The Father Knows

The Father Knows

by

Gilbert Torres

Admittedly, there was an alternate title for this article which crossed my mind; who’s your daddy? The point being, if you can move past my low grade humor, is on the superiority of father. Certainly, among Christians when the discussion centers on the question of deity one can almost hear the chant, Father! Father! Father! as the one who knows and who knows all things. This is especially true in contrast with the Son who unabashedly and unapologetically declared, in the minds of some saints, that he did not know the hour of his coming. Hence, Jesus dropped the deity card, or as others strongly imply in this gotcha theology, it makes Jesus unreliable.

assertions and claims

Typically, most of the arguments and counter-arguments on the deity of Jesus are both bland and either negative or positive assertions that Jesus is not God or Jesus is God. The back and forth exchanges often seem like and take on the tone of a shouting match between schoolyard kids, “is not!” “is too!” Does anyone remember getting into a schoolyard word fight over who's dad was bigger and stronger? So, too, are the demands for just one verse as proof to support one’s theology. After all, it is the isolated, single-verse mentality which often reigns supreme in these so-called discussions. I cringe at the thought of the reactionary response with which this article might be seized as just another ping pong ball. Any understanding which purports to exalt the Father but which denies or diminishes the Son is, to understate it, seriously suspect. Of course, no one would deliberately or outright claim or acknowledge that they deny or diminish the Son. But, it would be just as bad to think that we can exalt the Son if we deny or diminish the Father.

Why didn’t Jesus, as is often heard from Muslims as well as Christians who doubt or deny the deity of Jesus, just declare and say clearly and aloud, “I am God.”

lessons lost

Understandably, this demand for such proof is the same and it is very much what might be expected from atheists. However, it is a travesty, on the other hand, that Christians would make this their ultimate standard. Once again, the mere query purports to disprove, or at least seriously question, the deity of Jesus by way of a negative question. It speculates on what the scripture does not state rather than examine what it does state. The even worse travesty of this negative question tactic is that it is often assumed to be and is mistaken for knowledge and understanding by the one posing the question.

The lessons on what the scripture states about Cain are lost. Cain interacted with God. Yet, although Cain had no doubt, at least it would seem reasonable to infer given his interactions with God, as to the existence of God it is hardly true to say that Cain believed God. Then, there is the lesson of what the scripture states about the testimony from God himself about Israel who heard his voice and saw his works. Yet, Israel did not believe God. On the contrary the testimony from God is that they were an obstinate, unbelieving and stubborn people. Hence, seeing and hearing are not necessarily a full-proof guarantee of belief.

One of the much touted claims against the deity of Jesus stems from the time when Jesus declared to the disciples concerning the hour of his coming that, no one knows, not even the angels, nor the Son, but the Father alone. (Matthew 24:36) Here is my blog article on that discussion topic, Was Jesus Ignorant? The reason why I mention this claim here is only to highlight what the ignorance which is ascribed to Jesus and which simultaneously purports to exalt the knowledge of God, the Father.

the Shema and Jesus

Shortly after Jesus had twice strongly admonished the Sadducees saying to them

Is this not the reason you are mistaken, that you do not understand the scriptures or the power of God?

And

. . . you are greatly mistaken.

that Jesus quotes the Shema from Deuteronomy 6. It was at this time that the Pharisees saw that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees (Matthew 22:34) that they move in to take their turn at Jesus. It is this quotation of the Shema by Jesus which is blithely claimed to be proof for a negative assertion that Jesus was not a so-called trinitarian. What escapes this blissful glee is the significance in the words of the Shema as spoken by Jesus. The Shema reads:

Hear, o Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord is one.

The quotation by Jesus reads as follows:

Hear, o Israel! The Lord our God is one Lord.

