In an article on the Christian
Apologetics and Research Ministry (“CARM”) website, Luke Wayne states
that “the Bible identifies
Jesus as YHWH (Jehovah) by name, thus unambiguously claiming Him to be the true
and living God Almighty” (Does the Bible identify Jesus as Jehovah?). Before I consider the verses to
which Mr. Wayne has appealed in support of this claim, I want to first give a
relatively brief defense of the view that the only God who is
YHWH (or “Yahweh”) – and who is thus “the true and living God Almighty – is the
God who is referred to in the following (and other) verses of Scripture:
John 20:17
”But go to My brothers and tell them
that I am ascending to My Father and your Father—to My
God and your God.”
2 Corinthians 1:3
Blessed be the
God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the
Father of mercies and God of all comfort.”
Ephesians 1:17
“…the God of our Lord Jesus
Christ, the Father of glory.”
Colossians 1:3
“We give thanks to the
God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.”
1 Peter 1:3
“Blessed be the
God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.”
Revelation 1:5-6
“To Him Who is loving us and
looses us from our sins by His blood and makes us a kingdom and priests
to His God and Father, to Him be glory and might for the eons of
the eons! Amen!”
Revelation 3:12
”He who conquers, I will make him a pillar in
the temple of my God. Never shall he go out of it, and I will
write on him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my
God, the new Jerusalem which comes down from my God out of
heaven, and my own new name.”
In other words, Jesus’ God
and Father is the only God who is Yahweh. He alone is “greater than all” (John 10:29; 14:28) and “the only true God” (John 17:3). And since Jesus’ God and Father – and no one
else – is greater than all and is the one God of all (Eph. 4:6), it necessarily
follows that he alone is Yahweh. Any other beings to whom the Hebrew and Greek
titles translated “God”/“god” are applied in Scripture – including the
celestial “sons of the Most High” (John 10:34-35; Psalm 82:1-6), Satan (2 Cor.
4:4), and Jesus Christ himself (Heb. 1:8-9; Psalm 45:6-7) – are not Yahweh;
rather, they are necessarily subordinate to (and exist because of) Yahweh.
Hence, Yahweh alone is the “Most High” God:
Genesis 14:22
Then Abram said to
the king of Sodom, “I have raised my hand to Yahweh God Most High, possessor of heaven and earth…”
Psalm 7:17
I will give thanks to Yahweh according to His righteousness and will sing praise to
the name of Yahweh Most High.
Psalm 83:18
That they may know that you alone—your name is Yahweh— are the Most High over all
the earth.
Psalm 92:1
It is good to give thanks to Yahweh and to sing praises to your name, O Most High;
Psalm 97:9
For you are
Yahweh Most High over all the earth; you are exalted far above all gods.
Rather than being identified with the “Most
High,” Jesus is instead said to be the “Son of the Most High.”
In Luke 1:31-32 we read the following:
”And lo! you shall be conceiving and
be pregnant and be bringing forth a Son, and you shall be calling His name
Jesus. He shall be great, and Son of the Most High shall He be called.
And the Lord God shall be giving Him the throne of David.”
In accord with what Gabriel declared to Jesus’ mother, the
demons also accurately identified Jesus as “Son of God Most High” (Mark 5:7). Now,
we know that Jesus and
the God who fathered him are two distinct beings, since (1) Jesus does not exist
as the God who begot him (and of whom Jesus is the Son), and (2) God
does not exist as the man whom he begot (and of whom he’s the Father). And since Jesus
is not his own Father (and God is not his own Son), Jesus is necessarily
distinct from the Most High God. That is, Jesus is not God Most High. And in light of the fact that Yahweh alone is the
Most High God, it follows that Jesus isn’t Yahweh. Consider the following
argument:
1. There is only one God who
is Yahweh, the Most High God.
2. Jesus is the Son of the
Most High God (the Most High God is Jesus’ Father).
3. Jesus is not Yahweh, the
Most High God.
In fact, Christ considered himself to be as distinct a being from his Father as
one man is distinct from another. For example, in John 8:16-18 we read
that Christ declared the following:
“And yet if ever I should be judging, My judging is true, for not alone am I, but I and the Father Who sends Me. Yet in this law,
also, of yours it is written that the testimony of two men is true. I am the One testifying concerning Myself,
and the Father Who sends Me is testifying concerning Me.”
