83 
CHRISTO LOGICAL FOUNDA nONS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT AND 
CONTEMPORARY AFRICAN CHRISTO LOGY 
Emmanuel Martey 
Abstract: In this article, the author underscores the fact that every Christological 
di scussion must begin with the New Testament foundation and evidence about Jesus the 
Christ of God. Following Reginald Fuller's trajectory of thought, the author sees the 
Christology of the New Testament Church developing the three phases upon which three 
Christo logical paradigms can be discerned. It is from these paradigms, say the author, 
tha t ' we get the fullest pattern of Christology ' and 'we are prov ided with the 
Christological foundations of the theologies of the New Testament writers'. The writer 
again points out that it was this same paradigm that the ontological statements of the 
Church Fathers followed at Nicaea and Chalcedon; and it is the same foundation that 
African theologians are following today in their search for who Jesus is and what He does 
for A fri can. Taking the title 'Son of God' as an example, the authoulI1derlines that the 
Afr ican worldview and thought-forms are shedding great lights on New Testament 
Christo logical titles and concepts. 
The foundations of the New Testament Christo logy are the 
foundations not onlyfor the New Testament theologians 
themselves and the christologicalfoundations o[ the[athers, 
they are also the foundations for Chris/ology today.' 
In trodllc.:l ion 
Prior to the Enlightenment, theologians built their portraits of Jesus of Nazareth from all 
kinds of unscientific assumptions. It was during the Age of Reason that the scientific 
methods of the historian were brought into academic Christology. Thus , from Form 
Criticism and Redaktionsgeschichte came the recognition that in the New Testament are 
not just one Christo logy but a number of christologies evolving from competing and 
conjoining christo logical traditions, each having a different point of departure and a 
different emphasis. There was another recognition-that, in the New Testament times 
there was no such thing as "the early Church" in the singular but rather, " the early 
churches" in the . plura,l , which had different backgrounds and developed different . . . 
chnstologlcal tradltlons .-
I Reginald R. Fuller, The Fuundations u/New Testament Chl'istolugy (New York: Scribner's Sons, 1965) 
p.257. 
C r. Norman Perrin . "New Beginnings in Christology: A Review Article ," Journal a/Religion, 46 
(1966), p. 491. 
84 EMMA NUEL MARTEY 
Veritabl y, the varieti es of early churches and of chri sto logical traditions pose a probl em. 
Th is problem becomes more complex if we consider the relationship that these di fferent 
churches and christo logical traditions had with the actual teachings of Jesus of Nazareth ; 
or, with what the neo-Bultmanians ca ll ed Jesus ' own implicit christologica l self-
understanding. 
Doubtl essly, thi s problem was what confro nted Reginald Full er and, in an effort 
to solve thi s, traces ou t what he ca ll s " the fo undations of New Testament Chri stology" by 
dis tinguishing three phases or strata in early Christi anity and separating the tradit ions 
according to the titles and conceptions used. As the title of his much celebrated book-
The Foundations oj New Testament Christo logy ( I 965)-suggests , Full er' s main a im is 
not to present the Chli stology or chri stologies of the New Testament writers as to lay 
bare the chri sto logical foundations of their theology3 
Surveying the tools, the terms, images, concepts and patterns "which the church 
picked up and used for cllfi stological response," Fu ller mentions " three success ive 
environments in whi ch the ea rly church was operating" fro m which these tools were 
de ri ved, namely; Palestinian Judaism; Hellenistic Judaism and Hellenistic Gentile 
ci rcles 4 Fu ller therefo re sees the Christology of the I ew Testament Church evolving in 
three phases , upon whi ch three different christological paradigms can be di scerned. 
Christ% gica/ Paradigms oJthe New Testament 
The fi rst pattern, which evolved in the matrix of Palestinian Judaism conceived a two-
foc i Chri sto logy. One focus was on Jesus ' earl y life-Hi s hi stori cal word and work. Like 
the post-Bultmannians, Fu ll er sees in "the kerygma of the earliest church," th e di stinction 
between the Proclaimer and the Proclaimed; and speaks of Jesus ' own self-
understanding in terms of the Mosaic eschatological prophet5 To Fuller, the ea rli est 
church in terpreted Jesus ' message and ministry in continui ty w ith Jesus ' self-
understand ing. 6 
The other focus was the Parousia-the expectation of Jesus ' imminent return and 
exal tation in the Son of Man to consummate and "validate His own earthly word and 
work which were still present in the church.,,7 So in this survey of the Palestinian 
paradigm, "we have Jesus understanding His ministry as that of an eschatological prophet 
and expecting its consummation at the coming of the Son of Man; the Palestinian 
kerygma identi fy ing Jesus as tbe Son of Man and interpret ing His ministry in terms of 
exoLtsia, so reaching a two-foci Cllfi stology."s 
Th e second chri sto logical pattern that Full er iden tified was that whi ch developed 
in the Hell eni sti c Jewish Church. Here, there were considerable developments that 
brought an important shi ft of emphasis concerning the Lordship of Chri st. Unlike in the 
kerygma of the earli est church, where the emphas is was placed on Christ ' s future 
Fu ller, The Foundations or NeII' Teslament Chris lO /ogy, pp. 16f. 
