“Jesus is God” as a New Testament Study

Jesus is God in the New Testament? Yes, if you mean it as they did. 

A Study in “Conceptual Flipping” in the New Testament as a Model for the “Jesus is God” Claim (in a Sense)

This is just one way historians frame one of the conceptual moves going on in the New Testament, I’m just highlighting it to bring the point out so it’s helpful to understanding the claims of this post. Enjoy!

Conceptual flipping refers to the innovative and intentional reapplication of established philosophical, religious, and cultural concepts to communicate fresh and subversive ideas. In the New Testament context, it involves the juxtaposition and intertwining of Jewish and Hellenistic thought to articulate the nature, mission, and identity of Jesus Christ. The idealized version of second temple Judaism came to be known as a monotheistic Jewish tradition that affirmed the absolute oneness of God, emphasizing God’s otherness and transcendence. On the other hand, Hellenistic philosophy also a historical context and influence on the New Testament authors offered a spectrum of views on divinity, ranging from pantheism to dualism. This paper will argue that at times the New Testament flipped these concepts, using Hellenistic ideas to assert Jesus’ Jewishness, and Jewish notions to convey his Hellenistic philosophical implications. 

The Combination of Jewish Monotheistic Traditions and Hellenistic Philosophical Concepts as the Framework for Conceptual Flipping in the New Testament

The New Testament emerges from a rich historical and cultural milieu, influenced by both Jewish monotheistic traditions and Hellenistic philosophical concepts. This unique combination of influences provides the framework for the conceptual flipping observed in the New Testament, enabling the authors to convey a distinctive portrayal of Jesus as both divine and human.

1. Jewish Monotheistic Traditions:

In the Jewish monotheistic tradition, particularly within Second Temple Judaism, the belief in the absolute oneness and transcendence of God was paramount. Monotheism formed the core of Jewish religious and cultural identity, with a strong emphasis on the exclusive worship of Yahweh as the one true God. This understanding of monotheism influenced the Jewish worldview, affirming God’s uniqueness and otherness.

Within the framework of Jewish monotheism, the New Testament authors grappled with the theological challenge of presenting Jesus as divine while maintaining the belief in the oneness of God. They drew on Jewish concepts, symbols, and expectations to convey the profound nature of Jesus’ relationship with God. By employing these familiar Jewish elements, the New Testament authors engaged in conceptual flipping, reimagining their significance within the context of Jesus’ identity.

2. Hellenistic Philosophical Concepts:

Parallel to the development of Jewish monotheistic traditions, the Hellenistic world witnessed a flourishing of philosophical ideas and diverse understandings of divinity. Hellenistic philosophy offered a spectrum of perspectives on the nature of the divine, ranging from pantheism, which equated God with the universe, to dualism, which posited a division between the material and spiritual realms.

The New Testament authors were not immune to the philosophical ideas prevalent in the Hellenistic world. They were familiar with the philosophical currents and engaged in dialogue with them, adapting and reinterpreting concepts to convey the nature of Jesus’ divinity. By employing Hellenistic philosophical concepts, the New Testament authors engaged in conceptual flipping, infusing their writings with innovative understandings of Jesus’ identity that would resonate with both Jewish and Hellenistic audiences.

3. Synthesis and Conceptual Flipping:

The New Testament represents a synthesis of these two influential streams of thought – Jewish monotheistic traditions and Hellenistic philosophical concepts. This synthesis enabled the authors to convey a unique and nuanced understanding of Jesus’ divine and human nature.

Conceptual flipping occurred as the authors reimagined and repurposed existing concepts and symbols to articulate the profound nature of Jesus’ relationship with God. They skillfully employed Jewish notions, such as messianic expectations, divine Sonship, and prophetic fulfillments, to convey Jesus’ Jewishness while simultaneously employing Hellenistic philosophical concepts, such as the Logos (Word), divine Wisdom, and theos (divine), to communicate his profound implications within a Hellenistic philosophical framework.

Through this process of conceptual flipping, the New Testament authors engaged in a creative and innovative theological enterprise. They sought to bridge the gap between the divine and human realms, presenting Jesus as the embodiment of both, thereby challenging conventional expectations and offering a profound understanding of Jesus’ identity that transcended the boundaries of both Jewish and Hellenistic thought.