The meaning of the divine
name “Yahweh” provides us with further confirmation that Jesus’ God and Father
alone is Yahweh. In Exodus 3:13-15 (LSB) we read the following:
Then Moses said to God, “Behold, I am
about to come to the sons of Israel, and I will say to them, ‘The God of your fathers
has sent me to you.’ And they will say to me, ‘What is His name?’ What shall I
say to them?” And
God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM”; and He said, “Thus you shall say to
the sons of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’” And God furthermore said to
Moses, “Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, ‘Yahweh, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac,
and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.’ This is My name forever, and this is
My memorial-name from generation to generation.”
In this passage we read
that God used two forms of the name by which Moses, when speaking to the sons
of Israel, was to identify the God who’d sent him to them: (1) “Ehyeh”
(translated above as “I AM”) and (2) “Yahweh.” The first form of the divine
name (which occurs twice in the expression translated above as “I AM WHO I AM”
or “Ehyeh asher Ehyeh”) is the first person, singular, imperfect
form of a variant of the Hebrew verb “to be” (“hayah”). Exodus 3:14 is the only
verse in which it occurs. The second form of God’s revealed name
(“Yahweh”) is the third
person, singular, imperfect form
of this verb (in contrast with “Ehyeh,” the name “Yahweh” occurs in the Hebrew
Scriptures 6,519 times). Insofar as both forms of the divine name are forms of
the verb “to be,” the third-person form of the name (“Yahweh”) can be
understood to mean “He was/is/will be,” while the first-person form
of the name (“Ehyeh”) can be understood to mean, “I was/am/will
be.”[i]
Regardless of what, exactly, these
names mean, however, the point that needs to be emphasized is this: both the
first-person form of the divine name revealed to Moses (“Ehyeh”) and the
third-person form of the name (“Yahweh”) are singular. This
being the case, God’s revealed name should be understood as referring to one
divine being with a singular personal identity (and not two or more
such divine beings). There is only One who is (and not two or
more who are) Yahweh, the one God of Israel. That is, Yahweh
is one “he” or “I” (as opposed to one “they” or “we”).
In accord with this fact, we find God repeatedly
referring to himself (or being referred to by others) with the use of singular
personal pronouns and verbs all throughout Scripture (more than 20,000 times).
The only exceptions to God’s use of singular personal pronouns when speaking in
the entirety of Scripture are found in Genesis 1:26; 3:22; 11:7 and Isaiah 6:8.
In Genesis 1:26, for example, we read the following:
Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our
likeness.”
However, in the very next verse we find
singular pronouns being used once again in reference to God:
“So God created man in his own
image, in the image of God he created him; male and
female he created them.”
We can thus conclude that, when God used the
plural “us” and “our,” he was speaking to other intelligent, personal beings
who are distinct from himself. But to whom was God speaking? Answer:
God was speaking to (and on behalf of) the created celestial beings that
we find referred to elsewhere as “the sons of God” (see, for example, Deut.
33:2; Josh 5:13-15; 2 Sam 5:24; 1 Kings 22:19-23; 2 Kings 6:8-17; Job 1:6; 2:1;
38:7; Psalm 82:1, 6; 148:1-5; Jer. 23:18; Dan 7:10; Neh. 9:6). In fact, in
the last example in which we find God using a plural pronoun when speaking
(i.e., Isaiah 6:1-8), it’s evident that Yahweh was speaking to and on behalf of
the celestial beings who were in his presence (e.g., the Seraphim that Isaiah
saw surrounding his throne). [ii]
Understood in a natural and
straight-forward way, God’s
consistent use of singular personal pronouns indicates that he is one divine individual, or person (and not two or more persons). Thus, the use of these singular pronouns contradicts the view
that Yahweh is more than one divine person (i.e., more than one rational,
self-aware divine being).
In addition to the fact
that the name “Yahweh” is singular (and thus denotes one divine individual –
i.e., the God and Father of Jesus Christ), this name also expresses the fact
that Yahweh has always existed (and thus does not depend on anyone for his
existence). In accord with this fact, we
know that the Father alone is the source of the existence
of all. For example, in 1 Cor. 8:6, Heb. 2:10 and Rev. 4:11 we read
the following concerning the God and Father of Jesus:
“For us there
is one God, the Father, out of Whom all is, and we
for Him…”
“For it became Him, because
of Whom all is, and through Whom all is, in leading many sons into glory,
to perfect the Inaugurator of their salvation through sufferings.”
