gospels. The phrase ‘Son of God’ is a common claim in the bible and Jesus identifies himself with his Father.[viii]  

According to McGrath “the Old Testament used the term ‘Son of God’ in a broad sense, perhaps best translated as ‘belonging to God.’ It was applied across a wide spectrum of categories, including the people of Israel in general (Exodus 4:22), and especially the Davidic king and his successors who were to rule over that people (2 Samuel 7:14).”[ix] That means that the term, ‘son of God’ in its broad usage can be applied to Jesus, any Christian or Muslim and yet, without it being associating partners with God: “There will then be (left) no Fitnah (excuses or statements or arguments) for them but to say: ‘By Allah, our Lord, we were not those who joined others in worship with Allah” (Al-An‘âm 6:23).

St. Paul used the term ‘Son of God’ in reference to Jesus and believers as well. But Paul “draws a distinction between the sonship of believers, which arises through adoption, and that of Jesus, which originates from his being “God’s own Son” (Romans 8:31). [x] Let’s examine the various usages of the phrase “Son of God” in the New Testament.

Son of God in the New Testament

In Romans 1:4, Paul argues that Jesus had been declared the Son of God because of his resurrection. Moreover, “those whom he foreknew to be made conformable to the image of his Son”, also share the same glory. “We have received the Spirit of adoption of sons whereby we cry Abba! Father!” (Romans 8:15).  For Thomas Aquinas, there was the need for the begottenness of the Son of God: “The natural Son of God is begotten not made; adopted sons are made, though sometimes said to be begotten by a spiritual rebirth which comes not from nature but from grace... The Son of God proceeds by nature from the Father as a mental Word of one existence with the Father....” For Vermes, there are two types of sayings that are particularly important to the study of the term “Son of God” in the Gospels and Acts. Namely: (1) a typology of Jesus self-identifying himself as the “Son of God” and (2) the typology whereby others describe or address him as such. [xi]

Son of God by Self-identification

In describing the way, the title Son of God is applied in the Gospels, especially when Jesus Christ is assumed to be arrogating the title to himself, there are two biblical translations – The New Jerusalem Bible (NJB) and New Living Translation (NLT) that underpins the Synoptic parallels. The reason for this is to unravel the implications of the Son of God discourse.

But as for that day or hour, nobody knows it, neither the angels in heaven nor the Son; only the Father (Mark 13:32). [NJB]

However, no one knows the day or hour when these things will happen, not even the angels in heaven or the Son himself. Only the Father knows (Mark 13:32). [NLT]                            

Everything has been entrusted to me by my Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father, just as no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him (Matthew 11:27). [NJB]

My Father has entrusted everything to me. No one truly knows the Son except the Father, and no one truly knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him (Matthew 11:27). [NLT]

Everything has been entrusted to me by my Father, and no one knows who the Son is except the Father, and who the Father is except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him (Luke 10:22). [NJB]

My Father has entrusted everything to me. No one truly knows the Son except the Father, and no one truly knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him (Luke 10:22). [NLT]

The above biblical citations, especially from the NLT are emphatic. The NLT precisely ‘foregrounds’ the uniqueness of the Father (God) by using adverbs such as ‘only’ the Father (Mark 13:32). Then in (Matthew 11:27) and (Luke 10:22) the NLT used another adverb ‘truly’ to signify that the true knowledge of the Father (God) can only come through the Son and true knowledge of the Son can come only through the Father and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him. And yet another, significant point from the above citations is that (Matthew 11:27) and (Luke 10:22) portrayed Jesus as declaring himself the Son of the Father, in the phrase “My Father.”

The above discourses are parts of the eschaton and especially in Mark 13:32, the title ‘the son’, followed later Gospel tradition as a complement to counterbalance the disturbing impression left by the entire saying. [xii] 

Son of God and Messiah

Here the phrase “Son of God” is meant to designate “Messiah”. “The Greek word Christos translates the Hebrew term Mashiah, most familiar in its anglicized form of “Messiah”, with the root meaning of “one who has been anointed” [xiii] The term “Messiah” is used to describe God’s anointed as was in the case of Saul, David and even Persian, King Cyrus (Isaiah 45:1). Rengstorf argues that “the decisive feature of the NT against the background of contemporary messianic expectation is summed up in the thesis that the combined NT witness to Jesus of Nazareth, however, varied in detail, is consciously Christological.” [xiv] 

The term “Son of God” if associated to the concept of Messiah denotes two natures (human and divine) of the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity. Hence, the title “Son of God” is about his divinity while “Messiah” is about his humanity. The following New Testament verses support this argument.