The New Testament’s conceptual flipping finds its foundation in the combination of Jewish monotheistic traditions and Hellenistic philosophical concepts. This unique framework allowed the authors to reimagine and repurpose existing concepts, symbols, and expectations, resulting in a distinct portrayal of Jesus as both divine and human. By skillfully engaging with these influences, the New Testament authors contributed to the theological discourse of their time and conveyed a powerful message about the nature, mission, and identity of Jesus Christ.

The New Testament’s Unique Portrayal of Jesus as Divine and Human

The New Testament presents a remarkable and distinctive portrayal of Jesus as both divine and human, achieved through the process of conceptual flipping. This unique depiction emerges from a range of key passages, allegories, titles, and narratives that illuminate the profound nature of Jesus’ divine identity and his intimate relationship with God.

One of the central themes in the New Testament is Jesus’ identification as the Son of God, a title that carries significant theological weight. This designation signifies Jesus’ divine nature and his distinct connection with God the Father. The concept of Sonship blends Jewish Messianic expectations with Hellenistic notions of divine filiation, merging the understanding of Jesus as the promised Messiah with the Hellenistic understanding of divine sonship. An example of this blending can be found in Matthew 16:13-20, where Peter confesses Jesus as the Messiah, the Son of the living God. This affirmation not only highlights Jesus’ divine identity but also demonstrates the process of conceptual flipping, as Jewish Messianic expectations intersect with Hellenistic understandings of divine sonship.

The Gospel of John provides a particularly rich portrayal of Jesus’ divinity through the introduction of the concept of the Logos (Word). This Hellenistic philosophical idea describes Jesus as the preexistent Word of God who was with God in the beginning and through whom all things were made (John 1:1-18). The concept of the Logos serves to communicate Jesus’ eternal and divine nature, bridging the gap between Jewish monotheism and Hellenistic philosophical concepts. Through this process of conceptual flipping, the Gospel of John presents Jesus as the divine Word incarnate, blending Jewish and Hellenistic ideas to convey the profound reality of Jesus’ divine nature.

Another allegory employed in the New Testament is that of Jesus as the Word made flesh, found in the prologue of the Gospel of John (John 1:14). This powerful imagery challenges conventional understandings of the divine and human realms, depicting Jesus as both fully divine and fully human, existing in a unique and mysterious union. This allegorical portrayal exemplifies the process of conceptual flipping as it draws on Jewish ideas of divine presence while incorporating Hellenistic philosophical notions of the divine assuming human form.

The New Testament further employs various narratives and titles to emphasize Jesus’ divine nature and his relationship with God. Jesus is depicted as performing miracles, exercising divine authority, and forgiving sins, thereby demonstrating his participation in divine actions. For instance, in Matthew 9:1-8, Jesus forgives a paralyzed man’s sins and heals him, showcasing his divine power and authority. These narratives highlight Jesus’ unique divine attributes and his role as the divine agent of God’s redemptive plan. However, it is not solely Jesus’ participation in divine actions that makes this an example of “Jesus is God,” but rather the fact that Jesus manifests and presents this participation as one with the divine nature. This can be seen in John 20:23, where there is a strong allusion to Jesus not only participating in the divine nature but also embodying and representing it. In this passage, Jesus not only forgives sins but also grants the power of divine forgiveness to others, being the source of divine authority. It is at this point that we begin to recognize the importance of analyzing conceptual flipping in understanding the depth of Jesus’ identity and his intimate connection to the divine nature. Jesus not only participates in the divine nature, but he also manifests and presents it to the world. This unique trinity of openness to the divine nature, actualization of unity with it beyond mere humanity, and oneness with the Father lends credence to the claim that Jesus is God in some sense that would have emboldened the debates of the 3rd and 4th centuries.

Additionally, the New Testament portrays Jesus as the embodiment of divine wisdom and divine attributes. He is identified as the Wisdom of God (1 Corinthians 1:24), drawing from Jewish wisdom traditions, and as the image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15), reflecting Hellenistic philosophical ideas of the divine as transcendent and unknowable. These allegories and titles contribute to the New Testament’s unique portrayal of Jesus, showcasing the blending of Jewish and Hellenistic concepts to articulate his divine nature and his intimate connection with God.