“Worthy art Thou, O
Lord, our Lord and God, To get glory and honor and power; For Thou
dost create all, And because of Thy will they were, and are created.”
The fact that all is “out of” (and
exists “because of”) the Father implies that he is the only uncreated
being (hence Christ’s reference to the Father as “the only true God” in John 17:3). Rather than being “out of” anyone, the
Father is the eternal source and cause of all else that exists. And this
includes Jesus, God’s only-begotten Son. For example, in John 8:42 we read the
following:
Jesus, then, said to them, “If God were your
Father, you would have loved Me. For out of God I came forth and
am arriving. For neither have I come of Myself, but He commissions Me.” (See also John 13:3 and 16:27-28)
Compare these words of Christ with what
Paul wrote in 1 Cor. 8:6:
Paul: “There is one God, the Father, out of Whom all is.”
Christ: “For out
of God I came forth.”
Since everything that was/is created by
God is “out of”
God – and since Christ came forth “out
of God” – it follows that Christ was created by
God. Thus, Jesus – unlike his God and Father – is not an eternally-existent
being. God is the source of Jesus’ existence.[iii]
We also know that, unlike Yahweh, Jesus is dependent upon another being
for his existence – i.e., his God and Father. Thus we read the following words
of Christ in John 6:57:
“According as the
living Father commissions Me, I, also, am living because of
the Father.”
We can thus conclude
that Christ’s life – and
thus his existence – is dependent on the Father. In
contrast with what’s true of Christ, the Father’s life doesn’t depend on anyone
else; he is living (and thus exists) because of what he is. And this, of
course, is in accord with the fact that the Father – and not Jesus – is Yahweh.
Moreover, the fact that Jesus is dependent on
the Father for his existence further confirms the fact that Jesus does not
exist as his Father (and that God doesn’t exist as his Son). Obviously, Jesus
can’t be the same being as his
Father if Jesus’ existence is dependent on his Father (whereas, in contrast, Jesus’
Father is not dependent on anyone else for his existence). And since Christ understood his Father to be
Yahweh, the one God of Israel (and thus “the only true
God” [John 17:3]), it follows that Christ understood himself to be as
distinct from Yahweh as he (Christ) is distinct from every other man.
In accord with the fact
that Yahweh has always existed (and that he doesn’t depend on anyone for his
existence), we know that it’s impossible for Yahweh to die. That is, he cannot
become lifeless. He is necessarily existent, and an essentially living being. In contrast, we know that Christ did die (Luke 24:46; Rom. 5:8; Rev. 2:8)
– that is, Christ “became dead” (Rev. 1:18). And that which was true of Christ – that he was dead
(i.e., lifeless) for three days – has never
been true (and can never be true) of
Yahweh. Since Jesus died (became
lifeless) – and Yahweh can’t die
(become lifeless) – it follow that
Jesus isn’t Yahweh (for a more in-depth defense of the truth that Jesus
himself died – and not just his body – see the following articles: https://thathappyexpectation.blogspot.com/2019/11/pauls-gospel-and-death-denying.html
and https://thathappyexpectation.blogspot.com/2020/12/a-defense-of-reality-of-christs-death.html).
Consider the following
argument:
1. Yahweh can’t die (he
can’t become dead/lifeless).
2. Jesus died (he became
dead/lifeless).
3. Therefore, Jesus isn’t
Yahweh.
On the other hand, those
who believe that Jesus is Yahweh (and thus believe that Jesus
is the same eternally-existent and immortal divine being as his own God and
Father) cannot consistently believe that Jesus died/became lifeless. Instead,
they must believe that it was only Jesus’ human body that died
(and that Jesus himself – i.e., the person who they identify as Yahweh –
continued to live). Thus, the belief
that Jesus is Yahweh is contrary to the truth of the gospel that Paul heralded
among the nations (1 Cor. 15:3-4).
Now, the reader will recall
that, when God was speaking to Moses, he referred to himself as “Yahweh, the God of your fathers, the God
of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” From this we
can conclude that Yahweh is the God of
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. And according to what Peter declared in Acts 3, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is a
being who is distinct from Jesus. For example, in Acts 3:13 we read that
Peter declared the following:
The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, the God of our fathers,
glorified his servant Jesus, whom
you delivered over and denied in the presence of Pilate, when he had decided to
release him.
