English

Main Menu

Global Christianity




Designed by:
SiteGround web hosting Joomla Templates
Home People Jürgen Moltmann Chan VSY : Crucifixion Hologram- The Concept of Identity in the Crucified God by Jürgen Moltmann and
Chan VSY : Crucifixion Hologram- The Concept of Identity in the Crucified God by Jürgen Moltmann and PDF Print E-mail
Written by Publisher   
Friday, 05 April 2013 15:23

Crucifixion Hologram- The Concept of Identity in the Crucified God by Jürgen Moltmann and its Importance to the Liberation Theology

Referee: Dr. Benedict Kwok

Anthor: Chan VSY

Abstract

My term paper seeks to investigate the identity issues of ‘the Crucified God’ by Moltmann with references from Bauckham and Sobrino.  What are the significances of identity change, identity revelation and double identities to the crucified God?  If the significance of the crucifixion to man is about identity, does identity change relate to time in which man has to hope for?  Or does it vary because of different context? What is the relation between identity and Trinitarian relationship?  The common concept of regarding identity of the suffering of the crucified God and the liberation striving of the oppressed are to be discussed in the end this term paper and finally an evaluation of the significance of the Crucified God to the liberation theology will be presented using an analogy of Hologram.


Table of Contents

Introduction                                                                                   1-2

Ways and Forms of Christian Theology

  1. Christianity is for Believers Only?                                   2-3
  2. Time Issues                                                                          3-4
  3. Faith Seeking Understanding                                            4-5

The Crucified God by Jürgen Moltmann                                    6-7

Meaning of the Crucified God to God and Christ

& to the Christians

  1. Interchange of Identity – Between God and Christ     7-9
  2. Change of Identity – Among Christians                          9-10

God Crucified by Richard Bauckham                                         10-11

  1. Revelation of Identity                                                        11-13

Crucified People by Jon Sobrino                                                          13-14

  1. Double Identities                                                                14-15

Moltmann’s Questions Regarding Contextual Theology       16

Moltman’s Liberation Theology                                                  17-18

Hologram of Crucifixion                                                              18

Bibliography                                                                                   19-21


Introduction

Lassalle-Klein states two fundamental claims in his article regarding contextual Christology by Jon Sobrino and Ignacio Ellacuria: 1. the real sign of the Word made flesh is being realized by the historical reality of Jesus; 2. resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth is to be found today among the ‘crucified peoples’ victimized by oppressions around the world.  [1] Lassalle-Klein thinks that Sobrino is talking about an analogy between the historical reality of Jesus Christ and the crucified peoples of today.  That is partly true as what Sobrino suggested connotes that the victims can literally save people like Jesus.  Lassalle-Klein says that disciples of Jesus are called to take the crucified people down from the cross.  [2] In fact, Sobrino asserts that this group of people is God chosen servants and they bring salvation. He says, ‘If we do not accept the possibility that the crucified people bring salvation, it is pointless to repeat the crucified Christ bring salvation.   [3] It is definitely not an analogy as Lassalle-Klein said.

As a matter of fact, Sobrino’s concept of the crucified people is originated from Moltmann’s the Crucified God.  Sobrino understands the abandonment of Jesus by God differently otherwise he would not have added the ideas of the crucified world or the crucified people.  Sobrino links Jesus’ cry to liberation of the oppressed in context, especially the Latinos from the poor.  Bauckham talks about God crucified in relation to exegesis.  Sobrino understands the crucifixion from below but Bauckham from above.  Nevertheless, Moltmann, Bauckham and Sobrino are conferring crucifixion a different meaning from the identity point of view.  The following discussion will concentrate on Moltmann first.  What does Moltmann say about the Crucified God?  And what are his comments about the liberation theology which using victims as the entry point?  Before discussing on the significance of the Crucified God, one should take note of Moltmann’s theological methodology.

Ways and Forms of Christian Theology

Christianity is for Believers Only?

God is not solely a God of believers.  He is the Creator of heaven and earth, and so He is not particularist.  He is as universal as the sun which rises on the evil and the good, and the rain which falls upon the just and on the unjust, and gives life to everything created.  (Matthew 5:45)  [4] Christian faith in God is not a simple trust but the overcome of the unfaith.  Faith grows up in the pains of one’s own suffering and the doubts of one’s own heart.  The contradictions and rebellions do not have to be suppressed.  The people who recognize God’s presence in the face of the God forsaken Christ have protest atheism within themselves, but as something they have overcome.  Christian theology is theology for Christ’s sake and in Christ it reaches out beyond the alternatives between simple theism and the atheism that corresponds to it.  Therefore, a Christian theologian must not just get to know the believers but the godless as well.  [5] To put it precisely, for a particular ‘Christian believer’, he/she can become atheist in anytime but once when something is overcome, they may return to the original status.  My question is does it mean that there is a change in the ‘Christian believer’ or in God when the overcoming process is occurring?  Does God change?  If He does not, it seems that the whole process depends on human’s initiation?  If he does, how can it happen?