Furthermore, throughout the New Testament, Jesus is associated with divine roles and attributes that further affirm his identity as God or closely related to God. For example, in John 10:30, Jesus asserts, “I and the Father are one,” indicating a profound unity with God. In Hebrews 1:3, Jesus is described as the “exact representation of God’s being,” underscoring his divine nature. The New Testament also presents Jesus as the supreme authority and the object of worship, indicating his divine status (Philippians 2:9-11; Revelation 5:12-14).

In conclusion, the New Testament’s portrayal of Jesus as both divine and human arises from the fusion of Jewish and Hellenistic concepts through the process of conceptual flipping. The use of key passages, allegories, titles, and narratives in the New Testament exemplifies this unique depiction, underscoring Jesus’ divine identity and his profound relationship with God the Father. Through these various expressions, the New Testament authors invite readers to contemplate the deep mysteries of Jesus’ nature and his integral role in the divine plan of salvation.

Now for the identity issue…

The Historical Context of Identity

When we say Jesus is God in the way the Bible means it, it’s in part because of the conceptual flipping going on of both Jewish and Hellenistic meanings applied uniquely to Christ collectively. However, to the modern reader they have the baggage of being post enlightenment and as such having a completely different concept and set of intuitions of identity that has to be contextualized to make sense of the unity that God is and is not. Let’s reflect on identity so this conceptual flipping idea gets more context to why it’s a helpful way of understands the developing and meaning of the New Testament cannon. 

To understand the concept of identity in the New Testament, it is essential to explore the historical context in which it emerged. In the ancient world, identity was primarily understood in terms of collective identity, social roles, and metaphysical frameworks.

Collective identity played a crucial role in ancient societies. Individuals’ identities were closely tied to their membership in specific communities, such as family, tribe, or city-state. These communal affiliations defined one’s social status, responsibilities, and obligations. Identity was often shaped by one’s lineage, heritage, and the customs and traditions of the community to which they belonged. This collective identity was seen as an essential part of an individual’s identity, as it provided a sense of belonging and security within the social fabric.

Social roles also played a significant role in shaping identity in the ancient world. People were assigned specific roles and responsibilities based on their gender, occupation, and social status. For example, men and women had distinct roles and expectations within society, and social hierarchies determined the privileges and duties of individuals. Identity was closely tied to one’s social position and the fulfillment of societal expectations.

Metaphysical frameworks further influenced the ancient view of identity. Philosophical traditions, such as those of Plato and Aristotle, explored questions of personal identity within metaphysical contexts. These frameworks emphasized universal essences, fixed categories, and the existence of an unchanging self. Identity was often understood as an inherent and unchanging aspect of a person’s nature, determined by their place within the cosmic order or their participation in a broader metaphysical reality.

The Differences between Ancient and Contemporary Views of Identity

In contrast to the ancient understanding of identity, the modern concept of identity has undergone significant transformations. The contemporary view emphasizes individual autonomy, self-awareness, and fluidity. It emerged during the Enlightenment and was further shaped by scientific discoveries, cultural shifts, and philosophical developments.

In the modern understanding of identity, individuals are seen as autonomous agents with the capacity to shape their own identities. Personal identity is considered a product of self-reflection, introspection, and individual experiences. It is influenced by factors such as personal beliefs, values, choices, and subjective self-perception. Identity is no longer solely determined by external factors such as social roles or communal affiliations but is considered a more personal and self-determined aspect of one’s being.

The contemporary view also recognizes the fluidity and complexity of human identities. It acknowledges that individuals may have multiple intersecting identities that can vary across different contexts and situations. Identity is seen as a dynamic and evolving aspect of human existence, shaped by social, cultural, and historical factors. This recognition challenges the notion of a singular and essentialized identity, highlighting the diversity and malleability of human selfhood.

The Absence of Modern Identity Concepts in the New Testament

While the modern concept of identity, particularly the Leibnizian view, has shaped contemporary philosophical discourse, it is not prevalent in the New Testament. The New Testament authors did not employ the precise definitions and categories associated with modern identity concepts.

