Christology cuts straight to the heart of the Christian faith. Our understanding of Jesus—who he was and is—shapes our faith and devotion. I still remember sitting in my first Christology course over two decades ago listening to John Stevenson discuss how the eternal Son of God could be fully human. (That he managed to keep this college kid awake during an 8 a.m. class is a testament both to his teaching skill and the subject matter!)

In Jesus the Spirit Baptizer, pentecostal theologian Frank D. Macchia has rethought Christology from a Day-of-Pentecost perspective. The revelation of Jesus’ identity is ultimately grounded not in the incarnation, or Jesus’ death, but in the completion of his mission: the pouring out of the Spirit.

The purpose of this book is to view all of the events of Christ’s life and mission through the lens of their fulfillment at Pentecost. Each event will be recognized for its own unique and forceful contribution to the story of Jesus; but Pentecost, as the culmination of the story, will be granted a privileged place as the horizon toward which the story’s trajectory is directed (6).

In this series of six blog posts (which follow the six chapters of his book), I will summarize Macchia’s arguments and offer a few reflections. I have two goals in this series:

1. The Selfish Goal: If I take the time to summarize this book, I’ll remember it better! This has been the case with every book I’ve studied, whether Dunn’s Theology of the Apostle Paul, Yoder’s The Politics of Jesus, or Torrance’s The Incarnation. Summarizing and reflecting on Macchia’s work will force me to slow down and chew on the content.
2. The Generous Goal: I want people to engage Macchia’s Christology. This book is creative, inspiring, and theologically rich—pentecostal scholarship at its finest. I hope this series will encourage pentecostal pastors, in particular, to rethink their Christology afresh. I hope to help put some important theology back in the pulpit.

So, without further ado . . .

Part I. The Task of Christology
Chapter 1. Christological Method

Summary

Christology addresses the identity of Christ. In this first chapter, Macchia tries to sort out how to properly investigate Jesus’ identity. Macchia argues that “Pentecost be viewed as the focal point of christological method” (12) since Pentecost is the completion of Christ’s mission.

A Christology from Below

The pastor-theologians of first centuries of the Christian era developed Logos Christology, or a “Christology from above” (13). While insightful, this way of doing Christology has some inherent problems:

1. Competing Natures. By studying the divine and human natures of Christ separately, they always end up being set in opposition to each other. Early church heresies are usually rooted in an under- or over-emphasizing of either Jesus’ divinity or his humanity.
2. What Spirit? Christology from above focuses on Jesus’ relationship to the Father while virtually ignoring his relationship to the Spirit! Jesus’ relationship to the Spirit clarifies his identity. “As divine, the Son can impart the Spirit; as human, the Son does this through the sacrament of his faithful and glorified (vindicated) flesh” (15).

Christology from above was challenged by Albert Schweitzer in two ways. First, in The Quest for the Historical Jesus, Schweitzer emphasized the human nature of Jesus, thinking this would shatter tradition and release Jesus from “the tyranny of dogma” (Schweitzer in Macchia 15). Second, Schweitzer emphasized the eschatological nature of Jesus’ identity and mission. Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet who announced the kingdom that apparently did not arrive in his day. Schweitzer does not say whether Jesus’ announcement of the kingdom of God was ultimately vindicated, but Wolfhart Pannenberg does.

For Pannenberg, Christ’s identity did not come to an end at the crucifixion, but at the resurrection. “The entire sojourn of Christ, from the incarnation to the cross, is thus to be interpreted in anticipation of Christ’s resurrection” (19). It is in the resurrection where Jesus is shown to be human as well as divine. Pannenberg’s Christology can be described in five points:

1. During his earthly life, Jesus related to God as his Father, not directly through his Logos nature.
2. Christ understood during his life that he was an indispensable part of the Father’s coming reign.
3. God’s reign is connected to God’s sovereignty and is “thus essential to God’s very being” (20).
4. Jesus’ unity with his Father’s reign indirectly implies his deity.
5. Pannenberg developed an “eschatological ontology” (21) in which the future determines the past. Therefore, it is the risen Christ (human and divine) that interprets his life and all of creation.

This is a Christology from below, but not in the sense of the historical Jesus questers. “[F]or Pannenberg, the resurrection is the meeting place between a Christology from below and a Christology from above” (23). Jesus’ unity with God is discerned in his incarnation and life, and verified in his resurrection.

There are some problems with Pannenberg’s Christology. Chiefly, his theology of the incarnation is weak. This is because Pannenberg, while insightful, doesn’t go far enough. A focus on Pentecost will provide a strong theology of the incarnation.

Jesus “rose” from Mary’s womb, conceived by the Spirit (Luke 1:35), and from the waters of the Jordan River, anointed by the Spirit in order to impart life to others (Luke 3:22)—in order to foreshadow his later rising up from the dead to decisively impart the Spirit to all flesh (25).

By sending the Spirit, Christ incorporates people into his risen life. This is why a focus on the resurrection alone is inadequate. Jesus, filled to overflowing with the Spirit of life, breaks through death in order to pour out that Spirit of life on others. It is Pentecost that confirms Jesus’ identity as fully God and fully man.