Time Issues

The nearness of eternal life, the kingdom of God and the new heaven and the new earth ought not to be restricted chronologically.  [6] Yahweh who has been revealed is both the present and the coming One.  This historical faith in God leads to the hope that God’s presence will not be mediated solely out of remembrance of the history of promise but will be experienced directly.  It is presupposed that divine presence is eschatological.  History is ended with an open up into the future.  [7] The end of history has two aspects: its end and its ultimate goal.  [8] In Christian faith, one perceives the transition from the God of history to the coming of God, and from the history of salvation to the salvation of history.  It is a transition from historical to messianic faith, and on the other transition from messianic faith to the eschatological contemplation of God.  Therefore, Christian faith is a way and a transition from believing to knowing, from hoping to seeing and from loving to understand.  [9] The above is especially important to understand how the presence and future happen at the same time.  From the perspective of eschatology, the historical past and eternal future runs in a different timeline and that is why Moltmann says that they are not pinned down chronologically.  Secondly, Christian faith is a ‘way’ and it connotes a process.  Thirdly, it is a transition and that means it is a changing process.  According to Moltmann, we may discover theology’s pain and joys through this changing process.  [10] We change when we understand through believing.  This process involves suffering and delights.  My question is how our process of understanding through believing affects God?  Does He change like us as well?  Believers have the perception that God is well planned and He will not change.  God is omnipotent and for sure he can change but will he?

Faith Seeking Understanding

Faith is on the subjective dimension while understanding on the objective side.  Does it mean that Christian faith starts from personal experience first which is from below?  Moltmann states that this assertion from Anselm basically is unidirectional and leading to the meaning that understanding is the goal of this faith.  [11] However, the history of Christian theology does not begin with faith of Jesus’ men and women disciples but with their seeing of the Easter appearances.  Therefore, does it mean that seeing precedes faith?  This Easter appearances are pointing towards the eschatological appearance of Christ in glory.  If we look at our faith from the eschatological point of view, it means that we have witnessed these Easter appearances and therefore, understanding seeks faith.  On the other hand, it is an absolute truth that we did not see the Jesus’ appearance and therefore faith seeking understanding?  I think that is why Moltmann says that ‘we walk by faith not by sight’ (2 Corithians 5:7) is neither the first thing nor the last.  [12] The most crucial thing is foundation of this faith, which is hope of eschatology.

Moltmann interprets faith in terms of promise and he describes it as ‘moving’.  It connotes a realization process.  In this promise, the hoping mind is kept in a state of ‘not yet’.  [13] Promise is both past and future.  It is both objective (what had happened) and subjective (what is experiencing).  It is both visible already and revealing towards future.  Therefore, promise is faith but faith is not only promise.  God identifies Himself with his promises.  [14] The person who breaks promise loses his identity.  If we keep our promises we are trusted.  Our name stands for the identity of our life history.  I identify myself with what I was in my past, and anticipate the person I want to be in my future.[15] To go back to the relations between faith and promise, it is believed that God reveals Himself to show his faithfulness in glory eschatologically through raising Christ.  To Moltmann, God’s identification is eschatological but eternal present.  Does God’s identity change?  If does, in what way he shows this change? And how does this change affect faith and promise?

From the title of the book called Experiences of Theology, one may conclude that Moltmann’s Christian theology is from below.  As a matter of fact, his is not from either ends but from eschatology.  This also affects the way how he understands crucifixion.  Regarding the people who are poor and suffering, Christ says that he who visits them visit me.  And with these people he identifies himself through his humiliation to the point of death on the Roman cross.  In the crucified people, the crucified Christ is present and calls the righteous to himself.  [16] Theologians have related crucifixion to different figures.  How do we understand the crucified Christ, the crucified God, the crucified Jesus and even the crucified people?  The following discussion attempts to interpret these terms through identity.