4 Ibid . p. 16 
Ib id. p. 130 
See ibid. pp . 11 4f. (For example, Jesus call ing God Abba) ; cf. Oscar Cullmann, The Christu/ogy ojthe 
New Testament (Philadelph ia: Westminster Press/SCM Press, 1959), pp. 275 ff. 
7 Ibid. p. 243 
8 Norman Perrin , 'New Beginnings in Chri stology' p. 493. In thi s strarulll , Full er points out that Ihe title 
'Son of God' is used in connection with the Pal'Olis ia. See ibid. pp . 187, 164-1 67 . 
CHRISTOLOGICAL FOUNDATIONS 85 
Lordship at the Parousia, in the Hellenistic Jewish Church, the stress was more on 
Christ's present Lordship as He reigned in Heaven. Christ's exaltation is thus moved 
back from the Parousia to the Resurrection.9 Epitomizing the Hellenistic Jewish mission 
that also brings out the new emphasis, Fuller writes: 
Its achievement was to transform the earliest Palestinian Kerygma, with its two foci of 
Jesus ' historical ministry of exousia and the parousia as its vindication, into a 
proclamation orientated chiefly upon the present work of the Exalted One. To this 
present, exalted work the historical ministry was a preliminary stage and the parousia the 
expected consummation. 10 
The central title for the Exalted One in this stratum becomes Kurios (Lord). This stratum 
achieves "an adoptionist Christology in which Jesus exercises Divine Sonship at His 
exaltation after His resurrection ."II However, the christo logical emphasis here is, like in 
the Palestinian Judaism, still "functional" with the stress on what Jesus does rather than 
on what He is. Thus, in these two phases, the ontic question of the divinity of the Exalted 
Lord has not yet been raised. 12 
The third christo logical pattern was that which evolved from Hellenistic Gentile 
environment. The christological thought of this phase came not from the Genti Ie converts 
but from the adoption of certain features of the more syncretistic types of Hellenistic 
Judaism in the Diaspora. With the help of these features, "it produced a threefold 
christo logical pattern of pre-existence, incarnation and exaltation to replace the twofold 
pattern of earthly life-exaltation.','3 In this pattern, the parousia was frequently discarded 
and where it survived, it did so only as an appendage. Most controversial of all were the 
acceptance of the "divine man" epiphany Christo logy and the consequent evolution of "a 
full-blown doctrine of incarnation ... The redeemer was a divine being who became 
incarnate, manifested the Deity in His flesh, and was subsequently exalted to heaven.,,14 
Thus the Hellenistic Gentile mission evolved an incarnational Christo logy i,n 
which Christ was always a divine being. ls The incarnation of this three-stage 
9 See Wayne A. Meek's review article 'New Testament Christo logy Evolving,' Interpretation 21 (1967), 
p. 189; cf. Perrin, "New Beginnings in Christology" p. 493. 
10 Fuller, The Foundations of New Testament Chris/ology, p. 197. 
II Perrin, "New Beginnings in Christology," p. 493. 
12 Fuller, The Foundations o/New Tes/ament Christo logy, p. 197. This second pattern therefore has two 
stage Christology of earthly life and exaltation. To Fuller, in this phase, the' Son of God ' title is transferred 
to the exaltation instead of the Parousia in the early Palestinian Christianity. Secondly, in Hellenistic 
Jewish Christianity , there was a far-reaching christological development of' Son of God' in application to 
the earthly work of Christ. Fuller explains further that this stratum did not only combine "the early 
Palestinian Mosaic Servant-Prophet Christology with the eschatological Son of God Christo logy of Psalm 
27" but, it also enriched "that combination charismatic elements drawn from the Hellenistic Jewish OT 
divine man." (p. 196). 
I) Ibid. p. 232. 
14 Ibid. p. 232. 
15 We should therefore understand why in the early Church's efforts to solve the christological problem-
how to hold both the divine and human natures together in one person, Jesus Christ-it was easier for 
Docetism that emerged among Hellenistic Christians to emphasize the divinity of Jesus to the elimination 
of His hnmanity. On the other hand, Ebionism that emerged among Jewish Christians also rejected the 
divinity of Jesus and stressed on Hi s humanity. Both christologies were condemned by the Church and 
were declared heretic. 