The Focus on Pentecost

Jesus’ identity is clearest at Pentecost where he “imparts the Spirit via the sacrament of his faithful humanity in order to conform humanity to his image” (29). As Augustine once said, ‘he who gives God must be God!’ Moltmann views Pentecost as the place where Jesus goes from being the bearer to the imparter of the Spirit.

Schliermacher did well to include Pentecost as part of Jesus’ activity as the Redeemer, but he failed by elevating the historical experience of the church to the basis of our discernment of Christ. It is Pentecost that has “objective significance as the climactic event that forms the basis of christological dogma” (30). That is, it is God via the Spirit, not our experience that determines our Christology. It is at Pentecost where memory (of Jesus’ earthly life) and hope (for the coming kingdom) meet. It is also where we existentially encounter Christ for the first time. This is where Christology begins.

The gospels all speak of Jesus’ role: he will baptize people in Spirit and fire. Jesus, through his death, takes on the punitive elements of that fire on himself and baptizes his people with the Spirit and sanctifying fire. “The baptism of fire is transformed through union with Christ from an alienating into a sanctifying force” (34).

It was Pentecost where we were first incorporated in to Christ, the place where the church was born, the moment that caused Jewish monotheists to view Jesus as divine. The Jewish people already understood God’s Spirit to be divine (although not, of course, a separate ‘person’). Now Jesus was identified with that same Spirit.

James D. G. Dunn wrote that “[t]he climax and purposed end of Jesus’ ministry is not the cross and the resurrection, but the ascension and Pentecost” (Dunn in Macchia 38). The incarnation was part of a trajectory that came to its climax when Jesus transitioned from Spirit-bearer to Spirit-imparter.

The Christ of Pentecost and Soteriology

Christology and Soteriology are “inseparable and mutually illuminating” (40), but Soteriology logically follows from Christology. How does a Christology rooted in Pentecost impact our Soteriology?

The early church, due to their struggles with gnosticism, emphasized theōsis or deification. This is pithily described by Athanasius: “God became man so that man might become God” (In Macchia 43). The whole Alexandrian tradition resonates strongly with Pentecost Christology since at Pentecost God gave himself to draw us into his life.

Evangelical Soteriology tends to “dissolve the significance of Jesus into the word of acquittal that comforts believers gripped by guilt and anxiety” (45). Justification, fully understood, is much richer than this. It is not only a forensic declaration, but a relational concept. Justification comes not just by mental assent, but by receiving Christ in faith.

Both Calvin and Luther, known for emphasizing justification, understand it within its broader context. Consider Luther words in his Lectures on Galatians (1519): “[W]hen God is favorable and when he imputes, the Spirit is really received, both the gift and the grace” (in Macchia 49). Clark Pinnock follows suit. He laments the overemphasis of justification as a merely legal metaphor and sets it in the context of incorporation into Christ. Even the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification shares this perspective: “By grace alone, in faith in Christ’s saving work and not because of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God and receive the Holy Spirit, who renews our hearts while equipping and calling us to good works” (in Macchia 51).

Union and adoption should not be subordinated to justification. Rather, justification belongs within the larger soteriological framework of union with Christ. A Christology rooted in Pentecost emphasizes union and gives the various metaphors of salvation their proper emphases.

Humanity’s fundamental need is life. While we are used to explaining sin as a breaking of the divine law, on a deeper level, it is a denial of life. At Pentecost, Jesus mediates God’s life to us. Spirit baptism is not just and add-on, but a “root soteriological metaphor” (55).

The Christ of Pentecost and Ecclesiology

In pouring out his Spirit, Christ “opens himself to an ever-expanding ecclesial fellowship as the Spirit Baptizer” (56). This means that Christ’s identity is “open and ever more expansive” (59). One corollary of this is that no single voice can offer the definitive word on Christ. Macchia brilliantly notes (pun intended), “[t]here is more than one lampstand surrounding and illuminating the Christ in Revelation 1” (59). Multiculturalism reveals Christ in greater fullness. This is not to say that anything goes—scripture is still “the supreme standard and living measure of all Christologies” (64).

Joseph’s coat serves as a good image for the body of Christ. Each person from own their diverse culture brings a certain color to the robe that Christ wears.

Reflection

A confession. While I have always known that Pentecost was significant (I was born and raised pentecostal, after all), I never fully knew how to articulate its importance. Macchia has provided a theological framework for understanding Pentecost not as an add-on experience (no matter how significant that add-on is), but as integral to the life and mission of Jesus himself. Pentecost interprets Easter.

I appreciate the way Macchia does not minimize alternate theological views and their proponents. Indeed, he generously discusses the contributions of Calvin, Luther, Schliermacher, Bultmann, and Tillich (to name a few). Macchia’s Christological framework does not supplant traditional views, but enhances them. Two examples show this clearly:

1. Viewing Christ’s ontology in reverse, backwards from Pentecost, emphasizes his full deity and humanity while sidestepping the implicit tension between them.
2. Viewing justification through the lens of Pentecost prevents it from becoming a sort of legal fiction and underscores the participatory and relational nature of the doctrine.

Most Inspiring Quote

The Father loves, the Son is the embodiment of that love, and the Spirit is the perfection of that love poured out in eschatological freedom so that the Son may incorporate others into divine communion and mission (28).

Chapter 2: Challenges to Christology →