19th Atlanta Theological Conference

April 25-28, 2010


Sunday, April 25
4:00 Registration
5:30 Evening meal
7:15 Welcome
7:30 Dan Gill: “A First-Century Gospel – in the 21st Century”

Monday, April 26
8:30 Breakfast and Late Registration
9:15 Joe Martin: “They’ve Gone Too Far: Being Heterodox in a Homodox Ghetto”
10:30 Kent Ross: “Recovering a Theological World in Disarray”
11:30 Lunch and free time
1:30 Robin Todd: “From Being Scattered to Being One”
2:30 Break
3:00 Faith stories
4:00 Free time
5:30 Evening meal
7:00 Gregg Prettyman: “The Kingdom Parables of Jesus”

Tuesday, April 27
8:30 Breakfast
9:15 Faith stories
10:30 Dustin Smith: “The Gospel of the Kingdom and the People of God”
11:30 Lunch and free time
1:30 Joel Hemphill
2:30 Break
3:00 Faith stories
4:00 Free time
5:30 Evening meal
7:00 Dwight Anderson: “Keeping the Human Mind in Bondage”

Wednesday, April 28
8:30 Breakfast
9:15 Kermit Zarley
10:30 Anthony Buzzard: “Helping the World Count to One and Believe the Gospel of the KG”
12:00 Lunch

God is a Person

Every so often I come upon Christian networks [blogs] or listen to commentaries or debates on whether or not the God of the Bible [aka. YHWH of the OT] is a “Person” or a “spiritual being” — as if there is any real difference in the simple meaning of the word “person” [one individual being, in other words, a person(1)] as it is used throughout the scriptures in relation to YHWH God.

This whole debate is a product of the deeply ingrained and grammatically incomprehensible Trinitarian doctrine, which some of its most famous exponents, such as the German theological Karl Rahner in his The Trinity [1970, pp 113-14], teach as “the one God [of the Jewish-Christian Shema, Deu 6.4; Mar 12.29] subsisting [existing] as three distinct persons [hypostasis]…the Father, the Son, the Spirit…hence these ‘three’ are not the same ‘one’”. This doctrine is a product of the ancient Catholic creedal statements composed during the 4th-6th centuries first under the pagan, turned Christian sympathizer, Roman Emperor Constantine.

Apart from the fact that such Trinitarian statements have obvious theological holes, I’d like to argue from scripture [and not from Catholic creeds] why YHWH, the God and Father of our lord Messiah Jesus, is not a “What” [an essence, ousia] but one “Who”!

Similar to His creatures, YHWH is described in the Bible as having a “soul” [Lev 26.11, 30; Zech 11.8; Isa 1.14; Jer 32.41] and a “spirit” [Gen 6.3; Isa 42:1; Neh 9.30]. The word often translated “soul” comes from the Hebrew nephesh, a “feminine noun [that] is used 753 times in the Old Testament and has a broad range of meanings. Most of its uses fall into these categories:

• breath, literally or figuratively (Jer 15:9);
• the inner being with its thoughts and emotions (Jdg 10:16; Pro 14:10; Eze 25:6);
• and by extension, the whole person (Gen 12:5; Lev 4:2; Eze 18:4).”

Now the word translated “spirit” is likewise a “feminine noun [which also signifies breath and wind]. The word is used to refer to the "Spirit of God" or "the LORD"…properly referred to as the Holy Spirit (Psa 51:11; 106:33; Isa 63:10-11).”[2] The point is that these words are expressive of the whole person of God [cp. Deu 26.16; Joshua 10.39].

When scripture describes YHWH in such terms it should communicate to the reader that we are dealing with one single personal being, and not some non-personal “spiritual nature” — certainly not one “what” or one “essence.”

It is important to define God as a “Person.” We must not represent the God of the Bible as one What. The developed doctrine of the Trinity led to non-biblical, philosophical language of nature, being, substance and redefinition of “persons” as found in the creeds.

The Holy Spirit is the spirit of the particular individual whose name is YHWH. It is not some “third…distinct person existing within the One Godhead” composed of “the Father and the Son” — thus making up “the one [triune] God”.

