Old and New Testaments
The Heavenly Interpretation
"Jesus said to them, "My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I, too, am working." For this reason the Jews tried all the harder to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God. Jesus gave them this answer: "I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does. For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it. Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son, that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father, who sent him" - John 5:17-24 (NIV).
(In the process of being reformatted and updated)
This booklet looks at God and Jesus Christ exploring their roles and relationships. It exposes the false doctrine of the 'Trinity' which is an attempt to confuse and obscure Their multifaceted relationship. This booklet looks especially at their working relationship. It is concerned with "how They see things" - "the heavenly interpretation".
An example of the "heavenly" interpretation:
"... Saul began to destroy the church. Going from house to house, he dragged off men and women and put them in prison... Saul was still breathing out murderous threats against the Lord's disciples... As he neared Damascus on his journey, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, "Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?" "Who are you, Lord?" Saul asked. "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting," he replied" (Acts 8:3, 9:1, 3-5, NIV).
"... when the voice went on to ask the question "Why do you persecute me?" Saul was without doubt thoroughly confused. He was not persecuting God! Rather, he was defending God And his laws!...
"Saul came to realize something of the organic and indissoluble unity that exists between Christ and his own. For though he believed he was only persecuting the followers of Jesus, the heavenly interpretation of his action was that he was persecuting the risen Christ himself" (Richard N. Longenecker, Acts, EBC, Vol. 9, p.371).
"One of the greatest obstacles we face in trying to interpret the Bible is that we are inclined to think in our own cultural and linguistic categories. This is no surprise since our categories are often all that we have, but it is a problem because our own categories often do not suffice and sometimes mislead" (John H. Walton, Genesis, NIVAC, pp.67-68).
This booklet then attempts to explain the conventions employed by the Biblical writers to describe God and Christ's working relationship with each other, angels, prophets and mankind.
This booklet is part of a trilogy which includes The Kingdom of God - What, Where and When? and The New Covenant - The Sarah and Keturah Administrations. Because these subjects are interrelated certain material is common to all.
Note on quotes:
Various Biblical commentators are quoted. Some of these quotes are selective. That is, their material is used, as it agrees with the premises of this booklet. For example, most commentators believe in the Trinity so that references to or pertaining to the support of the Trinity are omitted.
GENESIS
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
John 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
"John is asserting that the "Word" is the source of all that is visible and antedates the totality of the material world.
"Literally, it could and should be rendered "When the beginning began, the Word was already there." This is the sense of en [was], which is in the perfect tense and implies continued existence in the past. So before the beginning began, the Word was already in existence. This is tantamount to saying that the Word predates time or Creation.
"... the presence of the article shows that it is the "Word" that is the subject. The fact that theos is a predicate shows that it is describing the nature of the Word; he is of the same nature and essence as the noun in the predicate; that is the Word is divine (RHG, p.767)" (Merrill C. Tenney, John, EBC, Vol.9, pp.28-29).
At the beginning of creation there were two God-beings: God and the Word. There is no mention of any other God-being.
NO TRINITY
"Trinity. The word Trinity is not found in the Bible, and though used by Tertullian in the last decade of the 2nd century, it did find a place formally in the theology of the church till the 4th century... It makes three affirmations: that there is but one God, that the Father, the Son, and the Spirit is each God, and that the Father, Son and the Spirit is each a distinct person. In this form it has become the faith of the church since it received is full formulation in the hands of Tertullian, Athanasius and Augustine.
"Though it is not a biblical doctrine in the sense that any formulation of it can be found in the Bible, it can be seen to underlie the revelation of God, implicit in the OT and explicit in the NT. By this we mean that though we cannot speak confidently of the revelation of the Trinity in the OT, yet once the substance of the doctrine has been revealed in the NT, we can read back many implications of it in the OT" (R.A. Finlayson, "Trinity", New Bible Dictionary, p.1221).
The Trinity doctrine attempts to prove that, based on a number of scriptures that at first glance appears to support the theory, the Holy Spirit is a God-being.
The argument for rejecting the doctrine of the Trinity is supported by two major points of typology, which will be look at below. The Trinity theory is a very subtle doctrine that twists two important relationships that the Bible reveals between God and the Word.
TYPOLOGY
Since typology is a foundation for this article we will briefly define what we mean:
Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Heb 8:4 ... there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:
Heb 8:5 Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern showed to thee in the mount.
"Type; Typology. A hermeneutical concept in which a biblical place (Jerusalem, Zion), person (Adam, Melchizedek), event (flood, brazen serpent), institution (feasts, covenant) office (prophet, priest, king), or object (tabernacle, altar, incense) becomes a pattern by which later persons or places are interpreted due to the unity of events within salvation-history... The "type" is the original person or event and the "anti-type" (Gk. antitypes; cf. 1 Pet 3:21) the later "copy" that fulfills the former... The relationship between type and antitype is real and historical, based on an analogous correspondence that exists between them..." (G. R. Osborne, "Typology", ISBE, Vol.4, p.930).
The above quote is a general description of typology. Osborne in his article went on to note that:
"... (in an interesting reversal of the usual order) the heavenly sanctuary prefigures the early tabernacle (8:5,9,24)...
"In fact we may speak of horizontal (historical) and vertical (earthly-heavenly) types, with the latter predominately in the Epistles to the Hebrews" (ibid., p.931).
Rom 5:14 Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern [tupos] of the one [Christ] to come. (NIV).
1 Pet 3:20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
1 Pet 3:21 The like figure [antitupos] whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
W.E. Vine defines "figure" as:
(1) TUPOS, a type, figure, pattern, is translated "figures" (i.e., representatives of gods) in Acts 7:43;... and in Rom 5:14, of Adam as a "figure" of Christ.
(2) ANTIUPOS, an adjective, used as a noun, denotes, lit., a striking back; metaphorically, 'corresponding to'
(a) a copy of an archetype (anti, corresponding to, and No.1), i.e. the even or person or circumstance corresponding to the type, Heb 9:24, R.V., "like in pattern" ... of the Tabernacle, which with its structure and appurtenances, was a pattern of that "holy place," "heaven itself," "the true," into which Christ entered "to appear before the face of God for us"...
(b) a corresponding type, 1 Peter 3:21, said of baptism; the circumstances of the flood, the ark and its occupants, formed a type, and baptism 'a corresponding type' (not an antitype), each setting forth the spiritual realities of the death, burial, and resurrection of believers in their identification with Christ. It is not a case of type and antitype, but of two types, that in Genesis, the type, and baptism, the corresponding type" (Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, pp.95-96).
In the article to follow type is used of the 'lesser type' while antitype is used of the 'greater type'.
It will be also argued, based on one of the two points of "typology" referred to above, that though the Word existed prior to "the beginning" that He had a beginning. Even if the typological argument turns out not to be correct it is a good 'template' in explaining who and what is God.
CREATOR AND SAVIOUR
In John 1:1-3 we saw that the Word made "all things". The Word, therefore, had the role of Creator. Later He was to have another role as Saviour:
John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Mark 1:1 ... the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;
John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
A note on the use of the term Jesus Christ in this article:
"The language Paul uses to refer to him before his human conception and birth is often borrowed from his later human life, just as we say 'the Queen was born in 1926', not meaning that she was already Queen, but that the person we now know as Queen was born that year. Thus 2 Corinthians 8:9, 'For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor': not that the pre-existent one was already Jesus, the Messiah, but that the person we now know as Jesus, the Messiah, is to be identified as God's pre-existent agent" (N.T. Wright, Colossians and Philemon, Tyndale, p.69).
The Word in the role of Saviour became "the Son of God". The Word as Jesus Christ was now in a Father-and-Son relationship with God. But what was the relationship of the Word, as Creator, with God? The Trinity doctrine obscures this relationship.
But before addressing this relationship we look at the basis of the working relationship of the Father and Son.
ABSOLUTE AND DYNAMIC CREATORS
Rev 1:8 "I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, "who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty."
1 Cor 8:6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
"Concerning the world, the Father is the source (ex hou) of all creation, and Jesus Christ is the dynamic One through whom (di' hou) creation came into existence. As for the Christian, he lives for God, the source of all, and has the power for so living through Jesus Christ" (W. Harold Mare, 1 Corinthians, EBC, Vol.10, p.239).
God the Father and Jesus Christ] "have differing functions, which are expressed in the Greek prepositions. The Father is one from (Greek ek) whom come all things: i.e. he is the source and origin. Jesus Christ is the agent and mediator: i.e. the one through (Greek dia) whom everything and everyone comes into existence.
"The most natural meaning of 'us' and 'we' in this passage is Christians: thus Jesus is the bridge to God, the go-between, the mediator, the way to God..." (David Prior, The Message of 1 Corinthians, BST, p.145).
This implies that both God and Christ are Creators. God creates through Jesus Christ. The implication being, that not only does God create by Jesus Christ, but God works through Jesus Christ to achieve His purpose in all things. With Christ as God's divine "agent", the titles and roles of God are applicable to Jesus Christ.
"God himself speaks and, with his own signature, vouches for the faithfulness of the coming of Christ... Only the Book of Revelation refers to God as the "Alpha and the Omega". God is the absolute source of all creation and history..." (Alan F. Johnson, (Revelation, EBC, Vol.12, p.423, note on Rev 1:8).
"God the Father is the ultimate source of creation (Ac 4:24). God the Son is the dynamic one through whom, with the Father, all things came into existence (Jn 1:3; Col 1:16)" (New International Study Bible, p.1744, note on 1 Corinthians 8:6).
At this point we will introduce a concept, that we will look at later, that God the Father is the "ultimate" or "absolute" Creator while Christ is the "dynamic" Creator, for want of better terminology. It then follows that the Father is the 'absolute' God-being, while Christ is the 'dynamic' God-being.
But before developing this concept further we need to present the typological argument for God's relationship with the Word.
THE AGENT OF CREATION
Prov 3:19 The LORD by wisdom hath founded the earth; by understanding hath he established the heavens.
Psa 33:6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.
Prov 8:23 I was appointed from eternity, from the beginning, before the world began.
Prov 8:30 Then I was the craftsman at his side. I was filled with delight day after day, rejoicing always in his presence (NIV).
Prov 8:31 rejoicing in his whole world and delighting in mankind (NIV).
"First, wisdom is what Yahweh as Creator counted primary and indispensable. Second, wisdom is both older than the universe, and fundamental to it. Not a speck of matter (26b), not a trace of order (29), came into existence but by wisdom...
"The important and keenly-debated question arises: is wisdom here conceived as a hypostasisi (i.e. an actual heavenly being) or as a personification (i.e. an abstraction, made personal for the sake of poetic vividness)?
"To the present commentator, the context points to the latter... But if this is how the poem should be read in its immediate context, there is also a wider setting. The New Testament shows by its allusions to this passage (Col 1:15-17; 2:3; Rev 3:14), that the personifying of wisdom, far from overshooting the literal truth, was a preparation for its full statement, since the agent of creation was no mere activity of God, but the Son, His eternal Word, Wisdom and Power..." (Derek Kidner, Proverbs, TOTC, pp.78-79).
"New Testament portraits of Jesus who was present and instrumental in creation did not claim one-to-one identification with these instruments of Wisdom but rather used the principle of analogy to say that Jesus, the wisdom of God, is like these various portraits... Jesus, present and instrumental at creation, was identified as sharing features in common with that literary personification of wisdom tradition" (Paul E. Koptak, Proverbs, NIVAC, p.258).
Pr 1:8 Listen, my son, to your father's instruction
and do not forsake your mother's teaching.
Pr 1:20 Wisdom calls aloud in the street,
she raises her voice in the public squares;
"20-21 The torah of the father/mother (v 8) has ended, but Woman Wisdom is now given center stage with a biting speech" (Roland E. Murphy, Proverbs, WBC, p.10).
One analogy that maybe made from the OT is that God and the Word were in a "father-mother" type relationship founded on their "husband-wife" type relationship.
MAN LIKE GOD
Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness...
Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him
Gen 5:1 This is the book of the generations of Adam...
Gen 5:2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam...
"In v.27 it is stated twice that man was created (bara') in God's image and a third time that man was created (bara') "male and female." The same pattern is found in Genesis 5:1-2a... The singular man ('adam) is created as a plurality, "male and female"... in a similar way the one God ... created man through an expression of his plurality (..."let us make man in our image"). Following this clue the divine plurality expressed in v.26 is seen as an anticipation of the human plurality of the man and woman, thus casting the human relationship between man and woman in the role reflecting God's own relationship with himself" (John H. Sailhamer, Genesis, EBC., Vol.2, p.38).
Sailhamer comes close to drawing the right conclusion. The trinity doctrine perhaps prevents him from drawing what, we would argue, is the right conclusion. We contend that the "human relationship" between a husband and wife is a "type" of the relationship between God and the Word.
"The words and called their name Adam (AV, RV), Or Man (RSV), emphasize the fact that though the male, as head, bore the name of the race, it takes the two sexes together to express what God means by 'human' (cf. 1 Cor 11:11)" (Derek Kidner, Genesis, TOTC, p.80).
"If we ask why the author has singled out the creation of man in this way, one obvious answer is that he intended to portray him as a special creature, marked off from the rest of God's works ... the narrative seems just as intent on showing that man is like God as well" (Sailhamer, Genesis, EBC, Vol.2, p.37).
While 'Adam' was the name of the first man, Eve, as the first woman, is also 'Adam'. While the Father is God, so also is the Word. God and Christ together are also God.
Gen2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.
With Adam and Eve being one flesh (Genesis 2:23-24) it would follow that the human relationship of marriage reflect the relationships of the Father and Christ in their relationships of being one (John 17:11). More on this principle later.
Typology therefore suggests that the 'human' relationship is only a type of the superior relationship that existed prior to Adam and Eve. The 'human' husband-wife relationship, that includes sex, is only one type of the husband-wife relationship that exists.
EVE A TYPE OF CHRIST?
Prov 8:22 "The LORD brought me forth as the first of his works, before his deeds of old;
Gen 2:20 ... for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.
Gen 2:21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
Gen 2:22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.
Gen 2:23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.
Gen 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
The argument is that as Adam existed before Eve, who was also an "Adam", God existed before the Word, who was also "God".
Typology would suggest that God 'took-of-Himself' and created the Word. As Eve was a physical-being like Adam so the Word was a God-being like God.
(God and Christ did not 'take of themselves' to create other 'beings').
If this is so, then it would follow, that when the time came for the Word to become God's son that God 'took-back-of-Himself' and then through His Holy Spirit impregnated Mary "begetting" His Son.
Or a better explanation is that as Christ's spirit is God's spirit, (this concept is developed later), when God's spirit came upon Mary (cp. Luke 1:35) it was actually Christ's spirit and at that exact time the Word of God became the Son of God. (When Christ's spirit comes upon those whom God is calling they become God's spirit-begotten sons - see below).
John 5:26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;
John 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.
It could be said that Eve began life at the creation of Adam, that is, she existed in Adam, seeing that she was made from Adam's rib. It could also then be said though the Word was created that He has also existed in God the Father. Below is the precedent for this conclusion:
Heb 7:5 And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they come out of the loins of Abraham:
Heb 7:9 And as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, payed tithes in Abraham.
"...the author suggests that since Levi was a descendant of Abraham [Levi was the great-grandson of Abraham] he could be said to be already in Abraham's loins. He senses that this method is somewhat strange, hence his introductory formula: One might even say (hos epos eipein), and expression found nowhere else in the New Testament. He seems to be preparing the readers for a turn of thought with which they might not be familiar. The idea is clearly that Abraham's descendants are identified in their forefather and therefore the Levitical order was in effect acknowledging the superiority of Melchizedek [who received tithes from Abraham]. The force of this argument would come more strongly to minds familiar with the idea of solidarity, as the Hebrews were, than to those dominated by the idea of individuality. Neither the father nor the children could be independent of each other. Abraham's payment of tithes could be transferred to his descendant Levi and hence to the whole order of his priesthood..." (Donald Guthrie, Hebrews, TNTC, pp.159-60).
If we apply this concept to God we could say that the Word has always existed. It could be argued that the Word did not create all things:
Eph 1:22 And [God] hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,
1 Cor 15:27 For he [God] hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.
Adam existed before Eve in the Garden in Eden. It may be that God had existed in heaven, for Eden is a type of heaven, before the Word. From the principal of 'solidarity', which will be looked at later, it could be said that Christ created the 'spiritual' heaven even though it may have existed before he was created.
Gen 3:20 Adam named his wife Eve, because she would become the mother of all the living.
Adam and Eve, in a husband and wife relationship, are the father and "mother of all living".
John 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
When it is said that Eve is the "mother of all living" she is not the mother of Adam. So when the Word created all things there may be some 'things', related to the Father, that Christ did not create.
TAKING FORM?
Dan 7:9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire.
Dan 7:13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.
Dan 7:14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.
It has been argued that God, because He is not limited by time and space, does not need a body. This may or may not be correct, but the Bible does picture God with a body as above. The argument says that while God is pictured as having a body, it is so that man can relate to Him. The typology of the human experience would suggest a better explanation.
A single adult male has, within reason, the freedom to do what he likes. But he gives up that freedom when he decides to share his life with a woman in marriage. The man forgoes his freedom to enter into a relationship with a wife and children for a greater good.
This 'typical' human experience may have been foreshadowed in the 'antitypical' experience in that God may have taken form to create the "heavens and the earth". (Adam had no form before he was created).
CREATION A TYPE OF BIRTH
The husband and wife in their marriage relationship may 'create' children. Typology, then would suggest also that human procreation is a type of God's creation of "all things".
Gen 1:2 ... And the Spirit of God moved [rahap] upon the face of the waters.
Deu 32:11 As an eagle stirreth up her nest, fluttereth [rahap] over her young, spreadeth abroad her wings, taketh them, beareth them on her wings
"This verb occurs only in the Piel (Gen 1:2; Deut 32:11)" (William White, TWOT, No. 2149, Vol.2, p.843).
"An 'awesome wind' (1:2) was sweeping over the water. The Hebrew word means both 'wind' and 'spirit',and is here is rightly understood as the creative Spirit of God. The picture is that of a mother eagle stirring up her nest, fluttering over her young, bringing what is immature into active life. Derek Kidner comments, 'In the Old Testament the Spirit is a term for God's outgoing energy, creative and sustaining'. He refers to Job 33:4: 'The spirit of God has made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life.' God is as intimately involved in his creation as a mother bird is in intimate touch with her young. The motherhood of God is seen in this creativity - bringing creation to birth. A similar feminine metaphor for God's creativity can be seen in the way 'Wisdom', the principle of creation, is depicted in feminine terms in the Book of Proverbs (8:1,22)" (David Atkinson, The Message of Genesis 1-11, BST, p.26).
MORE GODS
Gen 5:3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:
Gen 6:5 And God saw that the wickedness of man ['adam] was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
Rom 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
"There is a similarity between the picture of the first parents and their sons and that of God and Adam. This is most readily seen in the fact that God's naming Adam appears here for the first time in Genesis... In other words, the effect of this prologue [Genesis 5:1-3] is to cast God in the role of a father who has named Adam as his son.
"... the role of God as a father is heightened even further by the parallel between his creating Adam "in the image of God" and Adam giving birth to a son "in his own likeness, in his own image" (v.3)" (Sailhamer, Genesis, EBC., Vol.2, p.70).
Adam is the name of the first man; Eve is an 'adam'; and their descendants, human-beings, are also 'adam'.
God is the name of the Father; Christ is God; typlogy suggest that through God and Christ there will be other God-beings.
HUSBANDS
While God and Christ are in a 'husband-wife' relationship and are a 'father' and 'mother' of all things, there is a sense in which Christ is also a Husband:
Eph 5:31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
Eph 5:32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
The 'human' husband-wife relationship is the lesser type of the relationship of "Christ and the church", the antitype. Christ is a 'husband' to the Church. But the relationship of Christ and the church is a type of the relationship of God and Christ, the antitype.
Isa 54:5 For thy Maker is thine husband; the LORD of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called.
"For "Remember thy Creator in the days of thy youth," is literally, "Remember thy Creators" [Eccl 12:1]. Again, "None saith, Where is God my Maker?" is in the Hebrew, "God my makers" [Job 35:10]. So again, "Let Israel rejoice in Him that made him," is, in the Hebrew, "in his Makers" [Ps 149:2]. And so again in the Proverbs, "the knowledge of the Holy Ones is understanding" [9:10]. So again where the Prophet says, "Thy Maker is thy husband," both words are plural in the Hebrew [Isaiah 54:5]" (Andrew Jukes, The Names of God, p.17).
Christ, as God's agent in dealing with His nation, is a "husband" and "father" to Israel. God is a "husband" and "father" through Christ. But this need not mitigate against God and Christ being in a "husband-wife" relationship.
Before looking, in some detail, at the spiritual analogy of human reproduction we need to define the Holy Spirit, which the male sperm is a type.
"The angel answered,
"The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and
the power of the Most High will overshadow you.
So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God" (Luke 1:35, NIV).
The Holy Spirit is both the power and presence of God. The first characteristic of power is simply presented in this synonymous parallelism, that is, where the "second line repeats or reinforces the sense of the first" (Gordon D. Fee & Douglas Stuart, How To Read The Bible For All Its Worth, p.189).
The second aspect, which will be looked in greater detail later, is also presented in another synonymous parallelism:
Rom 8:9(b) ... if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
Rom 8:10 And if Christ be in you...
Christ is present through His Spirit. But there is also another dimension to this relationship:
Rom 8:9(a) if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you
Rom 8:10 And if Christ be in you
Gala 4:6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.
