Extolling Him https://www.extollinghim.com Fri, 18 May 2012 23:03:26 +0000 en hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= The Messianic Expectation of the 1st Century – Part 4a: Rabbinic Tradition of the Messiah https://www.extollinghim.com/the-messianic-expectation-of-the-1st-century-part-4a-rabbinic-tradition-of-the-messiah/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=the-messianic-expectation-of-the-1st-century-part-4a-rabbinic-tradition-of-the-messiah https://www.extollinghim.com/the-messianic-expectation-of-the-1st-century-part-4a-rabbinic-tradition-of-the-messiah/#comments Fri, 18 May 2012 20:55:55 +0000 Joe Meyer http://extollinghim.com/?p=1661

We have laid the ground work for first century Jewish thinking, briefly defined what “Christ” meant during the times of Jesus, and explored the messianic meaning of “Son of God” as used in the New Testament. We now turn our attention to rabbinical tradition concerning the Messiah.

Some may be unfamiliar with what “rabbinical tradition” means. Rabbi was a respectful term of recognition before 70 CE that means, “my master” or “my teacher” (it clearly was being used towards those who taught the Scriptures in Jesus’ day; albeit only after 70 CE did this term become an official title for a teacher [Matt 23:7 - 8; 26:25, 49; Mk 9:5; 11:21; 14:45; Jn 1:38; 3:2, 26; 4:31; 6:25; 9:2; 11:8). Historically, it was used in context of a slave to his or her master. These men extensively traveled the countryside to instruct the populace of Torah. They used various methods (parables and Jewish hermaneutics) to communicate biblical truth to the people. Most practiced a trade to earn a living (they were forbidden to charge for teaching), and relied on the hospitality of communities to supply their needs, since work was often scarce and difficult to find (due to a busy travel schedule). Note the connections between this description and Jesus' ministry [this information was inspired by from "New Light on the Difficult Words of Jesus" by David Bivin; pg. 9 - 12].

Their tradition consisted of interpretations of the written Law and other books that were recognized as canonical. In Jesus’ day, these collections were known as the Tradition of the Elders (Matt 15:2, 3, 6; Mk 7:3, 5, 8 – 9, 13; Gal 1:14; 1 Pet 1:18). Around 200 CE, these teachings would be compiled in what is now known as the Mishnah. In the 6th century CE, a commentary on the Mishnah was compiled called the Gemara; these together form an incredibly important document for understanding Judaism in Jesus’ day: the Talmud. (Be noted – there are two historical versions of the Talmud [Jerusalem or Babylonian] with different published dates).

Contrary to popular belief, Jesus did not condemn all of the Oral Law (tradition of the elders). He opposed only aspects that contradicted the written Torah. Moreover, it was common for rabbis to aggressively disagree with one another. Many of the same accusations used by Jesus against particular pharisees were also used by rabbis before and after Jesus’ time [see Yeshua - A Guide to the Real Jesus and the Original Church on pgs 98 - 99 by Dr. Ron Mosley]. In fact, Jesus and His disciples adhered to at least parts of the Oral Torah as seen in John 7:37 – 38 [see Jewish New Testament Commentary on pgs 178 - 179 by Dr. David Stern and The Jewish Annotated New Testament on pg 173]. Jesus taught the people to obey the traditions of the elders (Matt 23:3) and the Apostles formed their own important traditions in light of the New Covenant (1 Cor 11:2; 2 Thess 2:15).

Clearly, traditions were important methods of communication. What then, did rabbinic tradition have to say about the Messiah?