Scripture tells us that although YHWH is described as a “spiritual being”, He is also said to have this spirit within Him. This concept may be confusing for some since Jesus tells us that “God is spirit” [John 4.24]. So we must keep in mind that the spirit of God [an expression of His character, mind and Person] is the one and the same Person of God.

In other words, while “God is spirit”, God also has a spirit that is said to work and communicate to us [cp. John 14.15f.]. This is parallel to the Johannine saying that “God is love” [1 John 4.8] or “God is light” [1 John 1.5]. Again, these are qualities that are perfectly expressed and manifested in the one personal God.

“But God has revealed [His promise, purpose, plan, gospel etc.] to us through the spirit, for the spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. For who among men knows the things of a man, except the spirit of the man, which is in him? Even so [in the same manner] the things of God no one has known, except the Spirit of God. But we received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit that is from God, in order that we might know the things that were freely given to us by God.” 1Cor 2.10-13[3]

The first thing to note in this passage is the personal quality that is given to “the spirit of man…who” is said to be “in him”. This example is in turn contrasted with that of “the Spirit of God” Who is the one “who knows and searches the deep things of God”. This makes sense only within the Hebraic thinking of the Bible writers who see both “the spirit” and “the man” [in this instance] as representative of the one whole, human person. The same can be said for God in this passage. God's spirit as an extension of His Person!

The same idea is also present in the NT when the Apostle Paul prays “that the God of peace Himself…keep your whole spirit and soul and body” holy until the coming of the lord Jesus Christ [1Thess 5.23].

“Spirit, soul, and body represent the entirety of [a human person]. It seems unlikely that this is a tripartite division of human nature into body, soul, and spirit, where ‘spirit’ and ‘soul’ would refer to different parts; more likely Paul is simply using several terms for emphasis. For similar ways of expressing the totality of [a human person] see Matt. 10:28; Mark 12:30; 1 Cor. 7:34.”[4]

When it comes to the infinite, “self-existing” person Who is God [Ex 3.14], His qualities are likewise infinite and varied [wisdom, prudence, word, etc.] yet, they remain expressive of the one Personal God. These personifications should not be confused with distinct persons.

The Biblical God is not an abstract idea, never an essence, as pagan religions would like us to believe [leading to the aberrant Trinitarian concept of the “triune nature of God”]. God is a Personal Being described by singular personal pronouns. Yet it is clear that just because YHWH God is described as having a “soul” and “spirit” [hence described as a “Person”, in the secular and biblical sense of the words] He is unlike His creatures in so far as God is not a human being, animal nor an angelic spirit.

Nonetheless, YHWH, the God and Father of our lord Messiah Jesus, is one Person!

Thousands of singular personal pronouns describe Him, not it, as a singular Person.

“YHWH, the God of the breath of all flesh…In His hand is the life of every living thing and breath of all mankind…For I will not contend forever, nor will I always be angry, for the spirit would grow faint before Me, and the breath of life that I made.” Num 27.16; Job 12.10; Isa 57.16

Footnotes:

[1] See Merriam-Webster Dictionary.

[2] All quotes from nephesh & ruach found in The WordStudy Dictionary.

[3] Revised English Version by Spirit & Truth Fellowship International.

[4] ESV Study Bible.

Human “gods”

A biblical answer to the oft-asked question, ‘is Jesus god?’

First, it will serve us well to look back at the scriptures and see what they mean by the word “god” [elohim]. Biblical usage suggests that the plural ending of elohim reflects a plural of honor or plural of fullness. It's like capitalizing the word “God” instead of printing “god”. The Hebrews sought to intensify or amplify the word because they believed, unlike their polytheistic-pagan neighbors, that theirs was the Only Deity who embodied all definitions of the title elohim. Hence, we find this unique title given to the God of Israel: “Elohim of elohim” [Deu 10.17; Ps 136.2; Dan 2.47; 11.36].