The God of Abraham, Isaac and
Jacob is, of course, the one divine being/God who identified himself to Moses
as Yahweh. And as noted earlier, both the name “Yahweh” and Yahweh’s repeated use of first-person
singular pronouns (e.g., “I” and “my”) tells us that he is one divine person (one “he” or “I” as opposed to one “they” or
“we”). And since it’s an indisputable fact that Jesus’ God and Father is Yahweh
– and since Yahweh is the name of a single divine person – it necessarily means
that Jesus (who is the Son of God, and thus the Son of Yahweh) is not himself
Yahweh.
Thus, the fact that Peter
understood Jesus to be the servant of
the one God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (and to have been glorified by this one God) means that Peter
understood that (1) Yahweh is identical with Jesus’ God and Father, and (2)
Jesus and Yahweh are two distinct beings. Jesus is, in other words, just as
much distinct from Yahweh as he is from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. That Peter
understood the one God of Israel to be distinct from Jesus is evident from what
he declared in his first message to Israel. In Acts 2:22 we read the following:
“Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to
you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as
you yourselves know…”
Peter
clearly had two distinct beings in view here:
1.
Jesus of Nazareth (the man
through whom God did mighty works and wonders and signs)
2. God
(i.e., the divine being who did the mighty works and wonders and signs through
Jesus)
Now,
we know that Yahweh is (1) one God (not two or more gods) and (2) only one
being (not two or more beings). It therefore follows that only one of the two distinct beings referred to by Peter is Yahweh, the one God of
Israel. Obviously, Yahweh is not the man through whom God did mighty works,
wonders and signs. Rather, Yahweh is the
God who did these works through Jesus.
Moreover,
since Jesus is “a man” (albeit the only man who is now an immortal,
heaven-dwelling being!), it follows that Jesus inherently has less in common with Yahweh with regard to his
being/nature than he does with other humans. For although Yahweh is a person
(i.e., a
rational, self-aware being), he is the only being who is
uncreated/eternally-existent, and who inherently possesses what Paul referred
to in Romans 1:20 as “divinity.”
In Acts 3:22-23 we read that
Peter declared the following:
Moses said, ‘The
Lord God will raise up for you a prophet like me from your brothers.
You shall listen to him in whatever he tells you. And it shall be
that every soul who does not listen to that prophet shall be destroyed
from the people.’
In these verses, Peter was
quoting from Deut. 18:15-19. Here’s how these verses read in the LSB:
“Yahweh
your God will raise up for you a
prophet like me from among you, from your brothers; you shall listen to
him. This is according to all that you asked of Yahweh your God in Horeb on the day of the assembly, saying, ‘Let
me not hear again the voice of Yahweh my
God; let me not see this great fire anymore, or I will die.’ And Yahweh said to me,
‘They have spoken well. I will raise up a prophet from among their brothers like you, and I will put My words in his mouth,
and he shall speak to them all that I command him. And it will be
that whoever will not listen to My words
which he shall speak in My name, I Myself will require it of
him.
In Deut. 5:4-5 we read that Moses described the same encounter
with Yahweh at the foot of Mount Sinai as follows:
“Yahweh spoke to you face to face at the mountain from
the midst of the fire. I was standing between Yahweh and you at that
time, to declare to you the word of Yahweh; for you were afraid because of
the fire and did not go up the mountain.”
It’s evident that the expression “face to face” is an idiom that
refers to direct communication between two individuals, for in Deut. 4:12, 15
we read that Moses had previously declared the following to the people of
Israel concerning the events that took place while he was on Mount Sinai:
“Then Yahweh spoke to you from the midst of the fire; you
heard the sound of words, but you saw no form—only a voice…So keep
your souls very carefully, since you did not see any form on the day
Yahweh spoke to you at Horeb from the midst of the fire…”
Based on
what we read in the above verses, it’s evident that Israel’s “face to face”
encounter with Yahweh at Mount Sinai did not involve a visible
manifestation of Yahweh. The expression “face to face” simply means that Yahweh spoke to them directly (i.e.,
without the mediation of another). In other words, when God communicated with
the people of Israel at this time, he spoke just as directly and plainly as he
did after Christ was baptized (Matt. 3:17) and when Christ was transfigured
(Matt. 17:5).[iv]
We can thus conclude the following: the one who spoke
directly to the people of Israel “from the midst of the fire” on mount Sinai (i.e.,
Yahweh) is distinct from the “prophet like Moses” whom Yahweh promised to raise
up for Israel (and in whose mouth Yahweh promised to put his words). They are
two different beings. And since the “prophet like Moses” is Jesus Christ, it
follows that Yahweh (the one whose voice Israel heard) and Jesus Christ (the
future prophet of whom Yahweh spoke) are two distinct beings.