The anachronistic nature of applying contemporary identity categories to the New Testament becomes apparent when considering the historical context in which the texts were written. The New Testament authors were primarily concerned with conveying theological and religious messages rather than engaging in philosophical debates on personal identity. Their use of language, metaphors, narratives, and symbolism reflects this focus on theological expression rather than the delineation of precise identity concepts.

Instead of offering explicit definitions or theories of personal identity, the New Testament authors used metaphors, allegories, and narratives to convey theological truths and reveal the nature of Jesus Christ. They drew upon the cultural, religious, and philosophical resources of their time to communicate profound theological ideas, employing a language accessible to their audience and consistent with their shared understandings.

By using metaphors and allegories, the New Testament authors tapped into the rich tapestry of ancient thought and imagery to express the complexities of Jesus’ identity and his relationship with God. These figurative expressions provided a means to communicate profound truths that transcended rigid philosophical categories, allowing for a more expansive and imaginative exploration of Jesus’ divine and human nature.

The New Testament’s portrayal of identity aligns with the ancient understanding rather than the contemporary concept of identity. The ancient world emphasized collective identity, social roles, and metaphysical frameworks, while the contemporary view emphasizes individual autonomy, self-awareness, and fluidity. The New Testament authors did not employ modern identity categories, as their primary focus was on conveying theological truths and revealing the nature of Jesus Christ through metaphors, allegories, and narratives. Recognizing the historical context and the distinctive communicative strategies of the New Testament enables a more accurate understanding of identity within its original framework.

The New Testament’s portrayal of Jesus as both divine and human emerges from a unique blend of Jewish monotheistic traditions and the innovative theological developments found in the early Christian community. The authors of the New Testament engage in conceptual flipping, reimagining prevalent cultural, religious, and philosophical concepts to express the profound relationship between Jesus and God. This paper has explored the significance of this conceptual flipping, demonstrating how it contributes to the New Testament’s portrayal of Jesus as both divine and human.

Throughout the paper, we have examined various examples that reflect the New Testament’s engagement in conceptual flipping. These examples highlight the blending of Jewish and Hellenistic concepts and the use of allegories, metaphors, and narratives to convey the divine nature of Jesus and his relationship with God. From the Gospel of John’s depiction of Jesus as the eternal Word made flesh to Paul’s exploration of Jesus’ participation in human life and divine redemption, the New Testament authors present a rich and multifaceted understanding of Jesus’ identity.

Understanding the historical and cultural context of the New Testament is essential for interpreting its portrayal of Jesus. The New Testament authors were influenced by their Jewish monotheistic heritage, the Hellenistic philosophical milieu, and their own experiences of Jesus and the early Christian community. By examining the conceptual frameworks and thought patterns of the time, we can better appreciate the innovative and profound ways in which the New Testament presents Jesus as both divine and human.

However, this exploration of conceptual flipping in the New Testament is not exhaustive. It serves as an invitation for further research and exploration of this rich phenomenon. The comprehensive list of examples we have compiled throughout this paper provides a valuable starting point for scholars and readers to delve deeper into the New Testament’s depiction of Jesus as related to or as God. By analyzing the nuances of each verse and its cultural context, we can gain a more comprehensive understanding of the New Testament’s theological assertions.

The New Testament’s engagement in conceptual flipping offers a unique and profound portrayal of Jesus as both divine and human. It challenges conventional boundaries and presents a vision of Jesus that transcends simplistic categorizations. Recognizing the New Testament’s innovative use of concepts and its blending of Jewish and Hellenistic thought enhances our understanding of Jesus’ identity and his profound relationship with God. By continuing to explore the rich tapestry of conceptual flipping in the New Testament, we can further appreciate the theological depth and significance of this foundational text.

The following list provides a compilation of the examples we have discussed throughout this paper, illustrating the New Testament’s conceptual flipping in relation to Jesus’ divine nature and his connection to God:

1. Mark 1:1-11: Jesus as both divine Son of God and human son of John the Baptist.

2. Matthew 16:13-20: Jesus as Messiah and Son of the living God.

3. Luke 1:26-38: Jesus as Son of God conceived by the Holy Spirit.

4. John 1:1-18: Jesus as the Word, both God and with God, made flesh.

5. Philippians 2:6-11: Jesus as existing in the form of God yet humbling himself as a human.

6. Hebrews 1:1-4: Jesus as the radiance of God’s glory and exact representation of His being.

7. Acts 9:1-19: Jesus identified with his followers (“Why do you persecute me?”)

8. 1 John 1:1-3: Jesus as the Word of life, which was with the Father and was made manifest.

