Developing a Biblical Sophia Christology
I. Introduction and Purpose
Evidence of the association between
Jesus Christ and the Jewish concept of “Divine Wisdom” or “Sophia” (sofia) can be found in the earliest traditions of
the Christian Church in the Gospels and Pauline epistles. However, each Gospel tradition reveals a
slightly different perspective and relationship between Jesus and Divine
Wisdom. Given the varying perspectives
on the relationship between Jesus and Wisdom as presented in the Gospels,
Christians must ask whether Jesus is to be primarily understood as a prominent
prophet of Sophia, an incarnation of Sophia, or as Sophia Incarnate and apply
the theological implications that arise from such conclusions accordingly. In this essay I will briefly examine five
texts from Matthew and Luke and demonstrate that Luke/Q portray Jesus as a
prophet of Wisdom, while Matthew portrays Jesus as incarnating Wisdom in a
direct and powerful way, and, in light of these texts, I will examine two in
adequate approaches to Sophia-Christology in order to develop a third, more
balanced Biblical Sophia-Christology for the Church today. II. Background to
the Wisdom Tradition Roots of the Wisdom tradition can be found in post-exilic Jewish
circles, in apocalyptic literature, and in the writings of Qumran.[1]
Wisdom writings can be
observed in both protocanonical texts such as Proverbs and Job, and in
deuterocanonical texts including Sirach, Esdras, and the Wisdom of
Solomon. In these Jewish texts, Divine
Wisdom is personified as a female figure that is sometimes referred to as “Lady
Wisdom.” Lady Wisdom is portrayed as a
teacher, bride, sister, savior, mother, and beloved, who actively invites men
to accept her. Philo referred to Sophia
as “the daughter of God” and many scholars believe that Sophia was deliberately
contrasted with the pagan goddess Isis, while at the same time taking on many
of the characteristics attributed of Isis.[2] It is has been pointed out that Sophia was
meant to be a poetic reference to the Law/Torah of God, rather then a real or
separate person within the Jewish tradition.
However, in early Christian tradition, Sophia was often extended and
understood to refer to Jesus Christ himself. According to RH Fuller, “the evidence suggests that it was on
Hellenistic Jewish soil that the concept of wisdom was first exploited for
christological use.”[3] Historically, the Wisdom/Sophia
tradition moved into two differing directions within early Christianity. One stream was that of the Gnostic tradition
and the other was that espoused by St. Paul and the Gospel writers, which led
to the theology of the early Church Fathers.
Among the Gospel authors however, there are some differences in use and
frequency of the term “Sophia.” R.
Brown points out, “personified wisdom language appears in the Synoptic
tradition on a few occasions, but there is nothing to match the massive number
of echoes in John” (210). The Johannine
tradition of the “Logos,” which was used as an equivalent term to “Sophia” by
John, is more prevalent in John’s Gospel than in the Synoptic traditions. The early Christian Church seems to have embraced the Wisdom Tradition
as relating to Jesus in a way that is nearly lost today. The early Church accepted as canonical and
authoritative Wisdom texts such as Sirach and the Wisdom of Solomon (as Roman
Catholics still do) and viewed many of those texts as referring to Jesus
directly. In particular, the Byzantine
Church seems to have upheld the Wisdom Tradition in equating Christ with Sophia
more explicitly then many of the Western Churches. An example of this can be seen in the famous and beautiful “Hagia
Sophia” (Holy Wisdom) Church in Istanbul, Turkey that is dedicated to Jesus
Christ. III. The Wisdom Tradition in 20th and
21st Century Feminism
Surprisingly, Feminist scholars
have had rather mixed reactions to incorporating Sophia Christology into their
theology. Some feel that the Wisdom Tradition,
in its Jewish roots, was primarily written for elite men of Jewish society and
does not accurately incorporate Feminist ideals. Others believe that Sophia Christology has many benefits for
Feminist Christianity in portraying a more approachable and feminine view of
God and Jesus Christ. Theologian E.S.