But he was silent and made no answer at all. The high priest put a second question to him saying, ‘Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?’ (Mark 14:61). [NJB]

But Jesus was silent and made no reply. Then the high priest asked him, ‘Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?’ (Mark 14:61). [NLT]

But Jesus was silent. And the high priest said to him, ‘I put you on oath by the living God to tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God' (Matthew 26:63). [NJB]

But Jesus remained silent. Then the high priest said to him, ‘I demand in the name of the living God – tell us if you are the Messiah, the Son of God’ (Matthew 26:63). [NLT]

Look! You are to conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you must name him Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give the throne of ancestor David... (Luke 1:31-32). [NJB]

You will conceive and give birth to a son, and you will name him Jesus. He will be very great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his ancestor David (Luke 1:31-32). [NLT]

From the preceding, NJB uses the title “Christ” (the anointed one) and associates it with the Son of the Most High while the NLT uses “Messiah” (Mark 14:61).

Both mean the same thing except that NJB is translated from the Greek Christos and the NLT translates from the Hebrew Mashiah. Again, the title “Son of the Most High” is linked directly to the role of kingship which goes to define the title “Christ” (the anointed one). The Luke account identified Jesus as a descendant of David (Luke 1:32) and this links again to the claim that he is the son of David.

In the theological glossary of NJB, the title ‘son of David’ is a “messianic title stemming from the promise to David and stressed thenceforth in the Old Testament (OT) and at the time of Jesus .... Jesus himself was hesitant towards this title, perhaps because it suggested too human a notion of the Messiah.” [xv] Jesus was not keen on the title son of David, perhaps because of its political connotations. 

Examining the effect of messianism on the early church, Rengstorf argued that “when it represented itself as the community of Jesus the primitive church intended to represent itself simply as the messianic community. For in its preaching of Jesus as messiah it was at the same time interpreting itself messianically in relation to its life, its historical origins, and its aims.” [xvi]

Son of God – Miracle Worker

In the New Testament, miracles were considered effects of the works of someone viewed as coming from God. The Son of God concept is attributed to Jesus because of the many miracles (for example, bringing the dead back to life) he performed which in the eyes of his onlookers were unimaginable. The title of Son of God was associated with Jesus not only by humans but by demons and by heavenly voices as well. [xvii]

Son of God used by Demons

And the unclean spirits, whenever they saw him, would fall before him and shout, ‘You are the Son of God!’ (Mark 3:11). [NJB]

And whenever those possessed by evil spirits caught sight of him, the spirits would throw them to the ground in front of him shrieking, ‘You are the Son of God!’ (Mark 3:11). [NLT]

Devils too came out of many people, shouting, ‘You are the Son of God.’ But he warned them and would not allow them to speak because they knew that he was the Christ (Luke 4:41). [NJB]

Many were possessed by demons; and the demons came out at his command, shouting, ‘You are the Son of God!’ But because they knew him, he was the Messiah, he rebuked them and refused to let them speak (Luke 4:41). [NLT]

Suddenly they shouted, ‘What do you want with us, Son of God? (Matthew 8:29). [NJB]

They began screaming at him, ‘Why are you interfering with us, Son of God? (Matthew 8:29). [NLT]

Son of God used by men

And as they got into the boat the wind dropped. The men in the boat bowed down before him and said, ‘Truly, you are the Son of God’ (Matthew 14:33). [NJB]

Then the disciples worshipped him. ‘You really are the Son of God!’ they exclaimed (Matthew 14:33). [NLT]

The centurion, who was standing in front of him, had seen how he had died, and he said, ‘In truth, this man was the Son of God’ (Mark 15:39). [NJB]

When the Roman officer who stood facing him saw how he had died, he exclaimed, ‘This man truly was the Son of God!’ (Mark 15:39). [NLT]

