The Forgotten Jesus and the Trinity You Never Knew

By Damon W.K. So

This book presents a dynamic picture of Jesus and relates this picture to Jesus' fundamental and underlying relationship with his Father through the Holy Spirit. The concrete expression of that relationship in Jesus' life, ministry, death, and resurrection is presented in a unified manner, avoiding the pitfall of majoring on only one of these aspects. This holistic and dynamic picture of Jesus in intimate fellowship with his Father through the Spirit gives the readers a valuable glimpse into the mystery of the Trinity and invites them to reflect on what it means to follow Jesus as individuals and as communities in the context of the twenty-first century with its many challenges.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Wipf and Stock
• Release date: Jun 1, 2010
• ISBN: 9781621892830

Damon W.K. So

Damon So is Research Tutor in theology at the Oxford Centre for Mission Studies, and the author of another book on the Trinity--Jesus' Revelation of His Father: A Narrative-Conceptual Study of the Trinity with Special Reference to Karl Barth (Paternoster, 2006). He studied theology at Oxford University and Wales University. His first doctorate was in Atmospheric Dynamics at Imperial College, London.

Book preview

CHAPTER 1

Introduction

What is the significance of Jesus for the world in the twenty-first century? Before this question can be answered, one needs to look at the present state of the world. As in the last century, much of the world in the twenty-first century continues to be afflicted with wars, poverty, corruption, famines, and injustice, which are the sources of an untold amount of suffering for the poor and the innocent in the world. The people of the richer countries enjoy much greater stability and prosperity (though there are still poor people in these countries), but with the secularization of these countries people explore different lifestyles which are very different from those of their forefathers. Their grandparents most probably adhered to some religious beliefs but for many of the present generation, these beliefs are no longer thought to be true or applicable. In the West, Christianity, which used to provide the framework and backbone for life in the family and the society, no longer occupies the pre-eminent and regulatory role as before. With the dwindling belief in and practice of Christianity in Western societies, there is no longer a clear and recognized pattern for living in these societies—everyone is free to choose or create their own lifestyle as they see fit. Yet people in these countries are not without concerns for the world. There is a growing awareness of the plight and suffering of the poor, the exploited and oppressed. There is a gathering of momentum in popular opinion and aspiration to make poverty a fact only in past history, i.e., to remove poverty for a better future. There is a genuine concern for the preservation of the global environment for future generations. People are waking up to these problems and concerns in the world and realize that unbridled self-interest on the one hand inflicts exploitation and injustice on fellow human beings, and on the other hand inflicts damage to the global environment, some of which could be irreversible.