86 EMMANUEL MARTEY 
christo logical pattern is initially conceived as a kenosis, and later as epiphany. To Fuller, 
this pattern of the Gentile mission-pre-existence, agency of creation, descent in the 
incarnation , incarnate life as epiphany, atoning death, resurrection and exaltation, victory 
over the powers, continued reign in heaven until the parousia, final consummation at the 
parousia-represent the fullest pattern of Christology.1 6 
It is this pattern, Fuller holds , which provided the christological foundations of the 
theology of the New Testament writers . He further suggests that in this pattern, there is a 
movement from a purely jimctiona/ application of titles to Jesus to ontic affirmation 
about Him, and sees the justification in the nlrther development of ontological statement 
in Chalcedon. In his own words : 
This pattem completes the foundations of New Testament Christo logy. The 
theologians of the New Testament (Paul and the Pauline School, the Evangelists , and 
other sub-apostolic New Testament writings) , all erect their theological superstmctures 
upon the foundations, not indeed invariably upon the nlll pattern, but always upon part of 
it. It is this pattern which lies behind the process of christo logical formulation which 
culminates at Chalcedon . . . . 17 
Furthermore, Fuller argues that, of the three pattems, the earliest Palestinian and 
Hellenistic Judaism emphasize more on functional Christology while the Gentile Mission 
stresses ontological Christo logy-thus disagreeing with Oscar Cullmann who holds that 
New Testament Christology is purely fuctional. 18 To Fuller, it was the ontic language of 
the third pattern that patristic Christology followed . 
Therefore , in their attempt to preserve and proclaim the gospel in their world, 
Chalcedoni an and Nicene Fathers used ontological language that was intelligible then in 
the Graeco-Roman world. This ontological language was derived from Greek 
metaphysics with which the Fathers were able to explain New Testament terms and 
concepts such as "Pre-existence of Christ" (as 'begotten of the Father' or 'homoousios 
with Him') ; and the "Incarnate Christ" (as ' One person in two natures') etc. 
For Reginald Fuller, Christology today must not merely concentrate on the earthly 
life and work of Jesus but must as well reflect the different phases of the New Testament 
paradigms. For example, the Nicene Creed and the Chalcedonian formula were attempts 
of the Church Fathers to proclaim the gospel into their own situation: For " [t]he 
Definition of Chalcedon was the only way in which the fifth-century fathers, in their day, 
and their conceptual apparatus, could have faithfully credalized the New Testament 
witness to Christ" and Fuller therefore calls on the Church " to proclaim the gospel into 
the contemporary situation.,,1 9 Thus while he disagrees with H. W . Montefiore's 
statement that "any attempt to formulate a Christo logy will properly start with the 
Chalcedonian definition," he stresses that "such an attempt must surely start where the 
fathers started, namely; with the New Testament witness ofChrist.,,20 
Fuller 's project has not escaped critic isms. A limitation in his work is that he presents the 
development of New Testament Christology among the different circles and traditions 
1(, Ibid. p. 246. 
17 Ibid. p. 246 . 
18 Ibid. p. 247 : cf. O sca r Cullmann, The Christn/ogv lIthe New Testament, pp. 3f. 
19 Ibid . p. 250 . 
,0 Ibid . p. 250 . 
CHRISTOLOGICAL FOUNDATIONS 87 
sequentially, as if they are successive in time or no parallel development was possible. 
This gives the wrong impression that early Christology was as logical, simple and 
understandable as Fuller presents it. As one critic has pointed out, "Paul who represents 
the Gentile Mission, gives us letters beginning about twenty years after Jesus' death; his 
earliest letters show a highly developed Christo logy, which he has had for years." He 
then concludes; "it is difficult to trace a step-by-step development in the church's 
Christo logy, particularly since the Hellenistic outlook already appears in the early 
Jerusalem Church.,,21 
There is no doubt that there were "stages" in the shaping of early Christian belief, 
but not all were in the same stream. There might have been different traditions and 
environments whose developments were parallel, not sequential, from the very earliest 
time, and "the interactions among these circles, at various stages, will have further 
complicated the picture.,,22 
The New Testament Foundations and African Theologians 
The New Testament writings are the sources that report on Jesus of Nazareth. The 
existential locus of these writings of the Jesus tradition in the New Testament is the 
Church. The gospels are the witnesses of the early Church about the man called Jesus; 
and although they contain historical evidence, they are not in the modern sense, historical 
records, but rather, testimonies of faith. 
These testimonies provided for us by the New Testament writers are 
"christo logical credo" of the early Church. Walter Kasper therefore states more 
succinctly what is only implied in Reginald Fuller's entire project, namely; Jesus of 
Nazareth "is accessible for us only by way of the faith of the first Christian churches,,23 
and that "the staI1ing-point of Christo logy is the phenomenology of faith in Christ; faith 
as it is actually believed, lived, proclaimed and practiced in the Christian churches.,,24 
African Christology, like any other alternative Christo logy, regards the New 
Testament and the whole of Scripture as indispensable not merely because it talks about 
the truth of Christianity or, bears witness to the earliest expression of the Christian faith, 
but more importantly because, the primary source of our knowledge of the history of the 
life and death, the teachings and miracles, the pre-existence and exaltation of Jesus the 
Christ, which figured prominently in the triumph of the Christian movement has come to 
us from the evidence that the New Testament writers have given us about this Jesus 2S 
The New Testament is the earliest witness about the man Jesus that is available to 
us. James Dunn argues his point very deftly when he asserts that Christo logy is "the most 
obvious and pressing test case" for the dialogue which New Testament theology provides 
and, for every New Testament writer, Jesus Christ clearly stands at the center of faith and 
thought. It is the faith focused on Jesus that from the outset has provided the main reason 
,I See Floyd V. Filson's review article on Fuller's book in Theology T(){lay , vol. 23 July, 1966, p. 316. 
