Source: Crispin Fletcher-Louis, Jesus Monotheism: Christological Origins: The Emerging Consensus and Beyond, vol. 1 (Eugene, OR: Whymanity Publishing, 2019), 31–64.
Fresh Support for the Emerging Consensus.wav
This podcast delves into the ongoing debate surrounding the origins of "Christological monotheism"—the early Christian belief that Jesus Christ was included within the unique identity of the one God of Israel. The author analyzes arguments against this "emerging consensus," particularly those from scholars like James McGrath, and offers fresh support, especially from the numerical structure of 1 Corinthians 8:6, which is argued to subtly encode the divine name and the concept of oneness. The discussion highlights the interconnection between early Christian belief about Jesus' divine status and the practice of worship directed towards him, asserting that understanding the former is crucial for interpreting the latter. Ultimately, the text prepares the ground for a new perspective on these complex historical and theological questions.
1. Responses to Unconvincing Objections to the Emerging Consensus
The text addresses arguments raised against the claims of the "emerging consensus," particularly regarding earliest Christian beliefs and practices concerning Jesus Christ. The emerging consensus posits a "Christological monotheism" where Jesus is included within the divine identity of the one God of Israel, and that early Christians offered genuine worship to Christ. The objections discussed attack both ends of this case: some scholars might accept early Christian worship of Christ but reject the idea of Christological monotheism, arguing that if Jesus wasn't included in the divine identity, then actions directed toward him weren't biblical "worship." Conversely, others argue there isn't much hard evidence of Christ worship, suggesting he wasn't included in the divine identity. The text critiques specific objectors, including Maurice Casey, dismissing his arguments against Christ worship in Pauline churches as unpersuasive in light of subsequent scholarship. It also strongly criticizes Adela Yarbro Collins for dismissing "Christological monotheism" in Paul without fully engaging with the arguments or the complete body of evidence, such as Colossians 1:15-20 and the concept of a redefined Shema in 1 Corinthians 8:6. Her interpretation of Philippians 2 as simply describing a preexistent royal messiah dependent on texts like the Similitudes of Enoch is questioned because the Messiah in that text is not described as being in the "form of God" or possessing the kind of equality with God presented in Philippians.
A significant objection comes from James McGrath, who argues against the idea that Paul "split the Shema" in 1 Corinthians 8:6 to include Jesus within God's identity. Instead, McGrath proposes that Paul "expanded" the Shema, affirming one God (the Father) alongside whom there is also one Lord (Jesus Christ). In this view, Jesus is a mediator or agent of creation but not identified with the Yhwh-Kyrios of the Shema; he is a messianic lord, not the fully divine Kyrios. The text finds problems with McGrath's argument, questioning how a purely messianic lord could be described as an agent of creation, language typically reserved for one fully expressing divine identity. It also argues that McGrath's expectation that Paul should have explicitly explained such a radical theological move misunderstands Paul's method, where high Christology is often a presupposition he argues from, not for, particularly in 1 Corinthians 8:6 within the context of discussing food offered to idols.
2. Support from Numerical Theology: Introduction and Concepts
The text introduces "numerical criticism," or the study of numerical patterns and structures in biblical texts, as a new interpretative tool providing fresh support for the emerging consensus. While simple numerical observations (like word counts indicating a formula, as seen in 1 Corinthians 8:6) are part of this, the text focuses on the recognition among some practitioners that numbers can have deeper symbolic significance, similar to allegorical meanings. This is linked to the ancient world's closer connection between numbers and words, where letters also served as numerical signs.
The Jewish tradition of interpreting texts through numerical structures, known as "gematria," is discussed, along with similar practices like Greek "isopsephy." The text notes that scholars like Hurtado and Bauckham have observed numerology conveying deeper Christological meanings in NT and early Christian literature, citing examples like possible gematria on Jesus' name in the letter of Barnabas and numerical structures encoding Christological claims in John's Gospel. The practice of scribes paying attention to word counts had practical reasons (copying accuracy, payment) but also allowed for conveying symbolic meaning. Hebrew letters doubled as numbers, meaning a written text could function as both literature and a sequence of numbers. This "logotechnical" composition is seen in well-known examples like the numerical value of "Nero Caesar" (666) in Revelation 13 and the numerical value of "David" (14) structuring Matthew's genealogy (Matthew 1). Special Hebrew words and their numerical values were used to enrich scriptural meaning, potentially serving as a form of "divine watermark" or iconic structure that avoided visual representation of God, consistent with prohibitions against idolatry.
3. Numerical Analysis of 1 Corinthians 8:6
The text provides a detailed numerical analysis of the confession in 1 Corinthians 8:6 (excluding the introductory "but"). It points out its carefully balanced two-part structure, characteristic of a traditional confessional formula. This structure consists of exactly thirteen words in each of its two halves, totaling twenty-six words. The syllable counts also show symmetry, with 19 syllables in each half (8 + 11). While the syllable count might primarily serve to make the confession memorable and easily recitable, the numerical word structure is proposed to make a profound contribution to its theological meaning.
The key insight is the connection between the numbers 26 and 13 and the numerical values of significant Hebrew terms. The numerical value of the name of God, Yhwh, using simple addition of its letters' positional values (yod=10, he=5, waw=6, he=5), is twenty-six. Furthermore, the numerical value of the Hebrew word for "one" (ʾehad), which is the climactic word in the traditional Shema (Deuteronomy 6:4: "the LORD our God, the LORD is one"), is thirteen (aleph=1, het=8, dalet=4). The text argues that the 26-word structure of the reworked Shema in 1 Corinthians 8:6 is a deliberate echo of the numerical value of Yhwh, signifying that the confession is still fundamentally about the identity of Yhwh-Kyrios, even as it includes Jesus Christ. The division into two 13-word halves, corresponding to the numerical value of "one," is interpreted as encoding the idea that the "one" God is now expressed as "two-in-one" – the one God the Father and the one Lord Jesus Christ together comprise the identity of the one God, Yhwh-Kyrios. This creates a sophisticated "arithmetic tagging of concepts and identities," where the two parts (each representing "one" entity with a numerical value of 13 words) add up to the whole (representing Yhwh-Kyrios with a numerical value of 26 words), illustrating that in this divine identity, "one plus one" mysteriously makes "one." The structure is seen as preventing the conclusion that Jesus Christ is Yhwh without remainder, asserting instead that both the Father and Jesus Christ together constitute Yhwh-Kyrios.
4. Implications of the Numerical Theology of 1 Corinthians 8:6