What is significant about the way Jesus quotes the Shema is his emphasis on Lord. Jesus reiterates what the Shema asserts, namely, that the Lord is God. The sum of every word and work of Jesus was to give glory to God, the Father. The unfortunate point about this and on which some are mistaken and others greatly mistaken is that while the Father is God, both the Shema and Jesus declare it is The Lord is our God (the wording of the Shema) and The Lord our God (the wording of Jesus) - is one Lord. It may not be intentional, but the focus and emphasis on who is or is not God seems misplaced and be suggestive of an inability, perhaps reluctance, to grasp and accept the emphasis on Lord.

The emphasis in both by the Shema and by Jesus is not on God, but on the Lord. This reflects the prevalent references in the Old Testament. There is the example of the Lord God himself who declared that he himself (Ezekiel 34) would seek for, search for and care for his sheep like a shepherd. Then, when Jesus, the Begotten Son comes into the world, he declares that he himself is the Good Shepherd. The implication concerning the Lord God and the Good Shepherd is there for all to read and the inference is for all to draw.

conclusion

Do not swing wildly and run to the other end of the spectrum with a seriously mistaken negative claim that the Father is not God and thereby you dishonor the Son, because to dishonor one is to dishonor the other. The positive assertion from the Shema and Jesus is that the Lord is God with the designation of Lord being as prevalent of Jesus as the scriptures state in, both the Old and New Testaments declare that, the Lord our God is one Lord. The Son acknowledges and praises the Father as Lord of heaven and earth, Jesus declared. (Matthew 11:25, 27)

"All things have been handed over to Me by My Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him.”

Then, yet again, Jesus followed up with one final point. He posited a query to the scribes concerning the enigma of Psalm 110 about the Lord and my Lord. No one ventured to answer Jesus. He did not offer any explanation. Once again, the implication is there for all to read and the inference is for all to draw concerning the Lord. It is not for you to wonder why Jesus did answer his own question for the scribes. It is for you to understand the scriptures and to teach what the scriptures state, not what they do not state.

The Father knew, just as those who profess to know him as their Father, who is Lord. The Son knew who is Lord. Do you? If you say Jesus is Lord, as Jesus said to Pilate when Pilate asked Jesus if he was the king of the Jews,

Are you saying this on your own initiative, or did others tell you about me?

Read More

YaHWeH, LORD of hosts

The scriptures testify of God and of his purposes and the fulfillment of his purposes from antiquity to the time Jesus and the apostles walked this earth. (see Ephesians 1 for a succinct testimony of the Lord God and his purpose for redemption, the fulfillment of redemption and the affirmation of redemption.) My purpose in this article is to align a small glimpse of this testimony from the Tanakh, that is, the Old Testament along with the New Testament reference to those same testimonies. I will present the ways in which God refers to himself, the mindset of the hearers and his purpose to fulfill and accomplish his will. I prefer to leave it to the reader to draw the inferences and conclusions concerning the meaning and significance of this testimony of God for themselves.

Israel is a people and a nation who has the unique distinction of having being the people with whom the Lord God chose to associate himself and to declare himself as the God of Israel. Yet, for all the works, wonders and words which Israel heard, both directly from God and through his servant Moses and later the prophets, they did not believe in him. Initially, the first time when Moses informed the leaders of Israel of the words that the Lord had spoken to him they were quick to tell Moses that they would do all that the Lord spoke to Moses. Immediately following that session with the leaders the people heard the voice of God. Their reaction was one of terror and fear. They couldn’t bear to hear the voice of the Lord and pleaded with Moses to talk with God and whatever God told Moses for them to do they would do it.

(check out these two blog articles Christianity Unmasked & Human Sacrifice at Mt Moriah and Egypt
The first article was my response to Rabbi Blumenthal's article. Six months are I published it he learned about my article. This led to a prolonged amiable and respectful discussion with the rabbi as well as a few of his congregants who were a little less genial, but it was good that they joined us too. You can read our exchange in the comments  The rabbi saw the second article and we engaged in a much shorter discussion again.)

seeing, but not believing

Of course, it was not long after the Lord had delivered Israel from their bondage of slavery in Egypt that they cried out to Moses their longing desire to have stayed in Egypt. Pharaoh’s army was closing in on Israel. Then, again they cried out to Moses that it had been better for them if the Lord had killed them in Egypt rather than die of starvation in the wilderness.