When the centurion saw what had taken place, he gave praise to God and said, ‘Truly, this was an upright man.’ (Luke 23:47). [NJB]

When the Roman officer overseeing the execution saw what had happened, he worshipped God and said, ‘Surely this man was innocent.’ (Luke 23:47). [NLT]

Son of God used by heavenly Voice

And a voice from heaven said, ‘This is my dearly loved Son, who brings me great joy’ (Matthew 3:17). [NLT]

And suddenly there was a voice from heaven, ‘This is my Son, the Beloved; my favour rests on him’ (Matthew 3:17). [NJB]

And a voice came from heaven, ‘You are my Son, the Beloved; my favour rests on you’ (Mark 1:11). [NJB]

And a voice from heaven said, ‘You are my dearly loved Son, and you bring me great joy’ (Mark 1:11). [NLT]

As he was praying the heavens opened, and the Holy Spirit, in bodily form, descended on him like a dove. And a voice from heaven said, ‘You are my dearly loved Son, and you bring me great joy (Luke 3:22). [NLT]

And the Holy Spirit descended on him in a physical form, like a dove. And a voice came from heaven, ‘You are my Son; today have I fathered you’ (Luke 3:22). [NJB]

Son of God in the Fourth Gospel – According to John

Nathanael answered, ‘Rabbi, you are the Son of God, you are the king of Israel’ (John 1:49). [NJB]

Then Nathanael exclaimed, ‘Rabbi, you are the Son of God – the king of Israel!’ (John 1:49). [NLT]

The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, ‘Look! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! (John 1:29). [NLT]

The next day, he saw Jesus coming towards him and said, ‘Look, there is the lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world’ (John 1:29). [NJB]

The first thing Andrew did was to find his brother and say to him, ‘We have found the Messiah' – which means the Christ – and he took Simon to Jesus (John 1:41). [NJB]

Andrew went to find his brother, Simon, and told him, ‘We have found the Messiah’ (which means “Christ”) (John 1:41). [NLT]

When the people saw him do this miraculous sign, they proclaimed, ‘Surely, he is the Prophet we have been expecting!’ When Jesus saw that they were ready to force him to be their king, he slipped away into the hills by himself (John 6:14-15). [NLT]

Seeing the sign that he had done, the people said, ‘This is indeed the prophet who is to come into the world.’ Jesus, as he realized they were about to come and take him by force and make him king, fled back to the hills alone (John 6:14-15). [NJB]

These are recorded so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God and that by believing this you may have life through his name (John 20:31). [NJB]

But these are written so that you may continue to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God and that by believing in him you will have life by the power of his name (John 20:31). [NLT]

John’s account of Jesus as the Son of God included other titles, such as ‘Rabbi’, ‘the king of Israel’, ‘the Lamb of God’, ‘Messiah’, and ‘And Prophet’. At the end of his gospel, John argues that Jesus is the Christ as well as the Son of God; and that believing in the name – of Jesus Christ – as the Son of God, gives life to any who believes it.

It is a long narration from the gospels as they depict the person and nature of Jesus. Jesus is the “Son of God” and a “Messiah”. There are other titles associated with him as listed above. Rengstorf argues that “to express this a single title like Messiah or Christ is just not sufficient. Therefore, when the NT kerygma expounds the salvation bound up in Christ, it makes use of other titles of honour which are appropriate to the particular reference.” [xviii] He eventually, brings together the link between Christology and soteriology:

If Christ has been transformed from a title of honour to a part of Jesus’ name, this corresponds to the essential feature in his historical appearance which at the same time must be reckoned as the condition of his whole work as a mediator of salvation: his obedient submission to God’s will as manifested in the process of God’s self-revelation in the history of the people of Israel. [xix]

Jesus’ messiahship and Sonship are at the heart of Christian Christology as against Islamic ‘Isalogy.