9. Revelation 1:9-18: Jesus as the “first and the last,” dead and alive forevermore.

10. Romans 9:5: Paul’s mention of the human lineage of Christ, who is also God over all.

11. Matthew 26:63-64: Jesus affirming the high priest’s declaration of him as the Messiah, the Son of God.

12. John 8:58: Jesus declaring, “Before Abraham was, I am.”

13. Colossians 1:15-20: Jesus as the image of the invisible God, firstborn of all creation.

14. 1 Timothy 3:16: Mystery of godliness as God manifested in the flesh.

15. John 10:30: Jesus asserting, “I and the Father are one.”

16. 2 Peter 1:1: Jesus as our God and Savior.

17. James 2:14-26: Flipping faith and works dichotomy to express true faith in Jesus.

18. Ephesians 2:14-18: Jesus as the peace and the peacemaker, reconciling Jews and Gentiles to God.

19. John 15:1-8: Jesus as the true vine, signifying divine presence.

20. Philippians 2:5-11: Declaration of Jesus’ lordship, countering the emperor’s divine status.

21. Revelation 1:12-18: Jesus as the supreme divine authority over life and death.

22. 1 Corinthians 15:45-49: Jesus as the last Adam, the life-giving spirit.

23. Luke 24:13-35: Recognition of the resurrected Jesus in the breaking of bread.

24. John 1:29-34: Jesus as the Lamb of God, tied to divine work of redemption.

25. Hebrews 12:1-2: Jesus as the pioneer and perfecter of our faith.

26. Romans 1:3-4: Jesus as both human (descendant of David) and divine (Son of God).

27. Revelation 19:11-16: Jesus as the Rider on the White Horse, the Word of God.

28. Matthew 28:18-20: Jesus with all authority in heaven and earth, promising eternal presence.

29. Acts 2:32-36: Jesus as both Lord and Messiah.

30. Colossians 2:9: Full and embodied divine presence in Jesus.

31. John 4:7-26: Jesus as the revealer of true worship.

32. Philippians 3:20-21: Affirmation of Jesus’ divine authority and bodily resurrection.

33. Luke 22:70: Indirect affirmation of Jesus as the Son of God, critiquing lack of understanding.

These examples further demonstrate how the New Testament authors creatively reimagined prevalent cultural and religious concepts to convey Christological ideas and the relationship between Jesus and God. They showcase the depth and diversity of the New Testament’s conceptual flipping, inviting further exploration and study into this fascinating aspect of the biblical text.

Conclusion 

By engaging in conceptual flipping with the Old Testament, the New Testament authors creatively repurposed Jewish traditions and concepts to express the transformative nature of Jesus’ identity and mission. They drew upon the rich tapestry of Old Testament prophecies, symbols, and narratives to articulate the fulfillment of God’s promises in Jesus Christ.

For example, the New Testament frequently utilizes messianic prophecies from the Old Testament to demonstrate how Jesus embodies the long-awaited fulfillment of those promises. Passages such as Isaiah 53, which speaks of the suffering servant, are reinterpreted to reveal Jesus’ sacrificial death and atoning work on the cross. The authors of the New Testament employ allegorical and typological readings of Old Testament narratives, drawing parallels between figures like Adam, Moses, and David with Jesus to highlight his unique role as the new Adam, the greater Moses, and the ultimate King.

In this sense, the New Testament’s use of the Old Testament can be seen as a form of conceptual flipping. The authors repurpose familiar symbols, themes, and prophecies to convey the profound significance of Jesus’ person and work. They take existing Jewish concepts and reimagine them in light of their understanding of Jesus as the Messiah, the Son of God, and the embodiment of divine redemption.

This practice of conceptual flipping with the Old Testament demonstrates the innovative and transformative power of the New Testament authors’ theological reflections. It invites readers to engage with the text on a deeper level, recognizing the intricate interplay between the Old and New Testaments and the rich theological tapestry that emerges from this dynamic relationship.