So, to the Jew, whenever they referred to their one and only elohim they did not mean to say “Gods” but something like, “the Great, the Mighty One God” [cp. Josh 22.22]. Older Hebrew grammars called this a plural of majesty or excellence; plural of greatness or fullness of power and might; or a plural of intensification.[1]

Exodus 18:21–22 tells us Moses appointed a group of officials to serve as judges to relieve some of the burden of leadership which he alone had carried since leaving Egypt. Some 40 years earlier! Their magisterial role is mentioned frequently in the Hebrew Scriptures (Deut 16:18; 19:16–18; 21:1–4, 20). Later, after Israel’s military conquests of Canaan, different offices were established to serve the people [elders, Josh 7:6; 8:33; leaders, 1:10; 3:2; 8:33]. Their function was to council people like Joshua on administrative and military issues, carrying out their orders in organizing and keeping order in the camp, as well as performing important ritual and covenant-making occasions (see Ex 24:1; Num 11:16).[2]

Yet, even before the official institution of these leaders scripture tells us that Moses was made elohim to his brother Aaron and later to the Pharaoh so he could stand-in as the God of Israel’s representative in the pagan court of Egypt (Ex 4.16; 7:1). But even though elohim was not the common title for the Jewish judges, when used in their legal sense, it was employed not strictly but figuratively. This is because the judges were instructed to “judge not for man but for YHWH [since] the judgment remains with God [alone]” [Deu 1.17; 2Chro 19.6].

So, then, it came to be understood that these human judges were in some sense regarded as divine representatives or as bearers of divine authority and majesty. Not only to the people of Israel but to other nations as well.

We find other examples in Exodus 21:6; 22:8[3] [cf. 1 Sam. 2:25]; Judg. 5:8; and Psalm 82:1, 6[4] where “the term ‘elohim is morphologically plural, so it can mean ‘gods’ (not the only true God but lesser supernatural beings) in many contexts, including already Exod 12.2; 15.11; 18.11, 15; 20.3, 23. This could seem to lend credibility to the idea that by extension ‘elohim might mean ‘mighty people’ or ‘persons of authority’. The term is used as well in legal contexts in ways that might seem at first glance to refer more to human judges than God per se (Exod 22.8-9[5]). Seemingly convincing to some is the use of a plural verb with ‘elohim in Exod 22.9 (NIV ‘the one whom the judges declare guilty’)…”[6]

“Elohim may describe beings who were thought, as superhuman, to partake of the Elohim-nature, though they were not on that account regarded as objects of worship…Accordingly, we ought probably to explain Gen 1.26 in the same way…Man is formed in the Elohim-mould, borne by God, and possessed in some sense by angelic beings...The titles Elim, Elohim are used in some few cases of men, as possessors of God-like power or rank. Such may be the use of Elim in Job 41.25[7]; Ezek. 17.13; 32.21; 2Kings 24.15, where the R.V. adopts the rendering mighty. Moses is to become Elohim in relation to Aaron [and] again he is to be Elohim to Pharaoh [Ex 4.16; 7.1]…Elohim is employed to denote judges or rulers, either as acting as God’s representatives, or as exercising a power which is God-like. So Ex 21.6; 22.8-9, 28; 1Sam 2.25; Ps 82.6…So also, the Elohim of Ps 138.1, in whose presence the psalmist will sing praises to God, may perhaps denote earthly potentates…And, once more, the intensive plural Elohim appears, upon the only tenable explanation, to be used in Ps 45.6[8] of the King who forms the subject of the poem…”[9]

The reference in Ps 82.1“undoubtedly [refers] to magistrates [judges], and the idea is, that they were to be regarded as representatives of God; as acting in his name; and as those, therefore, to whom, in a subordinate sense, the name gods might be given. Compare Psalm 82:6…they were the representatives of the divine sovereignty in the administration of justice. Compare Rom 13:1-2, 6. They were, in a sense, gods to other people; but they were not to forget that God stood among them as their God; that if they were exalted to a high rank in respect to their fellow men, they were, nevertheless, subject to the One to whom the name of God belonged in the highest sense.”[10]

In the NT, it’s not unusual to find Jesus appealing to this biblical precedent of humans as “gods” in John 10.34 when arguing the case for his self-designation as “the [naturally created] Son of God” [cp. Mat 1.1, 18-20; Lu 1.30-35; John 1.18]. Who, as the “seed of the woman” [Ex 3.15], promised prophet [Deu 18.14f.] and prophesized Anointed One has been divinely authorized as the supreme messenger and expression [cp. "character", Heb 1.3; "image", Col 1.15] of “the only true God” [John 17.3].