These are just two instances of numerous times when the scriptures testify to the unbelief of Israel of the Lord God whom Moses and various of their leaders saw. Yet, they would not believe in him. They were an obstinate people such that they created a molten calf and declared it to be their god who had delivered them from Egypt. (It is with dire, but tireless unbelief that many of those who profess to lead, teach and preach parrot the standard line: no man can see God. This is with total disregard for the footnote in the verse that follows, namely, that they saw God, but he did not stretch out his hand against them, that is, to strike them dead.)

All this is to say that merely because Israel heard and various of their leaders saw God is not an assurance that they believed God. Does the joint alliance between the Lord and Moses bear any parallel similarities to the Father and Jesus? Let us not deceive ourselves that surely we are wiser than Israel when they could not believe what was manifested before their eyes anymore than we can believe what the Son has explained about God.

The discussion concerning the question of deity with respect to the Father and Jesus is often characterized by the same talking points. These include certain negative assertions and positive assertions. Sometimes, but not always, these are associated with a particular verse. It is just as common to have no biblical verse or passage to which the hearer can turn to for verify and confirm the assertion for his or her learning. Of course, there is the fire exchange of labels such as unitarian and trinitarian. Usually the discussion shapes up as though the other person were not present. Each one busies themselves peddling what they might know or assume that they know about the other person’s belief and understanding and not what they hear from the other person is saying in the moment.

6: shmo hear-you ! יִ שְׂ רָ אֵ ל ishral Israel יְ הוָה ieue Yahweh אֱהֵ ינוּ alei·nu Elohim-of·us יְ הוָה ieue Yahweh אֶ חָ ד achd one : :

Isaiah 53

the sending of Moses

God sought to prepare Israel for life without and after Moses whom he had sent to Israel. What God did in Deuteronomy 6 was to impress on Israel his unity, harmony and oneness. Israel was to learn and teach the statutes and commandments for themselves and for every successive generation. This is how God defined his unity, harmony and oneness for Israel. Everything that God said was to be obeyed, everything that Moses said God said was to be obeyed, everything that the prophets said God said was to be obeyed, everything that Jesus said was of the Father was to be obeyed, everything that the apostles said was of the Holy Spirit was to be obeyed, everything that the saints in Christ read from the written word of the revelation of the Lord God is to be obeyed. There was never to be a time when the will of the Lord God was not to be obeyed, not when it was spoken, not after it was spoken, not after it was repeated, not when it was written, not when it was printed, and not when it is read. When the Lord God spoke these things Moses pronounced, "Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD is one!” (Deuteronomy 6) Here it is in Hebrew for those who prefer it so. (verse 4,4)

4 shmo hear-you ! יִ שְׂ רָ אֵ ל ishral Israel יְ הוָה ieue Yahweh אֱהֵ ינוּ alei·nu Elohim-of·us יְ הוָה ieue Yahweh אֶ חָ ד achd one : : (Deuteronomy 6)

The greatest point of contention between self-professed so-called unitarians and self-professed so-called trinitarians is that they share equally in the same mistaken notion. Both blithely ascribe a numeric quantitative value of one or three to the passage even as they (like the Jews who acknowledge it) disregard the plural forms which Moses used to refer to the Lord God. What neither one address cohesively is the terms elohim (plural) which is rendered Yahweh or YHWH and the term echad which is rendered one. Yes, the term elohim, or Yahweh, is used of the pagan idols and gods. These things are not a theological interpretation or notion. These are a matter of grammar and merely reading it in the English or Hebrew languages does not necessary mean that we understand or that we accept the significance and implications of those words. Single word definitions in isolation are much touted with little understanding or edification coming from for the saints in Christ.

