IN UNDERSTANDING JESUS’ identity, it is not uncommon to approach the
problem theoretically by asking whether he is God or man. Thus, we may begin with a certain idea of God
and see if this could be applied to Jesus.
Such an approach, however, is not without peril, because the idea of God
is itself problematic, to begin with. In
the Gospel of Luke, the people’s observations on his words and works led them
to ask who he was. After the calming of
the tempest, the disciples inquired, “What sort of man can this be?” (Luke
8:25). When Herod heard about what Jesus
was doing, he said, “Who is this man?”
While these questions were never answered, the people’s perception of
him, on the basis of his speech and action, was diverse: he was John the
Baptist raised from the dead, Elijah or one of the prophets of old risen (Luke
9:7-8.19). If anything, the effort to know Jesus from what he said and dead
does not succeed, either. How, then, do
we know his identity?
It would seem that the
best way to approach the problem of Jesus’ identity is to have a personal
encounter with him. If Peter was able to
approximate the truth about Jesus’ identity, it is because he has been
following him. He followed Jesus from
the beginning of his ministry, and shared in that ministry. This explains why in much the same way that a
wife’s knowledge about her husband is from removed from those of her
acquaintances, so Peter’s perception was different from that of the crowd, “You
are the Messiah of God” (Luke
9:20). In making this confession,
Peter, of course, understood Jesus in the Jewish sense of an expected anointed
agent in the kingly, Davidic tradition.
Having witnessed Jesus’ ministry of preaching, healing and working
miracles, he recognized him as the anointed to free Israel from the yoke of
Rome and restore the kingdom of Israel (Acts 1:6).
Since Peter’s
encounter with Jesus was limited only to the latter’s public ministry, it is
understandable that he did not have a full knowledge of Jesus’ identity. Although he correctly applied to Jesus the
title “Messiah,” yet his understanding of that title was still far from being
entirely correct. Which is why, Jesus
rebuked him as well as the other disciples (of whom Peter was the spokesman)
and directed him not to tell anyone about his identity. As a corrective to that understanding, Jesus
added, “The Son of Man must suffer greatly and be rejected by the elders, the
chief priests, and the scribes, be killed and on the third day be raised up”
(Luke 9:22). In other words, Jesus’ real
identity is the Son-of-Man Messiah who, in obedience to God’s plan of
salvation, must be repudiated and suffer many things. But all this was not yet fully disclosed to
his disciples.
His identity was fully
revealed when, after Jesus’ resurrection, the disciples themselves followed him
in his footsteps. In discipleship, his
followers had a full encounter with the risen Lord. For this reason, his messianic identity was
no longer concealed. Indeed, the
disciples were already being asked to be witnesses to it: “Let the whole house
of Israel know for certain that God has made him Lord and Messiah, this Jesus
whom you crucified” (Acts 2:36).
Logically enough, Jesus asked those who wished to really know him to
disregard themselves and take up their crosses daily on account of the Kingdom
of God (Luke 9:23). Only those who lose
their life for the sake of Christ will really come to a true knowledge of
Jesus’ real identity (Luke 9:24). A good
example is Paul who did not preach anything save the crucified Messiah. Notice how his knowledge of Christ is
intertwined with his sharing in the Jesus’ suffering: “I wish to know Christ
and the power flowing from his resurrection; likewise to know how to share in
the sufferings by being formed into the pattern of his death” (Phil 3:10). In the contemporary age, probably no one
knows the Lord’s identity better than St Francis of Assisi; his stigmata and
his poverty are witnesses to his encounters with the risen Lord.
No comments:
Post a Comment