Despite these growing concerns, people in richer nations often find themselves powerless to act, as they are caught up in the powerful currents of economic forces. When thinking about economic forces operating in the world, one must be very careful in assessing their positive contributions as well as their possible drawbacks which emerge when they are exercised without proper restraint and an ethical framework. One should not assume that all economic forces are inherently good or inherently evil. Their positive or negative nature depends on the intention and the manner of their deployment. The values and ethics underlying the work of economic forces and their manner of operation give them their positive or negative character. If the forces are exercised purely from an intention based on self-interest, the risk is that others may be disadvantaged or harmed while that self-interest is served. However, if they proceed from a genuine twofold desire to serve our neighbors (far or near) and to provide for the needs of one’s household, both of which come from love, these are honorable intentions, and the economic activities conducted in such a spirit of loving service, justice and creativity will help the world to flourish, to the benefits and rewards of all the parties involved. This is a rather idealistic picture. In the world that we live in, we have to acknowledge that things are not as desirable, particularly with the economic crisis at the end of the first decade of the twenty-first century, where various economic mal-practices have been exposed. Our human nature is not as altruistic as it should be. Sometimes (but not always), economic forces with unbridled self-interest and with influence on global or national scales crush the lives of the poor and vulnerable, damage the environment, and harm even those involved in driving those forces.1 Often, people in richer nations, despite their desire to care for the poor and care for the environment, find themselves enmeshed in the currents of economic forces because they have their own stakes and interests in the same forces—as consumers, employees, employers, shareholders, fund managers, bankers, civil servants, and politicians. Many consumers would like to be able to increase their buying capacity for the benefits of themselves and their household (including their children if they are parents), e.g., to provide a better standard of living and provide better education for their children. For this reason (and maybe for other reasons too), most employees would like higher salaries; most employers or boards of directors would like to increase their profits; most shareholders would like to see the value of their shares rise; fund managers would like to see their investment funds prosper; bankers would like to see their businesses and accrued interests expand, and politicians would like to see their countries’ economies flourish. These are fine and proper as long as their greater financial gains are reaped as a result of their own labor, fair and responsible trade; and that many people will be served by these healthy economic activities. These groups of people—consumers, employees, employers, shareholders, fund managers and bankers, which include most of the people in the West—have their inter-related interests in the economic processes and forces.2 The employers or board of directors have responsibilities towards their employees, their shareholders and their bankers who give them loans, and they rightly look after the interests of these people as well as their own when running their businesses. Likewise, the fund managers have the responsibility of looking after the interests of those investors who entrust them with their money and savings. Thus we see the individuals’ interests and corporate interests enmeshed together. But in some or even many cases, these corporate and individual interests of the richer countries, when handled without sufficient attention to justice, compassion and care, can override the interests of the people in the poorer countries and take a damaging toll on the environment. Whether or not the people in the richer countries fully understand the causes of the injustice and damage, they are aware of these issues from public media or otherwise, and many genuinely wish to see these problems overcome. However, the structural nature of the causes, in which they themselves are implicated as briefly alluded to above, has meant that these problems of injustice and environmental concerns are quite beyond individuals or even lobby groups to overcome. Perhaps the politicians can provide some solutions, but even they find the task extremely challenging because the politicians themselves are also caught up in the currents of the economic forces.

For the politicians to win votes, they have to bow to the real interests of the voters—­who are consumers, employees, employers, shareholders, fund managers and bankers. The politicians’ manifestos, policies, and decisions have to be shaped (though not absolutely) by these interests. For example, if a politician wishes to push for a reduction in arms production and the international arms trade, he will be significantly handicapped if his constituency (which voted him into office) or his country is heavily involved in arms manufacture. This is because reduction in arms manufacture will threaten jobs and livelihood, and therefore the self-interests, of many people to whom he is responsible as a politician. Another example pertains to the manufacture of cigarettes which are exported to other countries, including the developing ones. A third example is the levying of a relatively heavy green tax on fossil fuel consumption, which could be severely contested by a local community whose livelihood depends on truck manufacture and the haulage business. These are only three simple examples where the voters’ opinions will need to be heeded by politicians, and other examples can be cited. Nevertheless, some governments can attempt to regulate businesses, industries and even international trade for the good of the global community, for the sake of finding justice for the poor, and for the care of the environment, even to the extent that these can run against the wish and interest of many of their people. That is a distinct possibility for some brave politicians who may not look beyond the present term of office. But in reality, in many ways the politicians themselves are not totally free to break the cycle or currents of economic forces at work in their societies, even if they wish to do so. In that sense, they cannot be wholly blamed for the continuation of problems in the global community, though they must bear some responsibility. If one is truly honest, the ordinary people as voters and the elected politicians are both responsible for the forces underlying these problems. However, both alike are themselves victims falling into the closed circle of forces of their own making, and without the ability to set themselves free. There are further problems close at home.