The first glimpse into messianic rabbinic tradition during the time of Jesus is found in the Sanhedrin tractate, chapter 11:

“Rabbi Hisda also advanced a contradiction: It reads [Isaiah xxiv. 23]: “And the moon shall be put to the blush and the sun be made ashamed; for the Lord of hosts will reign on mount Zion”; and [ibid. XXX. 26]: “And the light of the moon shall be as the light of the sun, and the light of the sun shall be sevenfold, as the light of the seven days”? This presents no difficulty. The latter speaks of the time when the Messiah shall appear, and the former, of the world to come. And to Samuel, who maintains that there will be no difference between this time and the time of Messiah, except that Israel will no longer be under the dominion of foreigners, the explanation of these contradictory verses may be thus–that the latter speaks of the camp of the upright and the former of the camp of the Glory of the Shekinah. (bold mine)”

Some have propagated the idea that the Messiah is not a literal and historical figure, but rather, an era of time or metaphorical figurative imagery for when God openly reigns as the King of the Earth. While it is argued that the concept of a supreme messiah developed within Jewish thought (ie: Abraham might not of knew of a promised Messiah, but Paul used his story to say a Messiah was promised), we begin to see the manifestation of a singular and physical person who God anoints as the Messiah. While the quote above can still be viewed as a metaphor, given the larger context that will be posted here, I suggest the word, “the“, indicates a particular object, rather than a section in time. You can be the judge whether or not this view is fitting.

Does Jesus fit this Messianic tradition/expectation?

Isaiah 24 and 30 have arguably different contexts. The former is clearly eschatological while the latter may be better seen in the past. Ironically, these rabbis put messianic emphasis on the latter! Neither of these passages are directly quoted in the New Testament. If these promises were to happen in the Messianic Age (perhaps the millennium), then one may argue that since these two passages were included in messianic thought, it would naturally be applied to Jesus, even though a direct quotation or allusion does not exist in the NT. If this phrase were to refer to after the messianic age (the millennium?), then we have a contradiction. Revelation 21:23 emphatically asserts that there will be NO moon and NO sun, because Jesus and God’s glory will be the light of the world (literally..?). Even if this is a metaphor, it completely goes against the grain of Isaiah’s prophecies.

Depending on your conclusion, Jesus either fits this via assumption, or New Testament teaching contradicts it.

The next tradition provides an excellent example of a rabbinical hermaneutic known as Haggadah. Here, the rabbis find a verse in Ruth to suggest a similiarity between David, Daniel, Chananyah, Mishael, Azaryah, and the Messiah.

Rabbi Tanhun said: Bar Kappara lectured in Ciporias thus: It reads [Ruth. iii. 17]: “These six barleys gave he unto me.” How is to be understood six barleys? It cannot be meant literally, for would a man like Boas give six grains of barley as a gift? And it also cannot be said “measures of barley,” as it is not customary for a woman to carry six measures. Therefore the six barleys were a hint that in the future six sons would come out from her, each of whom would be blessed with six blessings: viz., David, Messiah, Daniel, Chananyah, Mishael, and Azaryah. David–as it reads [I Sam. xvi. 18]: “Then answered one of the servants, and said, Behold, I have seen a son of Jesse the Bethlechemite, who is skillful as a player and a mighty valiant man, and a man of war, and intelligent in speech and a person of good form, and the Lord is with him.” Messiah–as it reads [Is. xi. 2]: “And there shall rest upon him the spirit of the Lord, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord.” Daniel, Chananyah, Mishael, and Azaryah–as it reads [Dan. i. 4]: “Lads in whom there should be no kind of blemish, but who should be handsome in appearance, and intelligent in all wisdom and acquainted with knowledge, and understanding science, and such as should have the ability to serve in the king’s palace, and that these should be taught the learning and the language of the Chaldeans.” (Hence all of them were blessed with six things.) (bold mine)

We see rabbis taking a text that arguably has no messianic tones whatsoever, figuratively interpreting an obscure verse and connecting it to the godly men – namely the Messiah! This is a valid form of Haggadah, and this is the normal use of such an exegetical application. While this method bothers literalists, this is how Hebrew Scriptures were interpreted before and even during Jesus’ time. Jesus, Paul, Matthew and other New Testament figures/writers use this general style of communication, and we would gleam much understanding if we see the benefits of such a perspective.