The Crucified God - by Jürgen Moltmann

In How I Have Changed: Reflections on Thirty Years of Theology, Moltmann emphasized that he no longer wanted to be so controversial and therefore he spent fifteen years in formulating a series of systematic theology.  [17] Moltmann had been controversial ever since the publication of Theology of Hope.  He then published the Crucified God.  Perhaps it was the Crucified God which pushed this controversy to the pinnacle ever.

Bauckham understands Moltmann’s concept of the crucified God from three reasons for speaking of God’s suffering: 1. passion of Christ; 2. nature of love; 3. problem of human suffering.  Then he goes onto to the discussion that Jesus’ cry of dereliction is the focus of the suffering of God.  He says that the crucified Jesus’ abandonment by God his Father is the deepest theological reality of the event of the cross and dictates the terms in which a theology of the cross must speak of God’s suffering.  He then talks about Trinity, the event of the crucifixion and God’s relationship with the world. [18] As a matter of fact, Moltmann never uses the term the crucified Jesus but the crucified Christ.  Bauckham’s views regarding the crucified God is from the passion of Christ.  Nonetheless, Moltmann emphasizes that people have discussed sufficiently about the question of the saving significance of the crucified Christ and therefore he reverses the question by asking: what does the cross of Christ mean for God?  [19] Apparently, Moltmann’s concern about the event of the cross is from God’s perspective but Bauckman is still on Jesus. Nonetheless, Bauckman is not discussing Christology from below.   He starts from above, which will be discussed in the next section.  That is the reason why in the beginning of the Crucified God, Moltmann has justified clearly about the methodology he adopted in claiming the qualification of the crucified God.  It is the knowing by the opposite.  That is: instead of knowing the event of the cross from the crucified Christ, one should focus on the reverse which is the crucified God.

Meaning of the Crucified God to God and Christ & to the Christians

I reckon that even if we look at the crucifixion from God’s point of view, there are two levels of meaning to the believers: the implication between God and Christ and the implication among the believers.  Let us look at the one between God and Christ first.

Interchange of Identity – Between God and Christ

The death of Jesus on the cross is the center of all Christian theology.  Moltmann says that cross and resurrection are not a sequence of facts.  The first expresses a historical happening to Jesus while the second is an eschatological event.  Therefore, the focus of Christian theology is not about cross and resurrection but by the resurrection of the crucified Christ, which says that His death as something happened for us and the cross of the risen Christ, which reveals and makes accessible to those who are dying his resurrection from the dead.  [20] The connotation is apparent.  One should understand Christian theology eschatologically.

It is said that ‘God’ is to be found in this Christ event.  The Christ event on the cross is a God event.  And conversely, the God event takes place on the cross of the risen Christ.  God is not just acting externally but he has acted in himself and suffers in himself.  [21] The implication for the above is that there is an interchange of identity between Christ and God in terms of their function and status eschatologically.  Nevertheless, my questions are: 1. In what way does God present in Christ event? 2. Is crucified Christ same as the crucified Jesus?  3. If so, is God being found in crucified Jesus?  According to what Moltmann suggested in understanding Christian theology eschatologically, we also understand the crucified God eschatologically.  As such, the crucified God happens eschatologically.  Therefore, the crucified Christ and the crucified Jesus can never be understood on the same level and God will not be found in crucified Jesus.  Then what is the relationship between God and the crucified Jesus?  Can we say the crucified God as crucified Father or the crucified Jesus as the crucified Son?  How does the crucifixion link to Trinitarian relationship?

Moltmann says that for the death of Jesus on the cross, it is an event happens between Jesus and his Father in the spirit of abandonment and surrender.  In these relationships the person of Jesus comes to the stage in its totality as the Son, and the relationship of the Godhead and the manhood in his person falls into the background.  When one talks about the Trinity, he talks about the cross of Jesus.  Therefore, it is not right to say ‘the death of God’ but ‘the death in God’ or God in Jesus’ death.  The relationship is Trinitarian and is only among the Son, the Father and the Spirit but not God.  The implication is that one cannot say that the crucified Jesus as the crucified God.  Immanent Trinity is eschatological.  [22] If we look at all the persons in the immanent Trinity, can I consider the death of the Son as the death of the Father?  Can I regard the crucified Son as the crucified Father in the immanent Trinity eschatologically?  This is not discussed by Moltmann yet.  My reflection is that it is logical to say that crucified Son is the crucified Father but it is restricted to the Trinitarian relationship solely.  It does not touch on the faith dimension.  Following Moltmann’s theological methodology, if its foundation is built on faith which embraces hope and promise, then it is more appropriate to relate the crucified God to the crucified Christ, whose messianic coming is realizing eschatologically in the presence.  Messianic arrival brings hope.  The crucified Son is about relationship but not faith or hope and promise.  To conclude, the interchange of identity is between Christ and God in eschatology.

