James Stalker. The Teaching of Jesus concerning Himself. AMG, 1995.
Stalker, a well-known author of works about Christ such as, The Life of Jesus Christ, Imago Christi, Living the Christ Life, and Studies on the Person of Christ, has written yet another important Christological work with this volume, The Teaching of Jesus Concerning Himself. This work is not a light read. Untranslated Greek, Hebrew, and Latin, copious footnotes, and extensive interaction with higher-critical theories necessitate a deliberate, thoughtful reading. Intended for the educated, this work will benefit even the more advanced reader.
The book divides into six chapters and two appendices. The first chapter sets forth the importance of Jesus’ teaching. Chapter two focuses on Christ’s self-designation “Son of Man.” The title “Son of God” is occupies the discussion of the third chapter. Chapter four covers the title “Messiah.” Chapter five deals with Jesus as the Redeemer. The final chapter centers on Jesus as Judge. Following these are two appendices on Wendt’s untranslated volume on the teaching of Christ and the Book of Enoch.
The recent trend in New Testament studies has been toward the exaltation of the Gospels. Prior to this, the Epistles overshadowed the life of the Savior. This recent movement “to attach supreme importance to the words of Christ is a healthy one” (319). Jesus testifies in Matthew 23:8 that He is the One teacher and everyone else is a brother—a statement that “could not be a more emphatic warning against placing the apostles on the same level as the Master” (321). Though some try to argue that all of Scripture is on the same level, at the very least, Jesus’ words must be given a unique place above all other revelation (322). One must read Paul in light of Jesus rather than Jesus in light of Paul (325).
The favorite self-designation of Jesus was the title “Son of Man.” Debate exists concerning its significance and its origin. Some suggest that He invented the term, but this is highly unlikely. The phrase occurs frequently in the Old Testament, oftentimes as a synonym for “man.” Its use in Ezekiel is significant, but it is likely that Daniel’s use of it underlies the New Testament application to Christ. Most people assume the title emphasizes Jesus’ humanity, but the passages in which it occurs make this unlikely. Some regard the phrase as emphasizing His dignity as the ideal man, while others see stress laid upon the weakness and lowliness (341). The best view, however, sees “Son of Man” as Messianic.
The title “Son of God” never appears on Jesus’ own lips in the synoptics. It finds its origin in the Old Testament. It has a variety of uses: angels, Adam, the Hebrew nation, the kings of Israel, and Christians. The title conveys the ideas of derivation from God, loved by God, and like God (366). Some have suggested that the name is Messianic, but the evidence is lacking. Rather than being a testimony to human messiahship, “Son of God” ascribed to Jesus, conveys equality with God. Jesus’ life bore witness to this divinity through His miracles, His authoritative declarations, the demands He placed on people and the promises He made, and forgiving sins.
Jesus was the promised Messiah. Others recognized it, and Jesus affirmed it, though often in less than straightforward ways. “The Christ” was originally a title, but it lost its significance and simply become another name for Jesus. The Lord’s mission on earth was centered on one thing—the kingdom of God. The people expected a kingdom, but not the kind of kingdom that Jesus was preaching. The temptation of Jesus was Satan’s attempt to get Jesus to take the earthly kingdom (397). After His had people rejected Him, Jesus went from being the Messiah of the Jews to the Savior of the world. The fact that the epistles speak little of the kingdom is significant. The recent effort to speak of the kingdom is an error. It is “an attempt to force thought back into a form which it has long outgrown.” (406).
Stalker fully affirms the deity of Christ, speaking of His perfect revelation of God based on His perfect union with Him (336). In regard to the ignorance of Christ concerning His coming, the best answer is to acknowledge that it is a mystery (375). The aim of the atonement was primarily Godward. It removed the obstacle of sin so that the fullness of divine love could display itself (417).
Stalker makes some striking statements throughout the course of the book. For example, he suggests that the Scripture does not contain any dogmas (326). He also proposes that Luke’s gospel has only been a little unfaithful to history (332). As a rule of thumb, one should assume that the sayings of Jesus in the gospels are “authentic until strong evidence is forthcoming to the contrary” (334). He gives too much credit to non-conservative men and their theories. For example, he essentially excludes John’s Gospel from his discussion of the teaching of Jesus because of “the present state of criticism” (330). Supposedly, Matthew, Mark, and Luke did not actually write the canonical gospels. Their collections merely served as the primary sources for the gospels’ compilation (332). The attempt to reproduce a written gospel prior to the canonical gospels is “of profound interest” (333).
In spite of its weaknesses, Stalker’s book is most certainly one worth reading. His detailed discussion and thorough analysis is of enormous value, even if one should happen to disagree with his conclusions. No reader with leave Stalker’s book without profit. I heartily commend this volume.