"There is a close relationship between the Spirit of Christ and the Holy Spirit... In Romans 8:9-10 the Spirit, the Spirit of God, the Spirit of Christ, and Christ all seem to be used interchangeably" (NIVSB, Kenneth Barker, Gen Editor, p.1766, note on 2 Corinthians 3:17).
"As for the OT prophets, so for Paul the Holy Spirit was a gift from God... Repeatedly Paul refers to this fact: "Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is from God" (1 Cor 2:12);... "God who gives his Holy Spirit to you" (1 Thess 4:8). Paul correlates the fact of being given the Spirit by God with the actual reception of the Spirit in the individual Christian's experience...
"Paul most frequently speaks of the "Holy Spirit" or "Spirit of God" rather than simply using the term "Spirit." In this he is true to his OT background. He conceives the Spirit as intimately connected with God... Yet even his mode of expression indicates the distinction between God as such and the Spirit. This is especially clear in the many references to God giving or sending His Spirit."
"References to the relation between the Spirit and Jesus are rare but very significant.... ("Spirit of Christ," Rom 8:9; "Spirit of his Son," Gal 4:6; "Spirit of Jesus Christ," Phil 1:19). Paul's teaching links the OT Spirit, which was conceived primarily in terms of God's presence and power, with Jesus, so that in turn Jesus' presence and power are mediated to the Christian through the Spirit...
"The point of greatest significance in the Pauline awareness of the relation of Jesus and the Spirit is the existence of a reciprocity between the two. There is no experience of Jesus apart from the Spirit...
"For John the Spirit is essentially alter Christus, "another counselor [Paraclete]" (Jn 14:16) who comes from the glorified Jesus and takes His place... [or is] both a substitute for ... and a continuation (14:18) of the presence and ministry of Jesus... A comparison of Jesus' ministry with the future ministry of the Paraclete reveals a striking similarity, already implied by the reference to the Paraclete as "another Paraclete" (14:16). This means that Jesus is a Paraclete too. Both come from the Father (13:3; 14:26); both are sent (5:36f.: 15:26); both are related to the truth (Jesus is the Truth, 14:6 and the Paraclete is the "Spirit of truth," 15:26); both somehow remain in the disciple (compare 14:17 with vv. 20,23); both are rejected by the world (14:17; 15:18); both testify against the world (7:7; 16:8). Moreover there is a parallelism between the relation of Jesus to the Father and that of the Paraclete and Jesus, so that what Jesus is to the Father the Paraclete is to Jesus (cf. 5:19, 30; 14:13; 15:26; 16:13f)..." (D.A. Tappeiner, "Holy Spirit", ISBE, Volume 2, pp.737-741).
The Spirit of Christ is also Gods presence and power. As we saw in 1 Corinthians 8:6 God is the source of all things hence Christ's Spirit is also God's Spirit. The Holy Spirit is Christ's dynamic power and presence and God's absolute power and presence.
Gen 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
With God as the 'absolute' God-being and Christ as the 'dynamic' God-being it implies that there is a 'double' interpretation to Scripture: the 'absolute' and the 'dynamic'.
So in Genesis 1:2 the "Spirit of God" is primarily to be understood in the 'absolute' sense, that is, it is God's Spirit. But with God creating "all things" through Jesus Christ, and the argument immediate above, it is to also to be understood in the dynamic sense, that is, it is Christ's Spirit.
God the Father is the "source" of all except sin, which is a free choice:
Rev 1:4 John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne;
Rev 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood.
"The description of God the Father, which resembles the divine name made know to Moses in Exodus 3:14, shows the oddity of some of John's language... the Greek equivalent of 'Grace and peace from he who is' ... surely it should be 'from him'? Perhaps John was seeing God as one who is always 'he', the subject of every sentence, who governs every other part of speech and is himself governed by none" (Michael Wilcox, The Message of Revelation, BST, p.34).
Because God is the "source" of all, the 'absolute' description and understanding takes precedence over the 'dynamic'.
GOD'S CHILDREN
Rom 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
Rom 8:15 ... ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
Rom 8:16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:
Rom 8:17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.
"The spirit of sonship is so called because it is those who are led by the Spirit of God that are sons of God (verse 14)... 'In Christ Jesus' believers 'are all sons (and daughters) of God, through faith' (Gal 3:26), but their full instatement or manifestation as such will coincide with the resurrection (verse 19-23 below). The Spirit empowers them to anticipate this future consummation and to appreciate their present relationship as children to their Father. In Galatians 4:6 it is because they are his sons and daughters that God has given them 'the Spirit of his Son'...
"The term 'adoption' (used here in older English versions) may have a somewhat artificial sound in our ears; but in the Roman world of the first century AD an adopted son was a son deliberately chosen by his adoptive father to perpetuate his name and inherit his estate; he was no whit inferior in status to a son born in the ordinary course of nature, and might well enjoy the father's affection more fully and reproduce the father's character more worthily" (F.F. Bruce, Romans, Tyndale, pp.156-157).
REPRODUCTION AND CHILDREARING
"However disappointing the fact may be to a devoted father, there is something unique in the relationship between a mother and a baby. No known society replaces the mother as a primary provider of care... Female attachment to an infant seems to be innate, male attachment a function of social learning. Mothers are natural parents; men, with the best will in the world, are not... The female hormones are profoundly and inextricably bound up with the need to care for her child... It is the most intimate of relationships, between parent and child, it is the mother rather than the father who is more alert to the nuance and the non-verbal hint, more naturally responsive to the baby's needs. A woman is better equipped in all her sense for the task of child-rearing, better able to hear and identify the cry of the baby, more sensitive to touch, sound and smell... Fathers come into their own when the child begins to grow up. Or, perhaps more accurately, children come into their own when they are old enough to 'do' things with... while mothers deal with the child-as-it-is, fathers are concerned with the child as-it-will-be, preparing them for ocean surf and horseriding through those carpet romps on father's back... communication from the father is based on the need to teach..." (Anne Moir and David Jessel, BrainSex, pp.141-145).
(On the human plain the father and mother maybe said to be present in their offspring through their genetic inheritance).
The husband and wife in a marriage may have children. They may be said to be creating children. This role of human reproduction is a type of the way the Father and Christ created and maintains the heavens and the earth. It is also a type of the spiritual begettal, gestation and birth of God's sons.
2Cor 5:17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come! NIV.
The husband is a type of God, the wife is a type of Christ, the husband's sperm is a type of the Holy Spirit and the wife's ovum is a type of the spirit in man'. Once the husband's sperm unites with the woman's egg the role of the husband in the actual bring forth of the child is over. The wife then carries the new life to birth. The woman does all the hard work as she is intimately connected with the new life. It may be said that Christ does all the hard work in relation to the creation and to bringing many sons to glory.
The Holy Spirit uniting with the 'spirit in man' to create a new being correspond to the creation of life through the sperm uniting with the ovum. The period between the receiving of the Holy Spirit and the changing into a spirit-being corresponds to gestation. Having direct contact with God and Christ corresponds to the direct contact that the father and mother have with there new born child. After the child is born it has more direct contact with the mother which corresponds to the future role that God has for Christ and the Saints.
(It may also be that having to drink Christ's blood and eat his flesh is also a type of the un-born baby feeding off his mother; (cp. also 1 Pet 2:2 "As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby"); the Bible employs multiple figures to explain various concepts).
TWO 'SPIRITUAL' BIRTHS - TYPE AND ANTITYPE
The new heavens and the new earth are also typological births:
Rom 8:22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.
Rom 8:23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.
Rom 8:26 ... We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express.
"Paul makes a parallel between the saints and the material creation. In at least two respects their situation is the same - groaning (cf. 2 Cor 5:2) and eagerly awaiting the new age (v.23). Perhaps a third element of comparison is intended: "the redemption of our bodies," answering to the transformation of the earth..." (Everett F. Harrison, Romans, EBC, Vol.10, p.94).
"[Paul] draws once more on Jewish tradition, this time the theme of the great tribulation, the great woes, that would come upon the world in order for the new world to be born. This (essentially female) image of the birth pangs of the new age is applied first to the world, then to the church, and then, remarkably enough, to the Spirit" (N.T. Wright, The Letter to the Romans, NIB, Vol. 10, p.597).
(In regard to Genesis 1:2, above, the 'motherly' activity of the Spirit was suggested).
"The groaning of creation looks back to its subjection to frustration (v.20), whereas the pangs of childbirth anticipate the age of renewal... Christ spoke of the renewing of the world and called it a "rebirth" (palingenesis, Matt 19:28)" (Everett F. Harrison, Romans, EBC, Vol.10, p.94).
Mat 19:28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration [palingenesia] when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
REGENERATION: PALINGENESIA ... new birth (palin, again, genesis, birth) ... as a result of the Second Advent of Christ ... Thereby will be accomplished the deliverance of the world from the power and deception of Satan and from the despotic and antichristian rulers of the nations. This restitution will not in the coming Millennial age be universally a return to the pristine conditions of Edenic innocence previous to the Fall, but it will fulfil the establishment of God's Covenant with Abraham concerning his descendants, a veritable re-birth of the nation, involving the peace and prosperity of the Gentiles. That the worldwide subjection to the authority of Christ will not mean the entire banishment of evil, is clear from Rev 20:7-8. Only in the new heavens and earth, "wherein dwelleth righteousness," will sin and evil be entirely absent" ( W.E. Vine, Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, Vol.3, p.267).
In Scripture we have, generally speaking, a 'double' pattern. There is a 'double' interpretation: the 'absolute' and 'dynamic'. There is a typical and an antitypical application. There is a two-part ministry, of which the first-part is a 'smaller' fulfillment in anticipation of a 'larger' fulfillment. The first-administration may have greater importance than the second-administration, or visa-versa.
For example David, the warrior-king, and Solomon, the king of peace, picture the two ministries of Christ, one pre-millennium and the other millennium. But David and Solomon also picture Christ's and God's administrations of the earth. Christ is the 'warrior-king' preparing the earth for the dwelling of "the God of peace" (Heb 13:20).
1Co 15:24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
1Co 15:25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.
1Co 15:28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.
"Delivering up the kingdom of God, even the Father... The change then to take place shall be in the manner of administration, not in the kingdom itself: God shall then come into direct connection with the earth, instead of mediatorially, when Christ shall have fully and finally removed everything that severs the Holy God and a sinful earth (Col 1:20)... The son's power is from the Father, who is not without the Son, but whose power illustrates itself in the Son" (A.R. Fausset, 1 Corinthians, JFB, Vol.2, Part 3, p.329).
Luke 1:17 And he will go on before the Lord, in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers to their children and the disobedient to the wisdom of the righteous--to make ready a people prepared for the Lord." (NIV).
Christ is also a type of Elijah. The way before Christ at His first advent was prepared by John the Baptist who came in the spirit and power of Elijah and at his second by Elijah the prophet (Malachi 4:5). Christ is the true or antitypical Elijah who makes ready a people prepared for God the Father.
Isa 65:17 "Behold, I will create new heavens and a new earth.
|
Rev 21:1 Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth...
|
Isa 65:19a I will rejoice over Jerusalem
|
Rev 21:2 I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband.
|
Isa 65:19b and take delight in my people;
|
Rev 21:3 ...They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God.
|
Isa 65:19b the sound of weeping and of crying will be heard in it no more.
|
Rev 21: 4 ... There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain...
|
"This prophecy uses language which, whilst fulfilled on the millennial earth in a degree, shall receive its full accomplishment only in the regenerated earth, which shall succeed the post-millennial conflagration (2 Pet 3:10-13; Rev 21:1; Heb 12:26-28)" (A.R. Fausset, Isaiah, JFB, Vol.2, p.762).
There are birthpangs before Christ reigns and birthpangs before the Father reigns, hence there are two 'spiritual' rebirths for both the earth and man. In regard to the latter, God has direct contact with the first group of spirit-beings after the 'first' resurrection (Rev 20:4-6) and with the second group after the 'second' resurrection (Rev 20:11-13).
Before continuing with the typology of the husband-wife relationship we will now look at God and Christs relationship from an OT concept, which, it is most likely, the origin of the Trinity doctrine which misconstrues it, but which reinforces the argument of God's relationships with Jesus Christ.
PRINCIPLE OF SOLIDARITY AND A LIGHT TO THE GENTILES
Dan 2:31 Thou, O king, sawest, and behold a great image...
Dan 2:32 This image's head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass,
Dan 2:33 His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay.
Dan 2:36 This is the dream; and we will tell the interpretation thereof before the king.
Dan 2:37 Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory.
Dan 2:38 ... Thou art this head of gold.
Dan 2:39 And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee, and another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth.
Dan 2:40 And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron...
Nebuchadnezzar, the king of the neo-Babylonian empire, is said to be the head of gold while the other metals are said to be kingdoms. This account illustrates the principle that a king represents a kingdom so that King and Kingdom can be used interchangeably. Nebuchadnezzar was the 'greatest' king of the neo-Babylonian empire. The implication is that the 'greatest' king is the representative, or 'typical', king of an empire or kingdom. Nebuchadnezzar was also the 'typical' "king" or "head" of the image/body - the Babylonian system. Babylon opposes Jerusalem.
Mat 2:1 ... there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem,
Mat 2:2 Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have ... come to worship him.
Mat 2:3 When Herod the king had heard these things, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him.
Mat 2:4 And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be born.
Mat 2:5 And they said unto him, In Bethlehem of Judaea: for thus it is written by the prophet,
Mat 2:6 And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda, art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule ["shepherd", NIV] my people Israel.
Mt 12:42 The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for she came from the uttermost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here.
"This story, peculiar to Matthew, underlines several themes in Matthew's presentation of Jesus the Messiah... It presents Jesus as the true 'king of the Jews' (v.2) in contrast with the unworthy king Herod... And it shows Jesus as the Messiah of all nations, opposed by the leaders of the Jewish nation, but recognized as the fulfilment of the hope of the Gentiles... The whole episode recalls the story on 1 Kings 10:1-13 of the visit, homage and gifts of a foreign dignitary to the son of David, king of the Jews, a theme which will be taken up more explicitly in 12:42" (R.T. France, Matthew, TNTC, p.80).
Jesus Christ, the son of God, is the 'greatest' dynamic king of the nation of Israel - God the Father is the absolute king of Israel. Jesus Christ is the representative King of Israel.
Hos 11:1 "When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.
Mat 2:13 ... the angel of the Lord appeareth to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I bring thee word...
Mat 2:15 And was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son.
"In Egypt ... God now kept his Son safe, as he had preserved Israel there long ago and out of Egypt he would soon call him to his work of redemption as he had liberated Israel from Egypt to fulfil their role as his people - indeed, as Hosea 11:1 explained, as his son. Hosea's words are not a prediction, but an account of Israel's origin. Matthew's quotation thus depends for its validity on the recognition of Jesus as the true Israel, a typological theme found elsewhere in the new Testament by Jesus' use of Israel-texts in the wilderness (see on 4:1-11); there too it is as God's son that Jesus is equated with Israel" (R.T. France, Matthew, TNTC, p.86)
"When David was anointed king, the tribes acknowledged him as their bone and flesh (2 Sam 5:1), i.e., David as anointed king summed up Israel, with the result that his sin brought disaster on the people (2 Sam 12, 24). Just as Israel is God’s son, so the promised Davidic Son is also Son of God (2 Sam 7:13-14...)" (D.A. Carson, Matthew, EBC, Vol.8, pp.91-92).
DOUBLE FIGURE - SON AND WIFE
Hos 2:16 And it shall be at that day, saith the LORD, that thou shalt call me Ishi ["husband", NIV]; and shalt call me no more Baali.
Jer 3:14 Turn, O backsliding children, saith the LORD; for I am married unto you ["I am your husband", NIV]: and I will take you one of a city, and two of a family, and I will bring you to Zion.
"Again the Lord summons Israel to return. The context is one of tenderness and regard for the intimate relationship between the Lord and his people. The ground of the pleas is still the indissoluble marriage bond entered into at Sinai with the nation. Actually, a double figure is employed: Israel is both son and wife... In the OT ba lti means "to possess," hence "to marry"" (Charles L. Feinberg, Jeremiah, EBC, Vol.6, p.400).
God called His son, the 'nation' of Israel, out of Egypt, and He called His "Son" Jesus Christ, the 'representative' Israel, out of Egypt. God also calls for His 'wife', the Kingdom of Israel to return to the 'marriage'.
If Christ is God's "son" then it would then follow that Christ is also God's "wife". The implication is that in God's plan Jesus Christ and God were to have a dual relationship. The dual 'relationship' of God with the nation of Israel is a later and lesser type of God's relationship with the Word/Jesus Christ.
NT PARALLEL
Jesus Christ is the 'dynamic' LORD and "husband" to Israel the Kingdom. The husband-wife figure also describes the relationship of Christ and the Church.
Eph 5:31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
Eph 5:32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
"The marriage relation is seen as an analogy of Christ's love, saving work, and ongoing care for the church. Imagery from the Old Testament about the relation of God and Israel stands behind this use of the marriage analogy. Israel was viewed as God's marriage partner (see esp. Isa 54:5-7; 62:4-5; the book of Hosea)" (Klyne Snodgrass, Ephesians, NIVAC, p.297).
TRINITY COUNTERFEIT
"Although the notion of a Triad or Trinity is characteristic of the Christian religion, it is by no means peculiar to it. In the Indian religion, e.g., we meet with the Trinitarian group of Brahma, Siva, and Visnu; and the Egyptian religion with the Trinitarian group of Osiris, Isis, and Horus, constituting a divine family, like the Father, Mother, and Son in medieval Christian pictures. Nor is it only in historical religions that we find God viewed as a Trinity. One recalls in particular the Neo-Platonic view of the supreme or Ultimate Reality, which was suggested by Plato..." (James Hastings, Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, Vol.12, p.458).
Rev 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
The pagan Trinity doctrine is reflected in 'traditional Christianity' in two ways. Firstly, Mary, the mother of Jesus, is elevated into the 'divine' family so that we have three 'people'. And, secondly, by the misunderstanding of a number of Scriptures elevating the Holy Spirit to a 'person' forming a Trinity.
The Trinity doctrine obscures the relationships and goals of God and Christ. In the 'divine'family we have at present God as Father and Husband and Christ as Wife and Son - two 'persons' not three. In the future the membership of the divine family will become millions upon millions. The medium by which the 'divine' family grows and grows involves another 'figure'.
ANOTHER METAPHOR
"At times prophets like Hosea and Jeremiah made use of the metaphor of the husband-wife relationship to describe the covenant. The father-son relationship was also used (Hos 11). But the most significant metaphor was finally that of the suzerain and vassal or of the Lord and servant" (J. Arthur Thompson, "Covenant (OT)," ISBE, Vol.1, p.793).
Isa 49:1 Listen, O isles, unto me; and hearken, ye people, from far; The LORD [God the Father] hath called me [Jesus Christ] from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name.
Isa 49:2 And he hath made my mouth like a sharp sword; in the shadow of his hand hath he hid me, and made me a polished shaft; in his quiver hath he hid me;
Isa 49:3 And said unto me, Thou art my servant, O Israel [i.e. Jesus Christ] , in whom I [God the Father] will be glorified.
Isa 49:4 Then I said, I have laboured in vain, I have spent my strength for nought, and in vain: yet surely my judgment is with the LORD, and my work with my God.
Isa 49:5 And now, saith the LORD that formed me from the womb to be his servant, to bring Jacob again to him, Though Israel be not gathered, yet shall I be glorious in the eyes of the LORD, and my God shall be my strength.
Isa 49:6a And he [God the Father] said, It is a light thing that thou [Jesus Christ] shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel:
"Jacob cannot restore Jacob to a right relationship with God anymore than Israel can restore itself to Judah from Babylon" (John N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah Chapters 40-66, NICOT, p.293).
"[The restorer] His name is Israel! But how can this be, since ... a key aspect of his mission is to restore Israel to a proper relationship with God (5)? We are forced back to the tentative conclusion ... that he is a figure who embodies all that the nation of Israel was called to be, and therefore worthy of the name - God's perfect Servant" (Barry Webb, The Message of Isaiah, BST, p.193-194).
In the OT we have the servant 'Israel' referring to both the Messiah and His Kingdom and in the NT we have 'Christ' referring to the Messiah and His Church.
1 Cor 12:12 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.
Col 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
"... in 1 Cor 12:12 the church of believers is called Christos, like Christ its head" (Frank Delitzsch, Isaiah, Commentary on the Old Testament KD, p.129).
"In saying "So it with Christ," Paul is probably using metonymy. Thus "Christ" means the church as a shortened form for the "body of Christ." Clear evidence for this is found in v.27: "Now you are the body of Christ, and each of you are a part of it," followed by v.28. "And in the church God has appointed..." (Gordon D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, NICNT, p.603).
Isa 49:6b I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.
Lk 2:28 Simeon took him [Jesus] in his arms and praised God, saying:
Lk 2:30 ... my eyes have seen your salvation,
Lk 2:31 which you have prepared in the sight of all people,
Lk 2:32 a light for revelation to the Gentiles and for glory to your people Israel."
Ac 13:47 For this is what the Lord has commanded us: "'I have made you a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth.'"
"... the present passage asserts that the mission of the Servant is also the task of the followers of Jesus. Thus the task of Israel, which she failed to carry out, has passed to Jesus and then to his people, as the new Israel; it is the task of bringing the light of revelation and salvation to all the peoples of the world (cf. the clear allusion to Is. 49:6 in Lk. 2:29-32)" (I. Howard Marshall, Acts, TNTC, p.230).
"The mission of Israel was to be a model to the nations. Mission was not a matter of going but of being..." (Christopher Wright, Deuteronomy, NIBC, p.13).