Fiorenza explains: Feminist theology must rearticulate the symbols, images, and names of Divine Sophia in the context of our own experiences and theological struggles in such a way that the ossified and absolutized
masculine language about G*d and Christ is radically questioned and undermined
and the Western cultural sex/gender system is
radically deconstructed (162). Therefore,
according to many Feminists, developing a Sophia-Christology is dependent upon
the ability to define and use Sophia on their own terms. Of primary import to the question
about the Wisdom Tradition and Sophia-Christology, and part of what I want to
address in this paper, is the question of just how far we can or even should
take the connection between Wisdom/Sophia and Jesus Christ given the canonical
Gospel accounts. If Jesus and Sophia
are closely related theologically, what does this imply about the person of
Jesus? One possible radical Feminist
response to this question can be observed in the Sophia-Christ icon by Robert
Lentz on the cover of this essay. In
this icon the iconographer demonstrates the Feminist view that Jesus is Sophia
in a very literal way, e.g. the two are one and the same. I will examine and respond to this approach
in my conclusion and then suggest a Biblical Sophia-Christology for the Church
today. IV. Wisdom’s
Oracle of Doom Luke 11:49-51: Therefore,
also the wisdom of God said, ‘I will send them prophets and apostles, some of
whom they will kill and persecute,’ so that this generation may be charged with
the blood of all the prophets shed since the foundation of the world, from the blood
of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who perished between the altar and the
sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, it will be charged against this generation. Matthew 23:34-36: Therefore I send you prophets, sages, and scribes, some of whom you
will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town, so that upon you may
come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to
the blood of Zechariah son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the
sanctuary and the altar. Truly I tell you, all this will come upon this
generation. The primary and most important difference between these two passages is
the first part of the first sentence.
In Luke, it is the “sophia” of God who sends the prophets to Israel and
proclaims judgment, while in the Matthew, the “sophia of God” is replaced with
the personal pronoun “I” (egw), implying that it
is Jesus who sends the prophets to Israel and proclaims judgment. E.S. Fiorenza explains that the Lukan
version demonstrates the belief that Jesus’ fate is the same as all of Sophia’s
prophets and simply reflects “Sophialogy” (140). M.J. Suggs, on the other hand, explains that several theories exist for
understanding the phrase “the wisdom of God” as used by Luke.[4] One possibility is that Jesus is quoting
Sophia but not correlating himself with Sophia. Another option is that Q itself, which Luke is using as his
source, identifies Jesus with sophia.
Suggs believes this is unlikely since Q likely viewed Jesus simply as
one of Sophia’s last messengers. Suggs
believes the most probably theory is that Jesus is simply quoting a lost Jewish
source where it was given as an oracle of personified wisdom.[5] Contrary to both Suggs and Fiorenza, I believe it is likely that Matthew
simply correlates Jesus with sophia in an explicit way because for this author, the two
are equivalent in authority. This passage appears to be evidence of and reflects
the later development of Wisdom Christology in Matthew that moves beyond Jesus
as simply Sophia’s prophet, and into viewing Jesus as the incarnation of
Sophia. V. Wisdom’s Invitation
Matthew 11:28-30: Come to me, all you that are weary and are carrying heavy burdens, and
I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am gentle
and humble of heart, and you will find rest for you souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light. These
verses closely parallel the invitation of Sophia in Sirach 24:19: “Come to
me, you who desire me, and eat your fill of my fruits” and Sirach 51:23: “Draw
near to me, you who are uneducated, and lodge in the house of instruction.” It also parallels the description of
Sophia’s ‘yoke’ in Sirach 6:24-25, 28-30: Put your feet into her fetters, and your shoulders and carry her, and
do not fret under her bonds. For at last you will find the rest she gives, and
she will be changed into joy for you. Then her fetters will become for you a
strong defense, and her collar a glorious robe. Her yoke is a golden ornament,
and her bonds a purple robe. Tomas
Arvedson suggests that this call of Wisdom in Sirach is in contrast to the call
of the pagan goddess Isis.[6] The author is expressing the idea that the yoke
of Isis will lead only to slavery, but the yoke of Sophia leads to love and
liberty. It has also been suggested that
a number of the traits Sophia has accrued in these passages have been borrowed
from Isis.[7]
“Like Isis, Sophia is a divine savior
figure who promises universal salvation.”[8]
Suggs also takes up T.W. Manson’s
position that the “yoke” being spoken of in Sirach is likely the yoke of the
Law/Torah.[9] What is essential to our study,
however, is to determine what the Gospel writer intended by putting the
words and invitation of Sophia as Jesus’ own words. I tend to agree with Suggs who believes that while Jesus does not
totally displace the Torah, it does put Jesus “in place” of the Torah in a significant
way. This is because Jesus has the
authority to speak as Sophia and offers a similar invitation and promise to
those who would take his yoke upon them. VI. Wisdom’s Children and Deeds Matthew 11:18-19: For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, ‘He has a
demon’; the Son of Man came eating and drinking and they say, ‘Look, a glutton
and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’ Yet wisdom is
vindicated by her deeds. Luke 7:33-35: For John the Baptist has come eating no bread and drinking no wine, and
you say, ‘He has a demon’; the Son of Man has come eating and drinking, and you
say, ‘Look, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’
Nevertheless, wisdom is vindicated by all her children. The
most significant difference between these two passages is that Matthew refers
to the “deeds” (ergwn) of wisdom and Luke refers to the “children” (teknwn) of wisdom
as being vindicated. Suggs’ view is that
the “children” of wisdom are meant to be understood as Jesus and John the
Baptist.[10] They both belong to the line of wisdom’s
prophets but are in a unique position within that line. “Jesus and John stand
as the eschatological envoys of Wisdom.
