The Nature of God and Christ - Members Site - United Church of God

More documents

Recommendations

Info

THE NATURE OF GOD AND CHRISTDoctrinal Study PaperAs noted above, the Greeks used the term in a cosmological sense to describe the “rationalprinciple” that governs all things. As explained below, the Jews used the term to refer to theWord (Hebrew, Memra of Yehovah). 27As already noted, the Old Testament presents numerous theophanies in which YHWHappears to humans. Furthermore, there are numerous passages in the Old Testament in whichGod is anthropomorphized. That is, humanlike qualities are ascribed to God. As the years passed,the scribes who were given the responsibility of faithfully preserving and translating the OldTestament began to alter passages that anthropomorphized YHWH, generally substituting Adonaifor YHWH. Gradually the Jews developed a mystical view of the name of God, refusing toverbalize it.According to Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament, after the Babyloniancaptivity the Jewish doctors combined into one view the theophanies, prophetic revelations andmanifestations of YHWH generally, and united them into one single conception, that of apermanent agent of YHWH in the sensible world, whom they designated by the Memra (word) ofYHWH. The learned Jews introduced the idea into the Targums, or Aramaic paraphrases of theOld Testament, which were publicly read in the synagogues, substituting “the word of YHWH”for YHWH, each time God manifested Himself. 28The Jewish philosopher and theologian Philo tried to harmonize Greek philosophy withthe Bible, and thus used many of the terms that the Greeks use in describing God. Philo statesexpressly that the totality of ideas is simply the Reason of God as Creator. Yet, on the otherhand, they are represented as hypostases distinct from God, individual entities existingindependently and apart from Him. Philo regards all individual ideas as comprehended in onehighest and most general Idea or Force—the unity of the individual ideas, which he calls theLogos or operative agent of God in the world. The Logos, therefore, is the highest Mediatorbetween God and the world, the firstborn Son of God, the Archangel who is the vehicle of allrevelation, and the High Priest who stands before God on behalf of the world. Through Him theworld was created, and so He is identified with the creative Word of God in Genesis chapter 1. 29Thus the concept of the Logos or Memra of Yahweh appearing as an agent of God andspeaking to human beings was a familiar concept among the learned Jews of the first century.Furthermore, Philo had introduced the concept of the Logos serving as a mediator between Godand man. Thus John uses terminology that was well understood by Jews and gentiles.Some modern exegetes claim that the Greek word Logos merely denotes the reason orspoken word of God, thus embracing rabbinical superstition and Neoplatonism. By acceptingrabbinic and philosophical concepts of the Logos, they depersonalize the “Word” and reduceHim to God’s reason or spoken word. Furthermore, some exegetes try to build a case for thedepersonalization of the Logos based on capitalization and referent pronouns. The renownedBible translator William Tyndale did not capitalize Logos in his English translation of the Bible.27 Zondervan NIV Study Bible, p. 1593.28 M.R. Vincent, Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament, Vol. 2, pp. 26-28.29 Encyclopaedia Britannica 11 th Edition, Vol. 21, p. 410.Page 22September 2005© 2005 United Church of God, an International Association
THE NATURE OF GOD AND CHRISTDoctrinal Study PaperMoreover, in his translation of John 1:2-5, he used the neuter impersonal pronoun “it” inreferring to the Logos instead of the personal pronouns “he” and “him.” Thus his translationreads, “All things were made by it, and without it, was made nothing that was made. In it waslife, and the life was the light of men, and the light shines in the darkness but the darknesscomprehended it not.”By using the impersonal pronoun “it,” Tyndale fell into the same logical dilemma thatexegetes through the centuries have encountered when they attempt to depersonalize the Logos.For example, the impersonal pronoun “it” becomes nonsensical if one attempts to translate John1:12 in the impersonal sense, “But as many as received Him [it], to them He [it] gave the right tobecome children of God, to those who believe in His name.” The “Him” of verse 12 is the same“Him” of verse 4, who possesses life and light. The impersonal reason of God does not possesslife and light. Christ states that He is “the light of the world” (John 8:12).The apostle John forcefully rejects the Neoplatonic concept of the Logos being only aprinciple or force that governs the cosmos or that represents only the word or reason of God.John boldly proclaims that the Logos was made flesh and dwelt among us (John 1:14). Thusexegetes who attempt to reduce the Logos to an impersonal force must explain how the Logos isan impersonal force, yet is made flesh and dies for the sins of the world.The Biblical Origin of the LogosUnder the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, John clearly explains the origin of the Logos, thebeing who became Jesus Christ. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God,and the Word was God” (John 1:1). Thus in John 1:1, Logos is equated with God, yet distinctfrom God. Translators reversed the last clause from the original Greek to read “and the Wordwas God.” Three simple clauses of John 1:1 should serve to illustrate the eternal existence of theLogos as opposed to a created being:a. In the first clause, “In the beginning was the Word,” the Greek or eeni means “tobe,” “to exist.” The Logos existed in the beginning, an obvious allusion to Genesis1:1—at the very beginning of creation, the Logos already existed.b. In the second clause, the verb “to be” describes a relationship. That is, the Logos wasin God’s presence but distinct from God and at the same time in fellowship “with”God. (Greek for “with” is pros, a preposition that means “toward,” “to,” “with.” Hereit has the concept of “alongside.” Pros in this verse is used with the noun for God,which is in the accusative case. In defining this preposition, Robertson’s WordPictures of the New Testament says, “Pros with the accusative presents a plane ofequality and intimacy, face to face with each other.” 30 )c. The verb “to be” in the third clause is used in a predication in which the character oressence of the Logos is defined—“and Theos was the Logos.” 3130 A.T. Robertson, Word Pictures of the New Testament, commentary on John 1:1.31 Joel B. Green and Scot McKnight (ed.), Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, p. 483.Page 23September 2005© 2005 United Church of God, an International Association
Page 5 and 6: THE NATURE OF GOD AND CHRISTDoctrin
Page 17: THE NATURE OF GOD AND CHRISTDoctrin
Page 68: THE NATURE OF GOD AND CHRISTDoctrin

The Nature of God and Christ - Members Site - United Church of God

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?