,~ Meeks , "New Testament Christo logy Evolving," p. 192. However, it must be pointed out that. some 
would argue that this should not be regarded as Fuller's weakness at all. If anything, he should rather be 
commended for making a very complicated subject, such as this, accessible to a wide audience. 
23 Walter Kasper, Jesus the Chrisl (LondonlNew York: Burns & Oates/Paulist Press, 1977) p. 26. 
24 Ibid. p. 28 . 
2S Jaroslav Pelikan, Jesus Through the Centuries: His Place in the HistolY o/Cli/lUre (New Haven/London: 
Yale University Press, 1985), p. 186. 
88 EMJ\lfA NUEL MARTEY 
and inspiration for the distinctiveness of Christianity.26 It is because the New Testament 
is the witness of the earliest experience of Jesus that it is a valuable witness to listen to 
and a document to study meticulously. 
It is to this end that African theologians and the New Testament writers must be 
partners in constant dialogue if we are to tell who Jesus is for Africa today. Differently 
put, to be able to tell who Jesus Christ is for African people in contemporary soc iety, 
theologians on the African continent are to be continuing partners in dialogue with the 
New Testament christological paradigms . 
In their attempt to solve the christological problem or, demonstrate how unique 
Jesus of Nazareth was, the New Testament writers provide many titles or concep tual too ls 
familiar to them. These titles are ascribed to Jesus in order to "ex press who He is and in 
what His work consists .,,27 He is called "Christ," "Son of God," "Lord," "Prophet," 
"Sav iour," "Servant of the Lord," "Son of Man" and so forth. Evidently, not one of these 
titles is adequate to indicate who Jesus of Nazareth is or, to explain the " infinite fullness" 
disclosed in Jesus . Each of these titles presents a particular dimension of the 
chri sto logica l problem or rather, of the christological solution.28 
Following the pattem of the New Testament, African theologians have also used 
titles as well as other African concepts to respond to the christological question and by so 
doing, they have tried to show not only what Jesus does for the African, but al so, to 
exp li cate who He is and why uniqueness is to be ascribed or attributed to Him. But 
perhaps the best instruction that African theologians draw from the New Testament 
chri sto logical paradigms is the " fluidity of Christo logy" that the New Testament teaches. 
There is no single way to respond to the christo logical question and therefore Africans 
can also evolve their own Christo logy or christologies. 
To the African, Christ could make sense in the various cultures of Africa only to 
the extent that Africans use African idiom and therefore, most of the titles and concepts 
used in African Christology are deeply rooted in African worldview and thought-forms. 
The term Chris/ (Chris/os in the Greek and its Hebrew equivalent Messiah) from which 
"Christology" is derived is only a title just like Son of God or Lord. Like all other titl es 
used by the New Testament writers , Christos is a human categorization by which one 
particular culture-be it Jewish or Hellenistic Jewish or Hellenistic Genti le tried to 
capture the ineffable mystery of salvation communicated in the person and teaching of 
Jesus.29 
26 James D. G. Dunn and James P. Mackey, New Testament Theology in Dialogue: Christology and 
Minisoy (Ph iladelphia: Westminster Press, 1987), p. 54. 
27 Cullmann, The Christo logy oJthe New Testament, p. 6. 
28 Whereas Fuller discusses the New Testament christological titles from the viewpoint of the three strata 
he discovered in the New Testament foundations namely: Earliest Palestinian, Hellenistic Jewish , and 
Gentile Mission ; for Cull mann , the christological designations of the ew Testament fa ll into a phase of 
the Heilsgesch ichte and speaks of four functions of Christ in His pre-existence (e.g. Logos, Son of God); 
His earthly work (Prophet, High Priest, Suffering Servant of God); His present work (Lord, Saviour) and 
His future or eschatological work (Messiah, Son of Man). See Fuller, The Foundations oJNew Testamel1l 
Christology, pp.243-249; cf. Cullmann. Thl! Christology oJthl! New Testament, pp . 13ff. ; 109ff; 193ff. ; 
247ff. Cull mann however, points out that these christological tit les are related not only to one of the four 
different functions of Jesus Christ but two or more of them. 
,9 Cf. Aloys ius Pieris, 'Speaking of the Son of God in Non-Christian Cultures, e.g. in Asia' in E. 
Schillebeeckx & J-B Metz (eds), COllciliulI1-Jesus Son of God? (Edinburgh/New York: T&T 
Clark/Seabury Press, 1982), p.62. 