Thus, just as it was
undoubtedly Moses’ understanding that the prophet whom Yahweh promised to raise
up would be distinct from Yahweh himself, so we have good reason to believe
that Peter understood the “prophet like [Moses]” to whom he was referring here
(i.e., Jesus Christ) to be distinct from the one who promised to raise him up
(i.e., Yahweh, the one God of Israel).
In further defense of the truth that Jesus is not
Yahweh is what Scripture reveals concerning Christ’s Lordship (and the
authority that pertains to it). In contrast with the fact that Yahweh – by
virtue of his own divinity – is inherently and eternally supreme over all,
Jesus’ Lordship and authority was
given to him by God as a reward for his faithfulness and obedience to God unto
death. In other words, Jesus’ Lordship and authority is derived. Consider, for example, the
following words of Peter in Acts 2:29-36:
“This Jesus God raises, of Whom we all are witnesses. Being,
then, to the right hand of God exalted, besides obtaining the
promise of the holy spirit from the Father, He pours out this which you are
observing and hearing. For David did not ascend into the heavens, yet
he is saying, ‘Said the Lord to my Lord, “Sit at My right Till I should be
placing Thine enemies for a footstool for Thy feet.”’ Let all the
house of Israel know certainly, then, that God makes Him
Lord as well as Christ -- this Jesus Whom you crucify!”
In these verses, Peter was quoting from Psalm 110:1 (“Yahweh said to my
Lord: ‘Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.’”). In this Messianic prophecy of
David, we find Yahweh telling someone
distinct from himself to sit at his right hand. Besides literally referring
to a physical location in the heavenly realm, sitting at God’s right hand also
implies a position of authority and preeminence that is second only to God’s.
It implies that one has been given all authority in heaven and on earth.
While the
second “Lord” being referred to by David in this prophecy would’ve been
understood by David to be someone who is superior in rank/status to himself
(hence the words “my Lord”), it’s equally clear that this individual would’ve
been understood by David as being distinct from, and subordinate to, Yahweh
himself.[v] It’s
also evident that Peter understood this
prophecy to have begun to be fulfilled through the resurrection and
ascension of Jesus, and that the exalted position at God’s right hand that the
Messiah was prophesied to receive (as is indicated by the words, “Sit at My
right…”) is a position that Jesus began to enjoy after his ascension.
Notice,
also, Peter’s declaration “that God makes
[Jesus] Lord as well as Christ.” There is,
of course, a sense in which Jesus was already “Lord” before his death and
resurrection. However, it must be kept in mind that anyone who was considered
to have a superior rank or status in relation to others could be addressed as
“lord” or “Lord” (the capitalization of the term depends entirely on one’s
translational preference). In addition to the numerous examples of humans being
addressed as “lord” in the Hebrew Scriptures, we also find examples in the
Greek Scriptures of people other than Jesus being addressed as “lord,” as well
(e.g., Philip in John 12:21 and a celestial messenger in Acts 10:3-4 and Rev.
7:14). Prior to his death and resurrection, Jesus was Lord in the sense that
every king of Israel could be considered “Lord.” The authority that Christ
received when he was resurrected, however, made him “Lord of all” (Acts 10:36). And it is this highly
exalted status that Peter had in mind when he exclaimed that God had made the
risen Jesus “Lord.”
What we read in Acts 2:36 concerning Jesus’ being made Lord is
in accord with the words of Christ himself after his resurrection. In Matthew
28:18 we read that Christ declared to his disciples, “Given to Me was
all authority in heaven and on earth.” Although Jesus had relatively great
authority during his earthly ministry (having been anointed by God “with holy
spirit and power” when he was baptized [Acts 10:38]), he did not have “all authority in heaven and on earth” until after his
death and resurrection. The reason for this is that Christ’s exalted status as
Lord of all (and the universal authority that pertains to this status) was
given to him by God as a reward for his great
obedience to God. In
Philippians 2:8-11, for example, we read the following:
“…and, being found in fashion as a human, [Christ Jesus] humbles
Himself, becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
Wherefore, also, God highly exalts Him, and graces Him with the name that is
above every name, that in the name of Jesus every knee should be
bowing, celestial and terrestrial and subterranean, and every tongue should be
acclaiming that Jesus Christ is Lord, for the glory of God, the Father.”