The sending of Isaiah

The prophet Isaiah describes a vision in the sixth chapter. There is interesting response to the vision to which some of hold firmly. What they state is that what or whom Isaiah saw Isaiah is was simply mistaken. Isaiah thought he saw God or the Lord. The upper or lower case is of no significance, but I will use it here to illustrate this misunderstanding. The explanation states that Isaiah saw the Lord, but not the LORD. (This is akin to what my daughter as a child would distinguish as God or God God.) Isaiah initially states in verse one that he saw the Lord. (adonai) This fringe hanging-on-by-the edge explanation is nullified by the seraphim. It is the seraphim who declare to Isaiah in their own reference as to what Isaiah is seeing as being Yahweh of hosts. (verse 3, 3) Furthermore, after Isaiah hears how the seraphim refer to the one whom he is seeing Isaiah changes his word use to match that of the seraphim. (verse 5,5 ) (I have been consistent in my use of the verse numbers in this message to the English text from the NASB and the interlinear with this format as in this example: verse 3, 3, respectively.)

3 And one called out to another and said, "Holy, Holy, Holy, is the LORD of hosts, The whole earth is full of His glory." (Isaiah 6)

3 u·qra and·he-called זֶה ze this-one אֶ ל al to ־ - זֶה ze this-one וְ אָ מַ ר u·amr and·he-said קָ ד שׁ qdush holy-one קָ ד שׁ qdush holy-one קָ ד שׁ qdush holy-one יְ הוָה ieue Yahweh-of And one cried unto another, and said, Holy, holy, holy, [is] the LORD of hosts: the whole earth [is] full of his glory. 3 צְ בָ א ת tzbauth hosts מְ ל ֹא mla fullness-of כָ ל kl all-of ־ - הָ אָ רֶ ץ e·artz the·earth כְּ ב ד kbud·u glory-of·him : :  (Isaiah 6)

5 Then I said, "Woe is me, for I am ruined! Because I am a man of unclean lips, And I live among a people of unclean lips; For my eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts." (Isaiah 6)

5 u·amr and·I-am-saying א י aui woe ! ־ - לִ י l·i to·me כִ י ki that ־ - נִ דְ מֵ יתִ י ndmithi I-am-stilled כִּ י ki that אִ ישׁ aish man טְ מֵ א tma unclean-of ־ - שְׂ פָ תַ יִ ם shphthim lips אָ נֹ כִ י anki I . Then said I, Woe [is] me! for I am undone; because I [am] a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts. 5 וּבְ ת
u·b·thuk and·in·midst-of עַ ם om people ־ - טְ מֵ א tma unclean-of שְׂ פָ תַ יִ ם shphthim lips אָ נֹ כִ י anki I י שֵׁ ב iushb dwelling כִּ י ki that אֶ ת ath » ־ - הַ מֶּ לֶ
e·mlk the·king יְ הוָה ieue Yahweh-of צְ בָ א ת tzbauth hosts רָ אוּ rau they-saw עֵ ינָי oin·i eyes-of·me : : (Isaiah 6)

Isaiah is then sent to proclaim the word of the Lord to an obstinate and unbelieving people as Yahweh of hosts has commanded him.

Moses, unlike Isaiah, was not a prophet. In fact, Moses was no more a prophet than Jesus. God did not speak to either one through visions or dreams as he did with his prophets. What is significant to note is what God declared when he defined for Miriam and Aaron what constitutes a prophet in Numbers 12. God stated that he spoke face to face with Moses. Knowing that Moses and elders of Israel had seen God how does this statement by the Lord and the reality concerning Moses and the elders compare with each other? The point is that God spoke clearly with Moses concerning his will for Israel. God held nothing back from Moses as far as it concerned Israel. Yet, Moses, not unlike the prophets, did not know what it was all about.

The sending of the Son

Here I want to present the twofold testimony concerning the Son from Isaiah and a different testimony from Ezekiel. It is the apostle John who quotes Isaiah 6 in John 12. Although there were some of the leaders who were believing in Jesus this did not negate or nullify the overall unbelief of the people towards Jesus. It is this unbelief among the people to which Isaiah had been sent. Now John quotes from Isaiah and emphasizes the unbelief towards Jesus in the words of Isaiah.