Their position in relation to the eschaton gives them special status:
John is Elijah, Jesus is the Son of Man.”[11] Also of note is that in Proverbs 8:32,
Wisdom speaks to her children, “And now my children, listen to me: happy are
those who keep my ways.” Jesus and
John the Baptist are examples of Wisdom’s children who listen and keep her ways
according to Luke. E.S. Fiorenza takes a slightly
different interpretation of this passage and concludes that “wisdom’s children”
include the entire nation of Israel as her children. “The Sophia-God of Jesus
recognizes all Israelites as her children. She is justified, ‘made just’ in and by all of them.”[12]
However, Fiorenza also concedes that
among those children, Jesus and John the Baptist are seen as the most prominent.[13]
In the Matthean version, however,
wisdom is justified by her “deeds.”
Suggs suggests that these deeds refer to Jesus’ own miraculous works and
deeds as the “Messiah.”[14] Evidence for this is demonstrated by the
fact that Matthew introduces this section with reference to Jesus’ “deeds” in
verses 2-5 in response to John the Baptist’s question regarding whether Jesus
is the Messiah, and then following this section Matthew reminds us in verse 20
that “mighty deeds of power” have been performed by Jesus in his reproach of
the city. Matthew is making a very
explicit connection between Sophia and Jesus, exclusive of John the Baptist or
other Jewish “children” of Wisdom as implied by Luke. VII. The Jerusalem Lament Matthew
23:37-39: Jerusalem,
Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often have I desired to gather your children
together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing.
See, your house is left to you, desolate. For I tell you, you will not see me
again until you say, ‘Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord.’ (The Lukan
version is nearly identical to the Matthew version in this passage.) Many
scholars do not believe this passage is an authentic saying of Jesus because it
can only be seen as the words of a Divine Being.[15] Suggs points out that there are eight
references in the Old Testament to God’s “wings” which are seen as protection
to God’s people (66). This passage is
remarkable in that it closely parallels 2 Esdras 1:28, 30, 32a: Thus says the Lord Almighty: Have I not entreated you as a father
entreats his sons or a mother her daughters or a nurse her children…I gathered
you as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings. But now, what shall I do to
you? I sent you my servants the prophets, but you have taken and killed and
torn their bodies in pieces… In a similar
way, Baruch 4:12 describes the desolation of the city because the people have
turned away from God’s law. In all
these cases, it is the rejection of Wisdom that is occurring. E.S. Fiorenza points out that the lament of
Jesus is not anti-Semitic, in that it is not referring to all of Israel or the
Jewish nation as a whole, but is spoken only against the governing and ruling
authorities of the city. [16]
Suggs
mentions that the speaker in the Q text of this passage was likely Sophia, but
Matthew is able to transfer this lament and judgment as Jesus’ own words
because for Matthew, Jesus is the incarnate of Wisdom.[17] Jesus is rejected just as God’s law is
rejected. As John 1:11 describes, both
Jesus and Wisdom long for acceptance but are always rejected by their own. As the incarnate of Wisdom, Jesus is also
able to speak with the sorrow of God in his ardent desire to protect and gather
his children to himself and hide them under his wings. As Thomas Arvedson says, “the picture of the
bird with its young is thoroughly appropriate in the mouth of the maternal
Sophia.”[18] VIII. The Revelation to Babes Matthew
11:25-27: At that time Jesus said, ‘I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and
earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and the intelligent
and have revealed them to infants; yes Father, for such was your gracious will.