We also read in Romans 14:8-9 that Christ died and was restored to
life by God so that “he should be Lord of the dead as well as of the living.” This implies that
Jesus was not “Lord of the dead as well as of the
living” before his death and resurrection. We’re also told in
Hebrews 1:2, 4 that God appointed Jesus “enjoyer of the
allotment of all,” and that Jesus became “so much better than
the messengers as He enjoys the allotment of a more excellent name than they.”
In contrast with what we read concerning Jesus, Yahweh has never
had to become better than any other being or class of beings,
or receive from someone higher than himself “a name that is
above every name.” Yahweh has never had to be made “Lord,” or
be given “all authority in heaven and on earth.” Why? Answer:
Because Yahweh is “the Most High” and “the only true God.” He is the Supreme
Being. In contrast with Jesus Christ, no one made Yahweh “Lord”
or gave him his supreme authority; he has always had
the supreme authority that he has, by virtue of his inherent divinity. To think
of Yahweh, the one true God, as a being who has ever had to receive anything
from anyone is, quite simply, to fail to have a right conception of God as the
Supreme Being.
Consider the following argument:
1. Yahweh has never had to be made
Lord (he’s always been Lord in relation to his creatures), and
has never had to be given all
authority in heaven and on earth (he’s always had all
authority).
2. Because of his obedience unto death, Jesus Christ was made Lord
of all, and was given all authority in heaven and on earth.
3. Jesus Christ is not Yahweh.
What we read in Revelation
4-5 can help us better appreciate the fact that, while both Jesus and Yahweh
are worthy of being universally honored and praised, they are worthy of such
honor and praise for fundamentally different reasons. Revelation 4:11 makes it clear that the Father is worthy of
honor by virtue of being the one because of whose will all else exists:
“Worthy art Thou, O Lord, our Lord and God, to get
glory and honor and power; for Thou dost create all, and because of Thy will
they were, and are created.”
We know that the divine person referred to in
this verse as “our Lord and God” is the God and Father of Jesus Christ (i.e.,
the “Most High” and “only true God”), since he is distinguished from Christ
(who is represented as a “Lambkin” in John’s vision of the heavenly throne
room).
In Rev. 5:11-14 we read the
following:
And I perceived, and I hear a sound as of many
messengers around the throne and the animals and the elders, and their number
was ten thousand ten thousand and a thousand thousand, saying with a loud
voice, “Worthy is the Lambkin slain to get power and riches and wisdom and
strength and honor and glory and blessing!” And every creature which is in
heaven and on the earth and underneath the earth and on the sea, and all in
them, I hear also saying, “To Him Who is sitting on the throne – to the Lambkin
– be blessing and honor and glory and might For the eons of the eons!” And the
four animals said, “Amen!” And the elders fall and worship.
In contrast with what’s said concerning the
Father in Rev. 4:11 (whose worthiness is based on his divine status as Creator),
Christ is worthy to receive the honor and praise referred to in Rev. 5:11-14
because of his sacrificial death. We know this is the case because it’s by
virtue of Christ’s death that he is worthy of his God-given authority to judge
the world. In Rev. 5:9 we read the following:
“And they are singing a new song, saying, ‘Worthy
art Thou to be taking the scroll and to open its seals, For Thou wast slain and dost buy us for God by Thy blood.’”
The One from whom Christ
took the sealed scroll – i.e., the Father – is the very One who had the
authority to originally seal and possess this scroll. And God’s worthiness to
seal and possess the scroll (prior to giving it to Christ) was not based on any
act of obedience on his part (and especially not a sacrificial death, since the
Father – being the living God – has always
been immortal and unable to die). In contrast with the basis on which God is
worthy of the honor and praise he receives from the inhabitants of heaven, it
was Christ’s obedience unto death that resulted in his being worthy of the
great honor that is due him.
A similar point can be made in connection with
what we read in John 5:22-23 and Acts 17:30-31. In these verses we read the
following:
“For neither is the
Father judging anyone, but has given all
judging to the Son, that all may be honoring the Son, according as they are
honoring the Father. He who is not honoring the Son is not honoring the
Father Who sends Him.”