CHRlSTOLOGICAL FOUNDATIO S 89 
Therefore, in their attempts to retell Jesus ' story, African theologians a lso use 
African idioms to communicate Jesus' unique identity-idioms which come from African 
thought-forms. African theologians, following the foundations laid in the New 
Testament, educe their christologies from the depths of Africa's own cultural, religious 
and political experience. After all, does the notion of foundation not suggest or 
presuppose an uncompleted erecting structure? Thus the " foundations of New Testament 
Christo logy" are but partial insights into the mystery of the Incarnation. They are indeed 
' foundations' to be built on. This is what African theologians are trying to do . In this 
endeavour, they have accepted as ' relevant' those New Testament titles (or foundations) 
which fit into African thought-forms and religio-cultural experience. Those that have no 
parallels in African history, tradition , and experience are regarded as " irrelevant" and are 
given little or no christological significance.3D 
Besides, new titles and concepts that are purely and authentically African and are 
not found in the New Testament have been brought into Christology. Included in such 
titles and concepts that have been given christological importance by African theologians 
are ; Ancestor,31 Brother,32 Woman,33 and others. For our purpose, we select just one of 
the " rel evant" New Testament titles namely, Son of God and show how the African 
worldview and thought-form can illuminate the New Testament paradigm and provide 
aid to understanding Jesus as the "Son of God." 
'Son of God ' in African Theological Reflection 
The African worldview is replete with myths and, as such, much of African Christianity 
is mythical and much of the African Christo logical images also come througb· 
mythology3 4 For this reason, the African Christian finds no difficulty in understanding 
30 See John Mbiti , 'Some African concepts of Christo logy ' in Georg F. Vicedom (ed) Christ and the Young 
Churches (London: SPCK, 1972) especially pages 58ff. Included in the "relevant" titles and concepts that 
Mbiti mentions are: Son of God, Lord, Saviour, Redeemer, Servant of the Lord, Mediator Christus Victor, 
Sacrifice and Liberator. The ' irrelevant ' titles he mentions include: Son of David, Son of Man and Messiah. 
However, there are some African theologians who would disagree that the title Messiah is irrelevant since 
in Africa Jesus is also referred to as the ' Black Messiah' or its equivalent the 'Black Christ.' See for 
instance, Emilio J.M. de Carvalho, 'What Do the Africans Say That Jesus Christ is?', African Theological 
Journal, 10 ( 1982), pp. 18-22; cf. Allan Boesak, Farewell 10 Innocence: A Socio-Ethical Study of Black 
Theo logy and Power (Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books , 1976) and his Black and Reformed (Maryknoll , 
New York: Orbis Books, 1984) etc. 
31 John S. Pobee, Toward An African Theology (Nashville: Abingdon, 1979); E. Milingo, The World in 
Between (Maryknoll , New York: Orbis Books, 1984); de Calvaiho, 'What Do the Africans Say That Jesus 
Christ is?' pp. 22ff. , G.H. Muzorewa, The Origins and Development ofA fric'an Theology (Maryknoll , New 
York: Orbis Books , 1985); John Kurewa, 'Who Do You Say That I am?', Voices from the Third World, 
VIII , (1985) , pp. 14f.; Emmanuel Martey, African Theology: IncLilturation and Liberation (Maryknoll, 
New York: Orbis Books, 1993) pp. 84-86. . 
l2 Kurewa, Who Do You Say That I am?, pp . 10f.; de Carvalho, 'What Do the Africans Say That Jesus 
Christ Is? ' p. 17, etc. 
3J Elizabeth Amoah and Mercy Oduyoye, 'The Christ For African Women' in Virginia Fabella and Mercy 
Oduyoye (eds), With Passion and Compassion: Third World Women Doing Theology. (Maryknoll, New 
York: Orbis Books, 1988), p. 44; Emmanuel Marley, African Theology, pp. 82-84. 
3. Cf. Kofi Appiah-Kubi , 'Jesus Christ-Some Christo logical Aspects From African Perspectives ' in John 
Mbiti (ed), A/rican and Asian ContribUliol1s to ContemporQ/Y Theology (Geneva: WCC, 1977) p. 55; also 
Kofi Appiah-Kubi , 'Who Do You Africans Say I (Jesus) am?' Voices From The Third World, XI (1988), p. 
85 . 
90 EMMANUEL MARTEY 
and accepting similar mythological concepts used in the New Testament to explicate the 
mystery of God's salvific act communicated in the person of Jesus. A typical example is 
the concept of Parthenogenesis (or the Virgin Birth) as there are African myths that also 
talk about women having children without male involvement; as it is among the Bare of 
Southern Sudan. The same is equally true with the concept of " Son of God." 
In African mythology , many references are made to God-who in many societies 
is androgynous and not exclusively male35- as having a son or sons . Sometimes also the 
expression "children" is used in certain societies. For example, the Bemba of Zambia call 
the founder of their nation "the son of God"; and the Dogan of Burkina Faso also refer to 
an aspect of God called Nammo which is defined as "the son of God" who is "the 
appointed model of creation" and the "symbol of the ordered world. ,,36 In Nlier 
mythology, both the Nuer and Dinka of Sudan were "sons of God.,,37 Among the Ganda 
of Uganda, there is a saying that, in the beginning, there was only God and God 's two 
sons. 