Change of Identity – Among Christians

Paul and Mark understood the risen Christ as the crucified Christ.  This meant that they had to understand the God who raised him as the God who crucified him and was crucified. [23] This assertion is inapprehensible to many normal Christians.  The death of Jesus on the cross is the focus of all Christian theology.  It is not the only theme of theology but people enter problems and answers of theology from this point.  Moltmann says that the death and resurrection are understood on different levels as mentioned previously.  Moltmann also concerns about the linkage between the crucified Christ and the crucified God.  He links the crucified Christ and the crucified God differently.  He talks about change in identity.  That is the concept of identity in contributing the significance of the crucified God to human being especially to the oppressed.   First of all, Moltmann concerns about the meaning of the human cross of Christ to God instead of Jesus.  Secondly, He considers that the Christian identity can only be understood as an act of identification with the crucified Christ.  The identification is the moment of the proclamation that in him God has identified himself with the godless and those being abandoned by God, to whom one belongs oneself.  [24] To combine with the above two assertions from Moltmann, if the crucified God is the subject, Christian identity should be viewed from the crucified God instead of the crucified Christ.  It means that the Christian identity is not understood from the past into the future but from the future into the past.  This change of identity is also the link between the suffering of the oppressed and the hope of the oppressed.

God is unconditional love.  God allows himself to be forced out.  God suffers, allows himself to be crucified and is crucified and in this consummates his unconditional love that is in hope.  Crucifixion is an event of love in which human being is given a new identity.  Man can be liberated form the norms of social identifications.  [25] To us, the meaning of crucifixion connotes salvation.  Therefore, crucifixion comes before salvation.  Sobrino does not agree with this and his assertion will be discussed later.

God Crucified – by Richard Bauckham

Bauckham recognizes the contribution of the Crucified God but he refutes that God can suffer outside the incarnation.  The emphasis of a doctrine of divine passibility can promote its own peculiar kind of Docetism.[26] He declares that when Moltmann regards the cross as a Trinitarian event, he is failed to distinguish the human suffering of Jesus, which is human suffering, from the divine suffering of the Father, which is only analogous to human suffering.  [27] I reckon that he understands the suffering of Jesus and God based on the same foundation.  This ‘same’ foundation, as I defined, is referring to the same time frame.  He then introduces the negative theology by emphasizing the transcendence of God.  It connotes that we may not know how the transcendent God suffers but he does not suffer like us.  I refute this assertion.  Bauckham says the above without considering the time line which Moltmann always emphasizes.  [28] According to Moltmann, God definitely suffers like us but not in the present time.  Bauckham says that God cannot suffer outside the incarnation.  However, one should note that the nature of His suffering cannot be understood outside Trinity either.  He suffers eschatologically in Trinity.  Moltmann’s concern is to look from the future to the past.  [29]

Revelation of Identity

Bauckham states that when one thinks of divine identity, he/she can see that the so-called divine functions which Jesus exercises are intrinsic to who God is.  This Christology of divine identity is not only a patristic development of ontological Christology in the context of Trinitarian theology but also a full divine Christology maintaining that Jesus Christ is intrinsic to the unique and eternal identity of God.  [30] Through analyzing Isaiah 40-55, Philippians 2:6-11, Revelation and the Gospel of John, he concludes that there is recognition of the crucified Jesus as belonging to the identity of God.  [31] He then asks many sensible questions like: does Jesus reveal the same God as God of Israel?  How does the identity of Jesus relate to the identity of God of Israel? [32] He has answered the questions within a solid framework, which starts from the work and nature of God in the Old Testament (acts in Israel history and characters) and then goes onto the New Testament.  He seeks to investigate Christology from above.

Bauckham comes to a conclusion of the new identity of God in Jesus is that the inclusion of Jesus in the identity of God means the inclusion in God of the interpersonal relationship between Jesus and his Father.  This identity can no long be thought as an analogy from the human point of view.  God transcends the categories of human identity.  That means the divine identity is understood as a revelation as intra-divine relationship.  [33] Then I would want to ask:  what is the significance of this identity revelation to God, Jesus himself and men?

