Christianity is a human phenomenon. Therefore, it can be scientifically analyzed. Historians of religion and social scientists may come to the conclusion that Christianity is an upshot from Judaism. This is true to a certain extent. One will naturally ask what distinguishes Christianity from Judaism. Among the many differences in sacred texts, in worship and in institutions, I think the essential difference is their attitude towards the Nazareth carpenter called Jesus. For the Jews, Jesus was at most a Rabbi, a wise teacher. But for the Christians, Jesus is the Son of God incarnated. That is to say, Jesus is their God. But Jesus is also fully human. This is the basic stuff of the branch of theology called Christology --- trying to understand how Jesus is both God and man at the same time.
At the beginning, the greeting section, of his epistle to the members of the Church in Rome, Paul states without ambiguity his Christological position.
Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;
And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead (Romans 1:3-4).
Jesus is truly human. As a man, he is the seed of David.
Jesus is truly God because of his resurrection from the dead.
These two positions are easily understandable enough. However, what does it mean to be the seed of David? Why did Paul choose to mention David among a long line of ancestors? Before trying to answer these two questions, we need to ascertain who the readers were. What kind of Romans was Paul writing to?
Internal evidence suggests that Paul was writing to the believers of Gentile origins in the Church of Rome. For example,
... that I might have some fruit among you also, even as among other Gentiles (Romans 1:13b).
The word "other" suggests that the readers were gentiles.
For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office (Romans 11:13)
This verse is even more direct in showing that the readers were Gentiles.
Still, I have reservation with this conclusion. I feel that Paul was writing to Jewish Christians. For the moment, let us stick to the position of Gentile readership first. Perhaps I will come upon some contrary evidence later.
Now that it is established that the readers were Gentiles, that is non-Jews, what was the significance for these Gentile readers, of choosing David, instead of choosing, say Abraham or Jacob? Having Abraham or Jacob as a representative of all the human ancestors is enough to demonstrate the humanity of Jesus. Why did Paul bother to choose David?
Since the readers were Gentiles, the concept of Messiah might not be meaningful to them. If they were Jewish Christians living in Rome, they would understand that "the seed of David" referred to the Messiah, the God-Chosen One to liberate them from the Roman dominion. The whole epistle would become more political than theological. However, they were not Jews. Therefore, they did not subscribe to the idea of "Messianic Expectation", i.e. to hope that one day, God would send a Messiah to save God's people. But what could a Gentile believer understand from "the seed of David"?
A reasonable, though not spectacular, explanation was that David was a famous Israelite king and Rome was the heart of the Empire. The Romans paid attention to the social status of important personalities. However, this explanation does not stand because Solomon was also a famous Israelite king. Moreover, Solomon was also famous for his wisdom. Why did Paul not choose Solomon? I have no answer because I am not able to find something which David had and Solomon lacked.
I suspect the choice has nothing to do with the readers, but it meant a lot to the author, Paul. The choice reflected the Messianic Expectation of Paul, not of the Roman Christians. As a Pharisee, Paul had once awaited for the coming of the Messiah to liberate the Jews. But the Pharisees and the teachers of Law rejected Jesus as the Messiah. Paul had never met Jesus in person. From his eagerness to persecute the early Christians, he must have shared similar ideology with his fellow Pharisees. But did his conversion experience make Paul acknowledge that Jesus was the Messiah? Moreover, Paul must have outgrown the Jewish expectation of the Messiah. He understands that the Messiah is not simply a human being, but God Himself.
Paul had not met Jesus in person. He had not witnesses the feeding miracles, the healing miracles and the exorcisms. The 'only' miracle was the vision of the resurrected Jesus. Therefore, Paul made use of Jesus' resurrection to prove his divinity.
I don't think I have proven satisfactorily enough what it meant to be the "seed of David" to Paul. Deeper reflection is needed.
Dear Lord, You always surprise me. I long to see Your glory. Amen
No comments:
Post a Comment