3.2.2 - The authority of Jesus

The Authority Question

The AQA point is not simply "Who is Jesus?" It asks how different beliefs about who Jesus is change the authority of his teaching. In this lesson, authority means the weight Jesus' words and example have for Christian belief, moral decision-making and discipleship.

Two contrasting understandings set up the whole lesson:

The exam-relevant move is the implication. If Jesus speaks with God's authority, then the Sermon on the Mount may be treated as God's will for disciples. If Jesus is only human, the same teaching may still be admired, but its authority is persuasive rather than absolute.

This point also belongs in Sources of wisdom and authority. Matthew 5:38-48 is not studied just as an ethical case study. It is the specified source through which the authority of Jesus is tested: how seriously should Christians take his command not to retaliate and to love enemies?

Matthew 5:38-48

Matthew 5:38-48 comes within the Sermon on the Mount. In Matthew's Gospel, Jesus teaches his disciples and the crowd about the character of life before God. The specified verses contain two connected teachings.

The passage develops these teachings through specific examples:

• Verses 39–42 present turning the other cheek, yielding an additional garment, going beyond compulsory service and generosity to people requesting help. These challenge personal payback.
• Verse 44 joins enemy-love to prayer for persecutors: goodwill is active, rather than merely absence of revenge.
• Verse 45 grounds this in the Father’s indiscriminate provision of sunshine and rain.
• Verses 46–47 challenge love confined to those who reciprocate and greetings confined to one’s own group.
• Verse 48 gives the Father’s perfection as the disciples’ standard.

The retaliation section refers to the principle sometimes summarised as "an eye for an eye". In its original legal setting, that principle limited vengeance by making punishment proportionate. Jesus' teaching is more radical: disciples should not answer personal injury by demanding equivalent payback.

The love-for-enemies section goes further. Jesus does not only ask disciples to avoid revenge; he calls them to active goodwill towards enemies. The reason given in the passage is theological: disciples should imitate the generous love of their heavenly Father, whose care is not restricted to the morally deserving.

This creates the AQA tension. If Jesus' words carry divine authority, the passage becomes a direct challenge to retaliation, hatred and tribal loyalty. If Jesus' words are only human, the passage may still be a powerful moral ideal, but Christians may ask how far it is realistic, historically conditioned or binding.

Jesus' Authority as God's Authority

For mainstream creedal Christianity, Jesus is not only a messenger about God. He is the incarnate Son of God: truly divine and truly human. Catholic, Orthodox and many Protestant traditions express this through Nicene and Chalcedonian language, though they differ on many other authority questions.

On this view, Jesus' teaching on retaliation and enemy-love is not optional advice for unusually heroic Christians. It is a revelation of the character of God and the way God's people should live. A disciple cannot easily dismiss it as naive, because the authority behind it is not merely human opinion.

This can strengthen Jesus' value as a role model. If Jesus is both divine and truly human, he shows what human life looks like when it is perfectly open to God. His refusal of revenge and command to love enemies are not only moral rules; they display the kind of love Christians believe God has shown in Christ.

There is still a real evaluative difficulty. The more Jesus is emphasised as divine, the more his example may seem beyond ordinary imitation. A Christian response is that incarnation matters precisely because Jesus is truly human: Christians are not asked to imitate an unreal figure, but a human life understood as united with God.

Jesus' Authority as Only Human

AQA also requires the contrasting view that Jesus' authority may be understood as only human. This does not mean Jesus has no authority. It means his authority is grounded in his human wisdom, moral courage, prophetic challenge, religious insight or inspiring example rather than in being God incarnate.

Some liberal, historical-Jesus and non-Trinitarian Christian approaches fit this pattern, though they do not all say exactly the same thing. Unitarians, for example, have historically included views of Jesus as not God but as a human on a divine mission, an example, a prophet or a wise teacher. Many traditional Christians would judge this to be outside orthodox creedal Christology, so the wording needs care.

For Matthew 5:38-48, this view may make Jesus more accessible as a role model. A human Jesus who rejects revenge and loves enemies shows what human beings might actually become. His example may be persuasive because it is humanly lived rather than divinely unreachable.

The weakness is that human authority can be questioned more easily. If Jesus is only a wise teacher, Christians may ask whether a first-century teaching about insult, debt, Roman compulsion and enemies should always override modern concerns about justice, safety or protection of vulnerable people. His words may still be powerful, but the type of authority has changed.