The liberalization of society in the West has its benefits but also its perils. The benefits are greater equality between women and men, less racial prejudice (in a general sense), greater freedom of choice to pursue one’s own interests, etc. However, there are costly casualties and damages in an over-liberal society. For example, the sanctity of marriage, which used to be highly regarded as the bedrock of the family which in turn is the fundamental unit of the community, is no longer treasured in present day Western societies. Divorce, family breakup, and lack of parental care lead to a great deal of bitterness, anger, depression, and neglect of the children who need a stable family for a healthy upbringing. The pain of children experiencing parental separation or divorce cannot be easily described in words; the damage done to the children in the long term is not calculable. Quite often divorce and family breakdown are repeated from one generation to another. But how can these cycles of family breakup, with the attendant bitterness, depression, neglect and pain, be halted? How can people be freed and delivered from the depressing forces of family turmoil, division, and separation? Many families in the affluent liberal Western societies face such great challenges, but the scale of the problems that poor families in the developing world face is considerably greater because their very basic human existence and sustenance are endangered and called into question. It may be hard for them to understand why the families in the West face their troubles when they are comparatively much better fed and materially affluent.

One does not need to be an expert on world economy or medical health to appreciate the plight of the people and their families in poor developing countries (sometimes called the two-thirds world because they make up about two-thirds of the world population). The following statistics give a brief view of the kind of poverty that millions of people suffer in the world.

• Income poverty. There are still around 1 billion people living at the margins of survival on less than US$1 a day, with 2.6 billion—40 percent of the world’s population—living on less than US$2 a day . . .

• Nutrition. Around 28 percent of all children in developing countries are estimated to be underweight or stunted. The two regions that account for the bulk of the deficit are South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa . . .

• Child mortality. Progress on child mortality lags behind progress in other areas. Around 10 million children die each year before the age of five, the vast majority from poverty and malnutrition.3

News reports of urban slums, regional famines, victims of diseases (e.g., HIV-AIDS), and war refugees come regularly to our attention through the media. The images of children, women and men picking what can be salvaged from rubbish dumps for their sustenance are ones that cause distress, revulsion, compassion, and anger. Television reports of famines, e.g., in Africa, bring us images of human disasters on a horrific scale. Among these poor and suffering people, there is a deep sense of powerlessness; there is an indescribable sense of sorrow when they lose beloved members of their families through malnutrition or preventable diseases. For many of them there seems to be very little hope for the future because the history of their families and their countries is one that has been punctuated with human suffering, political crises and other disasters. Even though their plight consistently comes to the attention of the West through television reports and other media, what the affluent West has done for them seems to have minimal impact on improving their lives. Corruption, poor governance, and ethnic strife in those countries often hamper Western aid from reaching needy people effectively. In these cases, only very few people benefit from the assistance. Furthermore, some countries in the West can aggravate the situation by extracting much more from the poor countries than they return to them.4 It is a case of the more having more from the less, and the less having less. It is like the case of the shepherd who has a thousand sheep and yet has the heart to demand and take the one and only sheep belonging to a poor peasant. The poor peasant has neither the knowledge nor the power to resist the strong arm of the wealthy shepherd. He and his stricken family can only bow to the reality of the economic and political powers operating in the cruel and unjust world, and resign themselves to a state of lowliness, to a deep sense of helplessness, and to a life of poverty and sorrow. He and millions of other poor peasants find themselves in the cycle of injustice, corruption, bad governance, poverty, distress, disease, hunger and death; they also seem unable to deliver themselves from human sorrows and sufferings.