In conclusion, the New Testament’s conceptual flipping extends beyond its engagement with prevailing cultural, religious, and philosophical concepts. It also encompasses the authors’ creative use of the Old Testament, repurposing familiar symbols and narratives to illuminate the person and work of Jesus Christ. This practice invites further thought and exploration, prompting us to delve into the depths of the biblical text and uncover the profound theological insights that arise from the interplay between the Old and New Testaments. As we continue to study and contemplate the New Testament’s conceptual flipping, we are invited to a deeper understanding of Jesus’ identity and mission and a greater appreciation for the transformative power of the biblical message.

For further thought: How does the New Testament’s conceptual flipping with the Old Testament shape our understanding of Jesus’ identity and the continuity between the Hebrew Scriptures and the Christian faith? How can we apply the principles of conceptual flipping in our own theological reflections and interpretation of Scripture?

While I got you…

The construction of the biblical canon and the hermeneutics of the New Testament are essential for understanding the profound concepts and innovative ideas presented within these texts. These concepts sparked debates and controversies, particularly regarding the nature of Jesus’ divinity, leading to the establishment of the doctrine of the Trinity. The hermeneutical approaches employed in interpreting the New Testament reinforced the understanding that the Trinity is not just a derived doctrine from the New Testament but the most fitting explanation for interpreting the Bible’s message and expressing the received faith for the church. This viewpoint is supported by the overwhelming examples of conceptual flipping found throughout the New Testament, which serve to reinforce the belief that Jesus is God in the orthodox sense (“God from God, light from light, true God from true God…”)

The construction of the biblical canon involved a historical process influenced by various factors. Early Christian communities used specific criteria to determine which texts should be included in the New Testament. These criteria included apostolic authorship, orthodoxy, widespread acceptance, and consistency with existing Christian teachings. Through this process, the New Testament gradually emerged as a unified collection of sacred texts.

Within the New Testament, the authors engaged in conceptual flipping, reimagining prevailing cultural, religious, and philosophical concepts to convey a unique understanding of Jesus. They subverted established ideas and employed metaphors, allegories, and narratives to communicate the divine nature of Jesus and his profound relationship with God. Examples of conceptual flipping can be found throughout the New Testament, such as Jesus being depicted as the Word made flesh in the Gospel of John or Paul’s affirmations of Jesus’ divinity.

The doctrine of the Trinity played a central role in understanding Jesus as God and was established as a dogma. The hermeneutical approaches employed in interpreting the New Testament texts reinforced this understanding. The Trinity became the most fitting explanation for the biblical message, and the New Testament itself served as an aggregated source of material supporting the belief in Jesus’ divinity and his role within the Trinity. Let’s not forget the cannon was made by trinitarians, so it’s only fitting we reconstruct how they read the New Testament in not only text critically faithful ways, but ways sensitive that these texts are in a sense not merely isolated products of some synthetic historical critical context invented by scholars ascribing to the flavor of the age to put it all together in their own image. 

Finally, the construction of the biblical canon and the hermeneutics of the New Testament are vital for understanding the innovative concepts and profound interpretations of Jesus as both divine and human. When we say ‘Jesus is God,’ we mean it as a harmony of transcendence and immanence. This is God in Christ, known in the Holy Spirit and by the faith passed on from Christ to the Apostles to Christ’s church and body. This faith was transmitted from the apostles and the leaders they appointed, guided by the Holy Spirit and grace amid historical contingencies. The New Testament’s examples of conceptual flipping provide substantial evidence for the belief that Jesus is God. The doctrine of the Trinity emerged as the most fitting interpretation for understanding the Bible’s message. By exploring these topics, scholars and theologians can gain a deeper understanding of the New Testament and its theological implications for Christian belief and practice. This includes insights into Trinitarianism and its role in the common development and hermeneutics it is to be read in, the use of the Old Testament in the New, and how conceptual flipping explains Christology in profound ways.

For Jesus is God in a theological way please consider reading more about my Catholic model of God. Perhaps you can start here: https://robertdryer.com/what-is-a-divine-person-in-full-interval-trinity-theory/