To Bauckham, God crucified is the divine identity revealed in Jesus.  Therefore, God crucified is ‘something extrinsic’ but not ‘a proof intrinsic’.  The interesting thing is that he deliberately uses ‘God crucified’ instead of ‘the crucified God’.  There are two connotations regarding this reversal of words.  First of all, the subject is not a ‘who’ but a ‘what’.  It is not about a person but an incident.  Secondly, the term ‘God crucified’ means that there is only one God and the crucified one is nobody but God.  The article ‘the’ used in ‘the crucified God’ has the meaning that there are many Gods and the author is talking about the one who is crucified.  In this respect, Bauckham seems to be more precise.  Nonetheless, Bauckham is talking about the revelation of identity of God crucified.  I will say that he considers ‘revelation of identity’ as the linkage of Jesus and God crucified.

Bauckham asserts that from the consistency and novelty in the New Testament revelation of the identity of God, one should recognize that in Christ God both demonstrates his deity to the world as the same unique God his people Israel had always known.  As the God who includes the humiliated and the exalted Jesus in his identity he is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, that is, the Father of Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ the Son, and the Spirit of the Father given to the Son.  [34] Bauckham tries to look at the crucifixion as a revelation of identity so as to prove the monotheism of the Israel God.   His assertion connotes that revelation is in fact a Trinitarian relationship but how does the Trinity work in the revelation of identity?  He owes an answer to us.  In addition, Bauckham clearly states the importance of revelation of identity on the cross by God as a proof of the same God of Israel in his work of God Crucified, but he does not say anything about the significance of this identity revelation to human being.  I reckon that the significance is related to the faith, promise and hope which Moltmann is concerning about eschatologically.

Crucified People – by Jon Sobrino

After the publication of the Crucified God, Moltmann become attracted to the theology of liberation in Latin America.  He has a close contact with Jon Sobrino.  Sobrino starts his discussion on liberation theology from Jesus


just like the title of his book: Jesus the Liberator: A Historical -Theological View.  He certainly agrees with what Moltmann says about the future of God that only at the end will God be all in all.  Sobrino states that God was present on Jesus’ cross but this being present on cannot be separated from the cross, on which God was present, because it is a feature of the historical structure of revelation that the nature of the place in which God manifests himself is a mediation of God’s own nature. [35] This is an addition of identity instead of a change or a revelation.  Sobrino considers that the crucified God has double identities, which is like an ‘add-on’ to Jesus’ identity.  This addition, as he considers, is in fact more significant.  The event of the cross to God is historical not eschatological.  It seems that the hope for liberation in the Latin American sense is existential.  This echoes Sobrino’s view that when he talks about the crucified God, he sets it on a contextualized level by referring to the situation in Latin America.  [36] Responses and answers to the reason why an individual suffered are required to be immediate and current.

Double Identities

Sobrino complains that Moltmann has not explained the meaning of the presence of God’s suffering but only discuss on whether God is being affected by suffering Himself.  Human sufferings cannot be explained because this radical beyond the human sphere, which is God, is also affected by suffering.  [37] Sobrino looks at the meaning of the suffering God from the same point of view of most non-Christian religions.  I shall ask how one can love if he cannot suffer?  As a matter of fact, Moltmann and Sobrino enter Christology from two totally different levels.  Moltmann looks at the crucifixion from the eschatological point of view.  Sobrino locates the meaning of the crucifixion from below.  Sobrino says that the meaning of suffering in God is theological reflection.  God’s suffering is to express that God wants to reveal his solidarity with his World’s victims.  [38] Traditionally, the cross of Jesus is related to individual sufferings but Sobrino relates God’s suffering to people as a whole.  [39] He uses crucified people to call the people in the Third World who suffer death in a thousand ways.  He adds this idea to Christology and saying that the crucified people are those who fill up in their flesh what is lacking in Christ’s passion.  In crucified people, Christ acquires a body in history and that the crucified people embody Christ in history is crucified.  The connotation is that the realization of Christ mission on earth is considerably depending on the crucified people.

The crucified people are also considered as Yahweh’s suffering servant and because the servant is chosen by God for salvation, the crucified people bring salvation.  Sobrino says that if we do not accept the possibility that the crucified people bring salvation, it is no point to repeat that the Servant and the crucified Christ bring salvation.  [40] To Sobrino, besides of the importance of the identity of Jesus in the cross event, the identity of the crucified people is also significant.  Crucifixion brings out the issue of double identities.  Sobrino even raises the identity of the crucified people above Jesus’.  My question is if the crucified people are the savior, who is going to save them.  Did not they have to be saved first?  Then how can someone save while they need to be saved?


