God crucified: Monotheism and Christology in the New Testament (Didsbury lectures) [Unknown Binding]

Richard Bauckham (Author)

Book Description

Series: Didsbury lectures | Publication Date: 1999

God Crucified presents an exciting new proposal for understanding New Testament Christology in its Jewish context. Using the latest scholarly discussion about the nature of Jewish monotheism as his starting point, Richard Bauckham builds a convincing argument that the early Christian view of Jesus divinity is fully consistent with the Jewish understanding of God.

--This text refers to the Paperback edition.

Product Details

• Unknown Binding: 79 pages
• Publisher: W.B. Eerdmans (1999)
• Language: English
• ASIN: B0006FDYKW
• Average Customer Review: 3.9 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (7 customer reviews)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

62 of 65 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars THE INCLUSION OF JESUS IN THE IDENTITY OF GOD, December 17, 1999

By 

Terry B. Cullom (Memphis, Tennessee) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: God Crucified : Monotheism and Christology in the New Testament (Paperback)

Bauckham offers a new proposal for understanding Christology in its Jewish context; one in which the earliest N.T. Christology "includes" Jesus in the identity of God. He contends that, while this was a radically novel & unprecedented development, it was in no way a repudiation of the strict Jewish monotheistic faith.

He disagrees that second temple Jewish inter- mediary figures provide the proper category to understand Christian Christological conception. Such a category would make Jesus a second, lesser, demigod. His basic argument is, that too little attention has been given, in current discussion, to "who" God is, and that once we understand how second temple Judaism understood the identity of God, the N.T. Christological monotheism can be seen as compatible with strict Jewish Monotheistic thought.

Basically, he says, God is identified as Creator and Ruler, both of which are aspects of his absolute supremacy over all things. While there are other characteristics of God, these are ones that most readily distinguish God's absolute and unique identity. Since God alone is Supreme, exclusive worship is directed to him, and no other.

Primarily through an examination of Psalm 110:1 and Isaiah 40-55, and their reading as reflected in various N.T. passages, Bauckham argues that Jesus is portrayed as participating in the very functions of God that constitute his unique identity, and therefore shares in the identity of God--again, not as a second God alongside of God, but the identity of the one unique God.

Some concerns with this proposal would include: 1) He does acknowledge contrary evidence (e.g., some intermediary figures, as angels, do participate in the rule of God and receive homage), but dismisses it because it is not "typical" in the sources. 2) In his treatment of intermediary figures (i.e. principal angels and exalted humans), he argeus that the sources that portray them as exalted next to God also, in most contexts, make it clear they are only servants and are not included in the divine identity. Yet, most of the key N.T. passages (even I Cor. 8:6, which he cites as the earliest text that includes Jesus in the identity of God and uses to illustate the point), clearly distinguish between the one God, the Father, and the one Lord, Jesus Christ. However, rather than focus on this distinction, Bauckham points out that in the original O.T. passage (the Shema), both the word "God" and "Lord" refer to the one unique divine identity; therefore, he argues, by application of the word "Lord" to Jesus in this context, Paul is thereby including him in the identity of God.

The last half of the book works the identity in reverse: if Jesus is included in the identity of God, then God is now to be identified via the humiliation, suffering, etc. of Jesus. God's heart is opened to the world--this is the one true God, and no other.

15 of 17 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Convincing analysis of early Christian thought, May 28, 2004

By 

Matthew Gunia (Justice, Illinois) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (REAL NAME)   

This review is from: God Crucified : Monotheism and Christology in the New Testament (Paperback)

In this brief book, Bauckham attempts to prove that the earliest Church identified Jesus as the God of the Old Testament. To prove this, the author looks at how the Old Testament spoke of God (what terms were used, what wording was customary, etc.) and showed that the early Church (most of whom were Jewish converts--Paul was a rabbi) used the same termonology when writing about Jesus. He also looks at differences between Jewish/Second Temple Period references to God as opposed to angels (or any being that is less than God, but more than man) and shows that these types of references were not used when writing about Jesus.

There is an argument that the author too quickly dismisses many Scriptural passages that run counter to his argument. While this may be true, I don't think it was within the author's scope to fully treat each Biblical passage. This book is quite short, making it necessary for Bauckham to "get to the point" quickly. Furthermore, the book is intended to have people read the New Testament from a different perspective. In these things, Bauckham succeeded. It is an interesting read and I recommend it.

10 of 12 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Very Satisfying, July 26, 2003

By 

R S Shaffer (Seattle, WA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: God Crucified : Monotheism and Christology in the New Testament (Paperback)

At a time when I was questioning how to understand the Christian doctrine of the Trinity and, by extension, the deity of Christ, this little book gave me the answers I was looking for in a simple and non-technical way. The author has made this book accessible to a wide audience, it's short and the arguments are easily understood. I highly recommned this book.

As others have stated, now that I understand his basic arguments, I hope for a larger and more comprehensive discussion from this author on this subject. I think he is on to something very important here for Christian theology, Christology, and Christian apologetics.