In his article in French entitled; "Approches Chritologiques en Afrique," 
("Christo logi cal Approaches in Africa") Paul Stadler shows how several African peoples 
have a tradition of a "Father-Son" relation within God such as among the Ndebele and the 
Shana of Zimbabwe, the Shilluk of Sudan, and the Dogan of Upper-Volta (now Burkina 
Faso). In his own words; 
Plusieurs peuples africains , par exemple, les Ndebele et les Shona du Zimbabwe, les 
Shilluk du Soudan, les Dogon de la Haute-Volta connaissent une relation Pere-Fils it 
38 
I' interiellr de Dietl. La mythologie africaine offer bien d ' alltres exemples de ce genre
Among the Ndebele and Shona , God is perceived in trinitarian tel111s as Father, Mother 
and Son.39 The son of God concept is also present in African thought-forms for divine 
beings or spirits surrounding God or in the world. To the Balese of Congo for instance, 
God is surrounded by two spirits namely-Mutshemi and Fond. One of these is God's 
son and knows all the thoughts of God and decides for the good or ill of human beings in 
the world. The other spirit, the spirit of evil , is responsible for evi l in the world 40 Among 
35 For example, among my own Ga people of Ghana, God (Nyonmo) is either referred to as Alaa Nyonmo 
(meaning Grandfather/Father God) or Naa Nyonmo (meaning Grandmother/Mother God). God is also 
referred to as Atuu-Naa Nyonmo (Grandfather-Grandmother or Father-Mother God). For more on this, see, 
Rose Teteki Abbey, 'Rediscovering Ataa Naa Nyonmo--The Father Mother God ' in Talitha Cum! 
Theologies o/Aji-ic:an Women edited by Nyambura 1. Njoroge and Musa W. Dube (Pietennaritzburg: 
Cluster Publications, 2001), pp. 140-157. 
)(, See Mbiti, 'Some AfTican Concepts of C.hristology' in Viced0111, Christ and the Young Churches , pp. 
58f; cf. John Mbiti, Concepts o/God in Ajdca (London: SPCK, 1970), p. 115. Another writer has shown 
how Dogon Creation Myth begins with 'the egg of the world ' which is divided into twin placenta, each of 
wh ich contains a 'pair of twin Nommo, direct emanations and sons.' Sally Folk Moore, 'Descent and 
Symbolic Filiation' in John Middleton (ed), Myth and Cosmos: Readings in Mythology and Symbolism 
(New York : NaMal History Press, 1967), p. 70. 
37 Mbiti, Concept.l· (!lGod in AjNca, p. 99; cf. p. 116: 
.1~ Paul Stadler. 'Approches Christologiques en Afrique,' Bulletin de Theologie A/i-ic:aine, V, (19R3), p. 43 . 
)9 H. Kuper, A.J .B. Hughes and J. van Velsell. The Shon£l lind Ndelebe o(Sowhern Rhodesia 
(London: 1954), p. 105; cr. W.J . Van der Merwe, The Shona Idea o/God (Fort Victoria, 1957), p. 12 , cited 
in Mbiti. Concepts oj'God ill Afr'ica, p. 115; see also Mbiti, "Some African Concepts of Christo logy", p. 58. 
40 H. van Geluwe, Le.l' Mamvu-Mangutll et Bale.l'e-Mvuha (Tervuren, 1957), p. 166. Cited in Mbiti , 
COllcepts o/God in Aji'ica, pp. 54 & 83. 
CHRISTOLOGICAL FOUNDATIONS 91 
the Ga peopl e of Ghana, the di vine beings ca lled j emawoji are refen'ed to as "sons of 
God." Modupe Oduyoye quotes Joshua Kudadjie in reference to this and writes: 
The sons and daughters of Naa Nyol/lJlo [God] are asjemawoji "the gods of the world." 
They are powerful and intelligent bei ngs that wa lk about the world but th ey have their 
abodes in the sea, lagoons, mounta ins and other natural objects. Having been delegated 
by Naa Nyonmo to be his [sic!] vice-regents, they are in active contact with the world of 
nanlre in [humans] .41 
In hi s attempt to answer who the ben-ey ha- 'eloh-iym are, in hi s interpretation of Genesis 
6. Modupc Od uyoye has cogcntly argucd that this "refers to the samc di vine bei ngs 
whom the Ga of Ghana know as jemawoji [and] whom the Akan of Ghana know as 
abosol11 [abosom ye Onyame mew, · the abosom are the children of Onyame (God)']. ,,-12 
The concept of divine sonship is also given to African traditional figures. First, it 
is given to African chiefs or Icings. For instance, the Shilluk of Sudan hold their kingship 
to be divine and refer to him as " the first- born of God.',43 Second, African religious or 
national heroes are also given tbe title of divine sonship. The Sonja of Tanzania "believe 
that their national and religious hero simply appeared without mother or fat her, that he 
died. rose aga in, ascended to God (or the Sun) and is now identified with God. ,,4-1 Finall y. 
di vine sonship is given to people in general so that the Bemba, "who think of God as the 
universa l 'Father' call themselves ' the sons of God '-a titl e which one hears [them] 
ca lling cach other.',45 As noted above, the Nller and Dillka also ca ll themselves "sons of 
God." To the Akon of Ghana, men and women are all God's children because God 
created them.46 . • 
What does a ll this mean for Chri sto logy? There are signifi cant const ituents in the 
usage of the tit le ' Son of God' by Africans that can illuminate our understanding of Jesus. 