“Indeed, then,
condoning the times of ignorance, God
is now charging mankind that all everywhere are to repent, forasmuch as He assigns a day in which He is about to be
judging the inhabited earth in righteousness by the Man Whom He specifies,
tendering faith to all, raising Him from among the dead –”
In accord with the fact that
God made Jesus Lord of all, we read in the above verses that the Father gave
his Son the responsibility of judging the world (with the purpose being that “all may be honoring the Son, according as they are honoring
the Father”). Notice, also, that Paul identified the one by whom God is
going to be judging the world as “the Man Whom [God]
specifies.” It is a human being – the son of the one to whom Paul was
referring as “God” – whom all will be honoring (i.e., greatly esteeming and
respecting) “according as they are honoring the Father.” However, it is as judge of all (and not as the uncreated
Creator of all) that all will honor the Son just as they honor the Father. And
not only this, but Christ’s authority to judge is something that had to be given to him by the Father (hence the
words, “the Father…has given all judging to the Son”). In contrast with Christ, Yahweh (i.e., the
Father) never had to be given the
authority to judge. He has always inherently possessed this right.
[i] There is, to be sure, no consensus
among Hebrew scholars with regard to what, exactly, these names mean and how,
exactly, they should be translated into English. It would seem that the two
most commonly-held views are that “Ehyeh” means either “I am” or “I will be,”
and that “Yahweh” means “He is” or “He will be.” Despite the lack of consensus
on this, there is one point on which there does seem to be unanimous agreement:
both the first-person form of the divine name (“Ehyeh”) and the third-person
form of the divine name (“Yahweh”) are singular. This means that, regardless of how,
exactly, “Ehyeh” and “Yahweh” ought to be understood and translated into
English, the pronouns that should be used when translating these names are the
singular pronouns “I” and “he,” respectively.
[ii] This understanding is actually the mainstream view
within Christian scholarship, and is the view presented in (for example)
the NIV Study Bible as well as in the NET Bible.
For example, the NET Bible notes for Genesis 1:26 read as
follows:
“In 2 Sam 24:14 David uses the plural
as representative of all Israel, and in Isaiah
6:8 the Lord speaks on behalf of his heavenly court. In its
ancient Israelite context the plural is most naturally understood as referring
to God and his heavenly court (see 1 Kings 22:19-22; Isaiah 6:1-8). If this is
the case, God invites the heavenly court to participate in the creation of
humankind (perhaps in the role of offering praise, see Job 38:7), but he
himself is the one who does the actual creative work (v. 27). Of course, this
view does assume that the members of the heavenly court possess the divine
“image” in some way. Since the image is closely associated with rulership,
perhaps they share the divine image in that they, together with God and under
his royal authority, are the executive authority over the world.”
As mentioned in the above remarks, we have
reason to believe that the celestial beings to whom God was speaking in Gen.
1:26 (and elsewhere) – i.e., the “sons of God” – share the image and likeness
of God in which humanity was created. And, in some way not specified in the
text, these beings participated in the creation of humanity (however, it should
be noted that we’re not told that these beings were involved
in the creation of the heavens and the earth).
[iii] Elsewhere, Christ referred to himself as having come “out
of heaven.” As I’ve argued elsewhere (https://www.biblestudentsnotebook.com/bsn715.pdf), these words refer to the fact that God
was the direct source of his Son (having supernaturally generated Jesus – i.e.,
fathered him – in the womb of his mother). But even if one understands the
words “out of heaven” to mean that Christ first existed in heaven as a
celestial being before he “became human” (as most Christians believe to be the
case), the words “for out of God I came forth” do not express the idea of a
prior heavenly existence. Rather, they express the idea that God is the source
of Jesus’ existence (and that, therefore, Jesus did not always exist).
[iv] Similarly, in
Exodus 33:7-11 we’re told that, in the tent of meeting, Yahweh would speak
privately to Moses “face to face, as a man speaks to his friend.” The expression
“face to face” does not imply that Moses’ interaction with Yahweh on these
occasions involved a visual manifestation or facial appearance of Yahweh (after
all, one who is blind can speak to someone “face to face”).