Moltmann’s Questions Regarding Contextual Theology

The thesis of contextual theology is too linear by suggesting first practice and then theory.  Moltmann says that if the contextual theologians defend this declaration using ‘faith seeking understanding’, they have misunderstood its meaning.  This is only being used inside church and has no relation with the scientific and scholarly disciplines outside.  Moltmann says that the relation between practice and theory is always circular. [41] My reflections are: 1. Moltmann considers that faith seeking understanding is not liner and therefore, ‘understanding seeking faith’ should also be true.  They form a cycle. 2. Moltmann’s Christology is neither from below nor from above but eschatologically present.  3. Why is faith seeking understanding only valid in a church situation?  Did not Moltmann state that God is universal?  If God is universal, then Christian faith should mean something to everybody.  4. Contextual theologian like Sobrino talks about theological reflection, which is not arbitrary [42] but it is not objective enough.  It is not rooted through exegetical analysis [43] or being defined dialectically.  Sobrino says that the crucified God is not a phenomenon and hence cannot be explained through theology but practice. [44] If praxis is the criterion of theory, Moltmann asks: what is the criterion of praxis?  He affirms that it is Christ.  [45] Moltmann does not agree with the interpretation of the servant of God in Isaiah 40 & 53 being interpreted as the poor crucified people.  The terms are not collective but only pointing to a divine figure. [46] Once again, these two theologians talk about the crucified God from different approaches and that makes the divergence occurs.

Moltman’s Liberation Theology

Moltmann states that liberation deals with the freedom of the whole and not the freedom of the individual at the cost of others.  [47] Oppression always has two sides: on the one side stands the master, on the other side lies the slave.  [48] If oppression has two aspects, then the process of liberations from oppression must begin simultaneously on both sides.  Moltmann complains Sobrino’s extension to include all the oppressed in the Third making people who have never heard of Christ but have other religions quite involuntarily become the body of Christ.  [49] But what is his definition of oppressors?  Most of these oppressors are probably non-Christians.  Moltmann suggests that liberation of the oppressed is through hope and struggles which is comprehensively illustrated by the Exodus.  Contrary, the liberation of oppressors comes about by means of the suffering and death of Christ on the cross.  That is the forgiveness of sins, repentance and rebirth to new life in discipleship to the Crucified.  [50] Although Moltmann does not mention anything about the definition of oppressor, he suggests that liberation of them is through crucifixion.  If Christ is crucified for everyone, does Moltmann say that we are all susceptible to be oppressors?  It is true to say that we are oppressors to a certain extend in different contexts.  Oppressor might be defined in a general sense to Moltmann.

He considers liberation in five dimensions, which are all concerning about man striving for a change in identity.  Moltmann even concludes that the solidarity is not an elimination of the differences among races, peoples and sexes but identity through mutual recognition.  [51] A new future can be created qualitatively only when one identifies with those who are the minorities.  [52] In the cross of Christ, racism, masculinism and capitalism all die away.  A new born person is identified in open identity as a human being, abandoning the fixed identifications of his or her race or class.  [53] That is a change of identity, which also echoes what we have come up with the change of identity in the crucified God previously.

Hologram of Crucifixion

Bauckham examine crucifixion from above but Sobrino is contextually from below.  Moltmann is not from either extremes but an eschatological point of view.  The crucifixion of Jesus happens in our historical time and many people from the early church period had the experience of witnessing the event.  When the crucifixion of Jesus is happening, the crucifixion of God is proceeding as well but on a different time line.  Moltmann seeks to investigate the crucifixion from God’s point of view.  Usually it is the 3D-hologram runs in the reality from the human point of view at the same time frame.  Here, it is reversal.  To God, eschatology is the reality and the historical crucifixion of Jesus is the hologram.  They are happening but on a different time line.  These two incidents encounter each other on the cross and their meaning is a change of identities.  This idea of change of identities also extends to Moltmann’s Liberation theology.
Bibliography

Bauckham, Richard.  Theodicy from Ivan Karamazov to Moltmann in Modern Theology, 4:1, 1987, 83-97.

Bauckham, Richard.  The Theology of Jürgen Moltmann.  Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1995.

Bauckham, Richard.  God Crucified- Monotheism & Christology in the New Testament.  Cambridge: Paternoster Press, 1998.

Bauckham, Richard.  God Will be All in All – The Eschatology of Jürgen Moltmann.  Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2001.

Gutierrez, Gustavo.  A Theology of Liberation.  Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1988.