Firstly. si ncc several African soc ieties have a tradition of "Father-Son" (or Parent-Child) 
relation within God, the African worldview has prepared the Christian for this ti tle given 
to Jesus. The A fr ican understanding of the concept does not merely show who the son 0 r-
God is but also the fu nctions he perfonn s in the society. Perhaps, of a ll the ch ri sto logica l 
paradigms that are found in the New Testament, the Son of God Christ%g)i is the one 
that can best be understood in the Afri can contex t to portray who Jesus is and what He 
does for us. The titl e is used in Africa not only fo r di vine beings, but also, for human 
beings . Thus it is an ab iding concept that affi rms the divinity and hllmanity of Jesus. The 
African concep t of Son of God also answers th e uni ty as well as the distinction \vith in the 
Godhead . 
• 1 See Modupe Oduyoye. The Sons of the God, and the Dallghters o/Men: An Afro-Asiatic IntellJretatioll 
a/Genesis /-1/ (Marykno ll . New York: Orbis Books, 1984) p. 30 . 
• ~ Ib id. p. 31 . 
•.'  Mbit i. 'Some Ati' ican Co ncepts ofChri slO logy.' p. 58: a lso. hi s COllcepts o/God ill A/i'ica, pp . 93fcf. 
pp . I 16 "nd 218f. 
"" Mbi ti . 'Some A frican Concep ts of Christo logy, ' p. 59: cf Modupe Ocluyoyc, The SOliS a/ the Gael\' alld 
the Daughters a/Men, p. 24 where referring to the strength and fame ofS haka, the King of the Zu lu he 
writes: 'The theory (the myth) of the sons of the gods and the daugh ters of men was offered as an 
explanation lo r the superna tural- the. extraordinary-military performance of famous warriors of o ld . 
45 Mbiti. Concepts a/God in Aji·ica. p. 93. 
92 EMMANUEL MARTEY 
Secondly, the New Testament testifies to the filial obedience and submission of 
Jesus to God whom He calls Abba (John 4:34; 8:29; 14:28, 31). This "son's obedience" 
as related in the New Testament resonates with African traditional custom where parental 
authority and filial obedience are still esteemed.47 
The Son Sets Free 
Africans refer to people or human beings as sons of God. Therefore what 'son of God' 
means for the African must start from and remain related to sons and daughters who are 
free men and women; and this is to be distinguished from being slaves and prisoners. It is 
a view that stands against all enslaving structures or structures of oppression in Africa. 
On the basis of this sonship which the African Christian shares with Christ and 
other believers-whether male or female, black or white, rich or poor-there is no longer 
distinction between Jew and Gentile (race), slave and free (class) or male and female 
(sex); for we "are all one in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:28). Sonship with the Son is 
freedom in Christ-freedom from racism, c/assism and sexism, and all that tend to 
dehumanize the sons and daughters of God. 
If this freedom in Christ includes the social sphere-which we hold it does-then, 
the African is unwilling to limit the existence of the new humanity and the new liberated 
life in the eternal Son of God to an internal religious dimension in contemporary society. 
In Africa today, the concept of 'son of God' is as politically pertinent as it is religiously 
relevant. To the African Christian, the divine sonship of Christ also affirms that he or she 
is the child of God. As the Apostle Paul writes: 'And because you are children, God has 
sent the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, "Abba 1 Father'" So you are no longer a 
slave but a child, and if a child then also a heir, through God.' (Galatians 4:6-7, NRSV) 
Jesus' Sonship erupts into the world of social structures and critically breaks 
through the oppressive status quo, thus inaugurating a new social order. For us Africans 
therefore, Jesus, as the Son of God means He is our "soteriological prototype"; and the 
title does not just mean an isolated dogmatic statement about the man called Jesus, as if 
the christological inquiry could be detached from contemporary context of the experience 
48 
of salvation in practical terms.
The title 'son of God' cannot be separated from the existing religious, cultural, 
social and political situation of the African continent. It is thus not irrelevant in Africa 
today to use the title 'Son of God' Christol ogically; for, it has for us both religio-cultural 
and socio-po Iit i cal relevance. 