Moreover, this portion of text identifies the Messiah with four other historical figures (albeit it’s debated, but they nonetheless considered them real). This strengthens the position of a historical and personal (in the sense of a real and actual being) Messiah. They were godly men and were noted for their dedication to God. The connection uses interesting Jewish numerology (6 is typically bad) to associate the featured men. According to this tradition, the Messiah has the text Isaiah 11:2 applied to Him.

Does Jesus fit this Messianic tradition/expectation?

The New Testament never quotes this verse in reference to Jesus. It does, however, allude to and applies the surrounding contexts to Him (ch 10:22 – 23 in Rom 9:27 – 28; ch 11:4 in 2 Thess 2:8; ch 11:10 in Rom 15:12). While one may point out the potential negative consequence for the lack of a direct quote, Jewish cross-referencing practices assumes the entire chapter/context is being referred to, even if a single verse is quoted/used in an allusion. With this in mind, it is safe to say the New Testament authors and those who followed Jesus applied this passage to Him.

One may argue that the 7 spirits of God (or seven-fold Spirit of God) mentioned in Revelation (Rev 1:4; 3:1; 4:5; 5:6) alludes to Isaiah 11:2. Consider the possibility: The Spirit of the Lord (1) shall rest upon Him, the Spirit of wisdom (2) and understanding (3), the Spirit of counsel (4) and might (5), the Spirit of knowledge (6) and of the fear of the Lord (7). The primary issue with this connection is the rabbinic source explicitly mentions SIX – not seven – blessings given to the Messiah.

Either way, Jesus fits this tradition with Jewish quoting practices in mind. The New Testament and 1st century believers clearly understood Isaiah 11 to be Messianic. They then attributed its features to Jesus.

Due to the amount of rabbinic sources that contain elements of the Messiah, this post will be cut off here. Look for part 4b to continue reading elements from Jewish sources that pertain to the messianic expectation of the first century.

]]> https://www.extollinghim.com/the-messianic-expectation-of-the-1st-century-part-4a-rabbinic-tradition-of-the-messiah/feed/ 0 The Messianic Expectation of the 1st Century – Part 3: What does “Son of God” mean? https://www.extollinghim.com/the-messianic-expectation-of-the-1st-century-part-3-what-does-son-of-god-mean/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=the-messianic-expectation-of-the-1st-century-part-3-what-does-son-of-god-mean https://www.extollinghim.com/the-messianic-expectation-of-the-1st-century-part-3-what-does-son-of-god-mean/#comments Sun, 06 May 2012 21:21:57 +0000 Joe Meyer http://extollinghim.com/?p=1582

Contrary to popular belief, the phrase “son of God” meant something entirely different to Jews in Jesus’ day than what typically comes to mind in modern Christian preaching, teaching and thinking. It is common to hear the connection of “son of God” with the “Father” that “sent” Him to “die” on the cross for the “sins of the world”, thereby forging a belief system that typically supposes two things. The first is that Jesus is divine. Since God is the Father and He had a Son, that makes the son like the Father, who is God, which makes the Son God too. It is a logical progression, even though this particular train of thought never appears in the Bible. The second is that the title “Son of God” must be linked with an atoning death. This is popularized by the most quoted verse in the Bible – John 3:16:

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever so believed in Him would not perish, but have everlasting life.
 

The problem with these two ideas lay within not the text itself, but the lens which tries to interpret it. What if the audience of Jesus’ day (when hearing John 3:16 read to them) already knew what the “son of God” was? What if there is a biblical parallel (or motif) that informs us of what “only begotten” means? What if “believing” in the “Son” had precedence in the Hebrew Old Testament? What if “eternal life” was an already established idea by the time of Jesus? What if this verse is an example of a Jewish literary device (called a “ḥaruz“) used to communicate in their culture, like a metaphor or a simile does in ours? We must consider the possiblity that this verse communicated something very different than what it is often associated with today.