Konig, Adrio.  The Idea of the Crucified God: Some Systematic Questions in Journal of Theology for Southern Africa, no 39, 1982, 55-61.

Kristenson, Olle.  Universality and Particularity-a Contribution to the Interpretation of Gustavo Gutierrez’ Theological Reflection with a Focus on the Preferential Option for the Poor in Swedish Missiological Themes, 99, 1, 2011, 79-99.

Moltmann, Jürgen.  Theology of Hope.  London: SCM Press Ltd, 1967.

Moltmann, Jürgen.  The Crucified God-the Cross of Christ as the Foundation and Criticism of Christian Theology.  London: SCM Press Ltd, 1973.

Moltmann, Jürgen.  Liberation in the Light of Hope in Ecumenical Review, 26, no 3 , July 1974, 425-426.

Moltmann, Jürgen.  The Crucified God: Perspectives on a Theology of the Cross for Today in Journal of Theology for Southern Africa, no 9, 1974, 9-27.

Moltmann, Jürgen.  Crucified God in Theology Today, 31, no 1, April 1974, 6-18.

Moltmann, Jürgen.  The Liberation of Oppressors in Journal of the Interdenominational Theological Center, 6, no. 2, Spring, 1979, 69-82.

Moltmann, Jürgen.  The Way of Jesus Christ: Christology in Messianic Dimension.  London: SCM Press, 1990.

Moltmann, Jürgen.  The Coming of God.  London: SCM Press Ltd, 1996.

Moltmann, Jürgen.  How I Have Changed: Reflections on Thirty Years of Theology.  Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 1997.

Moltmann, Jürgen, Experiences in Theology: Ways and Forms of Christian Theology.  Minneapolis: SCM Press, 2000.

Moltmann, Jürgen.  The Hope for the Kingdom of God and Signs of Hope in the World: The Relevance of Blumhardt’s Theology Today in PNEUMA: the Journal of the Society for  Pentecostal Studies, vol. 26, no. 1, Spring 2004, 4-16.

Nessan, Craig L. Thine is the Kingdom, the Power, and the Glory: New Vistas for the Theology of the Cross in Dialog: A Journal of Theology, Vol 50, no. 1, Spring 2011, 81-89.

Ratke, David C.  Preaching Christ Crucified: Luther and the Revelation of God in Dialog: A Journal of Theology, vol43, no 4, Winter 2004, 272-278.

Runia, K.  Eschatology in the Second Half of the Twentieth Century in Calvin Theological Journal, 32, 1, 1997, 105-135.

Sobrino, Jon.  Jesus the Liberator- a Historical-Theological View.  Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1994.

Scott, David A.  Ethics on a Trinitarian Basis: Moltmann’s the Crucified God in Anglican Theological Review, 60, no. 2, April 1978, 166-179.

Simany, Roland Daniel.  Meaning of the Crucifixion and the Resurrection in Moltmann’s the Crucified God in Modern Churchman, 21, no 1, Winter 1977, 6-10.

Wiebe, Ben.  Interpretation and Historical Criticism: Jürgen Moltmann in Restoration Quarterly, 24, no. 3, 1981, 155-166.

 



[1] Robert Lassalle-Klein,  ‘Jesus of Galilee and the Crucifoed People: the Contextual Christology of Jon Sobrino and Ignacio Ellacuria’, in Theology Studies, 70, 2009, 347.

[2] Lassalle-Klein,  ‘Jesus of Galilee and the Crucifoed People: the Contextual Christology of Jon Sobrino and Ignacio Ellacuria’, 376.

[3] Jon Sobrino, Jesus the Liberator: a Historical-Theological View, (New York: Orbis Books, 1993), 262.

[4] Jürgen Moltmann, Experiences in Theology- Ways and Forms of Christian Theology, (Canterbury: SCM Press, 2000), 14.

[5] Moltmann, Experiences in Theology- Ways and Forms of Christian Theology, 16.

[6] Moltmann, Experiences in Theology- Ways and Forms of Christian Theology, 38.

[7] Moltmann, Experiences in Theology- Ways and Forms of Christian Theology, 40.

[8] Moltmann, Experiences in Theology- Ways and Forms of Christian Theology, 44.

[9] Moltmann, Experiences in Theology- Ways and Forms of Christian Theology, 45.

[10] Moltmann, Experiences in Theology- Ways and Forms of Christian Theology, 45.

[11] Moltmann, Experiences in Theology- Ways and Forms of Christian Theology, 47.