The implication of these verses in which Yahweh is said to have
spoken to people “face to face” is that, on other occasions (perhaps on most
other occasions), he didn’t speak directly to
people. Rather, he communicated with people through an intermediary or
representative. This means that, when we read of Yahweh appearing to
certain human beings in the Hebrew Scriptures – e.g., to Hagar (Genesis 16:13),
Abraham (Genesis 17:1-22; 18), Jacob (Genesis 32:24-30), Moses, Aaron, Nadab,
Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel (Exodus 24:9-11), Gideon (Judges
6:22-23) and Manoah and his wife (Judges 13:22) – the one referred to as
“Yahweh” in the historical narrative was actually a representative of Yahweh.
In support of this understanding, let’s consider Hebrews 2:2-3.
In these verses we read the following:
“For if the word spoken through messengers came to be confirmed,
and every transgression and disobedience obtained a fair reward, how shall we
escape when neglecting a salvation of such proportions…?”
The “word spoken through messengers” is a reference to the law
of Moses. That messengers were involved in the giving of the law is further
supported by the words of Stephen as recorded in Acts 7. In v. 38, we read
that the one who spoke to Moses on Mount Sinai was actually one of
God’s messengers (the same can be said for the being who spoke to Moses from
out of the burning bush; see Exodus 3:1-15 and compare with Acts 7:30). We go
on to read in v. 53 that Israel had received the law “as ordained by angels”
(LSB) or “by decrees given by angels” (NET). Paul confirmed this truth in
Galatians 3:15, where he wrote that the law was “prescribed through messengers”
(CLNT).
But how do we know that the messengers referred to in these
verses were acting as representatives of Yahweh? Answer: Because, in Exodus 19:20, we read
that “Yahweh descended to the top of Mount Sinai and called
Moses to the top of the mountain.” We go on to read that “Moses went up to
Yahweh,” and that “Yahweh” began to speak to him. In Deuteronomy 4:14
we read that Moses declared the following to Israel:
”Moreover, at that same time Yahweh commanded me to
teach you statutes and ordinances for you to keep in the land which you are
about to enter and possess.”
Since it was through the instrumentality of God’s messengers that
God gave the law to Israel, this can only mean that the one referred to as
“Yahweh” in verses such as Exodus 19:20 and Deuteronomy 4:14 was one of God’s
messengers, acting and speaking on God’s behalf. Evidently, then, a messenger of
Yahweh who has been authorized to speak and act on Yahweh’s behalf (and thus
function as Yahweh’s representatives/agents) could be referred to as “Yahweh”
in the historical narrative.
[v] Some Christians will claim that David was ascribing divine
status to the Messiah when he referred to him as “my Lord” in Psalm 110:1.
However, the term David used in reference to the Messiah – i.e., adoni (“my
lord,” which is from adon, “lord”) – is consistently used in the Hebrew
Scriptures for those who were understood to be distinct from Yahweh.
It was used most often in reference to humans who were considered to be of a
superior status/rank (e.g., Gen. 24:12; 2 Sam. 15:15). On a few occasions it
was used in reference to celestial messengers (e.g., Dan. 12:8; Zech. 1:9; cf.
Rev. 7:14, where an angel is addressed by John as “my Lord”). To see all the
occurrences of this term, click the following link: https://biblehub.com/hebrew/strongs_113.htm.
In contrast with the terms used for
humans (adon/adoni), the Hebrew title for “Lord” that is reserved for Yahweh
is Adonai (which is an emphatic form of adon). For all
occurrences of this term, see the following: https://biblehub.com/hebrew/strongs_136.htm. Although the terms are similar in spelling, the
differences in use and application have significant implications regarding the
identity of the one God of Israel and the nature of the Messiah. While it
is clear that the person told to sit at Yahweh’s right hand would’ve been
understood by David as being superior in rank to himself (hence David calls him
“my Lord”), it is equally clear that this person was understood as being
distinct from, and subordinate to, Yahweh himself.
This is in accord with the fact that the Messiah had
consistently been prophesied in the Hebrew Scriptures as being a member of
Adam’s race, and as being distinct from the one God of Israel (see, for
example, Genesis 3:15; 12:3; 22:18; 28:14; 49:10; Numbers 24:17-19; Deuteronomy
18:15; 2Sa 7:12-13; 1 Chronicles 17:13; Psalm 45:2-7, 17; 72:1; 89:3-4; 110:1;
132:11; Isaiah 7:14; 11:1-5; 52-53; Jeremiah 23:5; 30:21; Daniel 7:13; Zech.
6:12-13; Micah 5:2).
No comments:
Post a Comment