I have found N.T. Wright’s treatments of the manner in which Christology can make sense within the framework of Jewish Monotheism very helpful in the past. Many others have commented on the manner in which his explorations of this have shed light on what is, for many, a vexing problem. Wright makes clear that the claims that the NT makes for Jesus are not inconsistent with the demands of Second Temple Jewish Monotheism.

When I started reading Richard Bauckham’s God Crucified yesterday, I expected to find many of the same issues dealt with, in much the same way as they are in Wright. Although much of the same ground is covered, this small book goes quite a bit further, in my opinion, than any of Wright’s published treatments to date (although Wright does have some insightful observations in his latest Paul book). If you have ever felt that NT Christology is in any sense a departure from the monotheism of the OT, this book is for you. If you have ever wished that you could more articulately defend your faith to those who deny that Christ is God, reading this book will be well worth your while (you should be able to read it in one two-hour sitting).

Bauckham approaches the subject by questioning the usefulness of the categories in terms of which the matter has usually been dealt with. He argues that it is Greek philosophical categories that really make it hard to attribute full divinity to Christ, rather than the categories of the Jewish Scriptures. The primary categories for the Jewish Scriptures are not those of divine essence or nature, but that of divine identity. It is in terms of this category, Bauckham argues, that we need to come to an understanding of the Christological claims of the NT authors. The category of ‘identity’ focuses on who God is, rather than upon what God is. It serves to identify God, both in His relationship to all reality and in His relationship to Israel in particular. Significantly, the category of identity provides us with a way by which to move past the common ‘ontological’ and ‘functional’ dichotomy that one encounters in certain parts of the literature on this subject.

Bauckham argues that Jewish montheism had a very strong line to draw between God and all other reality. Whilst some have sought to argue for the development of a high Christology by means of the role given to ‘intermediary figures’, stepping up, as it were, to the level of full divinity, Bauckham claimed that the strict monotheism of Second Temple Judaism placed these intermediary figures very clearly on one side or other of the Creator/creature distinction. God’s Wisdom and Word are, for example, clearly seen as aspects of God’s own identity, rather than as created beings distinct from Him. In speaking of God’s Wisdom and Word, the Jews recognized some distinction within the one being of God, which did not in any way compromise their monotheism.

The Creator/creature distinction was not merely a matter of belief alone, but was recognized and maintained in the belief that God alone was to be worshipped and worship of any other being was totally forbidden. Whereas in a Hellenistic context, worship was a matter of degree (as divinity was a matter of degree), this was not the case for the Jews.

God’s unique identity has a number of different aspects. Among them we see God’s universal sovereignty, creation, the divine name and His right to worship. From the very beginning, Bauckham maintains, Christians held to the very highest Christology — a Christology of divine identity. In holding to this Christology, early Christians

…did not see their Jewish monotheistic heritage as in any way an obstacle to the inclusion of Jesus in the divine identity; they used its resources extensively in order precisely to include Jesus in the divine identity; and they saw in this inclusion of Jesus in the divine identity the fulfilment of the eschatological expectation of Jewish monotheism that the one God will be universally acknowledged as such in his universal rule over all things.

Bauckham outlines the manner in which the NT writers articulate their Christology of divine identity. He observes the manner in which they attribute universal sovereignty to Jesus. Whilst localized sovereignty could be committed to a servant, rule over all things was proper to God alone. Whilst this is not a matter primarily of divine nature, it is inescapably an issue of divine identity. Sitting on the throne of God (understood in terms of cosmic status and role) is something that only God Himself can do. The exalted Jesus is also accorded worship, which is something unique to God Himself.

Early Christians did not just see Jesus as included in the eschatological identity of God. Such a belief entailed (given the eternal character of God’s sovereignty) Christ’s inclusion in God’s creative work. Bauckham observes that in texts like 1 Corinthians 8:6 we see an expression of Jewish monotheism in which Jesus is not presented as an addition to God’s identity, but is identified ‘as the ‘Lord’ whom the Shema’ affirms to be one.’ He also points to the light that doxologies such as Romans 11:36a can shed on the formulation of 1 Corinthians 8:6. Christ is included in the ‘exclusively divine’ work of creation, by the claim that all things were created ‘through’ Him.

The exegetical observations of Bauckham’s book are the most powerful points in his strong argument. Although it is easy to point to verses here and there and some general themes to argue for the divine identity of Jesus Christ, Bauckham shows just how deep this teaching goes and, significantly, how firmly rooted and woven into the fabric of OT monotheistic texts it actually is. OT exegesis and allusion are the chief manner in which the NT authors present their Christology. Isaiah 40-55, which Bauckham gives extended attention to, is chiefly concerned with eschatological monotheism, God’s revelation of His glory and demonstration of His deity to the whole world. Bauckham’s claim is that, in the NT, this eschatological monotheism proves to be Christological monotheism. Christian readings of Isaiah 40-55 can be found in such places as Philippians 2, Revelation (Alpha and Omega, first and last sayings) and John’s Gospel. He proceeds to explore the manner in which these different texts reflect differently upon the manner in which Christ’s humiliation and exaltation reveal the divine identity.

The question that is raised by these texts is the question of how the cross of Christ can be included in the identity of YHWH. This question is not primarily one concerned with the possibilities of divine ‘nature’, but with how YHWH’s actions in Jesus Christ can be regarded as consistent with His revealed identity. In the reading of John’s Gospel this question will confront us in the starkest of forms; for John the cross is Christ’s ‘lifting up’ and glorification. In the NT we see that the cross of Christ is not merely illustrative of general truths about God, but that Jesus and His story are intrinsic to God’s identity.

Bauckham observes that God’s revelation of His identity occurs progressively in history. God may be consistent with His revealed identity, but He is not predictable. For example, whilst the revelation of personal relationships within God Himself may come as a surprise with little anticipating it, there is nothing that rules out its possibility. Although his chief focus is upon God as Creator and Sovereign, Bauckham finally turns his attention to God’s self-revelation to Israel. God is identified by His acts in Israel’s history. At key points in redemptive history a new narrative movement takes place that becomes definitive of God’s identity. Key revelations of God’s character and identity occur at the time of the Exodus, for example. Whilst God’s identity as the God of the patriarchs is important, it is ‘not sufficient for the events in which he is to bring Israel out of Egypt and make them his people.’ In the NT we see the same thing taking place: a new name accompanies the eschatological Exodus (Matthew 28:19).