Pages

Saturday, June 13, 2009

God: Who or What?

"But rise and stand upon your feet, for I have appeared to you for this purpose, to appoint you as a servant and witness to the things in which you have seen me and to those in which I will appear to you, delivering you from your people and from the Gentiles— to whom I am sending you to open their eyes, so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.'" -- Acts 26:16-18 (ESV)


Isn't it interesting? As Paul retells the story of his conversion experience he notes that when Jesus appeared to him, he appeared with instructions regarding Paul's life mission; i.e. to open the eyes of the spiritually blinded and turn them from "the power of Satan to God." He also said that in their turning to God, they would "receive forgiveness of sins ... by faith in me [Jesus]." So, we have Jesus appearing to Paul and speaking to him about pointing people to God through faith in Himself!


Clearly, God is referenced as a distinctly separate being from Jesus. Note that Jesus did not say that Paul would turn them from the power of Satan to Me! It is, of course, by faith in Jesus that men come to God. This is in complete agreement with what Jesus said himself in the gospels (which we noted in the last blog post (John 14:1-6).


It is very curious to me that people don't seem to pay much attention to the word "God" as it is used in the English language. For example, in today's Christian culture if someone is heard uttering the phrase "God damn", it is considered taking the Lord's name in vain. Now, let's think about that for a moment. It may be crude and improper to say such a thing, especially when it is directed toward another human being. We do not wish for God to damn anyone and it is vulgar to say it. However, we must ask ourselves, "in what way is using this term taking God's Name in vain?"



It seems to me many people have a serious misunderstanding of the definition of God! God, as it applies to OUR God, the Father of the lord Jesus Christ, is a designation for the Supreme Being - the Creator and Originator of Life. God's Name however, is Yahweh, or Jehovah! So sacred is that Name, that ancient Jews would not dare to speak it or even write it; hence the letters YHWH (known as the tetragrammaton), to avoid actually using the proper Name. In the King James Bible, where the tetragrammaton appeared, the translators supplied the term "LORD." The word God is descriptive of "what" He is, just as "man" describes what we are. Yahweh, on the other hand, is descriptive of "who" He is - it is His Name!


Now, here is where it gets confusing. If, as orthodoxy suggests, God is a tri-unity, then when we use the word God, it is understood that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is meant. In speaking, or writing the term God, we must already have in our minds a being who is three persons, yet only one (a concept that, of course, makes no logical sense at all). But if "God" describes the divine Trinity, what sense would it make for any New Testament writer to use it in the same sentence with the terms Father, Jesus, or Holy Spirit?


For example: In Rom 1:8 Paul says "I thank my God through Jesus Christ." Why would it be necessary for Paul to thank God "through" Jesus Christ, if Jesus is already God. If thanks was intended for one person of the Godhead, it would make better sense to simply say "I thank the Father", or "I thank Jesus", or "the Spirit." Or, if thanks were meant for two it might be said "I thank the Father, with Jesus", etc. Otherwise, it would be just as accurate to say "I thank God" without qualifying it further, knowing that the term "God" includes the Father and Jesus and the Holy Spirit.


Now then, if when God and Jesus appear together the word God is taken as meaning "the Father" it would make sense to use the words together, i.e. "I thank the Father through Jesus Christ", but that raises another big problem! Using the word God to mean "Father" would not work because in Rom 1:7 and many other places in the NT, Paul greets Christians with the familiar greeting "Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ." In this case, if God already means "Father" it would not only be unnecessary to qualify God as "our Father", it would make the sentence extremely awkward. One would simply expect Paul to say Grace to you and peace from God.


Needless to say, this whole argument is rather silly! Just as silly, I would suggest, as the idea that the Bible actually instructs us in the idea that God is three persons in one, and that Jesus is both fully human AND fully God at the same time! Why must we complicate the relationship between God and Jesus when that relationship is plainly stated in Scripture (with the exception of a couple of verses) as Father and Son? The only reason that can be given is that the tradition of the Trinity has become so firmly seated that it is difficult to think outside the box that has been created for us. As we have seen, both here and in the last post from the book of Acts, neither Paul nor Luke seem to have had any concept of Jesus being God, or of God being a Trinity.


I hope this point about "God" makes sense to somebody. If not, please show me where I am wrong.


Gob bless,

Keith

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thank you for your comments.