In exploring what the “Son of God” means, we look to our understanding of “Christ” to see if there are any clues. Thankfully, there are many. Have we ever noticed that the phrase, “Son of God” is used either synonymously or interchangeably with “Christ” in the New Testament? (It arguably can be said it is always linked with a Messianic role, but we will not cover that topic in this post.) Usually, this title (son of God) is taught as a defense of Jesus’ divinity (He is the “preexistent Son of God”, or “God the Son” in light of the Trinity), or to His unique relationship to the Father. The latter are both ultimately true, but what if this title did not communicate that to the audience of Jesus’ day? What if stone masons in carving rock in Galilee’s rugged quarries understood this term to mean something … entirely different?

Below, we will briefly examine the term, “Son of God” in the New Testament as it relates with our study and understanding of the word, “Christ” or “Messiah”.

The first appearance of these two ideas or phrases connecting is seen Matthew 26:63 during Jesus’ trial before His execution. The verse is quoted below.

But Jesus kept silent. And the high priest answered and said to Him, “I put You under oath by the living God: Tell us if You are the Christ, the Son of God!”
 

Notice how the accusation is phrased against Jesus. The high priest wanted to know if Jesus was the “Christ”, or in other words, the son of God! They are paired together to clarify the same point. When stressing clarity, many people today will repeat an idea in several ways to ensure it was articulated clearly. Preachers do it all of the time. “Jesus will forgive your sins, save your soul, and wash you white as snow!”

All of those ideas are connected with each other and convey the same general point. Christ and Son of God are used in the same way in this context. The high priest apparently understood these two titles to be the same, or at the least, used them complement each other. In the very next verse, Jesus replies, “You said it”, ie., “Yes” (vs 64).

“Yes!” Jesus affirms the combination used by the high priest to convict him of being the Christ, the Son of God. It can be argued that this verse supports Jesus’ understanding of the interchangeability of the two terms in focus.

He then says, “…hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven (vs 64b).” We will explore what the “Son of Man” means in detail later, but it arguably was a title just as interchangeable as Christ was with Son of God. These two sections of dialogue offer a large amount of insight into what religious leaders (Jesus and the high priest) of the day believed when it came to these two terms. Jesus accented the accusation by, in essence, calling Himself the Son of Man.

In response to Jesus’ reply, the high priest tore his clothes, accuses him of blasphemy (vs 65), and asks the others who are listening if they agree with his opinion; they did (vs 66). The reason they condemned Jesus under the charge of blasphemy was linked to the political ramifications of declaring oneself “Christ” (for example, see this scene play out in John 19; John [who asserts the divinity of Jesus most clearly to modern readers in the New Testament] even relates the term “Son of God” to a political sphere).

“Blaspheme” comes from the Greek word, “βλασφημέω” (blasphēméō), which has a broad meaning. One lexicon suggests that “in the NT, [βλασφημέω is] generally synonymous with oneidízō (3679), [which means to] revile, and loidoréō (3058), [which is] to reproach (Matt. 27:39; Mark 15:29; Luke 22:65; 23:39; Rom. 3:8; 14:16; 1 Cor. 4:13; Titus 3:2; 2 Pet. 2:10; Jude 1:8 [emphasis mine]). In other words, one can read the high priest saying, “He has spoken wrongly!”, which excludes a divine nuance that is suggested when one uses the word, “blaspheme”; ie, “He is calling himself God!”.

As seen before in part 2 of this blog series, “Christ” or “Messiah” simply means God’s appointed king for Israel. Therefore, if someone claimed to be the Christ in the 1st century (which Jesus affirmed in vs 64), they would be taking a political position against Rome. They would be deemed as an ‘enemy of the State’. Nevertheless, even if “blaspheme” is a correct translation, the context begs for the terms Christ and son of God to be linked as interchangeable.