“The closest analogy to the use of the word (or title) ‘god’ for Jesus, however, is the use of such a term for Moses. Already Ex. 7.1 says that God makes Moses god to Pharaoh; and even before that Ex. 4:16 makes nearly the same claim (le lohim, ‘as god’) of Moses in his relation to Aaron. Consequently, Philo [1st century Jewish philosopher from Alexandria] does not hesitate to call Moses god, and in quite an unrestricted sense: ‘for [Moses] was called god and king of the whole people, for he was said to enter the dark cloud wherein was God’ (Life Mos. 1.158)…it is clear that by calling Moses god, Philo does not actually equate Moses with the supreme God, just as it is clear that the Johannine Christians, by calling Jesus god, do not actually equate him with the supreme God, inasmuch as Jesus is in Johannine tradition otherwise Son of God and the revealer sent from heaven. Beyond Philo, the divine appellation adheres to Moses when Josephus calls him a theios aner (‘divine man’, AF 3.180). One may suspect, on the basis of this evidence, that there was some connection between the equation of Jesus with God in the Fourth Gospel and the comparison of Jesus to Moses.”[11]

Footnotes

[1] See Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar. Ed. E. Kautzsch and A. E. Cowley. 2nd ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1910, 1985. See §124, especially paragraphs g-I; Paul Jouon. A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. Trans. T. Muraoka. Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1994.

[2]The IVP Bible background commentary: Old Testament, Jos 23:2, InterVarsity Press. 2000.

[3] NAB: “You shall not revile God, nor curse a prince of your people.” Footnote: or perhaps "the gods," in the sense of "the judges," as the parallel with a prince of your people suggests. Amplified Bible: “You shall not revile God [the judges His agents], or esteem lightly or curse a ruler of your people.”

NBV: Heap no abuse upon judges and do not curse a ruler of your people.” Footnote: Again the name Elohim is used, which usually stands for God, but balanced, Hebrew fashion, with "rulers" in the next clause, it must denote judges as it did previously.

[4] “…human judges are called elohim [gods], even as they are called theoi [gods] in the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew (Exod.22:27).” M. Thompson, The God of the Gospel of John, p. 21. Also see J. Harris, Jesus as God, the New Testament Use of Theos in Reference to Jesus, pp. 24-26.

[5] AB: “…the house owner shall appear before God [the judges as His agents]…the cause of both parties shall come before God [the judges].”

[6] The New American Commentary, p 481.

[7] Job 5.1; 15.15 has “holy ones. The term “holy ones”, which designates servants or angels, occurs elsewhere in Scripture (Hos 11:12; Zech 14:5; Dan 4:10, 14, 20; 7:13; and Ps 89:7). They are holy because of their closeness to God, not because of any inherent purity.” The IVP Bible background commentary : Old Testament, Job 5:1, InterVarsity Press, 2000.

[8] The messianic king may be called elohim in Psalm 45:6, although the Hebrew can be legitimately translated as: "Your throne is Elohim forever and ever." Isaiah uses the ancient word El in two messianic titles: Immanu-El (7:14, 8:8) and El Gibbor (“mighty warrior”, 9:5).

[9] C.F. Burney, Outlines of Old Testament Theology, pp14-16.

[10] Barnes’ Notes on the Old Testament, Psalms, Volume 1, p. 328. [emphasis added]

[11] Jack T. Sanders, Schismatics, Sectarians, Dissisdents, Deviants: The First One Hundred Years of Jewish-Christian Relations (Trinity Press International, 1993), pp. 93-94.