All things have been handed over to me by my Father; and no one knows the Son
except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to
whom the Son chooses to reveal him. (The Lukan
version, verse 10:22, adds the phrase, “who the Son is” and “who the Father is”
in place of “the Son” and “the Father.”) This
text parallels the liturgical form of prayer found in Sirach 51, a Wisdom Hymn,
in its introduction in verse 1: “I give you thanks O Lord and king, and
praise you O God my Savior.” Additionally, this passage reflects the words
regarding wisdom in Isaiah 29:14b: “The wisdom of their wise shall perish,
and the discernment of the discerning shall be hidden” and finds its
parallel in St. Paul’s writing in the first letter to the Corinthians 1:18-20, “Has
God not made foolish the wisdom of the world?”
Suggs suggests a further correlation to the Wisdom text of 4 Ezra
8:51-52, 61-62 because this passage refers to God revealing wisdom to only a
few, the “elect” (87). For Matthew, it
seems, the elect and the “infants” or “babes” are equivalent; both gain a special
revelation revealed to them by God, which is hidden from the world’s
traditional wisdom. Additionally,
verses 28-30 of Matthew are also found in the Gospel of Thomas. Finally, “these things” appears to refer to
the end times and it’s signs, the “eschatological secrets.”[19]
E.S. Fiorenza makes an important
point when she says that Matt. 11:27 is an exclusivist passage and every part
of it… can be traced back to Jewish Wisdom traditions. Just as Wisdom has received
everything from G*d, so Jesus has received everything from God. Just as Wisdom
is only known by G*d and is the only who knows G*d, so Jesus has all Wisdom; he
is even Wisdom herself. Just as Divine
Sophia gives her Wisdom as a gift, so also Jesus reveals Wisdom to all those to
whom he wants to reveal himself. Hence it could be concluded that here Jesus
replaces Sophia (143-44). This
passage clearly reflects the belief that Jesus and Wisdom are inextricably
linked. According to Matthew, Jesus
himself is identified with Sophia, an incarnate of Divine Wisdom because he
alone knows the Father directly. VIII. Towards a Biblical Sophia-Christology Having
examined some of the Biblical evidence demonstrating how Wisdom is identified
with Jesus as both a prophet of Sophia and the incarnation of Sophia, we will
now turn our attention to what a Sophia-Christology for today should
entail. What are the implications and
theological conclusions we can now draw?
Is it possible to take the connection between Jesus and Sophia too
literally? Or too far? First I will examine two forms of
Sophia-Christology that are inadequate in their application of Jesus and Wisdom
and then I will offer a third alternative which I believe to be a balanced and
Biblical understanding of Sophia-Christology. The Sophia-Christology that has been offered
by some of the more radical Feminists as portrayed by the Christ-Sophia icon by
Robert Lentz on the cover of this essay misunderstands
Sophia-Christology. Looking closely at
the icon we notice some important details.
First, the words surrounding the figure’s head are Hebrew and read, “I
Am Who I am,”or “Yahweh,” which is the traditional Hebraic name for God. The Greek lettering on the right and left
hand side, “IS CS,” stands for
“Jesus Christ.” Looking at the face of
the figure, it is clear she is a woman, a biological female. Given the clear naming of this individual as
Jesus and as God, the message being given is that Jesus, as God, in his
identification with Sophia, can be literally transformed and portrayed as a
woman. Sophia
also holds in her hands the Venus of Willendorf; a statuette of an extremely
ancient pagan “Earth Mother” or “Mother Goddess” that dates back to
approximately 24,000-22,000 BCE. Sophia
points to herself as if to say, “I am she.”
