“The Principle of Cruciform Accommodation” (chs. 13–14) states that, just as Jesus lowered himself to the point of appearing guilty and reflecting the ugliness of sin on the cross, God at times accommodated his self-revelation to Israel’s sinful, culturally conditioned capacities and expectations.
http://themelios.thegospelcoalition.org/review/the-crucifixion-of-the-warrior-god-interpreting-the-old-testaments-violent
An obvious problem with Boyd's comparison is that Jesus doesn't appear to be guilty in the NT. He doesn't appear to be guilty from the viewpoint of the Gospel narrators–or the other NT writers.
He doesn't appear to be guilty from the viewpoint of gentiles like Pilate and the Centurion.
He doesn't appear to be guilty from the viewpoint of Jews like Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea.
There's even a sense in which he doesn't appear to be guilty from the viewpoint of his detractors, since they oppose him in spite of miraculous evidence that he's a divinely accredited messenger.
From just about every viewpoint in the NT, whether the writers or figures within the narratives, he appears to be innocent and righteous.
Moreover, he consistently presents himself as innocent and righteous.
No comments:
Post a Comment