[12] Moltmann, Experiences in Theology- Ways and Forms of Christian Theology, 51.

[13] Jürgen, Moltmann. Theology of Hope, (London: SCM Press Ltd, 1967), 95-102.

[14] Moltmann, Experiences in Theology- Ways and Forms of Christian Theology, 63.

[15] Moltmann, Experiences in Theology- Ways and Forms of Christian Theology, 95.

[16] Moltmann, Experiences in Theology- Ways and Forms of Christian Theology, 132-133.

[17] Jürgen Moltmann, How I Have Changed: reflections on thirty years of theology, (Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 1997), 20.

[18] Richard Bauckham, The Theology of Jürgen Moltmann, (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1995), 45-58.

[19] Moltmann, How I Have Changed: Reflections on Thirty Years of Theology, 18.

[20] Jürgen Moltmann, The Crucified God-the Cross of Christ as the Foundation and Criticism of Christian Theology, ( New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1991), 204.

[21] Moltmann, The Crucified God-the Cross of Christ as the Foundation and Criticism of Christian Theology, 205.

[22] Jurgen Moltmann, The Trinity and the Kingdom: the Doctrine of God, (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1911), 168.

[23] Jürgen Moltmann, The Crucified God-the Cross of Christ as the Foundation and Criticism of Christian Theology, ( New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1991), 192.

[24] Moltmann, The Crucified God-the Cross of Christ as the Foundation and Criticism of Christian Theology, 19.

[25] Moltmann, The Crucified God-the Cross of Christ as the Foundation and Criticism of Christian Theology, 248.

[26] Bauckham, The Theology of Jürgen Moltmann, 65.

[27] Bauckham, The Theology of Jürgen Moltmann, 66.

[28] Jürgen Moltmann, The Crucified God-the Cross of Christ as the Foundation and Criticism of Christian Theology, ( New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 1991), 204.

[29] Moltmann, The Crucified God-the Cross of Christ as the Foundation and Criticism of Christian Theology, 190.

[30] Richard Bauckham, God Crucified- Monotheism & Christology in the New Testament, (Cambridge: Paternoster Press, 1998),  viii.

[31] Bauckham, God Crucified- Monotheism & Christology in the New Testament, 68.

[32] Bauckham, God Crucified- Monotheism & Christology in the New Testament, 69.

[33] Bauckham, God Crucified- Monotheism & Christology in the New Testament, 75.

[34] Bauckham, God Crucified- Monotheism & Christology in the New Testament, 77.

[35] Jon Sobrino, Jesus the Liberator: a Historical-Theological View, (New York: Orbis Books, 1993), 241-243

[36] Sobrino, Jesus the Liberator: a Historical-Theological View, 252.

[37] Sobrino, Jesus the Liberator: a Historical-Theological View, 241-241.

[38] Sobrino, Jesus the Liberator: a Historical-Theological View, 245.

[39] Sobrino, Jesus the Liberator: a Historical-Theological View, 254.

[40] Sobrino, Jesus the Liberator: a Historical-Theological View, 254-262.

[41] Moltmann, Experiences in Theology- Ways and Forms of Christian Theology, 294.

[42] Sobrino, Jesus the Liberator: a Historical-Theological View, 243.

[43] Sobrino, Jesus the Liberator: a Historical-Theological View, 255.

[44] Sobrino, Jesus the Liberator: a Historical-Theological View, 256.

[45] Moltmann, Experiences in Theology- Ways and Forms of Christian Theology, 295.

[46] Moltmann, Experiences in Theology- Ways and Forms of Christian Theology, 296.

[47] Jürgen Moltmann, , ‘Liberation in the Light of Hope’ in Ecumenical Review, 26, no 3 , (July 1974), 425-426.

[48] Moltmann, Experiences in Theology- Ways and Forms of Christian Theology, 185 & Jurgen Moltmann, The Liberation of Oppressors in Journal of the Interdenominational Theological Center, 6, no. 2 (Spring 1979), 69.

[49] Moltmann, Experiences in Theology- Ways and Forms of Christian Theology, 236.

[50] Moltmann, The Liberation of Oppressors, 70.

[51] Moltmann, , ‘Liberation in the Light of Hope’, 427.

[52] Moltmann, , ‘Liberation in the Light of Hope’, 418.

[53] Moltmann, ‘The Liberation of Oppressors’, 80.

 
Global Christianity and Contextual Theological Reflection, Powered by Joomla! | Web Hosting by SiteGround