The very brief survey above captures the common feature of human inability to break free from the forces that circle or imprison them. They are often trapped by the circle of self-interested economic forces, the turmoil of family feuds and separation, or they are trapped by the crushing weight of corruption, bad governance, injustice, diseases, famines, and wars. Despite the constant progress in science, engineering, and communication technology, humanity has not been able to free itself from these oppressive forces which permeate societies and inhibit humanity from its full potential. Whether it is recognized or not, humanity in the twenty-first century is in great need of deliverance, the deliverance which brings true freedom, so that humanity is free to be what it could be and should be. But where can this deliverance come from if human progress in science, engineering, and communication technology has not been able to deliver? Some look to new age religions for deliverance, others look to Eastern mysticism or other forms of human philosophy, but this book suggests the historical figure of Jesus Christ as the one who can deliver. Jesus Christ has long been forgotten in many of the Western societies even though elements of his wisdom and teachings surface in different areas of their cultures. The mention of his name at particular festivals, for example, at Christmas and Easter, and the occasional rumors in the media about him, hardly does justice to him. Given the various accounts of Jesus Christ by fiction writers, such as the author of the Da Vinci Code, which often are quite perplexing, it is time to remove the shroud around this historical person and re-discover his amazing and dynamic personality; his revolutionary teaching and his radical lifestyle; his penetrating insights and his incomparable wisdom; his compassion for the poor and needy; his humility and gentleness especially to the weak and marginalized . . . and his sacrificial love which has power to free people, inspire them and change their lives. The world in its present groaning and pains needs a decisive deliverance, and the person of Jesus Christ is the one who can offer the world a new and radical way of living, and give people the hope of deliverance from the forces that bind and oppress them. Jesus Christ can deliver.

If the person of Jesus Christ who can deliver has been largely forgotten in many Western societies (or may not be known in other societies), then the mystery of the Trinity is something most people have never known. People may have heard of the word Trinity, but it makes little sense to them. But this mystery of the Trinity, namely Jesus’ loving relationship with his Father through the Holy Spirit, is the very foundation which will help to restore human relationships with one another—relationships between the rich and poor, men and women, husband and wife, brothers and sisters, young and old, white and black, red and yellow. And it is this mystery—Jesus’ loving and obedient relationship with his Father through the Holy Spirit—that ultimately restores humanity’s relationship with God himself. How can this be? How can this relationship between Jesus and his Father (through the Spirit) promise to restore human relationships with one another and restore human relationship with God? The brief answer is that the relationship between Jesus and his Father is one of self-giving love, one of perfect love reaching out to the other and receiving from the other, and it is this love which will bond our relationships with one another and with God. God is love and God is the ultimate source of love in human relationships. The Christian faith does not confess that God is a solitary figure who can only love himself; rather, it confesses that God as Trinity—Father, Son and Holy Spirit—is an eternal relationship of mutual dynamic love. Far from being an antiquarian doctrine of the Christian church which has little relevance to human life in the twenty-first century, this Christian confession holds promise for our ultimate meaning in life because the very essence of this confession is inter-personal love. We need to discover or re-discover the significance of this Christian confession and thereby find our ultimate and wonderful goal in life—being embraced by the love of God and embracing one another in that love, overcoming the hostilities and barriers which separate people from people and people from God.

How do we set about knowing Jesus Christ, who holds the promise of delivering people from their plight? And how do we go about knowing the mystery of the Trinity which holds the essence of inter-personal love? The author’s suggestion is to go to the gospel story which presents Jesus Christ and his unique relationship with his Father. As one reads the events in this extraordinary story, which in the author’s opinion is the most beautiful and amazing story ever told, one comes into a personal contact with Jesus Christ and his Father. The author has chosen not to present Jesus Christ and his Father (and the Spirit) in abstract and propositional language, which has often been the case in the history of the church and theological discussions. Such discussions can run the risk of draining the life and drama out of the story. Rather than using such abstract theological language, the author has chosen to work through the narrative or story of Jesus which is more readily assimilated by ordinary people. It is the author’s hope that through the retelling of the unfolding drama and events in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, the readers may catch a glimpse of the unique person of Jesus Christ—who has unparalleled impact on the history of the world—and so come to a trusting knowledge of his Father, who provides the ultimate security and foundation for living a life of freedom, peace, and inter-personal love. The world in the twenty-first century, with all its dilemmas, pains, sufferings, injustice and its powerful currents, desperately needs to have this freedom, peace and love.