God has made Christ a "light to the Gentiles" - in the sense of 'outward' mission. But Christ 'delegates' this task to both His Church and Kingdom - pre-millennium and millennium respectively. The principle of 'delegation', with its 'absolute' and 'dynamic' applications, is developed below.
With the renewal, and hence 'transformation', of the covenant with Israel - which Israel originally broke - the nation's missionary mandate is expanded to "going".
FAMILY - NAMES AND ROLES
In a marriage the wife takes the surname of her husband. If they have children then they have the role and title of parents. If their children become parents they have the role and title of grandparents. If they have a business they are both proprietors. If they have shares they are both shareholders. If the husband has a home when they are married then it becomes her house also - therefore the husband and wife are homeowners.
God and Christ also share the same names, titles and roles, for example God, Lord, Creator, Temple owner, etc. Below are two basic definitions of God and Lord which are the terms of reference of this booklet:
DEFINITIONS OF GOD AND LORD
"Theos corresponds, generally with Elohim of the O.T., denoting the Creator...
"Kurios. Kurios means "owner"... It expresses the authority and lordship arising from and pertaining to ownership" (E.W. Bullinger, Companion Bible, Appendix 98 - "The Divine Names and Titles in the New Testament", (p.141).
"THEOS... In the Sept. theos translates (with few exceptions) the Hebrew words Elohim and Jehovah, the former indicating His power and pre-eminence, the latter His unoriginated, immutable, eternal and self-sustained existence...
"KURIOS , properly as adjective, signifying having power (kuros) or authority, is used as a noun, variously translated in the N.T., 'Lord,' 'master,' 'owner,' 'Sir,'..." (W.E. Vine, Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, Vol.2, p.160 and Vol.3, p.16).
"Elohim... this word is plural in form, and although it most frequently means "God" it can be used in a plural sense. Thus it can refer to other gods (Ex 20:3; Josh 24:16), foreign gods (Jer 5:7), gods of other nations (Isa 36:18)...
"The use of the plural form with a singular meaning is not unique to Israel. Similar forms occur in pre-Israelite Babylonian and Canaanite texts in which worshipper wishes to exalt a particular god above others..." (Robert J. Wyatt, "Names of God", ISBE, Vol.2, p.505).
A FATHER AND SON TYPE
While a wife should be the 'love' of a husband - they share their lives and intimately 'know' each other, but if the husband dies before the wife it is the 'first-born' son, according to the Bible, who inherits his fathers goods and possession.
It appears that Word had to become God's Son to inherit the kingdom that God has reserved for Him.
A father and son team as businessmen may be owners and employers. A father and son establishing a company would be in the role of 'creators'. A father and son running a company would be in the role of 'lords'. The Father, as Chairman, could be said to be the 'absolute' owner and employer with the son, as the Chief Executive Officer, the 'dynamic' owner and employer.
GOD AND CHRIST IN KINGDOM TYPOLOGY
Hos 11:1 "When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.
Hos 11:3 It was I who taught Ephraim to walk, taking them by the arms;
Jer 31:9 "... I am Israel's father, and Ephraim is my firstborn son.
God is God and Christ is God (John 1:1-3). God and Christ together are God. God, therefore, is a set-subset relationship (see the article "The House(s) of Israel - An Introduction to the Set-subset Concept". The "House of Israel" may refer to the United Kingdom of Israel or to the two 'subset' kingdoms that make up this United Kingdom.
The House(s) of Israel not only reflect the relationship of God and Jesus Christ but also depicts their two kingdoms. Below is a quote from the above article:
"A. Alt is probably correct in maintaining that the crowning of David as king over 'all Israel' (2 Sam 5:1-5) made him king of a dual kingdom in which Judah kept its separate identity" (H.L. Ellison,"Judah", NBD, p.628).
The southern kingdom of Judah, also called the "House of Israel" in its context, which pictures God the Father and His kingdom, may be said to be 'greater' than the northern kingdom of Israel which pictures Jesus Christ and His Kingdom. This is a dual concept. We are concerned with the 'lower' aspect as it relates to man.
The northern kingdom of Israel was called, by synecdoche, the house of Ephraim. Ephraim was the son of Joseph. Joseph is one of the great types of Christ as seen in this typology:
Gen 41:38 And Pharaoh said unto his servants, Can we find such a one as this is, a man in whom the Spirit of God is?
Gen 41:39 And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, Forasmuch as God hath showed thee all this, there is none so discreet and wise as thou art:
Gen 41:40 Thou shalt be over my house, and according unto thy word shall all my people be ruled: only in the throne will I be greater than thou.
Gen 41:41 And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, See, I have set thee over all the land of Egypt.
Gen 41:42 And Pharaoh took off his ring from his hand, and put it upon Joseph's hand, and arrayed him in vestures of fine linen, and put a gold chain about his neck;
Gen 41:43 And he made him to ride in the second chariot which he had; and they cried before him, Bow the knee: and he made him ruler over all the land of Egypt.
1Co 15:27 For he "has put everything under his feet" Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ.
Heb 1:5 For to which of the angels did God ever say, "You are my Son; today I have become your Father""?...
Heb 1:6 And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says, "Let all God's angels worship him."
Jer 31:9 ... I am Israel's father, and Ephraim is my firstborn son.
"All this tenderness and concern for Ephraim (Israel) stems from the original elective purpose of God declared in Exodus 4:22 (cf. Deut 32:6). The designation of firstborn in Exodus in Exodus 4:22 includes the whole nation, whereas it is transferred to Ephraim, the head of the Ten Tribes... The prophet could with warrant call Ephraim the firstborn, for Joseph actually received the birthright of the firstborn..." (Charles L. Feinberg, Jeremiah, EBC, Vol.6, p.568).
[Jeremiah 31:9 is a parallelism so that Ephraim refers to the Ten Tribes, that have Ephraim as their head].
The Kingdom of Judah, pictures the Kingdom of God the Father and the northern Kingdom of Israel/Ephraim, pictures the Kingdom of Jesus Christ.
1Cor 15:24 Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power.
Rev 22:3 The throne of God and of the Lamb will be in the city [of New Jerusalem]
The United Millennial Kingdom of Israel, the type, pictures, and looks forward to, the Kingdom of God and Jesus Christ, the antitype, commencing when New Jerusalem comes to the earth.
Eze 37:22 I will make them one nation in the land, on the mountains of Israel. There will be one king over all of them and they will never again be two nations or be divided into two kingdoms.
Eze 47:13 This is what the Sovereign LORD says: "These are the boundaries by which you are to divide the land for an inheritance among the twelve tribes of Israel, with two portions for Joseph.
"... Benjamin and Judah, historically located immediately to the north and south of Jerusalem are immediately north and south of the sacred zone (48:7, 23). Their historical order has been reversed, moving Judah to the north of the sacred reservation while Benjamin is on the south. This may be due to a desire to stress the integration of the new nation. No longer are they "north" and "south," "Israel" and "Judah," now Judah itself, the royal nation, is part of the north...
"It should also be noted that the site of the temple itself seems to have migrated north in Ezekiel’s vision... yet the shift in theological geography may also be driven by a simple desire to locate the temple closer to the centre of the land, in the midst of the people, while still (in deference to history) slightly south of center" (Ian M. Duguid, Ezekiel, NIVAC, pp.544-45).
With six tribes above Judah and four tribes below Benjamin the former tribes of the Kingdom of Judah are just slight south of centre of the nation and in a sense 'over' the other tribes.
ONE GOD
1 Tim 6:15 ...God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords,
1 Tim 6:16 who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen. (NIV).
1 Tim 1:17 Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God [only God, NIV], be honour
and glory for ever and ever. Amen.
John 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
Luke 18:19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
John 14:28 ... I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.
"Already in 1:17 immortality (athanasia) is ascribed to God, although the adjective aphthartos is used. Both words are found in parallel clauses in 1 Cor 15:53,54 with apparently no difference of meaning. The expression who only hath immortality does not deny it to another, but brings out uniqueness of the divine immortality in that God alone inherently posses it, being Himself the source of all life. Linked with this characteristic of eternity are two qualities which equally distinguished God from others, His transcendence (dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto) and His invisibility (whom no man hath seen, nor can see)" (Donald Guthrie, The Pastoral Epistles, Tyndale, p.117).
God the Father, the 'absolute' God is the "source" of immortality and has granted Jesus Christ to share it with Him, first as the "Word" of God then as the "Son" of God; and who will also grant others to share it.
GOD AS ONE
John 10:30 I and my Father are one.
John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.
"
"30. One translates the Greek neuter hen. This verse was much quoted in the Aryan controversy by the orthodox in support of the doctrine that Christ was of one substance with the Father. The expression seems however mainly to imply that the Father and Son are united in will and purpose. Jesus prays in 17:11 that His followers may all be one (hen), i.e. united in purpose, as He and His Father are united" (R.V.G. Tasker, John, TNTC, p.136).
"Had our Lord been here speaking of the absolute or essential unity of the Father and Son in the Godhead, He could not have prayed that believers might be taken into that Unity. But we have already seen (ch. 10:30), where the very same remarkable expression is used, what He meant by the Father and Himself being "one thing"..." (David Brown, John, JFB, Vol.3. Pt.1, p.453).
""I and the Father" preserves the separate individuality of the two Persons in the Godhead; the neuter pronoun "one" (hen) asserts unity of nature or equality (cf. 1 Cor 3:8)" (Merrill C. Tenney, John, EBC, Vol.9, p.112).
1 Cor 3:8 Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour.
"... Paul teaches that the servants with their various functions are really one, being united in God's work ... though they are one in the work, yet (de) they are individually subordinated to God..." (W. Harold Mare, 1 Corinthians, EBC, Vol.10, p.205).
GOD'S GLORY
Col 1:15 [Jesus Christ] Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature
Heb 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high.
Earlier we saw that God created ‘man’ in “our image, after our likeness” and that Adam had begat a son “in his own likeness, after his image”. Christ is the “image” and “likeness” of God.
Curtis Vaughan comments:
“Eikon, the Greek word for “image,” expressed two ideas. One is likeness... Christ is the image of God in the sense that he is the exact likeness of God, like the image on a coin or the reflection in a mirror (cf. Heb 1:3). The other idea in the word is manifestation. That is, Christ is the image of God in the sense that the nature and being of God are perfectly revealed in him (cf. John 1:18). Therefore Paul can boldly say that we have “the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ” (2 Cor 4:6)...” (Colossians, EBC, Vol.11, pp.181-182).
Leon Morris comments:
“The Son is described ... as “the radiance of God’s glory.” There is ambiguity in the Greek term apaugasma... Jesus is thus spoken of as the outshining of the brightness of God, or as the reflection of that glory [or both]. In either case we see the glory of God in Jesus Christ and we see it as it really is... “Glory” sometimes indicates the presence of God...” (Hebrews, EBC, Vol.12, p.14).
Raymond Brown comments:
“For the Hebrew people the glory of God was a visible and outward expression of the majestic presence of God. When the law was given at Sinai ‘the glory of the Lord’ settled on the mountain... Now, says the author of this letter, in these last days this same glory has been seen in the person of Christ who reflects or is ‘the radiance of God’s glory’ (NIV)” (The Message of Hebrews, BST, p.30).
Donald Guthrie comments:
“Perhaps some of the readers would have remembered that in the Jewish Book of Wisdom (7:26) the same word was applied to wisdom, thought of as personified” (Hebrews, Tyndale, p.66).
We see God the Father in Jesus Christ so that in a “higher” or absolute sense it was not Christ that we see but the Father. Jesus Christ is the ‘brightness’ of God’s glory. We may therefore say that Jesus Christ is the “glory of the Lord”.
A TENTATIVE EXPLANATION
John 2:19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
Gal 1:1 Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead.
Donald Guthrie comments:
“The application of the concept of a Temple to the body of Jesus is suggestive. Both were the dwelling-place of God. Some find difficulty in supposing that is referring to his own body, because there is no parallel reference to Jesus raising His own body” (John, NBC, p.935).
The next paragraph is a tentative explanation of the implication of Christ’s words. This may then provide ‘one’ way of seeing God and Christ at work, especially in understanding Old Testament Scriptures.
While God declares that He is the creator it is Christ that does the ‘creating’. In a reversal of this concept it could be said that while Christ declares that He will raise Himself from the dead it is the Father that does the ‘raising’. So that in a ‘higher’ sense God is actually speaking through Christ. Therefore, when Christ says that He will do such and such, the implication, for those who know that Christ is God’s ‘agent’ and that it will be done by God, it is to be understood that it is the Father who is speaking and will be doing the ‘doing’.
SOLIDARITY IN THE NT
Acts 9:4 And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?
Acts 9:5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest...
I. Howard Marshall comments:
“The reply which he received showed that it was Jesus who was speaking, and whom he was persecuting. Thus the effect of the vision was to indicated to Saul that in persecuting the Christians he was persecuting Jesus (Lk 10:16), but above all that in persecuting Jesus he was persecuting One who had now attained to a heavenly status and was thus shown to be vindicated and upheld by God. Paul’s zeal for the cause of God had turned into an attack on the God who raised Jesus from the dead” (Acts, Tyndale, p.170).
SOLIDARITY IN THE OT
Zec 12:10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.
A.R. Fausset explains the dynamic sense of this prophecy:
“They shall look upon me ... and they shall mourn for him. The change of person is due to Jehovah-Messiah speaking in His own person first, then the prophet speaking of Him” (Zechariah, JFB, Vol.2, p.702).
C.F. Keil explains the ‘absolute’ sense:
“It is true that we have not to think of a slaying of Jehovah, the creator of the heaven and the earth, but simply of the slaying of the Maleach Jehovah, who being of the same essence with Jehovah, became man in the person of Jesus Christ. As Zechariah repeatedly represents the coming of the Messiah as a coming of Jehovah in His Maleach to his people, he could, according to this view, also describe the slaying of the Maleach as the slaying of Jehovah. And Israel having come to the knowledge of its sin, will bitterly bewail this deed... over him they have pierced. Thus the transition from the first person ... to the third points to the fact that the person slain although essentially one with Jehovah, is personally distinct from the Supreme God...” (Zechariah, KD, “Minor Prophets”, p.610).
GOD WITH US - NT
Mat 1:23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
D.A. Carson comments:
“... Though “Immanuel” is not a name in the sense that “Jesus” is Messiah’s name (1:21), in the OT Solomon was named “Jedidiah” (“Beloved of Yahweh,” 2 Sam 12:25), even though he apparently was not called that. Similarly Immanuel is a “name” in the sense of title of description” (Matthew, EBC, Vol 8, p.80).
While Christ is God, God the Father is with His people through Jesus Christ.
John 14:7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
John 14:8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
John 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father?
GOD WITH US - OT
Mal 2:17 Ye have wearied the LORD with your words. Yet ye say, Wherein have we wearied him? When ye say, Every one that doeth evil is good in the sight of the LORD, and he delighteth in them; or, Where is the God of judgment?
Mal 3:1 Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.
Walter C. Kaiser, Jr. comments:
“The Lord’s answer to the scorner’s question could be put in one Aramaic word: Maranatha, i.e., “the LORD comes” (1 Cor 16:22). For now the messenger had prepared the way, the Lord (Hebrew, adon) would come back suddenly.
“The God of justice whom men sought (2:17, 3:1) is here variously identified with the “Lord” (adon), “the angel (or ‘messenger’) of the covenant” ... and owner of the temple... Since the word “Lord” is singular and has the article (haddon), it is certain he is God since adon with the article always has this meaning (Exod 23:17; 34:23; Isa 1:24; 3:1; 10:16;, 33, etc.). adon also is the title borne by Messiah in Psalm 110.1. It signifies ownership; he is owner and master of everything.
“The fact that God himself is the speaker and has just declared that the way is to be prepared “before me’ does not detract from this identification of “the Lord,” for he simply equates “me” with “the Lord” and “the messenger of the covenant.” Here, as in Psalm 2:2-3, the speaking God is one and the same time uniquely One, and yet he has One who proceeds from him who is called “the Lord” or “the messenger of the covenant” (not to be confused with “my messenger,” the announcer...
“It is clear that this One who is sent from the Father is the One Almighty God with supreme authority, for (1) he is owner of the temple: “he will come to his temple.” (2) He is also called “the Lord” whom men were seeking: the God of justice of Malachi 2:17. (3) He also was equated with “me” in the Father’s speech for whom was the way was being cleared. Thus, the Father announced, “Behold, I am sending my messenger who will prepare the way before me and he will come suddenly to his temple, even the Lord whom you are seeking.” This easy, sudden, but important transition from the first person “me” to “he” is extremely significant for a proper understanding of this passage.
“At first, we are tempted to equate “he will come” of verse 1 with the announcing messenger “my messenger,” malaki). But that option is quickly removed as we learn in rapid order that this can be no mere mortal or angelic being. He is “Lord,” the owner of the temple, one with the speaking God, the God whom men are seeking, even the messenger of the covenant whom men profess to take such delight in.
“What does this last title mean: “Angel (or ‘messenger’) of the covenant”? Which “covenant” does he mean? The Mosaic covenant? The covenant made with Levi (Mal 2:4-5)? The new covenant Jeremiah had heralded? And which “messenger” or “angel” does he intend?
“When Malachi’s prophecy is read against this background of the informing theology of Scriptures in the hands of the Jewish community at that time, it will be clear that the covenant and its contents were a unity even though there was a plurality of forms and times in which the covenant was given. Thus the single plan of God was the one promise-plan contained in a long succession of covenants beginning with Eve (Gen 3:15), Shem (Gen 9:27), Abraham (Gen 12:1-3), continuing on with Moses (Exod 6:2-8), David (2 Sam 7:12-19) and concluding with the renewal of that covenant for the new age to come in Jeremiah 31:31-34.
“The angel of this promise-plan was the same One whom God had sent ahead of Israel in the exodus from Egypt to guard their way (Exod 23:20-23; cf. Judg 2:1-2). We must make no mistake about the identity of this angel, for God’s name is in him” (Exod 23:21...). To equate the “name” of God (which stood for his person, his attributes, his character; in short, himself) with this angel was to call him God... This same “messenger” or “angel” (malak) is everywhere called the “Angel of the Lord.” He is the one who appeared in human form to Abraham, Hagar, Jacob, Joshua, Gideon, and Manoah and is variously called the “angel of God” (Judg 13:6,9), “angel of his face (or presence’)” Isa 63:9); cf. Exod 33:14-15) or more frequently, the “angel of Yahweh” (Gen 16:9-11; Judg 6:12; 13:3, etc.). Since he is always treated with the marks of deity, as he is in Malachi 3:1, this “Angel of the Lord” is to be identified with the preincarnate Christ. Both in his person and his functions, he is God - but he also is sent from God (as Exod 23:20 makes clear).
“The New Testament continues to strengthen this equation already made in the Old Testament. Christ is the mediator of the old and new covenants - now called the new (or better still - based on the large amount of continuity in is provisions - renewed covenant); (Heb 8:8-13). The “mediator of the new covenant” (Heb 12:24) was the same Christ or Messiah who originally made this covenant with his people when he bought them up out of the land of Egypt (Jud 2:1-2; cf. Exod 23:21-22). He is our Lord and Savior as well.
“Thus, there are three persons, not just one or even two in verse one. There is (1) the speaking God, (2) the announcing prophet (“my messenger”), and (3) the sent Lord or messenger of the covenant. And it is clear that the Sent One is just as fully God as the Father who speaks in verse 1, for he “the Lord,” the owner of the temple of God, and one who conveyed the covenant containing his everlasting plan of the promise to mankind throughout all the ages” (Malachi: God’s Unchanging Love, (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1984), pp.81-84).
When God the Father made the covenant with OT Israel there were two mediators - one representing each party. There was a God-being, the Angel of the Lord, representing the Father and a human-being, Moses, a type of Christ, representing Israel.
In the NT covenant with the Israel of God Christ being both God and man fulfills both roles of the Angel of the Lord and Moses in the Old - Christ is the true Israelite or the representative Israelite from the tribe of Judah.
GOD’S MESSENGER(S)
Judg 6:8 That the LORD sent a prophet unto the children of Israel, which said unto them, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, I brought you up from Egypt, and brought you forth out of the house of bondage;
Acts 3:22 For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you.
Acts 3:26 Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.
John 3:34 For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God...
John 12:49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.
John 14:24 ... and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.
Merrill C. Tenney comments:
“Because Jesus speaks the message the Father commanded him to speak, he is the Word of God... The Son, however, was not merely the messenger of God; he was the revealed object of faith” (John, EBC, Vol 9, p.134, 52).
Jesus Christ brings God’s message to the world. Therefore he is also the “messenger of God”. In both Hebrew and Greek the word which is translated messenger is the same word that is translated angel. The implication being that Christ is the “Angel of God”. More on this later.
God was speaking through Jesus Christ so that in a “higher” or “absolute” sense it was not Christ who was speaking but the Father. More on this later.
Gen 48:3 And Jacob said unto Joseph, God Almighty appeared unto me at Luz in the land of Canaan, and blessed me,
Heb 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
Heb 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds.
It may be argued that since God talked to Jacob, who is one of “the fathers” or patriarchs, face to face [see next section], ‘the fathers” in Hebrews 1:1 are BC Israel in general. God spoke to the people of Israel, the BC ‘fathers’, through the prophets, e.g Moses. In AD times God is still speaking through prophets, but this time He is speaking through His greatest prophet - His Son Jesus Christ.
While God spoke to the prophets it was, for all intents and purposes, through His agent Jesus Christ, as we will see. Christ therefore brought God’s message to the prophet who then delivered it to the people. (But there is another ‘dynamic’ dimension to this process).