Christian Christology presents Jesus as a messiah and Son of God. His messiahship not only that it is “the presupposition of his path to the cross”, but it is also “the presupposition of his resurrection and exaltation on God’s part”, hence, in (Phil. 2:5). Rengstorf argues that Paul “describes Jesus’ path via incarnation, the life of obedience and the death of obedience on the cross to the resurrection and to exaltation at God’s side as the path of Christ Jesus, i.e., of that messiah who is identical with Jesus of Nazareth.” [xxi]

The Jesus factors of the two religions are like two sides of the same coin. They are like 5 and 8 which gives 40 as a product. For greater or lesser, the two different positions of the two religions add to the scholarship of Jesus' arguments.

Conclusion

The Islamic understanding of the person of Jesus as both a messenger and prophet is far removed from the Christian understanding of the person and nature of Jesus as a messiah and Son of God. For the Qur’an, Jesus was the son of Mary, who was not killed but was raised body and soul by God to the heavens: “And because of their saying (in boast), ‘We killed Messiah ‘Isa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), the Messenger of Allah,’ – but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but the resemblance of ‘Isa (Jesus) was put over another man (and they killed that man), and those who differ therein are full of doubts” (An-Nisa’ 4:157). 

For Christianity, Jesus is the incarnate Word of God and Son of God. He also enjoys many other titles among Christian believers. However, there are quite a few things that can bring Muslims and Christians together in Jesus’ narratives. Both agree that he is the son of Mary, the messenger, the word of God, and the righteous one. Both also agree that he somehow left this world, whether, through translation or crucifixion, both await his return.  


[i] McGrath, AE 1999. Christian Theology: An Introduction. Blackwell, Oxford. P.320

[ii] (Wolfhart Pannenberg as cited in McGrath 1999. P. 320).

[iii] Barth, K 1956. Church Dogmatics. G. Bromiley and T. F. Torrance (eds). T. & T. Clark, Edinburgh. P.122

[iv] Ibid. P.123

[v] Pannenberg, W 1990, ‘Religious Pluralism and Conflicting Truth Claims: The Problem of a Theology of the World Religions’ in D’Costa, G, (ed) Christian Uniqueness Reconsidered: The Myth of a Pluralistic Theology of Religions, Orbis, Maryknoll, NY, pp. 96-106. (Pannenberg, W 1991, Systematic Theology, vol.1 translated by G Bromiley, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, MI).

[vi] Rahner, K 1965. Theological Investigations. vol. 1. Darton. Longman & Todd, London.

[vii] Karkkainen, V 2004. Trinity and Religious Pluralism: The Doctrine of the Trinity in Christian Theology of Religions. Ashgate, England. P.86

[viii] Vermes, G 1976. Jesus the Jew: A Historian’s Reading of the Gospels. Fontana/Collins, Glasgow.

[ix] McGrath. AE. Op. cit. 326

[x] Ibid.

[xi] Vermes, G 1976. Op. cit. P.200

[xii] Ibid. PP.200-201

[xiii] McGrath. AE. Op. cit. p.325

[xiv] Rengstorf, KH 1976. ‘Jesus Christ, Nazarene, Christian’. in Colin Brown (ed) The New International Dictionary of New Testament. G-Pre. The Paternoster Press, Exeter. P.338

[xv] The New Jerusalem Bible. 1990. p.1448

[xvi] Rengstorf, KH 1976. Op. cit. p.339

[xvii] Vermes, G. 1976. Op. cit.

[xviii] Rengstorf, KH. 1976. Op. cit. P.343

[xix] Ibid.

[xx] ‘Isalogy - a term deduced from the Islamic name for Jesus (‘Isa). I have used to counterbalance the Christian term, Christology, hence imagining the ‘Jesus Factors in Islam and Christianity.’

[xxi] Rengstorf, KH. 1976. Op. cit.  

Popular posts from this blog

Early Contacts between Christianity and Islam

The Connection between a Personal Name and Name Groups in Shawnee Social Organisation

The Akamba – Concept of the Supreme Being & Totems

Begrudging & Infightings: Aztec’s Theogony & Cosmogony

Nigeria’s Pledge Vs the President’s Mandate: An Antithesis of Patriotism

The Aesir Vs the Vanir – The gods at War

Nigeria’s 2023 Presidential Election - from preparation to verdicts

The Weyekin in Nez Percé Tribe and Catholic Angels

The Conflict between the Deities (Igwe and Amadioha) in Igbo Mythology over a Heat Wave