Van Christologie tot Jesulogie? Teologiese gesprek met Sakkie Spangenberg na aanleiding van sy boek Jesus van Nasaret (2009)

Abstract

Spangenberg het ’n boeiende boek oor Jesus van Nasaret geskryf waarin hy aandag skenk aan onder meer (vermeende) Ou-Testamentiese agtergronde, om daarna veral dieper in te gaan op verskeie Nuwe-Testamentiese perspektiewe op Jesus. Hy het tot die konklusie gekom dat die onderskeie Nuwe-Testamentiese skrywers elk ’n eie perspektief op Jesus ontwikkel het, perspektiewe wat mekaar soms weerspreek. In elk geval was daar ’n groot verskil tussen die historiese Jesus van Nasaret en die dogmatiese Jesus van die kerklike belydenis. In die kerklike dogma is Jesus vergoddelik, iets wat Hy nooit was of wou wees nie. Die ware Jesus was niemand anders nie as ’n Joodse profeet en wysheidsleermeester. Spangenberg kom tot hierdie gevolgtrekking op grond van wat hy noem ‘wetenskaplike studie’ en ’n radikaal-kritiese omgang met die Bybel. In hierdie artikel is sowel die filosofiese vertrekpunte as die teologiese konklusies van Spangenberg krities bespreek en bevraagteken.

From Christology to Jesuology? Theological discussion with Sakkie Spangenberg with reference to his book Jesus van Nasareth (2009). Spangenberg wrote a riveting book on Jesus of Nazareth in which he paid attention to inter alia (alleged) Old Testament background and then proceeded to a more in-depth investigation into several New Testament perspectives on Jesus. He came to the conclusion that the different New Testament authors each developed their own perspective on Jesus, perspectives which were sometimes contradictory. He found a huge difference between the historical Jesus of Nazareth and the dogmatic Jesus of the church confessions. In this church tenet Jesus was deified, something He was not, neither wanted to be. The true Jesus was none other than a Jewish prophet and wisdom teacher. Spangenberg reached this conclusion on the basis of what he called ‘scientific’ study and a radically critical way of dealing with the Bible. In this article both the philosophical points of departure and the theological conclusions of Spangenberg were discussed and queried critically.