John 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.
John 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
Acts 3:13 The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus...
Gen 48:15 And he blessed Joseph, and said, God, before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God which fed me all my life long unto this day,
Gen 48:16 The Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads; and let my name be named on them, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac; and let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth.
Robert Jamieson comments:
“16. the Angel which redeemed me from all evil. Jacob declares (v.3) that this Angel was God Almighty ... the God of his fathers and the God of his own personal experience... ‘...No created angel could in this manner be placed by the side of God, or be introduced as being independent of, and co-ordinate with, Him. Such an angel can only be meant as is connected with God by oneness of nature, and whose activity is implied in that of God. The singular [He may bless] is here of very special significance. It indicates that the angel is joined to God by an inseparable oneness, and that his territory is just as wide as that of Elohim’ (Hengstenberg’s ‘Christology,’ i, p.117)” (Genesis, JFB, Vol.2, p.263).
Joyce G. Baldwin comments:
“The angel had appeared at three crisis-points in his life, at Bethel (28:13), in Paddan-aram (31:11,13) and at Peniel (32:24-30). Jacob had recognised this angel as God himself, so that he called the place where he wrestled with the angel ‘the face of God’ (Peniel). [Later in this booklet we will see that the ‘face of God’ is a title of Jesus Christ; just as He is the ‘word of God’]. Through the intervention of the angel God had rescued him from both Laban and Esau, and had brought him home in safety, according to his promise. The angel who had so protected him he calls his ‘redeemer’ (Heb. goel), the one who stepped in to rescue a relative in time of trouble (cf. Lv 25:25-28; Nu 35:19)... This then was the God whom Jacob-Israel prayed as he adopted his two grandchildren so that they could play a leading part as inheritors of the promises” (The Message of Genesis 12-50, BST, p.202).
We may also say that when dealing with select people in BC times the working relationship of God and Jesus Christ in regard to them is basically the same as for the elect in AD times. In BC and AD times the people did not ‘know’ God, but the select/elect did and acknowledged God and Christ in their roles and relationships.
DELEGATION - NEW TESTAMENT
Rev 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:
Rev 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.
Robert H. Mounce comments:
“Had God not taken the initiative, the human mind could not have understood the real forces at work in the world.
“Christ is the revealer, not in the sense that he accompanies John on his visionary experiences (angels play this role), but because he alone is worthy to open the scroll of destiny (Rev 5:5,7) and disclose its contents (Rev 6:1,3,5,7,9,12; 8:1).
“God is the source of all revelation. He is, as Daniel declared to Nebuchadnezzar, the one who reveals mysteries and makes known what is going to happen (Dan 2:28,29,45; cp. Amos 3:7). In Revelation this disclosure is mediated by Jesus Christ. (In the Fourth Gospel the role of taking the things of God and showing them to people is often assigned to Christ: John 1:18; 5:19-23; 12:49; 17:8; cp. Matt 11:27.)
“The revelation is said to be made known by an angel sent to John. If “He,” the subject of the verb, is Christ, then there is an angel who acts as an intermediary between Christ and John. It would undoubtedly be the angel who appears again in chapter 22 to rebuke John for falling at his feet to worship. (In Rev 22:16 Jesus says, “I Jesus have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches”). In this case there would be four stages in the transmission: God to Christ, Christ to his angel, the angel to John, and John to his servants. It is possible although less likely that “made known” is parallel to “gave” in the previous sentence, which would make God the subject of both clauses. In that case, the term “angel” would have the general meaning of messenger (as in 1:20; 2:1,8; etc.) and refer to Christ himself. As mediator of the revelation, Christ would be performing the function of an angel in the general sense of messenger” (The Book of Revelation, NICNT, pp.40-42).
Alan F. Johnson comments:
“The content of the book comes from its author, Jesus Christ. Yet even Christ is not the final author but a mediator, for he receives the revelation from God the Father (“which God gave him to show”). John is the human instrument for communicating what he has seen by the agency of Christ’s messenger or angel (cp. 22:6,8,16)... “by sending his angel to his servant John” ... introduces us to the significance of angels in the worship of God, in the revelation of God’s Word, and in the execution of his judgments in the earth...” (Revelation, EBC, Vol.12, pp.416-417).
A.R. Fausset comments:
“which God gave unto him, The Father reveals Himself in and by His son” (The Revelation, JFB, Vol.3, p.655).
Rev 22:6 And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to show unto his servants the things which must shortly be done.
Rev 1:8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.
Rev 11:15,17 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever... Saying, We give thee thanks, O Lord God Almighty, which art, and wast, and art to come; because thou hast taken to thee thy great power, and hast reigned.
Robert H. Mounce comments:
““Our Lord and ... his Christ” reflects Ps 2:2, which was interpreted messianically by the early church (Acts 4:26-28). Although the Son will ultimately be subjected to the Father (1 Cor 15:28), he will nevertheless share the eternal rule of God. The singular (“he will reign”) emphasizes the unity of this joint sovereignty” (The Book of Revelation, NICNT, p.226).
“As the divine response to what has been said about Christ and His relationship to believers and the unbelieving world, God himself now speaks (1:8). Only here and 21:5ff. does God speak. He declares that he is “the Alpha and the Omega” (the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet). In 21:6 the same title is expanded and interpreted by the parallel expression, “the Beginning and the End.” Alpha and omega represent the Hebrew Aleph and tau, which were regarded not simply as the first and last letters of the alphabet, but as including all the letters in between. Hence, the title sets forth God as the sovereign Lord over everything that takes place in the entire course of human history” (ibid., pp.51-52).
Rev 22:6 And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to show unto his servants the things which must shortly be done.
Rev 22:7 Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book.
Rev 22:8 And I John saw these things, and heard them. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which showed me these things.
Rev 22:9 Then saith he unto me, See thou do it not: for I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this book: worship God.
Rev 22:10 And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.
Rev 22:11 He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.
Rev 22:12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.
Rev 22:13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.
Rev 22:14 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.
Rev 22:15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.
Rev 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.
Michael Wilcox comments:
“The validity of the message is testified by a strange feature of John’s experience as related here. Once more we put ourselves in his place, and hear a voice - apparently the same voice through out - saying, ‘”I am coming soon ... You must not [worship me]! I am a fellow servant with you ... I am coming soon ... I Jesus’ (verses 7,9,12,16). Is it the angel, since he refuses John’s worship? Or is it the divine Christ, who accepts such worship? Scene 8 contains the most striking of all John’s shifts of focus. We have noticed them in a number of places before, but here, as we might expect in the Scene which reveals the last concentration of the light of God, it is very hard indeed to discern which of its dazzling personages is speaking at any one time. What that means in relation to the Word of God is that though the angel and the Christ are distinct persons, yet their messages are indistinguishable. It is brought home to us in its opening verses, a Revelation given by God to Christ, by Christ to the angel, by the angel to John, and by John to us, without at any stage losing its divine authority; so that what John says is what God has said. Such indeed is the classical doctrine of the inspiration of Scripture as a whole, underlying the belief that John’s book is intended as a summary of, rather than an addition to, the rest” (The Message of Revelation, BST, pp.214-215).
E.W. Bullinger comments:
“22:6 And he said unto me, It is the angel of 1:1, reassuring John to the truth of what he had been “sent” to show and to tell” (Commentary on Revelation, p.678).
“22:7 And behold, I come quickly: The words of the Angel pass into the words of Christ, which he was commissioned to report. So in verse 12, and 11:3. This corresponds with chap 1:7[-8], as does 22:16” (ibid., p.678).
Robert H. Mounce comments:
“From this point [v.7] forward we encounter a number of changes in speakers. Here the words “Behold, I am coming soon” are those of the risen Lord... Greek i"Æ requires some continuity with what precedes, in this case an angelic announcement. Perhaps the words of Christ come through the mouth of the angel” (The Book of Revelation, p.404).
E.W. Bullinger comments:
“The speaker is the Lord Jesus; and that He is God is clear from the attributes used of Him; for they belong only to God... Even though the Angel be the speaker, he speaks in the name of Him who commissions him. There are other places in this book where fresh speakers are introduced without being named” (Commentary on Revelation, p.681).
We would argue based on OT precedent that these words were also the Father’s.
We also see that when Christ’s angel or messenger speaks for Him, or when God’s Angel, Jesus Christ, speaks for God, the angel/Angel does not necessarily preface his/His messenger “this is the word of Christ/God”. So that the hearer or reader is to determine who is speaking by the context of the message. So we have two conventions in the delivery of the message of God - a preface to it or no preface.
DELEGATION - OLD TESTAMENT
Zec 1:7 Upon the four and twentieth day of the eleventh month, which is the month Sebat, in the second year of Darius, came the word of the LORD unto Zechariah, the son of Berechiah, the son of Iddo the prophet, saying,
Zec 1:8 I saw by night, and behold a man riding upon a red horse, and he stood among the myrtle trees that were in the bottom; and behind him were there red horses, speckled, and white.
Zec 1:9 Then said I, O my lord, what are these? And the angel that talked with me said unto me, I will show thee what these be.
Zec 1:10 And the man that stood among the myrtle trees answered and said, These are they whom the LORD hath sent to walk to and fro through the earth.
Zec 1:11 And they answered the angel of the LORD that stood among the myrtle trees, and said, We have walked to and fro through the earth, and, behold, all the earth sitteth still, and is at rest.
Zec 1:12 Then the angel of the LORD answered and said, O LORD of hosts, how long wilt thou not have mercy on Jerusalem and on the cities of Judah, against which thou hast had indignation these threescore and ten years?
Zec 1:13 And the LORD answered the angel that talked with me with good words and comfortable words.
Zec 1:14 So the angel that communed with me said unto me, Cry thou, saying, Thus saith the LORD of hosts; I am jealous for Jerusalem and for Zion with a great jealousy.
Zec 1:15 And I am very sore displeased with the heathen that are at ease: for I was but a little displeased, and they helped forward the affliction.
Zec 1:16 Therefore thus saith the LORD; I am returned to Jerusalem with mercies: my house shall be built in it, saith the LORD of hosts, and a line shall be stretched forth upon Jerusalem.
Zec 1:17 Cry yet, saying, Thus saith the LORD of hosts; My cities through prosperity shall yet be spread abroad; and the LORD shall yet comfort Zion, and shall yet choose Jerusalem.
Here in Zechariah we have a similar inter-relationship to that in Revelation. The “Lord of hosts”, the “angel of the Lord”, the “angel that communed with me” and “Zechariah” correspond to God, Jesus Christ, Christ’s angel and John in Revelation 1:1.
Kenneth L. Barker comments:
“9-11 After Zechariah respectfully (“my lord”) inquired about the meaning of the vision, the interpreting angel (mentioned in vv.13,14,19; 2:3; 4;1,4-5 [cf.Heb.]; 5:10; 6:4) indicating that he would explain the meaning (v.9). It was however the horseman among the myrtle trees who did the explaining (v.10)...” (Zechariah, EBC, Vol.7, p.611).
A.R. Fausset comments:
“10. And the man who stood among the myrtle trees answered. The “Angel of the Covenant” here gives the reply, instead of the interpreting angel, to imply that all communications through the interpreting angel comes from Him as their source” (Zechariah, JFB, Vol.2, p.661).
Kenneth L. Barker comments:
“While the Persian empire as a whole was secure and at ease by this time, the Israelites in Judah were oppressed and, still under foreign domination...” 12 The angel of the Lord was moved to intercede for the people of Judah. He desired the completion of the process of restoration, which required the reconstruction of the temple, Jerusalem, and other towns of Judah...Through intercession suggestive of our Lord’s high priestly prayer as our mediator (John 17), the angel of the Lord prayed that in the mercy of God this situation would be rectified...” (Zechariah, EBC, Vol.7, p.612).
A.R. Fausset comments:
“Not only does Messiah stand among His people (the “myrtles,” v.8), but intercedes for them with the Father (“Lord,” or “Jehovah of hosts”) effectively, as their ever-living intercessor” (v. 13; Heb 7:25)” (Zechariah, JFB, Vol.2, p.662).
Joyce G. Baldwin comments:
“13. Though it was the angel of the Lord who had interceded in the previous verse [v.12], God’s answer comes direct to Zechariah’s interpreting angel, through him to the prophet, and finally is proclaimed to the people... It is not clear whether the interpreting angel passes on all that he hears or whether he has the more active role of selecting the message” (Haggi, Zechariah, Malachi, Tyndale, p.98).
Kenneth L. Barker comments:
“13-15 Although it was the angel of the Lord who had interceded in v.12, the Lord’s answer came directly to the interpreting angel and through him to Zechariah. Or “the Lord” (v.13) may refer to the angel of the Lord, who would be then be giving the reply that he had received from the “Lord Almighty.” The angel of the Lord is identified with the Lord elsewhere... 16-17 In response to the intercession of v.12, the Lord promised to return to Jerusalem (cf. Ezek 43:1-5; 48:35, which seems to reach to the end times for the final stage of the progressive fulfilment). The assurance that the temple (“my house”) would be rebuilt expresses the divine mercy” (Zechariah, EBC, Vol.7, p.612-13).
In the dynamic sense it may be that the Angel of the Lord, who is also the Lord, is delivering the answer for himself. For when in verse 16 the Lord says “I am returning to Jerusalem” it is the Angel of the Lord who will be actually returning; in the absolute sense it is the Father returning through the Messiah.
Zec 14:3 Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.
Zec 14:4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.
Zec 14:5 And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with thee.
Kenneth L. Barker comments:
“3-5 Just when it seems all hope is gone, “then the LORD himself appears as “divine warrior” and delivers his beleaguered people... But who is the “LORD”? When one compares this scene, including v.4, with Acts 1:9-12 and Revelation 19:11-16, it appears certain that “the LORD” here is ultimately the Messiah. The passage is indirectly messianic (see comments at 2:10)” (Zechariah, EBC, Vol.7, p.690).
Zec 2:8 For thus saith the LORD of hosts; After the glory hath he sent me unto the nations which spoiled you: for he that toucheth you toucheth the apple of his eye.
Zec 2:9 For, behold, I will shake mine hand upon them, and they shall be a spoil to their servants: and ye shall know that the LORD of hosts hath sent me.
Zec 2:10 Sing and rejoice, O daughter of Zion: for, lo, I come, and I will dwell in the midst of thee, saith the LORD.
Zec 2:11 And many nations shall be joined to the LORD in that day, and shall be my people: and I will dwell in the midst of thee, and thou shalt know that the LORD of hosts hath sent me unto thee.
A.R. Fausset comments:
“8. For thus saith the Lord of hosts; After the glory hath he sent me unto the nations which spoiled you - after restoring the “glory” (v.5; Isa 4:5; Rom 9:4) of Jehovah’s presence to Jerusalem, He (God the Father) hath commissioned ME (God the Son, Isa 48:16, the divine Angel ... to visit in wrath “the nations which soiled you.” Messiah’s two-fold office from the Father is (1) To glorify His Church [should be Nation; in a secondary sense the Church]; (2) To punish its foes (2Thess 1:7-10)” (Zechariah, JFB, Vol.2, p.665).
Kenneth L. Barker comments:
“10 In fulfilment of the great OT covenants, particularly the Abrahamic covenant, this section anticipates full kingdom blessing in the messianic era... The section begins with a call to joy, followed by the reason for such jubilation (cf.9:9). The reason given is the personal coming of God himself to live among his people in Jerusalem (Zion). This language is ultimately messianic - indirectly or by extension from God in general to the Messiah in particular... Indirect messianic prophecy refers to passages that can be literally and fully realized only through the person and work of the Messiah - e.g. passages that speak of a personal coming of God to his people...” (Zechariah, EBC, Vol.7, p.619).
“If the person who said, “I will live among you” (v.10) was also the speaker of the same words in v.11, as seems certain, then the “me” at the end of v.11 must refer to the messianic Servant-Messenger (or Angel of the Lord), for the speaker in v.10 was clearly deity” (Zechariah, EBC, Vol.7, p.620).
A.R. Fausset comments:
“And ye shall know that the Lord of hosts hath sent me. Messiah, sanctified and sent by God the Father into the world, is the true prophet, the antitype of Zechariah and all the prophets (Isa 48:16; 49:1; John 10:36)” (Zechariah, JFB, Vol.2, p.665).
“For the one Jehovah is represented (vv.10,11) as sending the other, and at the same time the unity of the Sender and the Sent is implied; for he who comes and dwells in Jerusalem names Himself “Jehovah,” and at the same times declares that Jehovah hath sent Him” (ibid., p.666).
GOD, ANGELS AND THE PATRIARCHS
Gen 17:1 And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the LORD appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect.
Genesis 18:1-5
|
Genesis 19:1-2
|
Genesis 19:15-21
|
And the LORD appeared unto him...
|
|
|
in the plains of Mamre:
and he sat in the tent door
in the heat of the day;
|
Sodom:
and Lot sat in the gate of
at even;
|
|
and, lo, three men stood by him:
|
And there came two angels
|
And when the morning arose, then the angels hastened Lot,
|
and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground,
|
and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the
ground;
|
And it came to pass, when they had brought them forth abroad,...
|
And said, My Lord [AdÇn~y],
|
And he said, Behold now, my lords [AdÇnay],
|
And Lot said unto them, Oh, not so, my Lord [AdÇn~y]:
|
if now I have found favour in thy sight... thy servant
|
|
thy servant hath found grace in thy sight
|
And they said,
|
And they said,
|
And he said unto him,
|
NOTES:
Genesis 18:3: “... [AdÇn~y] “Lord” with the lengthened final diphthong is used by the MT only to refer to God. The Masoretes marked AdÇn~y in this verse as “holy”... Several Masoretic MSS read yhwh in place of AdÇn~y in this verse...” (Notes on Genesis 18:3, EBC, Vol.2, p.146).
Genesis 19:2: “This is the only occurrence of ... AdÇnay, “my lords”), with the short final diphthong, in the MT. Its use here shows clearly that (AdÇn~y) in 18:3 is intentional. The Masoretes have marked it as ... (hwl), meaning it should not be taken as a reference to God...” (Notes on Genesis 19:2, EBC, Vol.2, p.154).
From the chart above we see that Abraham greeted the three men as Lord [AdÇn~y], Genesis 18:3], while Lot eventually addressed the two angels as Lord [AdÇn~y], Genesis 19:18). If the two angel/men can be addressed as Lord then it may follow that when the three men were greeted by Abraham as Lord it does not necessarily imply that one of the three was Christ.
Sailhamer presents the “less” common view, that is, in the absolute sense, that God the Father is the Lord, while the “more” common view, that is in the dynamic sense, Jesus Christ is the Lord. We believe that it should be understood as a combination of both senses.
John H. Sailhamer comments:
“The narrative of the arrival of three men at Abraham’s tent is complicated by several uncertainties within the text... there appears to be a conscious shift in the verbal forms between [chapter 18] v.3 and vv.4-9; In v.3 the verbs and pronouns are all singular masculine, whereas in vv.4-9 the forms are plural masculine...
“Finally, there is the question of the nature of the relationship between the uncertainties just raised in chapter 18 and their apparent counterparts in chapter 19... The verbs and pronouns in Lot’s greeting are all plural masculine (19:2) and continue to be so until the end of the story, where the same sort of unevenness found in chapter 18 reappears...
“As the following comments will attempt to demonstrate, throughout the narrative the apparent irregularities in the text can be seen, not as the end result of a haphazard weaving together of divergent stories, but the result of the author’s careful balancing of two central theological positions with respect to the divine presence and power... the need to reconcile two equally important views of God.
“The close similarities between the account of Abraham’s visit by “three men” (18:1-3) and that of Lot’s visit by the “two angels/men” (19:1-2) suggest that the narratives should be explored further for clues regarding their interrelationships...
“In opening the narrative with the statement that the Lord “appeared” to Abraham, the author leaves no doubt that in some (albeit unexplained) way the three men represented the Lord’s appearance...
“Abraham addressed them as “Lord” (AdÇn~y) and appropriately used the singular to address all three men in v.3... Lot, however, addressed the visitors as “lords” (AdÇnay) ... and thus used the plural to address the two angel/men... What is the reader to make of this contrast? The most apparent explanation is that the author wanted us to see that Abraham ... recognised the Lord when he appeared to him, where as Lot, who then lived in Sodom, did not recognise the Lord... Abraham knew God, but Lot did not” (EBC, Vol.2, p.143).
Gen 18:20 And the LORD said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous;
Gen 18:21 I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not, I will know.
Gen 18:22 And the men turned their faces from thence, and went toward Sodom: but Abraham stood yet before the LORD.
Gen 19:17 And it came to pass, when they had brought them forth abroad, that he said, Escape for thy life; look not behind thee, neither stay thou in all the plain; escape to the mountain, lest thou be consumed.
Gen 19:18 And Lot said unto them, Oh, not so, my Lord:
Gen 19:19 Behold now, thy servant hath found grace in thy sight, and thou hast magnified thy mercy, which thou hast showed unto me in saving my life; and I cannot escape to the mountain, lest some evil take me, and I die.
John H. Sailhamer comments:
“...In 18:21 the reader had been informed that the Lord was on his way to Sodom; thus when the two angel/men arrived, the most likely inference is that they represented the Lord’s visit... As the narrative continues, Lot comes to the point of recognizing his visitors as emissaries of the Lord. This can be seen in the fact that the last time he addressed these same two angels /men (19:18), he called “them” (notice the plural...) “Lord”...; and appropriately like Abraham, he addressed them both with the singular. In keeping with Lot’s recognition of the identity of the angel/men, in 19:19 Lot stated his requests to them in the same words as Abraham (in 18:3b) had addressed his three visitors: compare Lot’s words in 19:19 - “[If] your servant has found favor in your eyes”... - with those of Abraham in 18:3b - “If I have found favor in your eyes”... (EBC, Vol.2, p.143).