CHAPTER 2

Manifesto of Liberation at Nazareth

Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit, and news about him spread through the whole countryside. He was teaching in their synagogues, and everyone praised him. He went to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and on the Sabbath day he went into the synagogue, as was his custom. He stood up to read, and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written: The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor. Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him. He began by saying to them, Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing. All spoke well of him and were amazed at the gracious words that came from his lips. Isn’t this Joseph’s son? they asked. Jesus said to them, Surely you will quote this proverb to me: ‘Physician, heal yourself!’ And you will tell me, ‘Do here in your hometown what we have heard that you did in Capernaum.’ Truly I tell you, he continued, prophets are not accepted in their hometowns. I assure you that there were many widows in Israel in Elijah’s time, when the sky was shut for three and a half years and there was a severe famine throughout the land. Yet Elijah was not sent to any of them, but to a widow in Zarephath in the region of Sidon. And there were many in Israel with leprosy in the time of Elisha the prophet, yet not one of them was cleansed—only Naaman the Syrian. All the people in the synagogue were furious when they heard this. They got up, drove him out of the town, and took him to the brow of the hill on which the town was built, in order to throw him off the cliff. But he walked right through the crowd and went on his way. (Luke 4:14–30)

Jesus in the gospel story is known as Jesus of Nazareth. Though Jesus was born in Bethlehem, he grew up in Nazareth in a carpenter’s family. Nazareth was a small village in Palestine in the first century when the Romans ruled what is now called Europe, coastal northern Africa, Turkey, and Palestine. Nazareth was an agricultural place, as were many other villages and towns at that time. It was a rather unimportant village in an obscure corner of the Roman Empire, fifteen miles west of the Lake Galilee, twenty miles east of the Mediterranean and seventy miles north of Jerusalem. But this was where Jesus grew up, knew his neighbors, played with his friends, learned the skill of a carpenter, studied his Scripture (Old Testament), and attended the synagogue. With a small population, he and his family would have been known by the people of the village. Although he grew up in Nazareth, his public ministry was not based there; rather his base was at Capernaum, which was situated on the west side of Lake Galilee. He was already known in Capernaum and the surrounding area and so as he returned to his hometown Nazareth, he was asked to speak in the synagogue there on the Sabbath, the day of rest for the Jews. That Sabbath day turned out to be much less than normal.

As he was the speaker in the synagogue that day, he was handed a scroll of the Scripture to read. It is very possible that the particular scroll and the particular Scripture passage were chosen by him purposefully. This can be seen by the content of the passage. Unrolling the scroll, he stood up and read the following passage from the book of Isaiah.

The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me

to preach good news to the poor.

He has sent me

to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and

recovery of sight for the blind,

to release the oppressed,

to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.5

Having read this passage, he rolled up the scroll and returned it to the attendant in the synagogue. As he sat down and was about to speak on this passage, the eyes of the audience in the synagogue were fastened upon him. This would have been the first time Jesus spoke to them in the synagogue in Nazareth. They were eager to listen to what this rather familiar figure had to say to them. There was this expectant and curious atmosphere amongst the audience. The atmosphere is heightened by the fact that the Scripture passage read concerned God’s liberation of his people (Israel) through his anointed (i.e., specially appointed) servant. The people of Israel had been under the bondage of foreign rule for almost six centuries (Babylonian, Persian, Greek and then Roman).6 They had been waiting for God’s anointed one, the Messiah (or equivalently, the Christ), to overcome the Romans and liberate Israel from foreign rule. This Scripture passage about liberation and freedom echoed very much the audience’s concern. It is not surprising that they fastened their eyes upon Jesus, waiting to hear what he had to say to them. One can imagine the silence and the intensity of the anticipation—perhaps one could hear the proverbial pin drop.

