Christology 101

1500 words, 7 minute read

St. Paul's Letter to the Colossians (the Christian congregation at Colossae, east of Ephesus in Asia Minor) includes a very old Christological Hymn (1: 15-20), perhaps the oldest liturgical Christology extant today. It forms the basis of a complete Theology…and, perhaps more surprisingly, a complete Cosmology. It is in fact the TOE (Theory of Everything) we’ve been searching for ever since ‘Einstein and Schrödinger walked into a bar’:

"He (Christ) is the image of the invisible God,

the first-born of all creation,

for in him all things were created…

“All things were created through him and for him.

He is before all things

and in him all things hold together…

“He is the beginning, the first-born from the dead.

For in him all the fullness was pleased to dwell,

and through him to reconcile all things for him…"

Got it? Can we move on to the football scores? Or should we peel back the leaves of this artichoke just a bit? What are the essential elements of this Christology and why is it so important in the evolution of Christian theology:

(1)     “He (Christ) is the image of the invisible God.” God is insensible, but Christ is the sensible image of God.

(2)     “(He is) the first born of all creation.” Creation (Genesis and/or Big Bang) is the moment of minimal entropy (maximal order). Christ is logos, the ordering principle and order per se. Therefore, Christ is minimal entropy and so must precede, logically, every other event.

(3)     “He is before all things.” Christ precedes even spacetime itself. Therefore, Christ is eternal (atemporal)…and universal (aspatial).

(4)     “All things were created in him, through him, and for him.” Christ is the milieu in which entities come to be (in him), the origin (Alpha, efficient cause, through him) and destiny (Omega, final cause, for him) of whatever is, was, or will be.

(5)     “In him all things hold together.” Because Christ (eternal) precedes all events, all things share a common origin, and so Christ is necessarily an element in the constitution of every event. Because Christ is universal, all things also share a common destiny. Therefore, because Christ is an element in every entity, all things hold together; and because Christ is the locus of every event (above), all things hold together in him.

(6)     “He is the beginning, the first born from the dead.” Death is maximal entropy (minimal order). Whatever emerges from maximal entropy must (by definition) constitute an incremental increase in order. Therefore, whatever comes to be manifests Christ (logos, the ordering principle and order per se, above).

(7)     “In him all the fulness was pleased to dwell.” Christ is not just the sensible image of an insensible God; Christ is God (all fulness).

(8)     “And through him to reconcile all things for him.”  Entropy increases in the spatiotemporal world due to conflict between entities. Outside of spacetime (in Christ), reconciliation (through Christ) transmutes order-eroding conflicts into intensity-enhancing contrasts (for Christ).

Without Christ, the World would consist of a vast multiplicity of isolated events, a sea of ships passing in the night. There is no inherent reason why 'actual entities' should interact with one another, exhibit togetherness, mutually modify, or reconcile.

Unlike 'birds of a feather,' things that merely occur together don’t necessarily 'flock'. Intersubjectivity is needed and intersubjectivity requires a common element (e.g. Christ). But all things do hold together, and because they hold together, they do modify each other; and because they modify each other, they reconcile with one another - through Christ, in Christ and for Christ.

Does all this talk of ‘Christ’ make your non-believing self uncomfortable? Perhaps it would help you to know that an embryonic version of this model was outlined by the pre-Socratic philosopher, Anaxagoras, 500 years before Paul…or Jesus! He captured the essence of Paul’s model: Interactivity and solidarity require all entities to share at least one element in a common.

‘Christ’ by any name is the common element in every entity or event. Christ is the common origin and the common destiny, the Alpha and the Omega, of everything that is. But if the origin and the destiny of an event were the same then the event in question would not be an event at all; it would not be ‘a difference that makes a difference’ (Bateson, Whitehead). In fact, however, the World is a process of perpetual advance: you can’t step into the same river twice (Heraclitus).

If an event is ‘circular’, it’s time factor (t) = 0. In that case, the ‘event’ is not real (in spacetime); it’s a mathematical fiction, like a line or a plane in geometry, it’s a ‘virtual’ event. But this leaves us in a pickle: How can an event not be circular if its Alpha = its Omega?

The Christian doctrine of Incarnation provides a unique solution: Incarnation turns Being inside out. The whole becomes its own quantum element. Destiny becomes origin and origin becomes destiny, yet they remain distinct.

Bertrand Russell notwithstanding, Universe, the set of all events, is itself an event and therefore an element of itself. The origin, locus, aim, and destiny of the creative process (Christ) enters into that process…as an historical event.

This ensures that Universe is non-linear, recursive and self-modifying. Christ, begotten of the Father, not made, is progenitor of all the living but also the first born of the dead. The first born of the dead is the same, and not the same, as the progenitor of the living. Christ’s Glorified Body is the same and not the same as Jesus’ material body. The Son is and is not the same as the Father.

Christ is the overarching pattern of creation and salvation, universal and eternal (above), outside of spacetime. Jesus reflects and reiterates, fractal like, that pattern through the historical life of a single human being. The child “born of the Virgin Mary” in Bethlehem is the same, and not the same, as the man “crucified under Pontius Pilate” 33 years later, the same and not the same as the one “through whom all things were made,” the same and not the same as the one who is “seated at the right hand of the Father.” (Nicene Creed)

Every 'novel event' includes the Christ-event (Incarnation) as one of its elements, but the Christ-event is also the whole that includes all events. So every event, including the Christ-event, is part of the whole, but that whole is also a part of itself (Incarnation). The cosmos is not a circle; it’s a spiral!

***

In evaluating any model, logicians look for two things: Is it sufficient to account for the event(s) in question? Is it necessary to account for those events? Or is there some other, non-equivalent model that could account as well for the same phenomena?

So first, is Paul’s cosmology sufficient to account for the existence of a Universe like ours? We know that there is a Universe because we participate in it. Cogito, ergo est. The defining features of our World are Novelty, Intensity, and Solidarity. Does Paul adequately account for these features? Hope so, because if it ain't sufficient, "Forget about it!"

But the Holy Grail of model builders is not 'sufficiency' but 'necessity.' A model is necessary if it is the onlymodel that can account for the phenomena in question. So, what can we say about the model presented in Colossians? Can it account for Novelty, Intensity, Solidarity? Can it pass the easy test of sufficiency? And if so, can it pass the ultimate test, the test of necessity?

According to Colossians, all things were created in, through, and for Christ. Through Christ Novelty enters the world; in Christ all things hold together (Solidarity); through Christ all conflicts are reconciled as contrasts (Intensity). So, yes, Colossians passes the easy test, the test of sufficiency; but what about the hard test, the test of necessity?

Is it the case that only Paul’s model can account for a Cosmos characterized by Novelty, Intensity, and Solidarity? Of course, I can create a different model using different words but then I am just rearranging deck chairs. The real question is whether there is a model of cosmogenesis that is sufficient and does not map onto Paul’s model in Colossians.

If the answer is, "No," as I believe it is, then Paul’s model in Colossians is necessary as well as sufficient, and we have the Holy Grail of model making; we have our TOE. In that case Christ  is the answer, and the only answer, to the three isms of the Apocalypse -

Ø  Nihilism: There is no Being.

Ø  Skepticism: There is no Truth.

Ø  Solipsism: There is no Love (no Other). 

Any proposed alternative TOE must either duplicate the patterns and relationships outlined in Colossians…or it will fail to account for the Universe as we experience it. If you know of such a model, please send it my way. If not, I’ll stick with Colossians!