C.F. Kiel comments:
“In v.17 we are struck by the change from the plural to the singular: “when they brought then forth, he said.” To think of one of two angels - the one, for example, who led the conversation - seems to be out of place, not only because Lot addressed him by the name of God, “Adonai”(v.18), but also because the speaker attributed to himself the judgment upon the cities (vv.21,22), which is described in v.24 as executed by Jehovah. Yet there is nothing to indicate that Jehovah suddenly joined the angels. The only supposition remains, therefore, is that Lot recognised in the two angels a manifestation of God, and so addressed them (v.18) as Adonai (my Lord), and that the angel who spoke addressed him as the messenger of Jehovah in the name of God...” (Pentateuch, KD, p.150).
John H. Sailhamer continues:
“It should be noted that the narrative first states that the Lord (yhwh) said, “I will go down and see” ([chapter 18] v.21); then the narrative continues by stating that “the men ... turned away and went towards Sodom.” Thus once again the Lord and the men are brought into close association so that the actions of the one are identified with the actions of the other. It is important to notice the inherent logic of the narrative at this point since this same logic follows the reader into the next chapter. If “the men” ... are the emissaries of the Lord and represent his presence amid everyday affairs, then when they journey to Sodom and Gomorrah, as here, it can rightly be said that the Lord himself was visiting these cities, as in v.21 (“I will go down and see”).
“... So when the Lord said, “I will go down and see,” the reader is led to the conclusion that, as in chapter 18, “the men” in chapter 19 represented the Lord’s presence with Lot.
“One question remains, however. If the three men left Abraham, why did only “two messengers (...19:1) arrive in Sodom? It seems reasonably clear that the two messengers who visited Lot are two of the “three men” who visited Abraham, especially in the light of the fact that in chapter 19 the “messengers”are subsequently referred to simply as “the men”... But what happened to the other “man”? This question has given rise to several speculations about the identity of the other man who does not visit Sodom. The most common explanation is that the “man” is a “christophany,”... Thus when the text says that “the men ... turned away and went towards Sodom” and that the Lord remained with Abraham, and then further that only “two messengers” (19:1) came to Sodom, it seems to follow that one of the men must have stayed behind with Abraham. Since we know that Lord stayed behind, that man must have been the Lord. Abraham was then visited by the preincarnate Christ who was accompanied by two “angels” (19:1).
“Although this interpretation has many features of the narrative in its favor, the primary difficulty with such an explanation is that it overlooks the fairly certain fact that although Lot failed to appreciate it, the author of the narrative sees the “two messengers” as representatives of the presence of the Lord (e.g., “and Lot said to them, No Lord,’” 19;18 [NIV mg.]), just as the three men in chapter 18. Thus the fact that the men in chapter 18 are referred to as “the Lord” does not mean that one of them is actually the Lord; rather it means that all three represent the Lord’s presence. If the two men in chapter 19 can be addressed as “the Lord” even though they merely represent the Lord, so also the three men in chapter 18 (e.g., v.3). Hence, after calling attention to the fact that Lot is visited by only two messengers, the author subsequently refers to them simply as “the men”... as in chapter 18...
“By specifying the number of men who visited Sodom, the author has left the reader with an answer to the question of the Lord’s righteous and just treatment of Gomorrah. Although unstated ... the third man visited Gomorrah...” (EBC, Vol.2, pp.150-151).
In Genesis 18 and 19 the absolute and dynamic principle are portrayed. Here we see that in the dynamic sense it is not only the Angel of the Lord that is the “agent” of God. In Revelation while Christ is God’s Angel/Messenger Christ has his own angel that represents and speaks for Him. Christ’s angel is also God’s angel, but also all “good” angels are God’s and Christ’s angels. So that when Christ’s angel/angels speaks for him, Christ is speaking in the absolute sense and His angel/angels in the dynamic sense.
In the absolute sense God “visited” these cities through His agents, with the “Angel of the Lord”, being one of the three men. In the dynamic sense Christ “visited” Abraham and Gomorrah and in the absolute sense visited Sodom through His two angel/men.
GOD IN HIS ANGELS
Gen 18:10 And he said, I will certainly return unto thee according to the time of life; and, lo, Sarah thy wife shall have a son. And Sarah heard it in the tent door, which was behind him.
Gen 18:12 Therefore Sarah laughed within herself, saying, After I am waxed old shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?
Gen 18:13 And the LORD said unto Abraham, Wherefore did Sarah laugh, saying, Shall I of a surety bear a child, which am old?
Gen 19:12 And the men said unto Lot...
Gen 19:13 For we will destroy this place, because the cry of them is waxen great before the face of the LORD; and the LORD hath sent us to destroy it.
Gen 19:21 And he said unto him, See, I have accepted thee concerning this thing also, that I will not overthrow this city, for the which thou hast spoken.
Gen 19:22 Haste thee, escape thither; for I cannot do any thing till thou be come thither. Therefore the name of the city was called Zoar.
Gen 19:23 The sun was risen upon the earth when Lot entered into Zoar.
Gen 19:24 Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven
John H. Sailhamer comments:
“They tell Lot they will destroy Sodom [19:13]. But the text states that “the LORD rained down burning sulphur on Sodom and Gomorrah... As in18:13, the “he” in 19:21 is finally identified as “the Lord” in 19:24, some distance from the switch to the singular...” (EBC, Vol.2, p.143,146).
C.F. Keil comments:
“In the words “Jehovah caused it to rain from Jehovah” there is no distinction implied between the hidden and the manifest God, between the Jehovah present upon earth in His angels who called down judgment, and the Jehovah enthroned in heaven who sent it down...” (Pentateuch, KD, p.150).
In Revelation we saw that Christ has His own special Angel, who represents and speaks for Him, it may be that that Angel was the main spokesman in the visit to Lot.
THE EXODUS DISPENSATION
Judg 2:1 And an angel of the LORD came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said, I made you to go up out of Egypt, and have brought you unto the land which I sware unto your fathers; and I said, I will never break my covenant with you.
Kenneth L. Barker comments:
“The literature of the ancient Near East contains references to messengers who carried a god’s or king’s words to a king or a people... The messenger bore the authority of the one who sent him, appearing on the scene to deliver, not his own word, but the word of his sender. The messenger was the mediator of a word...” (Zechariah, EBC, Vol.7. p.607).
This verse may also be taken in the absolute and dynamic sense. God is speaking to the people through the “angel of the Lord” or the Angel is speaking to Israel on His own behalf.
Exo 13:17 And it came to pass, when Pharaoh had let the people go, that God led them not through the way of the land of the Philistines, although that was near; for God said, Lest peradventure the people repent when they see war, and they return to Egypt:
Exo 13:21 And the LORD went before them by day in a pillar of a cloud, to lead them the way; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light; to go by day and night:
Exo 13:22 He took not away the pillar of the cloud by day, nor the pillar of fire by night, from before the people.
Exo 14:19 And the angel of God, which went before the camp of Israel, removed and went behind them; and the pillar of the cloud went from before their face, and stood behind them:
Exo 14:20 And it came between the camp of the Egyptians and the camp of Israel; and it was a cloud and darkness to them, but it gave light by night to these: so that the one came not near the other all the night.
There are two ways of understanding “the LORD” in this section. In the absolute sense “the LORD” refers to the Father - and He “went before” and “went behind” Israel through the agency of the “the angel of the Lord. In the “dynamic” sense the “angel of the God”, who is also LORD “went before” and “went behind”.
Emphasising Exodus 14:19 in its parallelism:
And the angel of God
which went before the camp of Israel,
removed and went behind them
|
and the pillar of the cloud
went from before their face
and stood behind them
|
Walter C. Kaiser, Jr comments:
“How God led the Israelites (v.17) is now explained. The single “pillar” (14:24), which was a cloud by day and a fire by night, ... was a visible presence of Yahweh in their midst. The pillar of the cloud and fire was but another name for “the angel of God,” for Exodus 14:19 equates the two as does 23:20-23. In fact, God’s Name was “in” this angel who went before them to bring them into Canaan (23:220-23). He was the “angel of his presence” (Isa 63:8-9). Malachi 3:1 calls this angel the “messenger of the covenant,” who is equated with the Lord, the owner of the temple. Obviously, then, the Christ of the NT is the Shekinah glory or Yahweh of the OT. Through this cloudy pillar the Lord would speak to Moses (33:9-11) and to the people (Ps 99:6-7). Such easy movement from the pillar of cloud and fire to the angel of the Lord himself has already been met in the same interchange between the burning bush, the angel, and the Lord in chapter 3...” (Exodus, Vol.2, EBC, p.385).
“The identity of the angel of the Lord is clarified in the second part of v.19: the pillar of cloud and fire. The reality of God’s promised presence may be stated in the symbol of his presence (the pillar of cloud and fire), in his messenger (the angel of the Lord), or as the Lord himself who “went ahead of them” (13:21; cf.14:24)... (ibid., p.389).
In the absolute sense God the Father led the Israelites; He led them through the Angel of the Lord. In the dynamic sense the Angel of the Lord, that is Jesus Christ led the Israelites; His presence with Israel was symbolised by the pillar of cloud and fire.
Exo 23:20 Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared.
Exo 23:21 Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him.
Exo 23:22 But if thou shalt indeed obey his voice, and do all that I speak; then I will be an enemy unto thine enemies, and an adversary unto thine adversaries.
Exo 23:23 For mine Angel shall go before thee, and bring thee in unto the Amorites, and the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Canaanites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites: and I will cut them off.
Exo 23:24 Thou shalt not bow down to their gods, nor serve them, nor do after their works: but thou shalt utterly overthrow them, and quite break down their images.
Exo 23:25 And ye shall serve the LORD your God, and he shall bless thy bread, and thy water; and I will take sickness away from the midst of thee.
Gen 48:15 And he blessed Joseph, and said, God, before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God which fed me all my life long unto this day,
Gen 48:16 The Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads;...
Walter C. Kaiser Jr. comments:
“The angel mentioned here cannot be Moses, God’s messenger, or an ordinary angel; for the expressions are too high for any of these: “he will not forgive your rebellion” (who can forgive sin but God alone?) And my Name is in him” (v.22). This must be the Angel of the Covenant (cf. Isa 63:9; Mal 3:1)...Just as Yahweh’s name resided in his temple (Deut 12:5,11; 1 Kings 8:29), so this Angel with the authority and prestige of the name of God was evidence enough that God himself was present in his Son. Obedience to the Angel would result in all of the blessings listed in the text. Israel was commanded: “Do not rebel against him (v.21); yet they did just that (Num 14:11; Ps 78:17,40,56)” (Exodus, EBC, Vol.2, p.446).
“If the name - i.e., the character, nature, or attributes - of God was “in him,” could He be less than the nonincarnate Word tabernacling among them?” (Towards an Old Testament Theology, p.121).
In verses 20-24 the LORD your God is the Father while His Angel is Jesus Christ; but verse 25 may also refer to Christ in the dynamic sense. In the next section the Lord thy God is the Father; and Jesus Christ as the true Prophet is the goal of this prophecy:
Deu 18:15 The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;
Deu 18:16 According to all that thou desiredst of the LORD thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not.
Deu 18:17 And the LORD said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken.
Deu 18:18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
C.F. Keil comments:
“But whilst we are obliged to give up the direct and exclusive reference of this promise to the Messiah ... as not in accordance with the context or the words themselves, we cannot, on the other hand agree, in ... restricting the passage to the Old Testament prophets. There is no warrant for this limitation of the word “prophet,” since the expectation of the Messiah was not unknown to Moses and the Israel of his time, but was actually expressed in the promise of the seed of the woman, and Jacob’s prophecy concerning Shiloh; so that O.v Gerlach is perfectly right in observing, that “this is a prediction of Christ as the true Prophet, precisely like that of the seed of the woman in Gen 3:15” (Pentateuch, KD, p.935).
Earl S. Kalland comments:
“The “prophet like you from among their brothers” (v.18) was seen as a messianic prediction, a prophet par excellence. This interpretation was widespread in NT times, being mentioned in the NT and among the Essenes as well as among the Jews, Gnostics, and others (cf. John 1:21; 6:14; 7:40; Acts 3:22-23; Cross, Ancient Library, p.219; J.T. Milik, Ten Years of Discovery in the Wilderness of Judaea [Naperville: Allenson, 1959], p.124)...
“John the Baptist, in answer to the priests and Levites, said that he was not “the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet” (John 1:21,25); and later the people are reported to have said on two occasions: “Surely this is the Prophet” (John 6:14), and “Surely this man is the Prophet” (John 7:40). Philip also, referring to the one Moses wrote about in the law, applied to Jesus, saying, “We have found the one Moses wrote about” (John 1:45).
Was not Jesus himself calling this Deuteronomic passage to mind when he said of Moses, “He wrote about me” (John 5:46)? Moreover, Jesus claimed to fulfill the requirements of the prophet like Moses when he said, “For I did not speak of my own accord, but the Father who sent me commanded me what to say” (John 12:49-50).
“Peter, when speaking to the people at the Beautiful Gate of the temple, explicitly applied this passage to Jesus (Acts 3:22-23). To this can be added the testimony of Stephen (Acts 7:37).
“Though the statement in Deuteronomy promised a series of prophets, and so included the prophetic movement in the providence of God for the direction of his people, it looks beyond the prophetic movement to the One who is the supreme revealer of God; it looks to Jesus” (Deuteronomy, EBC, Vol.3, p.123).
Num 12:5 And the LORD came down in the pillar of the cloud, and stood in the door of the tabernacle, and called Aaron and Miriam: and they both came forth.
Num 12:6 And he said, Hear now my words: If there be a prophet among you, I the LORD will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream.
Num 12:7 My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all mine house.
Num 12:8 With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches; and the similitude of the LORD shall he behold:...
Ronald B. Allen comments:
“Descriptions of the appearances of God in Hebrew Scripture are usually styled “theophanies.” The term “epiphany” may be used where there is a dramatic descending of God, as in Psalm 18:7-15. The Hebrew verb yarad (“to come down”) is often used in these contexts. In 11:25, the Lord came down in grace; in Genesis 11:5-8, the Lord came down in judgment... In a sense, every theophany (appearance of God) and epiphany (descent of God) is a picture and promise of the grand theophany, the epiphany of the Lord Jesus Christ...” (Numbers, EBC, Vol.2, p.800).
C.F. Keil comments:
“Mouth to mouth” answers to the “face to face” in Ex 33:11 (cf. Deut 34:10), i.e., without any mediation of reserve, but with the same closeness and freedom with which friends converse together (Ex 33:11). This is still further strengthened and elucidated by the words in apposition, “in the form of seeing (appearance), and not in riddles, “ i.e., visibly, and not in a dark, hidden, enigmatical way... “The form (Eng. similitude) of Jehovah” was not the essential nature of God, His unveiled glory, - for this no man can see (vid., Ex.33:18ff.), - but a form which manifested the invisible God to the eye of man in a clearly discernable mode, and which was essentially different, not only from the visionary sight of God in the form of a man (Ezek 1:26; Dan 7:9 and 13), but also from the appearances of God in the outward world of the senses, in the person and form of the angel of Jehovah, and stood in the same relations to these two forms of revelation, so far as directness and clearness were concerned, as the sight of a person in a dream to that of the actual figure of the person himself. God talked with Moses without figure, in the clear distinctness of a spiritual communication, whereas to the prophets He only revealed Himself through the medium of ecstasy or dream” (Pentateuch, KD, p.704).
Exo 33:1 And the LORD said unto Moses, Depart, and go up hence, thou and the people which thou hast brought up out of the land of Egypt, unto the land which I sware unto Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, saying, Unto thy seed will I give it:
Exo 33:2 And I will send an angel before thee; and I will drive out the Canaanite, the Amorite, and the Hittite, and the Perizzite, the Hivite, and the Jebusite:
Exo 33:3 Unto a land flowing with milk and honey: for I will not go up in the midst of thee; for thou art a stiffnecked people: lest I consume thee in the way.
Exo 33:12 And Moses said unto the LORD, See, thou sayest unto me, Bring up this people: and thou hast not let me know whom thou wilt send with me. Yet thou hast said, I know thee by name, and thou hast also found grace in my sight.
Exo 33:13 Now therefore, I pray thee, if I have found grace in thy sight, show me now thy way, that I may know thee, that I may find grace in thy sight: and consider that this nation is thy people.
Exo 33:14 And he said, My presence shall go with thee, and I will give thee rest.
This section maybe interpreted in two ways - the absolute and the dynamic.
The LORD in verse 1 maybe both God and the Angel of God. The angel that the LORD was sending before Israel is therefore not the Angel of the Lord. In the dynamic sense the ‘sent’ angel was sent by the Angel of the Lord. It may have been Christ’s own angel, seen in the Book of Revelation, that was to be sent. As in Revelation the “sent” angel is also sent by God through Christ. So in the absolute sense God the Father was sending an angel.
So that in the absolute sense, after Moses petitions the Lord in vv.12-13, God is restoring His presence by sending His Angel, the Angel of the Lord also known as the Angel of His presence (Isa 63:9). In the dynamic sense the Angel of the Lord” would now go up personally instead of sending an angel with Israel.
Walter C. Kaiser Jr. explains the absolute sense:
“11-15 As the time approached for Moses to take up the lead of the Israelites, he became concerned as to the identity of the companion God had promised him (32:34; 33:2). He believed that a mere angel was no substitute for the presence of God... Moses asked the Lord for a demonstration of his love so that he might know and serve him better (v.33). The Lord responded by promising, “My Presence [lit., ‘my face’] will go with you” (v.14). With this new word, the Lord reinstated the angel of his presence in whom he invested his “Name” (23:2021) as the leader of Israel’s way to Canaan...” (Exodus, EBC, Vol.2, p.483).
Exo 33:18 And he [Moses] said, I beseech thee, show me thy glory.
Exo 33:19 And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the LORD before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy.
Exo 33:20 And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.
Exo 33:21 And the LORD said, Behold, there is a place by me, and thou shalt stand upon a rock:
Exo 33:22 And it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in a clift of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand while I pass by:
Exo 33:23 And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen.
Rom 9:14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
Rom 9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
Walter C. Kaiser Jr. comments:
“19-20 In response to Moses’ request to see God’s “glory,” God said that he would “cause all [his] goodness to pass” before Moses (v.19). By his “goodness” is meant his whole character and nature. In a later theophany the Lord passed by what may have been the same cleft of the rock (cave) for the discouraged prophet Elijah (1 Kings 19:11).
“A further aspect of the revelation of God’s glory was the proclamation of his name. The name of God includes his nature, character, person, (Ps 20:1); Luke 24:47; John 1:12), doctrine (Ps 22:22; John 17:6,26), and standards of living (Mic 4:5). In this context his name includes “mercy” (i.e. his “grace”) and his “compassion” (raham; lit., “womb,” “bowels,” i.e., deep-seated feelings). Romans 9:15 quotes this verse and applies it to the sovereignty of God... (Exodus, EBC, Vol.2, p.483).
FOUR TITLES OF CHRIST / THE ANGEL OF THE LORD
"the name of the Lord”
"the voice of the Lord”
"the glory of the Lord”
"the face of the Lord”; or "the presence of the Lord”.
In the dynamic sense Christ’s represents, displaying or reveals these characteristics of God. In the absolute sense these terms refer to the Father.
THE NAME OF THE LORD
Acts 1:15 And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and twenty,)
Exo 32:33 And the LORD said unto Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book.
“Name can stand by metonymy for the person bearing the name (Num 1:2; Acts 1:15; 4:10; Rev 3:4) and vice versa (Ex 32:33; Dan 12:1). God’s “glorious” name (1 Chron 29:13, Ps 72:19) is to be blessed, praised, exalted magnified, glorified, rejoiced and exulted in, thanked, hallowed, feared, loved, remembered, proclaimed, declared, waited on, walked in, desired and sought. For many of these verbs - those denoting verbal acts that necessarily include the name - God is virtually the object. The common expression “to call on God’s name” means literally to call on God by name. The name is, from the human point of view, the means by which God is approached and known, to the degree that God is known...” (Leland Ryken et al., General Editors, “Name”, Dictionary of Biblical Imagery, p.584).
The “name of the Lord” in the absolute sense may refer to the Father by metonymy and in the dynamic sense to Jesus Christ in that God’s name is revealed in Him and He is “the means by which God is approached and known”.
Gen 4:26 And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD.
Joel 2:32 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered...
Rom 10:9 That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. (NIV).
Rom 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
John H. Sailhamer comments:
“To underscore the importance of the line of Seth, the author notes that in his days people already practiced true worship of the God of the covenant: “At that time men began to call on the name of the LORD” (v.26). Such a note signifies that for the author of the Book of Genesis the worship of the Lord established at the time of Moses was not something new but rather a return to the worship pf the only and true God... At least as far as the line of Seth was concerned, these men, like Abraham after them, are described as true worshippers of the covenant God” (Genesis, EBC, Vol.2, p.69).
Everett F. Harrison comments:
“... Paul cites Joel 2:32. Peter used the same passage in his Pentecost sermon... The prayer promises of Scripture are restricted to the people of God, with one notable exception - namely, that God will hear the cry of any who call upon him for salvation. When v.13 is compared with v.9, it becomes evident that the Lord of Joel 2:32 is being identified with the Lord Jesus Christ...” (Romans, EBC, Vol.10. p.113).