There are at least 13 verses (and even more broader contexts, such as John 1:40, 49; 10:24, 36; Rom 1:4 – 6) that link the identity of the “Christ/King of Israel” with the “Son of God/Son of the Highest/Blessed” (Matt 26:63; Mk 1:1; 14:61; Lk 1:32; 4:41; John 11:27; John 20:31, Acts 8:37; 9:20; 2 Cor 1:19; Gal 2:20; Eph 4:13; and 1 John 5:20).

I will not explore each of these occurrences due to space. I have provided the logic of the first appearance as found in Matthew’s Gospel. Each of the other locations would be argued in the same light. I encourage you to look at each of them and determine for yourself whether or not this observation finds merit.

To be fair to the conversation, many will ask, “Why is this information new? Why haven’t I heard this before?” When one looks at different Bible dictionaries, you would be confronted with a myriad of differing perspectives. Baker’s, Tyndale’s, and Easton’s encyclopedias disagree with the view being presented here.

Baker’s suggests:

[The "Son of God" is a] term used to express the deity of Jesus of Nazareth as the one, only begotten Son of God.  

Tyndale’s is almost verbatim:

[The "Son of God" is a] term used to express the deity of Jesus of Nazareth as the unique divine Son.  

Easton’s provided a slightly varied, but remarkably similar conclusion:

The sonship of Christ [as it relates to the "Son of God" title] denotes his equality with the Father. To call Christ the Son of God is to assert his true and proper divinity.  

Somewhat ironically, Alfred Edersheim (a 19th century Jewish theologian) argues in his book, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, “…when the conviction of the reality of the Messianic manifestation in Jesus burst on their [the disciple's] minds, the boundary-line was easily, almost naturally overstepped … [they] readily owned and worshipped Him as the Son of God.”

However, there are scholars who find the conclusion presented in this blog quite strong; they range from liberal to conservative.

Eerdmans‘ explains:

[The term] “Son of God” does not appear to have been used in the Old Testament as a messianic title, although its use as a royal title easily lent itself to messianic use in later writings [ie., by the time of the 1st century] (e.g., 1QSa 2:11–12; 4QFlor1:10–13; 1 En. 105:2; 2 Esdr. 7:28–29). Nevertheless, “Messiah” and “son of God” clearly were used together in reference to Jesus (Matt. 16:16; Mark 14:61; John 11:27; cf. Luke 1:32).  

Harper’s defends:

But in view of the discovery of Psalm 2:7 in a messianic application in the Dead Sea Scrolls (4QFlor. 10-14), it is probably safe to conclude that it was just coming into use in this context during the period of Christian origins.  

The Jewish Encyclopedia writes:

The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha contain a few passages in which the title “son of God” is given to the Messiah (see Enoch, cv. 2; IV Esdras vii. 28-29; xiii. 32, 37, 52; xiv. 9); but the title belongs also to any one whose piety has placed him in a filial relation to God (see Wisdom ii. 13, 16, 18; v. 5, where “the sons of God” are identical with “the saints”; comp. Ecclus. [Sirach] iv. 10). (bold mine)  

Even “liberal” scholars, such as Dr. Bart Ehrman, share this conclusion. He writes, “But to ancient Jews, being the “son of God” did not make a person God; it made the person a human being in a close relationship with God, one through whom God does His will on earth” [Jesus, Interrupted; Dr. Bart Ehrman, HarperOne Publishers, 2009, pg 140]. More conservative theologians defend the perspective too, such as Dr. Mark Strauss when he writes, “First, as just noted, by the first century, Son of God seems to have been coming into use as a title for the Messiah. In a number of New Testament passages, Son of God is almost synonymous with Christ [Four Portraits, One Jesus; Dr. Mark Strauss; Zondervan publishers, 2007, pg 486]“. Another example is Brad H. Young, Ph.D., who, in his book Jesus the Jewish Theologian says, “In Hebrew thought, Psalm 2[:7] refers to the Lord’s anointed. It is a messianic text… In the time of Jesus… the “son of God” was identified with the future deliverer [ie., the Messiah] who would fulfill the divine plan of redemption.”