The message is that Sophia, as a female, “daughter of God,” and Divine Mother
is akin to the Mother Goddess. In other
words, because of Jesus’ explicit Divine connection with Sophia, God’s feminine
attributes, through Jesus-Sophia, have been brought to the fore and we now have
a basis by which to worship God, not only as God the Father and God the Son,
but also as Goddess Sophia. The
icon and its message are problematic in several ways. This icon and the Sophia-Christology it represents misunderstand
the point behind the meaning of Christ as Wisdom. The first problem is that it takes the concept of the grammatical
gender of the words “Sophia” (and the Hebrew “hokmah”) and applies them directly
to natural gender, since both terms are “feminine.” But even Philo, who refers to Sophia as “the daughter of God,”
recognized this distinction and explained that Sophia is also properly called
“Father” as well. [20]
Additionally, the recognition that Jesus is the incarnate of Sophia, or even as
the Johannine tradition would hold, as “Sophia Incarnate,” does not entail the
creation of a new persona of God in which God can now be recognized as a
Goddess. According to the New Testament
witness, it is Sophia that describes and foreshadows Christ as the Son of God,
not Christ who is descriptive of Sophia. This is an important distinction. Sophia is a poetic aspect, attribute, and description of the
Divine, but is not a literal separate person or being or “goddess.” As RH Fuller explains, “The material
involved gives no hint of Wisdom as an independent entity that has somehow ‘incarnated
herself’ in Jesus.”[21]
Another
extreme in Sophia-Christology, and one which has been the primary approach of
the Church for most of its history, has been to essentially ignore the
theological implications of the connection made between Christ and Sophia. In
an attempt to make clear distinctions between orthodoxy and heresy/Gnosticism,
the Church nearly dropped its original sense of Jesus as the incarnate of
Sophia and all that this Christology implies.
In fact, the Church has generally focused on the masculine attributes of
God and has emphasized God and Jesus’ maleness. To this day, one of the primary arguments against women serving
in the priesthood is that Jesus was/is a male and therefore females cannot
accurately represent Christ at the altar by virtue of their biological
sex. (Strangely this argument is not
taken to its logical conclusion in excluding those who are not biologically
qualified in terms of their race as a Jewish/Palestinian men or any another
other biological physical attribute such as age, appearance, handicap,
etc.) For the most part, the Church has
not sought to make significant theological ties to Jesus and Sophia or develop
a relevant Sophia-Christology accessible to Christians today. In
doing so, we have neglected an important Scriptural and early Christian
tradition and are left with an incomplete portrayal of Christ. In
order to take the connection and implications of Sophia-Christology seriously,
we need to re-look at the descriptions of Wisdom in the Wisdom texts that the
Gospel writers would have been familiar with.
In the descriptions of Sophia the authors of these texts go to great
lengths to describe Sophia in exclusively female and feminine terms. Sophia is never a neutral image, and even in
her personification[22]
she is intentionally portrayed as a woman in every instance. In
Proverbs Sophia is contrasted with a female prostitute who seeks to seduce and
charm men in characteristically feminine ways as she cries out to men at the
entrance of town (Proverbs 7, 8).
Sophia promises to love those who love her (Prov. 8:18). She draws men to herself and has laid out a
banquet table and sent her servant-girls to call men to come to her and drink
her wine (Prov 9:2-5). She is described
as having beauty (Wis 8:2) and as worthy as a bride (Wis 8:2). She is also described as a sister and as a
mother who teaches her children (Prov 8:32). Not only is Sophia always portrayed
explicitly as a woman, there are also many bold theological proclamations about
her position and relationship to God with descriptions often equivalent to
Divinity itself. In the Wisdom texts
Sophia is described as having come forth from the mouth of God (Sir 24:3), created
at the beginning before the earth was made (Prov 8:22-23), is ever at God’s
side (Prov 1:18), was active in creation (Wis 9:9), is a mediator of creation
(Wis 8:5-6), a ruler over kings who is all powerful and permeates the cosmos