But, what is even more significant is what John states: 41 These things Isaiah said because he saw His glory, and he spoke of Him. Whom was that Isaiah saw? Whom was it that the people did not believe?

The second testimony concerning the Son is from Ezekiel 34. The Lord God declares his great displeasure and that he is against the faithless and unfaithful shepherds who have not cared for his flock. He declares that he himself will search for, gather and care for his sheep. (verse 11, 11)

11 ki that כֹּ ה ke thus אָ מַ ר amr he-says אֲדֹ נָי adni my-Lord יְ הוִ ה ieue Yahweh הִ נְ נִ י en·ni behold·me ! ־ - אָ נִ י ani I וְ דָ רַ שְׁ תִּ י u·drshthi and·I-inquire אֶ ת ath » ־ - צ ֹאנִ י tzan·i flock-of·me For thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I, [even] I, will both search my sheep, and seek them out. 11 וּבִ קַּ רְ תִּ ים u·bqrthi·m and·I-make-quest·them : :

Jesus declared, 11 "I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd lays down His life for the sheep.

Furthermore, Jesus not only searched for and gathered and cared for his sheep, but he laid down his life for his sheep. Whom did Ezekiel say would come and himself search for, gather and care for his sheep?

conclusion

As close as Israel was to the visible manifestations of the Lord God as well as Moses and the elders of Israel Israel never understood because, as God testified numerous times, they were an obstinate people. Certainly, God did not break faith with Israel nor did he reject Israel because of their obstinance. I will not say it is obstinance on the part of some Christians, but the truth is that most of their misunderstanding of the God whom they love is not because God has not revealed it. The mission of the Word who was with God and was God (John 1) was to explain, John notes, God.

The prophet Isaiah went forward and proclaimed the word of the Lord God as he was commanded. Even though he desired to understand his own message or to see the subject of his prophecies he was revealed to him that it was not about himself. Jesus attested to the same about the prophets and righteous men. There is more than a bit of irony which involves the Word who became flesh and who explained God. The irony is that for all the incarnate manifestation of the Word it was this which was a stumbling block of unbelief for many. Why? Because they looked and judged what they saw of Jesus, as he said, according to the flesh. This is what blinded them and which preoccupied and consumed them such that they could never focus to hear and understand the explanation of the Lord God who is one and of his will as testified by Jesus. It was as easy for them to judge according to the flesh rather than to understand what Jesus explained about God as it is for some to disregard the testimony of the written word of the Lord God concerning himself.

Read More

Unity of the Spirit and The Shema

two messages, one God

This is a view of the scriptures concerning the apostle Paul’s message on the unity of the Spirit in the New Testament and it’s similarities with the message of Moses on the Lord God who is one in the Shema in the Torah; the Old Testament. Even more, these words on the call for unity or to be one were proclaimed by Jesus himself, both in his quotation of the Shema, (Mark 12) but also in the priestly prayer of John 17. It is this priestly prayer by Jesus which serves as the commentary and test between the message of one in the Shema in Deuteronomy and the unity of the Spirit in Ephesians from the same God.

Read More

Do You Hear The One I Saw?

A Christmas song lyric played in my mind as I read this book: Do you hear what I hear?

It is commendable and praiseworthy how these three men, three brothers in Christ, have co-authored and penned their discussion concerning the God who is one in their book, The Son of God. The essay format followed by challenges by the other two men and then explanations by the original essayist is an excellent one. I do not feel compelled to disparage or assail any one of them no matter our differences. The format of the book, especially the spirit of the authors, is worthy of imitation by those who would engage in discussion or in that loathsome, grandstanding format of public debate. I understand their struggle to understand the God who is one is not unlike that of other saints in Christ.

I read the book not because I expected to fulfill some unmet need in my understanding of the God who is one.

Read More