Sigurd Grindheim, «Faith in Jesus: The Historical Jesus and the Object of Faith», Vol. 97 (2016) 79-100
Did Jesus call his followers to believe in him? or did he merely call them to believe in God or in the contents of his teaching? This article examines the evidence found in the Synoptic Gospels and discusses its possible Christological implications in light of the Scriptures of Israel and the writings of Second Temple Judaism. If Jesus expected to be the object of his disciples’ faith, his expectation may be understood in light of his redefinition of messiahship. But he may also be seen to have placed himself in the role of God, who was the object of Israel’s faith in the Scriptures of Israel and in Second Temple Judaism.
Faith in Jesus 97
(1Qphab 2,14) 36. to believe moses (Josephus, Ant. 2,274) and the
prophets (4 Ezra 7,130; Josephus, Ant. 11,96) is a natural expression
of this conviction. in most of the cases in which “faith” language is
used in connection with the prophets, the object of faith is not the
prophets as such, but their message (e.g., Josephus, Ant. 8,232;
9,12.72.86; 10,28.39.105.114.119.124.178). tobit can therefore be
said to have believed the word of God through the prophet nahum
(tob 14,4, cf. philo, Agr. 50). Josephus explains that the Jews believed
that Daniel conversed with God (Ant. 10,267).
according to martin hengel, adherence to charismatic and Zealot
leaders was conditioned upon faith. the object of this faith, however,
was not the prophet himself but his message or his divine authoriza-
tion 37. lindsay quotes two instances in which Josephus refers to faith
in holy persons (in addition to moses and the prophets). in Ant. 3,308
Joshua and caleb dissuade the people from believing the frightening
message of the spies, and in Ant. 5,215 some young men believe
Gideon’s account 38. in both of these examples, faith is not understood
as absolute faith in a person, but belief in their message.
in the examples of a religious understanding of faith, the ultimate
object of faith is always God 39. Faith in God’s spokespersons is de-
rivative of faith in God; the one to trust for salvation is still God him-
self. philo discusses how israel ought to have had faith in moses. the
reason is that they had already received abundant proof of his truth-
fulness (Mos. 1,196), a reference to the divine legitimization of moses
(cf. exod 19,19). in Somn. 2,24, therefore, the virtuous person be-
lieves what moses says about God. as far as i have been able to as-
certain, Jewish writings that antedate the christian movement do not
award this role to the messiah. on the contrary, the Psalms of Solomon
emphasizes that the messiah will hope in God (17,34.39). the chris-
tian additions to the Testament of Benjamin (10,7.8.9 slavonic Recen-
sion), the Sibylline Oracles (8,255), and the Life of Adam and Eve
(42,3), constitute the only examples i have found of texts that describe
36
cf. also lohse, “emuna und pistis”, 150.
37
The Charismatic Leader and His Followers (ed. J. Riches; trans. J.c.G.
GReiG; new York 1996) 23. n. t. Wright compares Jesus’ call to faith to the
demand for personal loyalty by Jewish messianic pretenders and concludes that
Jesus’ call was not “unique” (Victory, 263). he fails to consider the distinction
described above.
38
Josephus and Faith, 131-132.
39
concerning philo, lindsay concludes: “pi,stij as religious faith or trust is
exclusively pi,stij which is directed toward God” (Josephus and Faith, 60).