I must mention that there is credibility in understanding Jesus as “God’s Son” as signifying a particularly close relationship between Him and the Father. This is best explained through the Abram and Isaac motif, but that will be covered in a blog unrelated with the theme of the Messiah.

In ending, I suggest that by the time of the first century, the phrase, “Son of God” was being used interchangeably with both “Christ” and/or “Messiah”. This changes the way we read the Bible (and particularly the New Testament), and it better focuses our view of what Jews in Jesus’ day understood and thought of when it came to the messianic expectation of the 1st century.

You are viewing blog number 3 of a series! If you have not read the first two parts, you can by clicking the links below.

Blog Post ONE: Jesus CHRIST?

Blog Post TWO: What does “CHRIST” mean?

]]> https://www.extollinghim.com/the-messianic-expectation-of-the-1st-century-part-3-what-does-son-of-god-mean/feed/ 0 The Messianic Expectation of the 1st Century – Part 2: what does “Christ” mean? https://www.extollinghim.com/the-messianic-expectation-of-the-1st-century-part-2/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=the-messianic-expectation-of-the-1st-century-part-2 https://www.extollinghim.com/the-messianic-expectation-of-the-1st-century-part-2/#comments Fri, 04 May 2012 23:20:51 +0000 Joe Meyer http://extollinghim.com/?p=1527

As mentioned briefly in the earlier post, we will be exploring what people in the days of the New Testament (1 century AD/CE) were expecting when it came to the topic of “the Christ”. The understanding that pervades the world today is significantly different than what a Torah minded Galilean fisherman would have possessed. Most people today are familiar with Jesus providing a spiritual salvation by saving them from their sins to go to a blissful heaven when they die. On the contrary, most Jews during the time of Jesus’ earthly ministry were familiar with a Messiah that would initiate the “Day of God” which would punish the wicked, overthrow the current evil regimes of the planet, and establish His messianic reign over the Earth. This would cause the God of Abraham to once again dwell in their midst as His people. These are quite different from each other, but both claim that the Christ is responsible and use the same Bible to prove it! This blog post will simply clarify what “Christ” means to establish a common ground before we attempt to understand the expectation of this figure in the first century.

Christ is the English translation (technically a transliteration) of the Koine Greek word “Χριστός” (Christos), which means, “to anoint with sacred oil”, or, “the anointed one”. Any lexicon or Bible dictionary will agree. This term is represented by its Hebrew equivalent, “Mashiyach“, of which we will explore in a few paragraphs. (To hear a sermon where this is briefly described in its proper context, listen to Stephen Venable’s OneThing 2011 message from 18:00 – 25:00).

The word Christ is used about 500 unique times in about 500 different places within the pages of your New Testament (3 additional findings are located in some copies of the Septuagint [Odes 14:14, 27], or the Pseudepigrapha [Psalms of Solomon 17:32]). It is not used in the Old Testament (because those books were written primarily in Hebrew, not Greek). Every book of the Christian New Testament but 3rd John uses the word “Christ”, and it appears particularly heavily in Paul’s writings. Click HERE for a graph-based visual.

Where did the word, “Christ” come from? It is a Greek word translated from the Hebrew “מָשִׁיחַ” (Mashiyach), which means, “anointed one”; ie., someone having sacred oil ceremonially poured over one’s head.

“Huh?”