What Jesus said was nothing less than daring and extraordinary: Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing [literally ‘in your ears’]. These words presented a puzzle to his audience. He had no doubt that this Scripture passage was fulfilled by himself in their hearing. He himself knew that this Scripture passage, uttered as a prophecy (in Isaiah) six to seven hundred years ago about the person who was to be sent by God to bring liberation to Israel, applied specifically to him. He understood himself to be the fulfillment of this promise given by God centuries before. This was no ordinary self-understanding but an extraordinary one. Though he knew himself to be God’s anointed one, i.e., the Messiah, according to the words that he used he did not directly claim before his hometown audience that he was the Messiah. His words about fulfillment in the here and now (today) could be interpreted by his audience in different ways, of which his claim to Messiahship was one.7 Indeed, his words about fulfillment could be very puzzling to them because as far as they could see, God’s liberation had not yet come to them, since Israel was still under Roman rule. However, regardless of his audience’s understanding of his words and his identity at that moment in time, he boldly and categorically said to them, Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing. This is not untypical of the way Jesus spoke. Often what he said to the people was not immediately comprehended by them, even though his words were true. Nevertheless, he still uttered them, not only because he knew them to be true, but also because he knew that some people would appreciate the full meaning of his words at a future time—they would look back and understand Jesus’ words much more. For example, after Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection his disciples would fully realize the force and meaning of his extraordinary claim of his own fulfillment of this Scripture passage about the promised Messiah. In some sense, Jesus had begun to unveil his self-identity to his audience in Nazareth. But the unveiling was gradual and would only be completed in his death and resurrection. This is the question of the process of Jesus’ gradual self-unveiling of his own identity. There is another question which also comes to our mind—how did Jesus come to know with such certainty that he was the anointed one (i.e., Messiah) promised and sent by God? After all, this self-understanding of his was not an ordinary one. This question cannot be answered immediately at this point. For now, we continue to look at the event in the Nazareth synagogue on that historic Sabbath day.

After uttering the fulfillment of the scriptural passage, Jesus went on to speak to his audience. No doubt, his speech was based on that particular passage. His audience initially responded positively—they were amazed at the gracious words which came from his lips. As we shall see in later chapters, the words of Jesus were no ordinary words—they were not dull in any way, they were not frivolous words without punch, significance or relevance. His words came with great liveliness, creativity, intensity, and searching power. Profundity and wisdom are the hallmarks of his speech. No wonder the folks in his hometown spoke well of him. But soon questions about him came to their mind—Isn’t this the carpenter? Isn’t this Mary’s son and the brother of James, Joseph, Judas and Simon? Aren’t his sisters with us?8 They also questioned how Jesus managed to receive such wisdom as manifested in his speech.9 They had heard that Jesus performed miracles elsewhere and they wondered about the source of his power. How do we understand the reaction of the people in Jesus’ hometown?

The initial reaction of delight soon turned to queries, doubts, and offence­, not because of the quality of Jesus’ speech but because of their familiarity of his background. Familiarity breeds contempt (there may well be equivalent sayings in other languages and cultures). The people of Nazareth would have found it difficult to appreciate that this Jesus, whom they knew as one of their neighbors, was someone special sent by God to liberate the people of Israel. If they were to acknowledge this, they would have to re-orientate their former way of thinking about Jesus. In their eyes, he was just one of them. It is possible that they felt they knew so much about, and shared so much with, Jesus that they found it unpalatable to see him as their teacher, let alone someone extraordinary and above them. Things went from bad to worse when Jesus pointed out to them that prophets are not accepted in their hometowns and went on to remind them that God sent the prophet Elijah to help a widow in Sidon (in Syria, i.e., not in Israel), and that God sent another prophet, Elisha, to heal a foreigner (Naaman, a general in Syria).10 His point was that often prophets received better reception in foreign or unfamiliar places. But when the people heard Jesus saying that God was merciful or favorable to the foreigners (at least in these two incidents) and thereby undermining their ethno-centricity, they were enraged. This hit a nerve in their whole way of thinking about their national identity because they prided themselves as the chosen people of God who should receive God’s favor rather than the foreigners. They were so angered by Jesus’ offensive comments that they drove him to the brow of a hill in order to throw him down the cliff. But Jesus walked through the