We try hard to enhance and fill out our understanding of deity and the God whom we love. We think we have attained this by touting ourselves as so-called unitarians or trinitarians and even, perhaps, as Arians and Jehovah’s Witnesses. We think if we just use the right name, especially in the Hebrew language form of that name, that we have understood these things. Of course, there is the stout claims and assertions to defense of our understanding. It is a telltale sign of our lack of understanding when that defense is usually in the form of negative assertions. These include “Jesus is not God” “Jesus is not the Father” as though this were on par or as though it equates with teaching and conveying our understanding of the written revelation of the word of God. So much time is expended in exchanges calling out and sticking the label on the person with whom we engage in discussion together with all presuppositions rather to listen to the person’s words. Invariably, those views center on a small handful of passages together with a message from rote memory sometimes without much ability by the individual to offer much or any explanation.
The purpose of this article reflects a fundamental conviction of mine, namely, that the greater part and easier part of the scriptures for our understanding is readily apparent for the reader. Of course, it is imperative not only that one read, but also that one ponder what he or she reads and not merely open there mouths as hungry birds eager to be fed. Briefly, I would to present two different ways in which the Lord God has spoken to us concerning deity and himself 1) through plural and singular forms, 2) through the marriage relationship of a man and a woman and 3) the diversity of gifts which the Holy Spirit has poured out the church.
plural and singular forms
The first reference in the scriptures of God to himself is recorded Genesis 2. It occurred on the sixth day when he declares, "Let us make man in our image." This English language plural noun form should not be a surprise. All the previous twenty six (26) times, including the one in verse twenty six (26) the term Hebrew language term for God, that is, elohim is in the plural form. This is not a theology. Let's not delve into the usual single word definitions in isolation as though this has led to much enlightenment for the saint in Christ and simply listen and ponder these thing for the time being.
Then, the first reference to a numeric quantity appears is the numeric value of one. It is not in reference to God. It is not in reference to Adam. It is not in reference to Eve. It is in reference to the two of them. God states the two of them are to be one. The two single, individual human beings, one male, one female, who constitute a plurality are to be a single one. The declaration which God made at the time that he created Adam and Eve and they were to be one is a popular passage often quoted in wedding ceremonies.
Sometime later after Moses had led the children of Israel out of Egypt Moses pronounced to Israel:
4 "Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD is one!
This is the first time the plural for the term God, elohim, and the term one appear together and are an undeniable and direct reference to the Lord God. It would be extremely poor to dismiss this as a contradiction. It would just as bad to ignore it without any explanation to provide a cohesive understanding of a plural and singular reference to the Lord God. There is a popular but dire explanation for the plural form of elohim for the term God that it is what is call a "majestic form" which God uses of himself. This, it is explained, is much as earthly kings and queens speak in the plural form of themselves.
I believe the ringing indictment on this notion is found in I Samuel 8. When Samuel was feeling quite low after Israel insisted that Samuel appoint a king for them it was the Lord who comforted and encouraged Samuel.
7 The LORD said to Samuel, "Listen to the voice of the people in regard to all that they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me from being king over them.
If there were any true to that explanation should the reader of the scripture expect some reference by God to himself as in the majestic form as king, the king who has just been rejected by his people? However, this is not the case. In fact the term in the passage is LORD (Yahweh, singular [plural in Isaiah 6:12]), not God. (elohim, plural) Of course, there is always the much touted cry about context. Yet here again, the context in which the Lord refers to himself is as king in in the singular form.
the two shall be one
The quotation of the Genesis 2 passage by the apostle Paul in Ephesians 1 is significant albeit a godly but superficial reference concerning its meaning. It seems reasonable and plausible that there is no better relationship to understand the Lord God who is one than that of a man and a woman who are called to be one in the union of marriage. An explanation of oneness between the man and the woman in terms of the physical sexual union is partial and incomplete. How can a man and a woman be one in the flesh with no thought to being one in hearts, mind and soul and in spirit? Paul states this is mystery, that is of a man and a woman being one, is great. Paul does not leave the matter there concerning this mystery of one. Although Paul does not explain it he gives only the briefest, passing note that he is speaking about Christ and his church. The implied question is how does a man and a woman become one? How are Christ and the church one?
So one thing that ought to be apparent is that the seeming variance between plurality and singular forms is ancient and very much a part of us and the God who we love and desire to know. It is an ancient running thread which the apostle Paul related it to the marriage union of a man and woman. The first long-term life lesson for us is of two (plurality) being one (singular) is as close as in how and what we see in our father and mother. This is personal relationship between mother and father, two human beings, is not merely something recorded in the scriptures of Adam and Eve. We observe and learn from watching them how often they agree and support one another even when we might have a different thought.
diversity of gifts
This is reflected just as much in the life of the body of Christ, that is, the church according to the wisdom of God. It is through the work of the Spirit who gave a wide variety of different gifts to the church for the purpose of the edification of the saints. The apostle Paul wrote much about this diversity of gifts with the constant reminder to the church that all these are from the one Spirit and the church might maintain the same unity and be one in the exercise of these gifts in Romans 12, I Corinthians 12 and Ephesians 4. In none of these instance is the term one intended as numeric, quantitative value nor is it to suggest or to be understand that the man is a woman or a woman is a man when they are one with and toward each other.
what’s in a name?
There is much to be said about the name, particularly of a woman, once she is married. It is as disrespectful to refer to her as a girl on the basis of one’s prior relationship with her as a friend or acquaintance. This is just as true were someone to address her by her maiden name. A change has occurred, not only in her relationship with the one to whom she is now married, but towards everyone else. It is in poor taste and inappropriate to say whose wife she is not, one, because it is not how a woman defines her marriage to her husband, and, two, because when she states that she is married to a particular man it is also to say, or to be understood, that the man is her husband.
One of the serious problems with thwarts our understanding of who Jesus is and the Father is because of the common practice to insert either a name (Jesus) or a title (Father) in a text where it does not appear. This is done with a select handful of verses from the scriptures. The testimony concerning the Father is foremost as revealed by the Jesus, the Son of God, with the notable exceptions at the baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist [1], the transfiguration, [2] and the resurrection of Lazarus. [3]
It is true that Jesus never claimed to be the Father. He claimed to be one with the Father. It is also true that the Father never claimed to be the Son. It is true that the Father never claimed nor did Jesus or the apostles by the Holy Spirit testify that the Father is Lord. There is no doubt and no denial that the Father is God. Furthermore, it is asserted that the Father is God. What is true is that the scriptures do attest and testify from antiquity that the Lord is God. The entirety of the scriptures testify that the Lord is God. Jesus unapologetically and unabashedly claimed to be Lord. The apostles by the Holy Spirit testify that Jesus is Lord. The conclusion is left for the reader to draw unapologetically, unashamedly and unabashedly for himself or herself.
conclusion
Israel, as well as Moses and the elders of Israel, had the unique privilege of actually seeing God. Israel was terrified. The waived all future one-on-one close encounters with God and told Moses to be their go-between before the Lord God. They would hear and do, so they said, whatever Moses told them to do.
The lesson in this is that sometimes even what is obvious without and surprise, terrifies us. We would just as soon waive and dispense with our opportunity and duty and turn it over to someone else to do it for us. The thing is no one can know the Lord God for us. We are called to know the Lord God whom we love. This was never truer as in our desire to draw close to the God whom we love. Praise be to God that he is neither surprised nor offended and he lifts us up to look up face to face and know and declare that the Lord is God. Peace to all.
No comments:
Post a Comment