What does having oil poured on someone’s head have anything to do with a political or spiritual ruler? In America, perhaps a potential comparison is when the Presidential-elect puts their hand on the Bible and swears, “so help me God”. Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible offers a great summary of the relationship between anointing oil and kings:

Before [Israel] had a king of their own, the Israelites were aware of anointing as a mode of inaugurating kings (Jgs 9:8, 15). Anointing became a divinely ordained rite accompanying induction of all the kings of Judah and Israel (2 Kgs 9:1–6; 11:12) from Saul onward (1 Sm 10:1; 1 Kgs 1:39). David’s anointing took place in three stages (1 Sm 16:1, 13; 2 Sm 2:4; 5:1–5). “The Lord’s anointed” or some similar phrase became a common designation for Hebrew kings (1 Sm 12:3, 5; 2 Sm 1:14, 16; Ps 89:38, 51; Lam 4:20).

Eventually, this term became associated with a particular figure, the “Messiah” (we will explore these references in later blog posts).

(The reason there is a close relationship between “anoint” and Christ/Messiah is because Messiah is the verbal adjective of the noun, “anoint”. The word anoint is transliterated, “mashach” and Messiah is, “mashiyach”. That is like saying, “You bake? Oh, you’re a baker!” It is easier to see the connection once a parallel is given in English.)

Since the root system and foundation of “Christ” is laid and built upon throughout the entire Old Testament, scattered throughout other important theological and historical writings, is used over 500 times in the New Testament and used by every author that contributed into the (specifically) Christian canon, this word must carry significant worth! It is used casually and perhaps, ignorantly by so many; I was one of them. However, we are now equipped with a general understanding so we can appreciate the value of its use in the New Testament.

Moreover, understanding the basic meaning and background of the words “Christ” and “Messiah” gives us a framework to pursue how these two words were used in the years leading up (and just after) Jesus’ earthly ministry and resurrection. Last but not least, they will help us shape the messianic expectation of the 1st century.

You are viewing blog number 2 of a series! If you have not read the first or third post, you can by clicking the links below.

Blog Post ONE: Jesus CHRIST?

Blog Post THREE: What does the term “Son of God” means?

]]> https://www.extollinghim.com/the-messianic-expectation-of-the-1st-century-part-2/feed/ 0 The Messianic Expectation of the 1st Century – Part 1: Laying the Ground Work https://www.extollinghim.com/the-messianic-expectation-of-the-1st-century-part-1/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=the-messianic-expectation-of-the-1st-century-part-1 https://www.extollinghim.com/the-messianic-expectation-of-the-1st-century-part-1/#comments Fri, 27 Apr 2012 22:23:38 +0000 Joe Meyer http://extollinghim.com/?p=1497

Millions of people alive today take the two words “Jesus Christ” for granted. Many do not understand the depth of connection that this small phrase carries, let alone comprehend its vast root system of history and thought. The purpose of this blog series is to inform us what Jesus Christ means, as well as its understanding in the days of Jesus Himself.

As a boy growing up in a Christian house, I heard the combination, “Jesus Christ” nearly everyday. People used it in different ways; some acted as if it was a swear word while others used it to identify the Person of focus in the Christian faith. Knowing, however, that every American I have met has a surname, I figured that “Christ” must be His. I rationed that since I am known as “Joe Meyer”, He must have been known as “Jesus Christ”. After all, people are still calling Him that nearly 2,000 years later!

As the years went by, I found myself in the fifth grade. During our Bible class one day, our teacher fondly said, “Christ is not Jesus’ last name; it was His role!” (For clarification, surnames in 1st century Israel functioned like, “Joe, son of Walt” instead of “Joe Meyer”.)

“Huh?” I thought. Never once in my American culture did a surname indicate a role or function. My teacher continued speaking and gave an important observation. “While Western names today do not carry such meaning, they once did in Europe. Who here has heard of the last names: “Smith”, “Cook” or “Baker”? These most likely came from what your ancestors did before they migrated to the United States.”

