by Robert Stewart

N. T. Wright consistently applies the hermeneutic that he outlined for his

readers in The New Testament and the People of God as he seeks to analyze

Jesus’ worldview in relation to questions he asks concerning the historical Jesus

in Jesus and the Victory of God. This section will examine how he answers

those questions.

Wright believes that Jesus’ self-identity may be found by examining Jesus

against the backdrop of the worldview of Second-Temple Judaism. So Wright

analyzes how Jesus’ basic beliefs were both similar and dissimilar to that

worldview. To grasp Wright’s understanding of Jesus’ self-identity, his understanding

of the worldview of Second-Temple Judaism must be examined.

Like all worldviews the worldview of Second-Temple Judaism is revealed as an

implicit story. That story is one of Creation, Fall, Election, and Vindication. It

goes something like this: Israel is YHWH’s chosen covenant people, but she has

been unfaithful to YHWH and disobeyed his Torah. For this reason she finds

herself in exile.93 But YHWH is faithful to his covenant and when Israel

repents and once again is obedient, YHWH will deliver her from exile, defeat

the evil ones, and dwell in Zion. When this takes place, a new world, with a

new way of living, will be realized.94 It was evident to most, if not all, Jews of

Jesus’ day that this had not yet happened, that Israel’s story was lacking its

God-ordained conclusion.95

The symbols of Israel’s worldview are Sabbath, Food, Nation, Land, Torah,

and supremely, Temple.96 Like all worldview symbols, they provide Israel with

a sense of identity and boundaries that make clear who is and who is not

among the people of God. Israel’s praxis may be summarized as including

worship, festivals, and living according to the Torah.97 Wright summarizes—

Story, symbol and praxis, focused in their different ways on Israel’s

scriptures, reveal a rich but basically simple worldview.

~~~

N. T. Wright’s Hermeneutic:

Part 2 – The Historical Jesus

Jesus’ Self Identity

1. Who are we? We are Israel, the chosen people of the creator god.

2. Where are we? We are in the holy Land, focused on the Temple, but,

paradoxically, we are still in exile.

3. What is wrong? We have the wrong rulers: pagans on the one hand,

compromised Jews on the other, or, half-way between, Herod and his

family. We are all involved in a less-than-ideal situation.

4. What is the solution? Our god must act again to give us the true sort of

rule, that is, his own kingship exercised through properly appointed

officials (a true priesthood; possibly a true king): and in the mean time

Israel must be faithful to his covenant charter.98

Out of this worldview flow Israel’s basic beliefs. These beliefs may be

summarized as monotheism, election, and eschatology. Monotheism declares

that Israel’s God is the only true God. The gods of other nations are false gods,

and worship of them is idolatrous.99 Israel’s God works within history through

natural events.100 Election is Israel’s answer to the challenge of Theodicy. What

will God do in the face of evil? He will choose a people to serve as his vehicle

through which he will set right the world.101 These two beliefs coupled with

the realization that things are not yet set right, lead to eschatology, i.e., Israel’s

expectation that God himself will act on her behalf. But for God to do this, he

must first deal with the source of the problem, Israel’s sin against him. Two

themes are central for this: sacrifice and suffering. Sacrifice, understood as

including regular worship, pilgrimages, national feasts, and fasts, not only

numbered the participants among God’s chosen people, but also enacted

symbolically the hoped-for restoration.102 Suffering served as the anticipated

prelude to God’s climactic act. Wright agrees with Tessa Rajak in concluding

that a number of first century Jews were preoccupied with the concept of

collective suffering for national sin.103 For Wright, these are the essential

elements of the Jewish worldview of Jesus’ day.

Wright recognizes that one may use different terms to speak of Jesus’ selfunderstanding.

One may refer to Jesus’ ministry, his career, his activity, his

work, his life, or his vocation. But none of these terms is fully adequate in and

of itself. He, therefore, chooses to use a variety of terms.104 Although he uses a

variety of different terms, the one that bears most significantly on the question

of Jesus’ self-understanding is ‘vocation’. Vocation ‘relates to Jesus’ inner

attitude to what he was doing’,105 not simply to his actions themselves. This is

consistent with Wright’s emphasis on uncovering Jesus’ aims and intentions.

Wright maintains that Jesus understood himself as the one through whom God

was fulfiling his promises to Israel. He writes, ‘The difference between the

beliefs of Jesus and those of thousands of other Jews of his day amounted

simply to this: he believed, also, that all these things were coming true in and

through himself.’106 He concludes that Jesus understood himself as functioning

in three basic ways: (1) as a prophet; (2) as Israel’s messiah; and (3) as the

embodiment of Yahweh.

Wright pictures Jesus as a combination of Robert Webb’s category of

‘leadership popular prophet’ and Richard Horsley’s and John Hanson’s

category of ‘oracular prophet’.107 Prophets of leadership and oracular

categories would be expected to gain a following, teach disciples, pronounce

judgements, and most significantly for Wright’s thesis, perform symbolic

actions,108 all of which Jesus did. Wright points out that, although early

Christians believed that Jesus was much more than simply a prophet, they

never denied that he was a prophet.109 As a prophet Jesus symbolically

proclaimed God’s plan through his entry into Jerusalem, his temple-action, his

meals with sinners, and the last supper. Finally, Jesus did what all the prophets

before him did: he called the people to repentance.110

Concerning Jesus’ consciousness of his messianic identity, Wright declares, ‘He

regarded himself as the one who summed up Israel’s vocation and destiny in

himself. He was the one in and through whom the real “return from exile”

would come about, indeed, was already coming about. He was the Messiah.’111

Again he writes—

This whole scene, summed up here from the previous Part of the book, has

encouraged us to ask the question, who did Jesus think he was? The first

answer must be: Israel-in-person, Israel’s representative, the one in whom

Israel’s destiny was reaching its climax. He thought he was the Messiah.112

The clearest case for Jesus’ consciousness of his messianic identity is found in

his temple-action, which demonstrates his kingly role by highlighting the fact

that the messiah has authority over the temple.113 The Last Supper and the

temple-action together symbolically point to his messiahship. They both serve

in no uncertain terms to declare the out-dated nature of the then-present

temple system and point to access to God—through Jesus himself.114 His

baptism points to his messianic call and anointing.115 Wright continues—

[A]n obvious first-century option for a would-be Messiah would run: go

to Jerusalem, fight the battle against the forces of evil, and get yourself

enthroned as the rightful king. Jesus, in fact, adopted precisely this

strategy. But, as he hinted to James and John, he had in mind a different

battle, a different throne.116

More… http://www.churchsociety.org/churchman/documents/Cman_117_3_Stewart.pdf

Related Articles:

• Jesus is all you need!
• Book Review: Simply Jesus
• The Jesus Driven Life: Reconnecting Humanity with Jesus
• Jesus’ disciples
• JESUS AS LIBERATOR (Richard Rohr)

This work, unless otherwise expressly stated, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 Australia License.