"Behold, the name of the LORD cometh from far, burning with his anger, and the burden thereof is heavy: his lips are full of indignation, and his tongue as a devouring fire" (Isa 30:27).
See also comments on Exodus 33:19-20 above.
THE VOICE OF THE LORD
“The standard phrase “obey the voice of the Lord” means essentially to obey the commandments (Dt 30:10-20; Josh 24:24 2 Kings 18:12; Jer 21:13; etc.)”J.C McCann, Jr, “Voice”, ISBE, Vol.4, p.997).
“The voice of God ...is also used in Scripture as a metaphor referring to his person. When Moses speaks with God in the tent of meeting, “he heard the voice speaking to him from between the two cherubim above the atonement cover on the ark of the Testimony” (Num 7:89 NIV; cf. 1 Kings 19:13; 2 Pet 1:17). This lies behind the later (Aramaic) Jewish practice of referring to God enigmatically as “the Voice” or “the Word.”” (Leland Ryken et all?, General Editors, “Voice”, Dictionary of Biblical Imagery, pp. 918-919).
"The voice of the LORD will shatter Assyria;
with his scepter he will strike them down.
Every stroke the LORD lays on them with his punishing rod..." (Isaiah 30:31, NIV).
THE GLORY OF THE LORD
"And the glory of the LORD abode upon mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it six days: and the seventh day he called unto Moses out of the midst of the cloud" (Exodus 24:16).
We will be looking at the “glory of the Lord” in detail later.
THE FACE OF THE LORD
Neh 2:2 so the king asked me, "Why does your face look so sad when you are not ill? This can be nothing but sadness of heart" (NIV).
“The king's question "Why is your face sad? means "Why are you sad?" (Neh 2:2)” (ibid., "Face, Facial Expressons", Dictionary of Biblical Imagery, (p.259).
“And the king answered and said unto the man of God, Entreat now the face of the LORD thy God, and pray for me, that my hand may be restored me again. And the man of God besought the LORD, and the king's hand was restored him again, and became as it was before” (1 Kings 13:6).
Isa 63:5 And I looked, and there was none to help; and I wondered that there was none to uphold: therefore mine own arm brought salvation unto me; and my fury, it upheld me.
Isa 63:6 And I will tread down the people in mine anger, and make them drunk in my fury, and I will bring down their strength to the earth.
Isa 63:7 I will mention the lovingkindnesses of the LORD, and the praises of the LORD, according to all that the LORD hath bestowed on us, and the great goodness toward the house of Israel, which he hath bestowed on them according to his mercies, and according to the multitude of his lovingkindnesses.
Isa 63:8 For he said, Surely they are my people, children that will not lie: so he was their Saviour.
Isa 63:9 In all their affliction he was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them: in his love and in his pity he redeemed them; and he bare them, and carried them all the days of old.
Isa 63:10 But they rebelled, and vexed his holy Spirit: therefore he was turned to be their enemy, and he fought against them.
Frank Delitzsch comments:
“There is nothing to surprise us in the fact that God should be said to feel the sufferings of His people as His own sufferings; for the question whether God can feel pain is answered by the Scriptures in the affirmative. He can as surely as everything originates in Him, with the exception of sin, which is a free act and only originates in Him so far as the possibility is concerned, but not in actuality. Just as a man can feel pain, and yet in his personality keep himself superior to it, so God feels pain without His own happiness being thereby destroyed. But because He, the all-knowing, all-feeling One, is also the almighty will, he sent the angel of His face, and brought them salvation. “The angel of His face,” says Knobel, “is the pillar of cloud and fire, in which Jehovah was present with His own people in the march through the desert, with His protection, instruction, and guidance, the helpful presence of God in the pillar of cloud and fire.” But where do we ever read of this, that it brought Israel salvation in the pressure of great dangers? Only on one occasion (Ex 14:19,20) does it cover the Israelites from their pursuers; but in that very instance a distinction is expressly made between the angel of God and the pillar of cloud.
“Consequently the cloud and the angel were two distinct media of the manifestation of the presence of God. They differed in two respects. The cloud was a material medium - ... the sign, and the site of the revealed presence of God. The angel, on the other hand, was a personal medium, a ministering spirit... In which the name of Jehovah was indwelling... the cloud was the medium of the settled presence of God in His angel in the midst of Israel, although it is never so expressed in the thorah. This mediatorial angel is called “the angel of His face,” as being the representative of God, for “the face of God” is His self-revealing presence (even though only revealed to the mental eye); and consequently the presence of God, which led Israel to Canaan, is called directly “His face” in Deut 4:37...” (Isaiah, KD, pp.599-600).
When national Israel was afflicted, God was afflicted; when individual Israel, the Messiah, was pierced, God was pierced. When Paul, based on the concept of solidarity, persecuted the early Church he was in effect persecuting Christ and God.
Alec Motyer comments:
“The Lord loved not in heart or word only but in deed and effectiveness: he became their Saviour ... saved them. Angel of his presence: literally ‘of his face’. We recognize people by face; ‘face’ is the Lord’s very own presence (Ps 139:7), among them in the person of his angel - that unique ‘angel of the Lord’ (e.g. Gn 16:7ff; 21:17; 22:11,15; Ex 3:2; 14:19; 23:20-23; Mal 3:1) who speaks as the Lord and is yet distinct from him, in whom the holy God ‘accommodates’ himself to live among sinners, an Old Testament anticipation of Jesus” (Isaiah, Tyndale, pp.386-87).
"And thou, child, shalt be called the prophet of the Highest: for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways" (Luke 1:76).
In Malachi 3:1 “my messenger” was to prepare the way before God who would come to his people in the Angel of the Lord. So in the dynamic sense “the face of the Lord” is Jesus Christ; therefore the “presence of the Lord” is a title of Christ. The above verse may therefore read “for thou shalt go before Jesus Christ to prepare his ways”.
SAVIOUR - PRESENCE
Mat 1:21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
Mat 1:22 Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,
Mat 1:23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.
D.A. Carson comments:
“No greater blessing can be conceived than for God to dwell with his people (Isa 60:18-20); Ezek 48:35; Rev 21:23). Jesus is the one called “God with us”: the designation evokes John 1:14, 18. As if that were not enough, Jesus promised just before his ascension to be with us to the end of the age (28:20; cf. also 18:20), when he will return to share his messianic banquet with his people (25:10).
“If “Immanuel” is rightly interrupted in this sense, then the question must be raised whether “Jesus” (1:21) should receive the same treatment. Does “Jesus” (“Yahweh saves”) mean Mary’s Son merely brings Yahweh’s salvation, or is he himself in some sense the Yahweh who saves? If “Immanuel” entails the higher christology, it is not implausible that Matthew sees the same in “Jesus.” The least we can say is that Matthew does not hesitate to apply OT passages descriptive of Yahweh directly to Jesus (cf.3:3)” (Matthew, EBC, Vol 8, p.80).
G.W. Bromiley comments:
“...all that can be said of God is also said of Christ... The name Immanuel, which had previously indicated the fact of God’s presence, is now brought to its most literal fulfilment, for God is directly with His people in Jesus” (“God”, ISBE, Vol.2, p.502).
God is with his people through Jesus Christ. While Jesus Christ is God with us it is, in a “higher” or “absolute” sense, God the Father with his people.
Luke 1:46-48 And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour. For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.
1 Tim 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the commandment of God our Saviour, and Lord Jesus Christ, which is our hope;
Titus 1:4 To Titus, mine own son after the common faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.
Jude 1:25 to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen. (NIV).
1 Chr 29:11 Thine, O LORD, is the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty: for all that is in the heaven and in the earth is thine; thine is the kingdom, O LORD, and thou art exalted as head above all.
Michael Green comments:
“To God alone be glory! This is the final note of Jude’s Epistle. There is but one God (‘wise’, AV, is an interpolation from Rom 16:27) and he is a Saviour. In the Old Testament it is emphasized that God is the Saviour of his people; there is none else (Is 45:15). The Christian doctrine of salvation goes hand in hand with the unity of God. The one, personal holy, loving God made the world, maintains it (sozo, to ‘save’, is often used in the sense), redeemed it through Jesus Christ, and will be glorified in it... this verse gives glory to the one Saviour God through Jesus Christ... Christ is sixteen times called Saviour in the New Testament, compared with eight times for the Father... Through Jesus Christ our Lord (phrase wrongly omitted by the AV)...
“Of the four words here used to denote God’s greatness, doxa means splendour, glory, like the radiance of light; megalosune denotes kingly majesty. It comes in the doxology in 1 Chronicles 29:11, and is twice used (in both cases of God) in the New Testament (Heb 1:3; 8:1)... God’s eternal radiance was crystallized in Jesus Christ (Jn 1:14; Heb 1:3); so was his majesty, the kingly greatness which suffers without complaint; so was his control, in the Lordship of Jesus; so was his authority over men, nature and the demonic. Such is our God, such are his eternal qualities, unveiled in Christ... ” (2 Peter & Jude, Tyndale, Revised Edition, pp.206-7).
D. Edmond Hiebert comments:
“The assignment came to him “by the command of God our Savior”... “God our Savior” is not used by Paul outside the pastoral Epistles... In the Pastorals the term is applied to both the Father (1Tim 1:1; 2:3; 4:10; Titus 1:3; 2:10; 3:4) and the Son (2 Tim 1:10; Titus 1:4; 2:13; 3;6). As the ultimate source of all salvation, the designation is appropriately applied to the Father” (Titus, EBC, Vol.11, p.428).
God the Father is the “absolute” Saviour and Jesus Christ is the “dynamic” Saviour.
Isa 8:13 Sanctify the LORD of hosts himself; and let him be your fear, and let him be your dread.
Isa 8:14 And he shall be for a sanctuary; but for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of offence to both the houses of Israel, for a gin and for a snare to the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
Isa 28:16 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.
1 Pet 2:4 As you come to him, the living Stone--rejected by men but chosen by God and precious to him--
1 Pet 2:5 you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.
1 Pet 2:6 For in Scripture it says: "See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame."
1 Pet 2:7 Now to you who believe, this stone is precious. But to those who do not believe, "The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone,"
1 Pet 2:8 and, "A stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that makes them fall." They stumble because they disobey the message--which is also what they were destined for (NIV).
Geoffrey W. Grogan comments:
“A comparison of the language of 8:14 and the present passage [28:16] shows us that there the sanctuary and stone were God himself whereas here the stone is laid by God. If this passage is a development of the former, then we are bound to ask, “Who, in Isaiah’s prophecies, is both God and distinct from him?” The clear answer is “the Messiah,” as 9:6 (cp. 7:14) shows. The soundness of this approach is confirmed when we note that thematic development is a leading feature of Messianism in this book...” (Isaiah, EBC, Vol.6, pp.181-182).
God the Father is a “stone and sanctuary” through Jesus Christ in the same way he is the Saviour through Jesus Christ.
CHRIST IN THE GARDEN IN EDEN
Gen 3:8 And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.
Gen 3:9 And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?
Gen 3:10 And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.
John H. Sailhamer comments:
“The expression ...[the voice (or sound) of the Lord God walking in the garden]... can be read in two ways. It may refer to the “sound” made by the LORD’s walking through the garden (e.g, “the sound of the LORD God as he was walking in the garden,” NIV), or it may refer to the “voice” of the Lord that echoed ... throughout the garden. In the latter view the “sound” can refer to the actual “voice” of God or, as in Deut 5:25, it can refer to the “noise” of a theophany, e.g., thunder (cf. Exod 20:18). The statement of the man in v.10 - “I heard your you [...lit., ‘your voice’] in the garden” - suggests that the “sound” they heard was not the sound of the Lord’s footsteps; also, the fact that it is only in v.9 that the narrative says, “But the LORD God called” suggests the “sound” in v.8 is not yet the sound of his voice (Cassuto, p.151). The close association between this passage and other theophanies in Scripture supports the interpretation that see the “sound of the LORD God” as part of a theophany.
“...the coming of the Lord at the mountain of Sinai is foreshadowed in this scene of the Lord God’s coming to the first disobedient couple. In Deuteronomy 5:25 and 18:16 (cf. Exod 20:18-21), when the Lord came to Sinai, the people “heard the sound of the Lord our God”... The response of Adam in the garden was much the same as that of Israel at the foot of Sinai. When the people heard the sound of the Lord at Sinai, they were afraid “and stayed at a distance and said ‘Do not have God speak to us or we will die’” (Exod 20:18-19). So also Adam and his wife fled at the sound of the Lord in the garden.
“The time of the Lord’s visit is often translated as “the cool of the day” or “the time of the evening,” but the text reads “the wind of the day”... In light of the general context of the picture of God’s coming in judgment and power, the “wind” ... that the author envisioned resembles that “great and powerful wind”... that blew on the “mountain .. of the Lord” in 1 Kings 19:11...” (Genesis, EBC, Vol.2, p.52).
This section of scripture may also be interpreted in the absolute and dynamic senses. In the absolute sense “the angel of the Lord” is representing and speaking for the Father. In this sense Adam is speaking directly to the Father. So when Adam said “I heard thy voice in the garden” he was saying to the Father that he heard the “sound” of Christ in the Garden.
In the dynamic sense Adam was saying to Christ that he had heard Him in the garden.
FOUR ASPECTS OF CHRIST’S CHARACTER
Kenneth L. Barker provides the overview:
“As Branch, the Messiah is presented in the OT in four different aspects of his character (King, Servant, Man and God)...” (Zechariah, EBC, Vol.7, p.626).
The NT parallel will be discussed after the OT perspective:
Isaiah 4 - “Branch” as Son of God
Isa 4:2 In that day shall the branch of the LORD be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the earth shall be excellent and comely for them that are escaped of Israel.
Isa 4:3 And it shall come to pass, that he that is left in Zion, and he that remaineth in Jerusalem, shall be called holy, even every one that is written among the living in Jerusalem:
Isa 4:4 When the Lord shall have washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion, and shall have purged the blood of Jerusalem from the midst thereof by the spirit of judgment, and by the spirit of burning.
Isa 4:5 And the LORD will create upon every dwelling place of mount Zion, and upon her assemblies, a cloud and smoke by day, and the shining of a flaming fire by night: for upon all the glory shall be a defence.
Isa 4:6 And there shall be a tabernacle for a shadow in the daytime from the heat, and for a place of refuge, and for a covert from storm and from rain.
Christ as David’s branch implies that He is a son of David. Therefore, the “branch” of Yahweh implies that the “branch” is a Son of God.
Walter C. Kaiser, Jr. comments:
“The Branch of Yahweh
“Who is the “sprout” or “branch” (selah) of Isaiah 4:2-6)? Very few doubt that the one who is afterward called “the Branch” is the Messiah. Nor do they doubt that later prophets directly depend on Isaiah 4:2 for that title. Those prophets who use this title for Messiah are:
“Branch of Yahweh” (Isa 4:2)
“Branch of David” (Jer 23:5-6)
“Branch, My Servant” (Zech 3:8)
“Branch, a man” (Zech 6:12).
“In Isaiah 4:2 the “Branch of Yahweh” is the Davidic dynasty in its human (“fruit of the land”) nature as well as its divine (“of Yahweh”). In this case “Branch” would be an equivalent term for “Anointed” or “holy One.”
“But many object that “Branch” was not yet a fixed designation for Messiah; besides, its parallelism with “the fruit of the land” (4:2) favored a reference to the sprouting forth of the land under the beneficent influence of Yahweh. However, as the following chapters of Isaiah show, Messiah was the Mediator of these benefits and He Himself was the greatest of all the benefits.
“Is it in wonder then that the later prophets applied this title to the living personal source of all these gifts in the last days? Some of those gifts found already in this passage are (1) the promise of the fruitfulness of the land; (2) the certainty of a remnant of “survivors”; (3) the holiness of the remnant; (4) the cleansing and purification of the moral filth of the people; and (5) the radiant glory of the personal presence of Yahweh dwelling in Zion with His people forever. The “holy nation” of Exodus 19:6 would finally be completely realized as would the permanent “dwelling of Yahweh in their midst. Even the “cloud by day” and fire by night’ (4:5) were to be renewed. For just as they were visible proofs of God’s presence in the wilderness (Exod 14:19ff.), so they would be a shade by day and illuminate the night to shield the city of God from all violence” (Towards an Old Testament Theology, p.207).
Alec Motyer comments:
“Many interpreters understand Branch ... fruit as looking forward to the earth’s abundant fertility in the messianic Day (cf., e.g., Je 31;12; Joel 3:18; Am 9:13). This is one aspect of the Old Testament’s view of creation: just as sin brought curse on the earth whereby it would henceforth yield its goodness only grudgingly (Gn 3:17-19), so the day will come when the curse will be no more ... and the new creation will explode in bounty. This richness, therefore, is not ‘pie in the sky by and by’ but a messianic expectation based on the removal of sin and its curse by the Messiah. Zechariah 3:8-10 links the removal of iniquity and the enjoyment of peace and plenty with the ‘bringing forth’ of ‘My servant, the Branch’. In other words, ‘Branch’ is a messianic title (Je 23:5; 33;15; Zc 3:8; 6:12), and the view taken hear is that Isaiah 4:2 marks its earliest occurrence. The references show that the title ‘Branch’ (semah) is used to point to the Messiah’s kingly and priestly offices, but in itself ‘branch’ is a ‘family tree’ motif indicating the Messiah’s ancestry. To Jeremiah, he is David’s Branch, tracing his human ancestry back to the great king (cf. Is 11:1, using different words but the same idea). Isaiah sees him as “The Lord’s Branch’, i.e. in some unexplained way he has a divine ancestry also. The fruit of the land could, of course refer to the messianic abundance, but we ought to notice that here it is associated directly with the Branch of the LORD as jointly providing (lit.) ‘adornment and glory ... pride and beauty for the escaped company of Israel’ It is suitable, therefore, to understand fruit of the land as indicating the human origin of the Messiah, in the same way as ‘a root out of dry ground’ in 53:2. His gifts to his people are ‘adornment’ (beautiful) and ‘beauty’ (glory), i.e. personal distinctiveness and attractiveness, in contrast to the false, deceptive beauty of 3:18; ‘glory’ (glorious) and pride point to a great change. ‘Glory’ had been their condemnation (3:8) and ‘pride’ their ruin (2:11-12), but now the divine glory will dwell among them (see on 5) and they will rightly pride themselves in him...” (Isaiah, Tyndale, pp.59-60).
Frank Delitzsch comments:
“... compare ch 28:5, where Jehovah Himself is described in the same manner, as the glory and ornament of Israel... The great King of the future is called zemach ...in the sense of Heb 7:14, viz., as shoot springing out of the human, Davidic, earthly soil, - a shoot which Jehovah had planted in the earth, and would cause to break through and spring forth as the pride of His congregation, which was waiting for this heavenly child. It is he again who is designated in the parallel clause as the”fruit of the land” (or lit., fruit of the earth), as being the fruit which the land of Israel, and consequently the earth itself, would produce, just as in Ezek 17:5 Zedekiah is called a “seed of the earth”... the messiah Himself, regarded as the fruit in which all the growth and bloom of his earthly history would eventually reach its promised and divinely appointed conclusion. The use of this epithet to denote “the coming One” can only be accounted for, without anticipating the New Testament standpoint, from the desire to depict His double-sided origin. He would come, on the other hand, from Jehovah; but, on the other hand, from the earth, inasmuch as He would spring from Israel. We have here the passage, on the basis of which zemach (the sprout or “Branch”) was adopted by Jeremiah (ch 23:5 and 33:15) and Zechariah (ch 3:8; 6:12) as a proper name for the Messiah...” (Isaiah, KD, pp.98-99).
Jeremiah 23 - “Branch” as Son of David
Jer 23:1 Woe be unto the pastors that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture! saith the LORD.
Jer 23:2 Therefore thus saith the LORD God of Israel against the pastors that feed my people; Ye have scattered my flock, and driven them away, and have not visited them: behold, I will visit upon you the evil of your doings, saith the LORD.
Jer 23:3 And I will gather the remnant of my flock out of all countries whither I have driven them, and will bring them again to their folds; and they shall be fruitful and increase.
Jer 23:4 And I will set up shepherds over them which shall feed them: and they shall fear no more, nor be dismayed, neither shall they be lacking, saith the LORD.
Jer 23:5 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth.
Jer 23:6 In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.
Charles L. Feinberg comments:
“1-2 The “shepherds” on whom Jeremiah pronounced woe are not only kings but all the leaders of Judah (v.1). They were the civil leaders and also the spiritual leaders, the prophets and priests... The leaders were guilty of gross dereliction of duty. By oppression and shedding innocent blood, they destroyed the flock; those who were not destroyed were scattered to wander without protection. So the leaders were guilty of the very things the shepherds are charged with preventing. By leading the nation into idolatry and so into the Babylonian captivity, the leaders had scattered the people. Moreover, contrary to the duty of shepherds to lead and feed the flock, they had driven the flock away...
“3-4 Just as the scattering of the people was literal, so will the regathering be (v.3). The promise of restoration presupposes the Exile... Now it is God himself who does the work of the true shepherd, regathering the sheep from all countries... What the shepherds did in driving the people away is now attributed to the Lord because he ultimately carried out the penalty brought on the people by their own sins and by the sins of their leaders (shepherds).The people will be returned to their pasture. Moreover, God will replace the faithless shepherds with faithful ones (v.4). They will rule in godliness under the ideal King (vv.5-6)... the fulfillment awaits eschatological times (cf. Matt 19:28)...
“5 The reference to good shepherds (v.4) leads on to a prediction of the Messiah, the Davidic King par excellence... the formula “days are coming” is a messianic formula...