(Wis 7:23, 27; 8:1,5), leads people to life and immortality (Wis 6:18-19),
resides in heaven as the glory of God (Wis 7:25-26), shares the very throne of
God (Wis 9:3), is the vine and stream of water (Sir 24:17,28) who offers living
water (Sir 24:18,20) to mankind, is a savior to humanity (Wis 9:18, 10:21,
10:9), makes her dwelling/tabernacle in Jacob (Sir 24:8) and will never cease
to be (Sir 24:9). “In short, Divine
Wisdom lives symbiotically with God (Wisd. 8:3f). ”[23]
It
is easy to see, given these descriptions that match so closely the description
we have of Jesus and the Divine, why the early Church and Gospel authors of Matthew
and John so readily identified Jesus with Sophia as being the incarnation of
Sophia and Sophia Incarnate. It is
possible that some of the theological shifts that occurred from the Jesus of
history to the Christ of faith can be drawn back to the understanding and
identification of Jesus with God’s Divine Wisdom, Sophia. At any rate, it is clear that the Church
must take this identification of Christ with Sophia seriously, along with its
theological implications. So
what are the implications of Sophia-Christology for Christians and our view of
God and Jesus Christ today? It is clear
that the proper theological response is not to simply shift gender language in
a literal way in order to identify God or Jesus as a “woman.” Rather, what we learn from this close
association between God and Jesus with the feminine attributes of Sophia is
that biological sex and gender are not essential attributes of God or
Jesus. The fact that God can be
described in feminine and female ways demonstrates that God is above and beyond
human “maleness” or “femaleness.” God
is not a male or a female, and because human language always falls short of
describing God, God can be described in either feminine or masculine
terms. It is just as misguided to focus
on God and Jesus’ “maleness” as it is to focus on their “femaleness” as portrayed
in the Sophia icon. From this
identification of Jesus with Sophia we are also able to affirm that the point
behind the Incarnation is not that Jesus has become a male as opposed to a
female, but that he became a man, a
human, anqrwpoV.
One
of the appropriate incorporations of a Biblically based Sophia-Christology is
that Jesus need no longer be identified in strictly male and masculine terms
and descriptions. Just as all language about God is more poetic
than literally descriptive, so Sophia language about God is mainly poetic. However, because Jesus is Divine Wisdom
incarnate, he is one with God and neither God nor Jesus are restrained, in any
theological sense, by “maleness” or masculinity. Silvia Schroer argues that “the discourse of personified Wisdom
seeks to integrate masculine and feminine elements into the image of G*d.”[24]
A proper Sophia-Christology, then,
illuminates the fact that Jesus is for all and a representative of all people,
and that all of us, when we live in unity with God’s Holy Spirit, become
“icons” of Christ, male and female alike.
Works Cited Brown,
Raymond. An Introduction to New Testament Christology. Mahwah: Paulist
Press, 1994. Fiorenza,
Elizabeth Schussler. Jesus: Miriam’s Child Sophia’s Prophet: Critical Issues
in Feminist Christology. New York: Continuum Publishing, 1994. Fuller,
Reginald Horace. The Foundations of New Testament Christology. New York:
Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1965. Fuller,
Reginald Horace. Who is This Christ? Gospel Christology and Contemporary
Faith. Fortress Press, 1983. Metzger,
Bruce, and Murphy, Roland, eds. The New Oxford Annotated Bible, NRSV.
New York: Oxford University Press, 1994. Suggs, M.
Jack. Wisdom, Christology, and Law in Matthew’s Gospel. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1970. [1] Fiorenza, 133. [2] See Suggs, 101 and Fiorenza, 136. [3] Fuller, “The Foundations of New Testament Christology,” p. 72. [4] Please see Suggs, 18-24 for a full treatment of these theories. [5] Suggs, p. 19. [6] Suggs, p.100. [7] Suggs, p. 101. [8] Fiorenza, p. 136. [9] Suggs, p. 103. [10] Suggs, p. 35. [11] Ibid, p. 55. [12] Fiorenza, p. 140. [13] Ibid, p. 141. [14] Suggs, p. 56. [15] See Suggs, 66. [16] Fiorenza, p. 142. [17] Suggs, p. 67. [18] Ibid, p. 67. [19] Suggs, p. 89. [20] Fiorenza, p. 137. [21] Fuller, “Who is This Christ,” p.56. [22] Raymond Brown identifies the following citations of the personification of Wisdom: Sir 1:1-18; 4:11-19; 6:18-31; 14:20-15:10; 24:1-31; 51:13-30; Wis 7-9; Baruch 3:9-38, pg. 207. [23] Fiorenza, p. 136. [24] As quoted in Fiorenza, p. 134. |