By affinning and declaring Jesus as the Son of God, Africans do not merely 
declare Jesus to be one of us; we as well declare parenthood to be a divine attribute. The 
African at the same time also expresses from the conviction that is derived from his or 
her reflection on the fate of Jesus that, the African faith in Jesus' Resurrection gives us 
the glorious hope for the resurrection of all humankind in the face of suffering and death. 
Divine love transcends destruction in mortality and human existence-the African 
existence-will surely attain fulfillment and true identity in belonging to God. 
47 
Cf. Paul Stadler, 'Christo logical Approaches in Africa,' Theological Digest, 31 ( 1984), p. 221. 
48 Cf Dietrich Wiederkehr," 'Son of God' and 'Sons of God': The Social Relevance of the Christological 
TitlP" in c;.:,. hillPhPPf'lrv -:onrl �lfpf7 r,.,,,,.,;f;.,-� '······- <"'--· _;·,,-,
_ l'l .. .... I"\ 
CHRISTOLOGICAL FOUNDATIONS 93 
In African theology therefore, the christological title Son of God has also a great 
anthropological significance. For instance, speaki ng on African Anthropology, Engelbert 
Mveng has pointed out how human responsibility before God is primarily a responsibility 
toward self, fellow humans and the entire cosmos. Such an anthropological conception, 
Mveng emphasizes, has a tremendous significance for "any theological expressIOn of 
faith," especially Christo logy. For Engelbert Mveng, Christo logy means 
An attempt to express the mystery of Christ in terms of the anthropology that is part of 
the theologian's own tradition. Judeo-Hellenistic tradition, for example, describes the 
mystery of the incamation in terms of the mystery of the Word-made-jlesh. The 
vocabu lary used stems from that tradition. African traditi on prefe rs to ta lk about the 
mystery of the Son of God becoming the Son of Man. It is a mystery of "humanization" or 
"humanification," if you wil1.49 
Mveng further underscores the fact that since real human beings are a network of 
interpersonal and cosmic relationships , the incarnation enables Christ to assume all of 
humanity and cosmos . Christ therefore realizes "a new creation that conta ins a new 
humanity, a new heaven, and a new earth . That is why a sacrament is the cosmic 
mani festat ion of the incarnation." For it is the Son of God "turned into water of Baptism, 
the bread and wine of the Eucharist, the anointing of the consecrates and the word, 
gestures, and rites that sanctify."so It is this Son of God who became the Son of Man that 
African theology identifies as the One who will liberate Africa from every form of 
oppression , dehumanization or anthopological poverty . 
Conclusion 
New Testament Chri sto logical inquiries have bequeathed us with Christo logica l fluidity . 
The New Testament times did not only present us with plurality of churches but also 
plurality of Christo logical paradigms. From these different paradigms--coming from 
di fferent ecclesial and cultural backgrounds-we get the full est pattern of Christology as 
we are provided with the Christological foundations of the theologies of the New 
Testament writers. These writers, coming from the various ecclesial and cultural 
environments, attempted to present and to proclaim the salvation message of Jesus the 
Christ in the clearest and most coherent language available that would make sense and be 
in telligib le in their respecti ve ecc.les io-cultural setti ngs . 
The Christo logical foundations of these Biblical writers ascribe titles to Jesus 
expressing who He was and what He .did; thus affirming not just jimctional Christo logy 
but also ontological Christology. All subsequent Christological discussions are to follow 
these biblical patterns. For example, the ontic affirmation about Jesus by these New 
Testament theologians was the pattern followed by the ontological statements of the early 
Fathers in both Nicaea and Chalcedon . 
Today, in their efforts to tell who Jesus is and what He does among the ir own 
impoveri shed and denigrated people, African Chri sti ans have also become continuing 
49 Engelbert Mveng, ' Slack African Art as Cosmic Liturgy and Religious Language' in Kofi Appiah-Kubi 
and Sergio Torres (eds), African Theology En Route (Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 1979), p. 140. 
50 Ibid . . 140. 
94 EMMANUEL MARTEY 
partners in di alogue with these New Testament Christological paradigms . Following the 
foundations laid by New Testament theologians, African Christian theologians are ' 
educing their Christologies from the riches of African soil and religio-cultural experience. 
These African Christologies, deeply rooted in African worldview and thought-fomls, are 
illuminating New Testament Christological titles and concepts rendering better 
understanding. For instance, taking the title 'Son of God' which also describes the Pre-
existence function of Christ, we have demonstrated how several African societies have 
traditions of "Father-Son" (or "Parent-Child") relations within God (the Supreme Being) , 
The African worldview has therefore prepared the African Christian for better 
understanding of the ' Son of God Christology.' Thus, for the African , the title Son o/ God 
ascribed to Jesus is not just a strange and abstract theological theorem; neither is it a 
sheer empty biblical axiom nor a theological chorus to be repeated over and over again . It 
is, rather, an existential reality with a strong soteriological motif. The African' 
Christo logical inquiry-following the foundation laid by the New Testament-is then not 
detached from our contemporary existential quest for salvation and liberation from every 
structure of oppression that promotes anthropological poverty, disease, death and decay.