“After Jeremiah has denounced the faithless shepherd of the nation and has predicted the coming of good shepherds, he describes as a climax the incomparable rule of the King Messiah, the “Branch.” This designation has much in common semantically with “seed” (Gen 3:15), the Davidic “son” (2 Sam 7), and the “servant of the LORD” (Isa 42-53). In each case there is a general reference to a number of individuals; but by the process of strict selection, and narrowing down, the seed, the son, and the servant ultimately find highest fulfillment in the Lord Jesus the Messiah, “the Seed of the Woman,” “the Son of David,”and the Servant of the LORD.” The Lord was thus superintending the historical process in such a way that his ultimate choice unmistakably was Jesus of Nazareth (cf. KD).
“It is clear that the term “Branch” is symbolic of the Messiah because the adjective modifying it is a quality of persons and not plants. The shoot or sprout is a scion of the stock of David.... the collective sense [of “Branch’] cannot be permitted here because (1) “a King who will reign” cannot refer to a number of kings; (2) “the LORD Our Righteousness” (v.6) cannot speak of a series of monarchs; and (3) the parallel passages refer to one person (cf. Isa 4:2; Eze 34:23-24; 37:24; for use of Branch [lit., “sprout”] for the Messiah, cf. Isa 4:2; Jer 33:15; Zech 3:8; 6:12). Moreover he will reign as a true king, not as a puppet like Zedekiah and his immediate predecessors. He will execute justice and righteousness like his ancestor David (cf. 2 Sam 8:15; for Messiah, see Ps 72:2). In contrast to the inequities and injustices common to the Davidic kings, the Messiah’s reign will be diametrically the opposite” (Jeremiah, EBC, Vol.6, pp.517-518).
Zechariah 3 - “Branch” as Servant
Zec 3:3 Now Joshua was clothed with filthy garments, and stood before the angel.
Zec 3:4 And he answered and spake unto those that stood before him, saying, Take away the filthy garments from him. And unto him he said, Behold, I have caused thine iniquity to pass from thee, and I will clothe thee with change of raiment.
Zec 3:5 And I said, Let them set a fair mitre upon his head. So they set a fair mitre upon his head, and clothed him with garments. And the angel of the LORD stood by.
Zec 3:6 And the angel of the LORD protested unto Joshua, saying,
Zec 3:7 Thus saith the LORD of hosts; If thou wilt walk in my ways, and if thou wilt keep my charge, then thou shalt also judge my house, and shalt also keep my courts, and I will give thee places to walk among these that stand by.
Zec 3:8 Hear now, O Joshua the high priest, thou, and thy fellows that sit before thee: for they are men wondered at: for, behold, I will bring forth my servant the BRANCH.
As Servant, the messiah came into the world to do the will of the Father. Through this work, Israel will yet be redeemed and restored as a priestly nation, which Joshua and his associate priests typified.
Walter C. Kaiser Jr. comments:
“... in Zechariah’s fourth vision, he saw the high priest Joshua wearing dung-spattered clothes and standing in the presence of the angel of the Lord with the accusations of Satan being hurled at him. For the accuser, the Lord ordered silence; but for the besmirched high priest, he ordered the removal of the filthy garments and the new clothing of rich clean apparel. The guilt of the whole nation was resting on the high priest, and thus it had made them all unclean (cf. Hag 2:11-14). But it also promised the reestablishment of the office of high priest after a long interruption (Zech 3:7). “The iniquity” of the land “will be removed,” promised Yahweh, “in one day” (v.9). Thus Joshua as representative of that “kingdom of priests” (Exod 19:6) was a “sign (mopet, 3:8).
“The “Branch” or Sprout” of 3:8 and 6:12 was another proper name for the last Davidite, who would arise out of obscurity, already known from Isaiah 4:2 and Jeremiah 23:5-6. The fact that he appears as the ‘Servant” in connection with the priesthood cannot be a mere coincidence. It is here made plain that the “Branch” or Servant” will not only be David’s successor but also Joshua’s. As Isaiah had declared that the Servant would give his life as an atonement for others and thereby remove their iniquity, so Zechariah 3:9 promised that the Messiah would do so in “one day” (Towards an Old testament Theology, p.254).
Kenneth L. Barker contributes:
“6-7 Israel’s originally intended position would finally be realized. The Angel of the Lord gave a charge to Joshua (v.6). In the charge (v.7) two conditions are stated, with three results following...
“An analysis of the three results of meeting the two conditions [“Walk in my ways” and “Keep my requirements”] reveals Israel’s earthly calling and her glory and ministry in the Messianic Age.
“1. Israel will govern the house of God. This includes deciding disputed matters in connection with the sanctuary. Furthermore, from the temple the other nations will be ruled and judged by the Messiah of Israel, the Head of the nations (cf. Jer 31:7).
2. Israel will have charge of God’s courts. This implies guarding the temple courts from pollution and idolatry. The temple will then be a house of prayer for all nations (Isa 56:7). Jeremiah 31:22 may well anticipate such a role for Israel in the future: “The LORD will create a new thing on earth - a woman will surround a man.” The last line of the verse is probably a proverbial statement that Jeremiah applied to Israel’s relation to God, the woman representing Israel and the man representing God in Jeremiah’s usage. The meaning may be that Israel will at last protect God’s interests rather than God will protect Israel.
3. Israel will have ready and free access to God in the priestly function, just as the angels (“these standing here” - cf. v.4) have access to God. This may be regarded as a renewal of Israel’s covenant of priesthood or as the reinstatement of the nation into her original calling, her priestly office and function (cf. Exod 19:6; Isa 61:6). Because of the work of Christ, Christians now enjoy free access to the presence of God (cf. Heb 4:16; 10:19-22).
“8 The persons involved in this prediction were Joshua, his colleagues, and the Branch, the Servant of the Lord. They foreshadow greater events in the future. Joshua and his fellow priests represented coming events and persons. They are said to be men of mopet (“divine sign or wonder,” “prophetic significance,” or “token of a future event”; cf. Isa 8:18). They symbolized future events for Israel, as NIV correctly interprets it. They excited wonder because they were types of Israel in close association with someone to come. This coming one was called “my servant, the Branch” - two well known OT appellations for the Messiah. As Servant, the Messiah came into the world to do the will of the Father. Through his work, Israel will yet be redeemed and restored as a priestly nation, which Joshua and his associate priests typified...” (Zechariah, EBC, Vol.7, pp.625-26).
Zechariah 6 - “Branch” as Man
Zec 6:11 Then take silver and gold, and make crowns, and set them upon the head of Joshua the son of Josedech, the high priest;
Zec 6:12 And speak unto him, saying, Thus speaketh the LORD of hosts, saying, Behold the man whose name is The BRANCH; and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the LORD:
Zec 6:13 Even he shall build the temple of the LORD; and he shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne: and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.
Zec 4:9 The hands of Zerubbabel have laid the foundation of this house; his hands shall also finish it; and thou shalt know that the LORD of hosts hath sent me unto you.
John 19:2 And the soldiers platted a crown of thorns, and put it on his head, and they put on him a purple robe,
John 19:3 And said, Hail, King of the Jews! and they smote him with their hands.
John 19:5 Then came Jesus forth, wearing the crown of thorns, and the purple robe. And Pilate saith unto them, Behold the man!
Kenneth L. Barker comments:
“11 In a coronation scene Zechariah was told to take the silver and gold brought from Babylon, to make a crown for royalty, and to put it on Joshua’s head. The Hebrew word for “crown” is not nezer (used for the high priest’s crown or turban) but tarot, referring to an ornate crown with many diadems - a plural of extension (cf. Rev 19:12).From the verses that follow, it becomes obvious that the royal crowning of the high priest is a type of the goal and consummation or prophecy - the crowning and reign of the messianic King-Priest. Therefore Joshua, who was never a priest-king, was a type of the messianic Branch of v.12... According to v.13, the Branch would be a priest on his throne. Thus the fulfillment in the messiah transcends Joshua’s status and experience (cf. Ps 110:4 [also part of a coronation scene]; Heb 7:1-3). It was, in part, to keep this hope alive that his crown was made for Joshua’s symbolic crowning and then placed in the temple as a reminder of this hope. How appropriate therefore that both the type (Joshua) and the antitype (Jesus) have a name meaning “the Lord saves” (cf. NIV mg. Matt 1:21)!...
“12 This verse predicts that the messianic Branch would appear as Joshua’s antitype and build the temple. The Aramaic Targum, the Jerusalem Talmud, and the Midrash all regard the verse as messianic. The words were addressed to Joshua; yet it is clear that the language refers to the messianic Branch. John 19:5 - “Here is the man!”- may well be intended by John as an allusion to the statement “Here is the man whose name is the Branch”... In Christ, the Son of Man, God original intention in the creation is fulfilled. He is the new Adam, the messianic King. Thus, we have in Pilate’s words a striking example of Johannine double entendre; whereas Pilate might merely have meant, ‘Look, here is the fellow’, his words contain the deepest truth about the person of Christ.” Indeed, Christ is pictured in Revelation 19:12 as the majestic Sovereign of the universe, with “many crowns”on his head - an ornate crown with many diadems, as in v.11 above.
“... As the “Branch,” he would “branch out” from his place (NIV here reflects the wordplay in the Hebrew text). “His place” (lit., “what is underneath” is most likely a reference to his humble and obscure origin, land, and people (cf. Isa 53:2; Mic 5:2).
“Verse 12 closes with the prediction that the Branch will build the temple of the Lord. Since the rebuilding of the restoration temple is to be completed by Zerubbabel (4:9-10), it is difficult to see how this could refer to that temple. Instead, it must have in view the temple of the Messianic Age (cf. Isa 2:2-4; Eze 40-43; Hag 2:6-9).
“13 Not only will the messianic Branch build the temple, but he will also have regal splendour, will take his seat on the throne and rule, and will perfectly combine the two offices of king and priest. The clause at the end of v.12 is repeated at the beginning of v.13 for emphasis, particularly to stress the fact that “it is he” (“he” is also emphatic in the Hebrew; hence NIV’s rendering), namely, the Branch, not Joshua, who will build the temple.... in the second clause of the verse ... “he will bear regal splendour” would b a more literal translation... “Will sit”means “will sit enthroned”... “his throne” refers to the promised Davidic throne (2 Sam 7:16; Isa 9:7; Luke 1:32). As to the prediction that the Branch “will be a priest on his throne,” Baldwin (Zechariah, p.137) observes: Nowhere else in the Old Testament is it made so plain that the coming Davidic king will also be a priest.” One possible exception Psalm 110.
“The clause at the end of the verse means that the messianic Branch will combine the two offices of king and priest in full accord...” (Zechariah, Tyndale, pp.639-40).
BRANCH IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
Kenneth L. Barker provides the overview:
“As Branch, the Messiah is presented in the OT in four different aspects of his character (King, Servant, Man and God). These aspects are developed in the NT in the four Gospels: (1) in Matthew as the Branch of David, i.e., as the Davidic messianic King (Isa 11:1; Jer 23:5; 33:15); in Mark as the Lord’s Servant, the Branch (Isa 42:1; 49:6; 50:10; 52:13; Ezek 34:23-24; Zech 3:8); in Luke as the Man whose name is the Branch (Zech 6:12; and (4) in John as the Branch of the Lord (Isa 4:2)” (Zechariah, EBC, Vol.7, p.626).
Related to this, though there are a number of difficulties with it, are the four living creatures:
Rev 4:6 And before the throne there was a sea of glass like unto crystal: and in the midst of the throne, and round about the throne, were four beasts full of eyes before and behind.
Rev 4:7 And the first beast was like a lion, and the second beast like a calf, and the third beast had a face as a man, and the fourth beast was like a flying eagle.
Alan F. Johnson comments:
“The “four living creatures” should be linked with Isaiah’s seraphim and Ezekiel’s cherubim (cf. Isa 6:3; Ezek 1:5-25; 10:1-22). They, like the elders and angels, are heavenly creatures of the highest order involved with the worship and government of God. “Covered with eyes” may give the impression of their exceeding knowledge of God, while the faces of a “lion,” “ox,” “man” and a “flying eagle” suggests qualities that belong to God, such as royal power, strength, spirituality, and swiftness of action. Each of the creatures mentioned is the chief of its species. Together they embody the reflection of God’s nature as the fulness of life and power. Together they embody the reflection of God’s nature as the fulness of life and power. Their six wings (cf. Isa 6:2) give the impression of unlimited mobility in fulfilling God’s commands. Their position “in the centre, around the throne” suggest that one might be before and one behind the throne with one on each side (Beckwith). The four living creatures appear throughout Revelation (cf. 5:6, 8, 14; 6:1ff; 7:11; 14:3; 15:7; 19:4)” (Revelation, EBC, Vol.12, p.463).
Andrew Jukes comments:
“For my own part, without pretending fully to explain “the living creatures,” I cannot doubt that they are a vessel to reveal the Lord’s glory; as such linked to the manifestation made in the flesh of Christ, and again that which shall be made in His mystic body, the Church... For the one fore-shadows the other... “the living creatures” may be used as figures of the various aspects of the manifestation given us in Christ.
“As to the details, the figures are these: “the first living creature was like unto a lion; the second living creature was like unto a calf; the third creature had a face as a man; and the fourth living creature was like a flying eagle” (Rev 4:7). The four camps in the wilderness - the camp of Reuben, of Judah, of Ephraim, and of Dan - had, it is said [in Jewish tradition], these four figures on their respective standards: for Israel was the elect vessel in which the Lord would be seen; on them, therefore, in a way they little thought, was stamped some figure of that which should be seen in the true Israel (Isa 49:3,4)...
“If Christ is seen as “the lion,” a heavenly voice tells us in what connection He holds this form: “The lion of the tribe Judah is the root of David (Rev 5:5; 22:16), again: “Judah is my lawgiver” (Psa 108:8). Under this figure, therefore, I expect to find Him as a Son of Abraham, connected with a kingdom, and so with Abraham’s seed. Then as to “the calf.” This is the figure for service. So we read, “Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn” (1 Cor 9:9), and again: “Much increase is by the strength of the ox” (Prov 14:4). Under this figure I expect to see the Lord as the patient labourer for others, if need be offering Himself in His service as a perfect sacrifice. The “man” needs no comment. “The face of a man” bespeaks human sympathy, as it is written, “I drew them with the cords of a man, with bans of love” (Hos 11:4). Here we shall see the “Son of man,” one who can have compassion on the ignorant, seeing he also is compassed with infirmities; who inasmuch as the children were partakers of flesh and blood, Himself likewise too part of the same...
“Very different is “the eagle,” Its ways are above the earth: “the way of an eagle in the air,” says the wise man, “is too wonderful for me” (Prov 30:17-18). Much on the wing, it often rises where no human eye can follow, and possesses the power of gazing with undazzled eyes upon the mid-day sun. Here, “the Word who was God,” who came to reveal the Father, is seen as the One who is from heaven, and whose home is there...”
“And as to the various views of St. Mark, where one sees the man, others the ox, a special reason may be found in St. Paul’s words, “He took upon Him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men” (Phil 2:7). The one relation is close to the other, that one runs into the other... For it is said of the living creatures, “two wings of every one were joined one to another,” so in certain places the view particular to one Gospel seems to run into another view...
“And this leads me to notice the writers of the Gospel; for the view of each is wonderfully connected with his own character...[For example] Mark was the Apostle’s servant: “They had John whose surname was Mark, for their minister” (Acts 12:12); and Paul says of him, “Take Mark, and bring him with thee, for he is profitable to me for ministry.” This is the man living to serve, who sees the Lord as Servant... (Four Views of Christ, p.17-21).
The four Gospels are in a sense the throne of Christ. They have carried Jesus Christ down to the present and He is still speaking out of, or “above” them to us today.
CHRIST IN THE MILLENNIUM
Ezek 1:4 And I looked, and, behold, a whirlwind came out of the north, a great cloud, and a fire infolding itself, and a brightness was about it, and out of the midst thereof as the colour of amber, out of the midst of the fire.
Ezek 1:5 Also out of the midst thereof came the likeness of four living creatures. And this was their appearance; they had the likeness of a man.
Ezek 1:6 And every one had four faces, and every one had four wings.
Ezek 1:10 As for the likeness of their faces, they four had the face of a man, and the face of a lion, on the right side: and they four had the face of an ox on the left side; they four also had the face of an eagle.
Ezek 1:11 Thus were their faces: and their wings were stretched upward; two wings of every one were joined one to another, and two covered their bodies.
Ezek 1:24 And when they went, I heard the noise [qowl] of their wings, like the noise of great waters, as the voice [qowl] of the Almighty, the voice [qowl] of speech, as the noise of an host: when they stood, they let down their wings.
Ezek 1:25 And there was a voice from the firmament that was over their heads, when they stood, and had let down their wings.
Ezek 1:26 And above the firmament that was over their heads was the likeness of a throne, as the appearance of a sapphire stone: and upon the likeness of the throne was the likeness as the appearance of a man above upon it.
Ezek 1:27 And I saw as the colour of amber, as the appearance of fire round about within it, from the appearance of his loins even upward, and from the appearance of his loins even downward, I saw as it were the appearance of fire, and it had brightness round about.
Ezek 1:28 As the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud in the day of rain, so was the appearance of the brightness round about. This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD. And when I saw it, I fell upon my face, and I heard a voice of one that spake.
Ezek 10:19 And the cherubims lifted up their wings, and mounted up from the earth in my sight: when they went out, the wheels also were beside them, and every one stood at the door of the east gate of the LORD'S house; and the glory of the God of Israel was over them above.
Ezek 10:20 This is the living creature that I saw under the God of Israel by the river of Chebar; and I knew that they were the cherubim.
Jesus Christ is "the glory of the Lord”, the dynamic God of Israel. We see this in this parallelism
the glory of the God of Israel was over the cherubim above
the living creature that I saw under the God of Israel
Ezek 9:3 And the glory of the God of Israel was gone up from the cherub, whereupon he was, to the threshold of the house.And he called to the man clothed with linen, which had the writer's inkhorn by his side;
Ezek 9:4 And the LORD said unto him, Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and set a mark upon the foreheads of the men that sigh and that cry for all the abominations that be done in the midst thereof.
Ezek 11:23 And the glory of the LORD went up from the midst of the city, and stood upon the mountain which is on the east side of the city.
Ralph H. Alexander comments:
“22-25 After God had encouraged Ezekiel ... God’s glory departed east from Jerusalem to the Mount of Olives (vv.22-23). His presence among Israel was hereafter pictured as removed (till his return in 43:1-4)” (Ezekiel, EBC, Vol.6, p.794).
C.F. Keil comments:
“... the glory of the God of Israel forsook the devoted city ... as a sign that both the temple and city had ceased to be the seats of the gracious presence of the Lord. The mountain on the east of the city is the Mount Olives, which affords a lofty outlook over the city. There the glory of the God remained, to execute judgment upon Jerusalem. Thus according to Zechariah 14:4, will Jehovah also appear at the last judgment on the Mount Olives above Jerusalem, to fight against His foes, and prepare a way of escape for those who are to be saved. It was from the Mount Olives also that the Son of God proclaimed to the degenerate city the second destruction (Luke 19:21; Matt 24:3); and from the same mountain He made His visible ascension to heaven after his resurrection (Luke 24:50; cf. Acts 1:12)...” (Ezekiel, Commentary of the Old Testament KD, p.89).
Ezek 43:1 Afterward he brought me to the gate, even the gate that looketh toward the east:
Ezek 43:2 And, behold, the glory of the God of Israel came from the way of the east: and his voice was like a noise of many waters: and the earth shined with his glory.
Ezek 43:3 And it was according to the appearance of the vision which I saw, even according to the vision that I saw when I came to destroy the city: and the visions were like the vision that I saw by the river Chebar; and I fell upon my face.
Ezek 43:4 And the glory of the LORD came into the house by the way of the gate whose prospect is toward the east.
Ezek 43:5 So the spirit took me up, and brought me into the inner court; and, behold, the glory of the LORD filled the house.
Ezek 43:6 And I heard him speaking unto me out of the house; and the man stood by me.
Ezek 43:7 And he said unto me, Son of man, the place of my throne, and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever, and my holy name, shall the house of Israel no more defile, neither they, nor their kings, by their whoredom, nor by the carcases of their kings in their high places.
Num 7:89 And when Moses was gone into the tabernacle of the congregation to speak with him, then he heard the voice of one speaking unto him from off the mercy seat that was upon the ark of testimony, from between the two cherubims: and he spake unto him.
John B. Taylor comments:
“7 The words here are an echo of Solomon’s prayer in 1 Kings 8:12, 13, 27. The most holy place of the temple is regarded as the Lord’s throne-room (cf. Je 3:17; 17:12), and as His footstool (cf. Pss 99:5; 132:7), though strangely enough this idea does not seem to contradict the view that in reality the Lord dwells in heaven. The temple is simply His early habitation” (Ezekiel, Tyndale, p.265).
“The angelic guide is still with Ezekiel and will continue to explain and instruct him in the law of the temple, but at this point there is a special word from the Lord out of the temple, which is virtually a statement of consecration” (ibid, p.264).
C.F. Keil comments:
“In vv.6-7 the question arises, who it is who is speaking to the prophet; whether it is Jehovah, who has entered the temple, or the man who is standing by Ezekiel in the inner court? There can be no doubt that [him speaking unto me] is Jehovah here, as in ch. 2:2; though the commentators are divided in opinion whether Jehovah spoke directly to the prophet, or through the medium the medium of the man who stood by his side” (Ezekiel, KD, p.395).
Keil concludes that “he spoke to the prophet from the temple addressed him through the medium of the man who stood by his side” (Keil, p.395). If this is the case then this is similar to Rev 22:6-7 where Christ’s angel is the medium of Christ’s words.
Isa 4:5 And the LORD will create upon every dwelling place of mount Zion, and upon her assemblies, a cloud and smoke by day, and the shining of a flaming fire by night: for upon all the glory shall be a defence.
Isa 4:6 And there shall be a tabernacle for a shadow in the daytime from the heat, and for a place of refuge, and for a covert from storm and from rain.
Walter C. Kaiser, Jr. comments:
“The “holy nation” of Exodus 19:6 would finally be completely realized as would the permanent “dwelling” of Yahweh in their midst. Even the “cloud by day” and “fire by night” (4:5) were to be renewed. For just as they were the visible proofs of God’s presence in the wilderness (Exod 14:19ff), so they would be a shade by day and illuminate the night to shield the city of God from all violence” (Towards an Old Testament Theology, p.207).
With the “glory of the Lord” in the temple in the Millennium God will be dwelling with His people through Jesus Christ. Christ dwelling with Israel will be manifested by the symbols of His presence.
DWELLING IN THE NT TEMPLE
God’s dwelling, through Jesus Christ, in the Church, the Israel of God, is similar to His dwelling in the nation of Israel in the OT and His future ‘abiding’ in the congregation of Israel (1 Kings 8:22). (See the booklet The New Covenant - The Sarah and Keturah Administrations where God’s ‘coming’ to dwell in Moses’ tabernacle, Solomon’s Temple, the Temple of the Church and Ezekiel’s temple are parallelled).
After the close of the last three and a half years of Christ’s seven year ministry He will return to His temple in a similar way after the close of the first half of His ministry.
CHRIST IN HIS SPIRITUAL TEMPLE
2 Cor 6:16 ... for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
1 Cor 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
1 Cor 6:19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?
Eph 2:22 And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit [NIV].
Lev 26:11 And I will set my tabernacle among you...
Lev 26:12 And I will walk among you, and will be your God, and ye shall be my people.
Murray J. Harris comments:
“Corporately the Christian community forms “the temple [or sanctuary] of the living God” (cf. 1 Cor 3:16,17; see 6:19, which individualizes the truth); or, as Paul later expressed it, “a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit” (Eph 2:22, NIV).
“To establish this point (v.16b) Paul quotes several OT passages. “I will live with them and walk among them” is based on Leviticus 26:11a,12a, with possible allusions to Exodus 25:8; 29:24a; 1 Kings 6:13; Ezekiel 37:27a. God’s promise to Israel in the wilderness, subsequently reiterated, becomes his promise to the church in the gospel era (cf. Rev 21:3). “I will be their God, and they will be my people” is a recurring promise of Yahweh to his covenant people (see Exod 6:7; lev 26:12b; Jer 32:38; Ezek 37:27b)” (2 Corinthians, EBC, Vol. 10, p.360).
John R.W. Stott comments:
“What is the purpose of the new temple? In principle, it is the same as the purpose of the old, namely to be a dwelling place of God (verse 22). Of course spiritually-minded Israelites knew that God did not dwell in man-made temples and that the whole universe could not contain his infinite glory. Nevertheless, he promised to manifest his glory (the shekinah) in the temple’s inner sanctuary, in order to symbolize the truth that he dwelt among his people. The new temple, however, is neither a material building, nor a ‘national shrine, nor has it a localized site. it is a spiritual building... What, then, has replaced the shekinah glory in the temple, as the symbol of God’s presence and the means of manifestation? Paul answers the question here. The church is a holy temple in the Lord (meaning, as always in the New Testament when not otherwise stated, ‘the Lord Jesus’) and a dwelling place of God in the Spirit... God dwells in his people as his temple ‘in the Lord’ and ‘in the Spirit’, or through his Son and by his spirit” (The Message of Ephesians, BST, p.109).
A physical temple has a physical manifestation of God’s presence (the shekinah); a spiritual temple has a spiritual manifestation of God’s presence (the Holy Spirit); but see Acts 2.
R.A. Stewart comments:
“The Shekinah, nearest Jewish equivalent to the Holy Spirit, became, with other OT ideas or derivates (Word, Wisdom, Spirit, etc.) a bridge between man’s corporeality and God’s transcendence. The term is post-biblical, but the concept saturates both Testaments. It underlines the teaching that God dwells in his sanctuary, (Ex 25:8, etc.), or among his people (Ex 29:45f., etc.)” (“Shekinah”, NBD, p.1101).
W.A. Vangemeren comments:
“A circumlocution used in rabbinic literature to signify God’s presence... Although the word “Shekinah” does not occur in the Bible, the root skn occurs not only in the verb (“dwell”), but also in the noun miskan (“dwelling place,” “tabernacle” and the name Shecaniah (“Yahweh dwells”; e.g., 1 Ch 3:21f.). The promise that God will dwell with mankind goes back to Noah’s blessing in Gen 9:27: “God enlarge Japheth, may he [God] dwell in the tents of Shem”... The Aramaic Tg. Onkelos renders this verse “he will cause his Shekinah to dwell in the dwelling-place of Shem”...
“The association of Jesus with the Shekinah is also apparent elsewhere in the NT. Paul saw the glory of the resurrected Jesus and was blinded by His brightness (Acts 9:3-9; 22:6-11; 26:12-18). Heb 1:3 speaks of God’s supreme revelation in Jesus, who “reflects the glory of God and bears the very stamp of his nature, upholding the universe by the word of his power.” Jas 2:1 addresses the Christian community as those who “hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory.”
“The presence of the Holy Spirit is also a representation of the Shekinah. The Spirit descended and remained on Jesus (Jn 1:33). At Pentecost the Spirit came down and rested on the 120 disciples: “And there appeared to them tongues as of fire, distributed and resting on each of them” (Acts 2:3, emphasis supplied).
“The NT is clearly set against the Jewish background. The NT authors attributed to the Spirit and to the Son the glory associated with the Shekinah. Jesus is the memrai (“Word”), filled with the Spirit of God and full of glory, and He reflects the glory of God. The Holy Spirit bestows the glory of God on all who are filled with the Spirit, and thus they are gloriously renewed in the image of God” (“Shekinah”, ISBE, Vol.4, pp.467-68).
John 14:16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
John 14:17 Even the Spirit of truth...
John 14:18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.
John 14:21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.
John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.
John 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
Gal 4:6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.
Rom 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
Rom 8:10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
Rom 8:11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
Eph 3:16 That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man;
Eph 3:17 That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love,
Gal 4:6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.
F.F. Bruce comments:
“Practically, be it noted, ‘if Christ is in you’ is equivalent to ‘if the Spirit of God really dwells in you’ (verse 9; cf. verse 11), even if the two may be distinguished theoretically. It is by the Spirit that the indwelling presence of the risen Christ is conveyed and maintained. Similarly, no practical distinction can be drawn between being ‘in Christ Jesus’ (verse 1) and ‘in the Spirit’ (verse 9)” (Romans, Tyndale, p.155).
Everett F. Harrison comments:
“... the Spirit of God ‘lives” in them. They are his dwelling-place... the title “Spirit of Christ” is justified and made meaningful by the deliberate way in which Paul says the same thing about the Spirit and Christ in relation to the believer: the Spirit lives in you (v.9) and Christ is in you (v.10). The presence and fullness of Christ are realized in the life of the Christian by means of the indwelling Spirit (Eph 3:16,17)” (Romans, EBC, Vol.10, pp.89-90).
John R. W. Stott comments:
“Some are puzzled by this first petition when they remember that Paul is praying for Christians. ‘Surely’, they say ‘Christ dwells by his Spirit within every believer? So how can Paul ask here that Christ may dwell in their hearts? To these questions we begin by replying that indeed every Christian is indwelt by Christ and is the temple of the Holy Spirit. Nevertheless as Charles Hodge rightly comments, ‘The indwelling of Christ is a thing of degrees’. So also is the inward strengthening of the Holy Spirit. What Paul ask for his readers is that the may be ‘fortified, braced, invigorated’, that they may ‘know the strength of the Spirit’s inner reinforcement’ (JBP), and may lay hold ever more firmly ‘by faith’ of this divine strength, this divine indwelling.
“That this is Paul’s meaning is further confirmed by his choice of words for the ‘dwelling’ of Christ in the heart. There are two similar Greek verbs, paroikeo and katoikeo. The former is the weaker. It means to ‘inhabit (a place) as a stranger’ (AG), to live in fact as a paroikos, the very word Paul had used in 2:19 for an alien who is living away from his home. Katoikeo, on the other hand, means to settle down somewhere. It refers to a permanent as opposed to a temporary abode, and it is used metaphorically both for the fullness of the Godhead abiding in Christ and for Christ’s abiding in the believers’s heart (here in verse 17). Bishop Handley Moule draws out the implication: ‘The word selected (katoikein) ... is a word made expressly to denote residence as against lodging, the abode of a master within his own residence as against the turning aside for a night of the wayfarer who will be gone to tomorrow.’ Again it is ‘the residence always in the heart of its Master and Lord, who where he dwells must rule; who enters not to cheer and soothe alone but before all things else to reign’. Thus Paul prays to the Father that Christ by his Spirit will be allowed to settle down in their hearts, and from his throne there both control and strengthen them...” (The Message of Ephesians, BST, pp.135-36).
R. Allan Cole comments:
“Exactly the same word (exapesteilen) is used of God’s action in sending the Spirit as has already been used in verse 4 of His sending the Son. It is not strange, therefore, that the Spirit is here described as the Spirit of his Son...The Spirit was the promise of the Son (Jn 15) as well as of the Father. It is by the Spirit that Christ lives in our hearts (Eph 3:16,17). Indeed, so close is that link that, without the Spirit, a man does not belong to Christ. (Rom 8:9). There is also another sense in which such a phrase is appropriate; the Spirit rested on Christ in all His fulness (Jn 3:34)...” (Galatians, Tyndale, pp.116-17).
SERVANT(S) OF GOD
2 Cor 5:18 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
2 Cor 5:19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
2 Cor 5:20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.
Isa 49:6 And he [God] said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant [Jesus Christ] to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.
Acts 13:47 For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.
Acts 13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.
Acts 13:49 And the word of the Lord was published throughout all the region.
Murray J. Harris comments:
““All this is from God” looks back to the new attitudes of v.16 and the new creation of v.17. God is as surely the author of the second creation as he was of the first (cf.4:6).
“At this point Paul passes from the subjective to the objective aspects of the atonement as he states the fact of reconciliation. Elsewhere he shows that reconciliation is the divine act by which, on the basis of the death of Christ, God’s holy displeasure against sinful man was appeased, the enmity between God and man was removed, and man was restored to proper relations with God...
“The two verses [18,19] make it clear that God was the reconciler, that it was mankind that God reconciled to himself (but cf. Col 1:20), although there is a sense in which this reconciliation was mutual; that Christ was God’s agent in effecting reconciliation (“through Christ ... in Christ”)... In this passage those to whom God has committed the ministry or message of reconciliation (cf. 4:7) are primarily Paul and his fellow-ambassadors. Nevertheless, a reference to all believers cannot be exclude, particularly since not only apostles were reconciled to God (v18a, “God ... reconciled as”).
“As proclaimers of the “gospel of peace” (Eph 6:15), which was the good tidings about reconciliation, the apostles were acting on Christ’s behalf as messengers and representatives duly appointed by him. Not only so. It was as if God were issuing a personal and direct invitation through them to their hearers to enter into the benefits of the reconciliation already achieved by Christ...” (2 Corinthians, EBC, Vol.10, pp.353-54).
ISRAEL AT WORK IN THE FUTURE
All things are from God. Reconciliation is from God. Christ is His delegated reconciler; and Christ delegates the ministry of reconciliation to the Church - the Israel of God. Compare in Revelation the message God gave to Christ; Christ is the revelator and He delegates His angel to deliver the revelation.
In the Millennium the nation of Israel will be Christ’s delegated instrument to take His salvation to the world as the Israel of God should be doing today. But it is God’s salvation.
If we take the dynamic sense as the base we may say that the absolute, or higher sense, is superimposed upon it. While there is one God composed of two God-beings, one God is greater than the other. One is the ‘absolute’ God and the other the ‘dynamic’ God, (for want of better terms).
(If we generalise and say in the sense that the New Testament explains the Old Testament then in the Old Testament God should be understood in the absolute sense, that is, God refers to the Father; except where the context alerts the reader that it is Christ, using such descriptions as “the angel of the Lord”; “the voice of the Lord”, etc.).
(What is called the Old Testament is really the Old and Renewed Covenant with Israel - the nation; and what is called the New Testament is really the ‘New’ Covenant with Israel - the church).
In the sense of superimposing one theme upon another the New Testament writers take OT Scriptures concerning the Old and Renewed Covenant that God will make with the House of Israel and the House of Judah and superimposes upon it the Covenant God has made with the Church - the Israel of God. While there is one New Covenant there are two aspects to it - one greater than other. (The Sarah dispensation is greater than the Keturah administration of the New Covenant; compare also the "Joseph" or "tabernacle" and "Judah" or "temple" dispensations of the Old Covenant).
While Christ, the Servant of the Lord, is the dynamic agent of God; the Nation of Israel, also the Servant of the Lord, is the dynamic agent of Christ and the Church - the Israel of God (Galatians 6:16)...
"And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth" (Rev 5:10).
Christ and the saints reign on the physical earth in the absolute sense but the nation of Israel reigns in the dynamic sense.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alexander, Ralph H, Ezekiel, Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992).
Allen, Ronald, B., Numbers, Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1990).
Atkinson, The Message of Genesis 1-11, Bible Speaks Today, Edited by J.A. Motyer, (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1990).
Baldwin, Joyce G, Haggi, Zechariah, Malachi, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries, (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1972).
Baldwin, Joyce G., The Message of Genesis 12-50, Bible Speaks Today, Edited by J.A. Motyer, (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1986).
Barker, Kenneth L., Zechariah, Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1985).
Bromiley, G.W., “God”, International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Edited by Geoffrey W Bromiley et al., (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdman's Publishing Company, 1982).
Brown, David, A Commentary: Critical, Experimental, & Practical on the Old and New Testaments, by Jamieson, Fausset, & Brown, (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdman's Publishing Company, 1993).
Brown, Raymond, The Message of Hebrews, Bible Speaks Today, Edited by John R.W. Stott, (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1982).
Bruce, F.F., Romans, Second Edition, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, (Grand Rapids: Wm.B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1985).
Bullinger, Ethelbert W, A Critical Lexicon and Concordance to the English and Greek New Testament, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1990).
Bullinger, Ethelbert, Commentary on Revelation, (Grand Rapids: Kregal Publications, 1984).
Bullinger, Ethelbert, Companion Bible, (London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott Ltd 1986).
Carson, D A, Matthew, Expositor's Bible Commentary, Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1984).
Cole, R. Allan, “Galatians”, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, (Grand Rapids: Wm.B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1965).
Delitizsch, Frank, Isaiah, Keil and Delitzsch (KD), Commentary on the Old Testament, (Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers Inc, 1966).
Duguid, Iain M., Ezekiel, NIVAC, Muck, Terry, General Editor, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1999).
Edersheim, Alfred, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, New Updated Edition, (Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers Inc, 1993).
Ellison, H.L., “Judah”, New Bible Dictionary, Second Edition, Edited by J.D. Douglas, et al., (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1982).
Fausset, A R, Isaiah, A Commentary, Critical, Experimental, & Practical on the Old and New Testaments, by Jamieson, Fausset, & Brown, (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdman's Publishing Company, 1993.
Fausett, A.R., 1 Corinthians, ibid.,
Fausett, A.R., The Revelation, ibid.,
Fausett, A.R., Zechariah, ibid.,
Fee, Gordon D, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, The New International Commentary on the New Testament, Fee, Gordon D, et al., Gen. Editors, (Grand Rapids: Wm.B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1987).
Fee, Gordon F, & Stuart, Douglas, How to read the Bible for all its worth, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993).
Feinberg, Charles L., Jeremiah, Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992).
Finlayson, R.A., “Trinity”, New Bible Dictionary, Second Edition, Edited by J.D. Douglas, et al., (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1982).
Green, Michael, 2 Peter & Jude, Tyndale, Revised Edition, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, (Grand Rapids: Wm.B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1987).
Grogan, Geoffrey W., Isaiah, Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992).
Guthrie, Donald, Hebrews, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, (Grand Rapids: Wm.B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1983).
Guthrie, Donald, “John”, New Bible Dictionary, Second Edition, Edited by J.D. Douglas, et al., (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1982).
Guthrie, Donald, The Pastoral Epistles, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, (Grand Rapids: Wm.B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1957).
Harris, Murray J., 2 Corinthians, Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1976).
Harrison, Everett, F., Romans, Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1976).
Hastings, James, Hastings’ Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics,(New York: Charles Scibner’s Sons, 1902).
Hiebert, D. Edmond, Titus, Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1978).
Jamieson, Robert, Genesis, A Commentary: Critical, Experimental, & Practical on the Old and New Testaments, by Jamieson, Fausset, & Brown, (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdman's Publishing Company, 1993).
Johnson, Alan F, Revelation, Expositor's Bible Commentary, Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein et al., (Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House, 1992).
Jukes, Andrew, Four Views of Christ, (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1966).
Jukes, Andrew, The Names of God, (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1967).
Kaiser, Jr., Walter C., Exodus, Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1990).
Kaiser, Jr., Walter C., Malachi: God’s Unchanging Love, (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1984).
Kaiser, Jr., Walter C., Towards an Old Testament Theology, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House,1991).
Kalland, Earl S, Deuteronomy, Expositor's Bible Commentary, Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein et al., (Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House, 1981).
Keil, C F, Daniel, Commentary on the Old Testament, Keil and Delitzsch, Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers Inc, 1996).
Keil, C F, Joshua, ibid.,
Keil, C F, Pentateuch, ibid.,
Keil, C.F., Ezekiel, ibid.,
Keil, C.F. Zechariah, ibid.,
Longenecker, Richard N., Acts, EBC, Vol.9, Gaebelein, Frank E., General Editor, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981).
Kidner, Derek, Genesis, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries, (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1967).
Kidner, Derek, Proverbs, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries, (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1964).
Mare, W. Harold, 1 Corinthians, Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1976).
Marshall, I. Howard., Acts, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, (Grand Rapids: Wm.B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1957).
Moir, Anne & Jesel, David, BrainSex,(London: Mandarin Paperbacks, 1991).
Morris, Leon, Hebrews, Expositor's Bible Commentary, Edited by F E Gaebelein, (Grand Rapids: William B Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1981).
Moyter, Alec, Isaiah, Tyndale Olds Testament Commentaries, (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1999).
Mounce, Robert H, Revelation, Revised edition, The New International Commentary on the New Testament, Edited by Gordon D Fee, et al., (Grand Rapids: William B Eerdman's Publishing Company, 1998).
Osborne, G R, "Typology", The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Edited by Geoffrey W Bromiley et al., (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdman's Publishing Company, 1988).
Prior, David, The Message of 1 Corinthians, Bible Speaks Today, Edited by John R.W. Stott, (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1985).
Ryken, Leland, et. al., General Editors, “Face”, Dictionary of Biblical Imagery, (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1998).
Ryken, Leland, et. all?, General Editors, “Name”, Dictionary of Biblical Imagery, ibid.,
Ryken, Leland, et. all?, General Editors, “Voice”, Dictionary of Biblical Imagery, ibid.,
Sailhamer, John H., Genesis, Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1990).
Sharp, Sarah, Idolatry: Its Origin and Development, (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1891).
Stewart, R.A., “Shekinah”, New Bible Dictionary, Second Edition, Edited by J.D. Douglas, et al., (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1982).
Stott, John R.W., The Message of Ephesians, Second Edition, Bible Speaks Today, Edited by John R.W. Stott, (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1991).
Tappeiner, “Holy Spirit”, International Standard Bible Encylopedia,Edited by Geoffrey W Bromiley et al., (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdman's Publishing Company, 1982).
Tasker, R.V.G, John, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, (Grand Rapids: Wm.B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1966).
Taylor, John B, Ezekiel, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries, Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity Press,1987).
Tenny, Merrill, C, John, Expositor's Bible Commentary, Edited by F E Gaebelein, (Grand Rapids: William B Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1981).
Thompson, J. Arthur., “Covenant (OT)” The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Edited by Geoffrey W Bromiley et al., (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdman's Publishing Company, 1979).
Vangemeren, W.A., “Shekinah”, International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Edited by Geoffrey W Bromiley et al., (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdman's Publishing Company, 1988).
Vaughan, Curtis, Colossians, Expositor's Bible Commentary, Edited by F E Gaebelein, (Grand Rapids: William B Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1978).
Vine, W.E., Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, (Iowa Falls, World Bible Publishers, 1981).
Walton, John H., Genesis, NIVAC, Muck, Terry, Gen. Editor, (Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House, 2001).
White, William, “Hover”, “Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament”, (Chicago: Moody Press, 1980).
Wright, N.T., The Letter to the Romans, The New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. 10, Keck, Leander E., Senior NT Editor, (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2002).
Wilcock, Michael, The Message of Revelation, Second Edition, Bible Speaks Today, Edited by John R.W. Stott, (Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1991).
Wright, N.T., Colossians and Philemon, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, (Grand Rapids: Wm.B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1986).
Wyatt, Robert J., “Names of God”, International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Edited by Geoffrey W Bromiley et al., (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdman's Publishing Company, 1986).
Bibles
King James: Quickverse for Windows 1.0c, (Craig Rairdin & Parson Technology, 1992).
The NIV Study Bible, Kenneth Barker, Gen Editor, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1987).