“Woah!” I had never heard of such a thing. I began to understand that the Bible was not written to English speaking Westerners who live across the Atlantic ocean on a completely different continent than Israel, being separated by an even a larger body of water consisting of 19 centuries worth of culture, language and time. There are terms, phrases, and concepts that are foreign to my worldview. Instead of assuming that I could insert my understanding into the Bible, I began to realize that I had to learn what the Bible says, not what I think it says.

This series will not be all encompassing, although I will cover a significant amount of material. This is being composed primarily to whet people’s appetite for a clearer understanding of the Bible and to appreciate Jesus in a deeper and more mature way. Some may ask, “how will understanding what Christ means deepen my love for God, especially since [insert various arguments here]?”

The Western world is fond of Jesus being a spiritual savior. Many people in the 1st world appreciate and even respond emotionally to the truth that Jesus saves sinners. However, most of civilized modernity would be shocked to realize that hardly anyone in Israel during Jesus’ day solely wanted a spiritual savior. They primarily looked for a political salvation; they wanted to be loosed from the heavy iron hands of the abominable Romans so they could experience the soon approaching glorious Messianic Age. This is an important contrast. Why has the focused switched? These questions and various answers will be discussed in the following parts of this series.

We will explore the following: what “Christ” means, the development of a Messianic figure as seen in the 1st century, works from within the Bible and outside (such as the Pseudepigrapha) and what scholarly authorities on the topic have to say.

You are viewing the first blog of a series! If you have not read the other two parts, you can by clicking the links below.

Blog Post TWO: What does “CHRIST” mean?

Blog Post THREE: What does the term, “Son of God” mean?

]]> https://www.extollinghim.com/the-messianic-expectation-of-the-1st-century-part-1/feed/ 2 Encouraging Houses of Prayer https://www.extollinghim.com/encouraging-houses-of-prayer/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=encouraging-houses-of-prayer https://www.extollinghim.com/encouraging-houses-of-prayer/#comments Thu, 26 Apr 2012 23:31:42 +0000 Joe Meyer http://extollinghim.com/?p=1486

After being a part of a missional community for the last 5 years in a dedicated and full-time way, I have learned a few life lessons regarding ministry involvement that I earnestly hope will aid your walk with Jesus as a missionary, minister, church goer or a participant in a local house of prayer expression.

In the context of a bustling and growing missions base, complete with the persona of leaders with global impact, and the push for the completion of world evangelism in this generation, it can be an overwhelming task to determine where exactly to fit in. Everyone has a valid agenda and vision – and they all want you to serve it! Need presents itself every which way, and it always seems as if there is not enough help to stabilize every outreach imitative that is launched.

There is so much demand, but only so much time in my day or energy in my body to help out! What should I do?

I have ministered in children’s ministry, youth groups, college groups, and in conventional Sunday morning congregational style settings. The only age demographic that I do not have experience with are our noble seniors (which is understandable – why would they want to listen to a 22 year old?). I have contributed in worship settings, preaching, teaching, small group leading, evangelism outreaches, prayer meetings and more. I have learned that some of those activities are very draining and are not enjoyable for me, while others fill my tank and fortify my desire to give my life to missions work.

The secret of sustainable ministry is finding what works for you! I appreciate the call to serve leaders’ visions. I do it. I honor the saying of, “find what God is doing in your generation and give your life for it”, and do my best at trying to do so. However, there is a difference between what someone else thinks you should do, and finding out what you enjoy doing.

After investing hundreds of hours into ministry, particularly serving other peoples’ visions, I realized that I had desires in my heart that I wanted to pursue.

After I fully gave my life to the LORD, I became an avid ignorant apologist. I would debate atheists and agnostics for hours on end – without knowing much of the Bible! Most American atheists or agnostics come from religious backgrounds, particularly Christianity. They are usually very smart, articulate, and educated. You will rarely find a dumb atheist.

Therefore, I found myself debating and arguing with people who knew more Bible verses than I did. They pointed out apparent contradictions in the Bible and asserted their stance – God does not exist or we cannot know He exists because of x, y, or z.

Since I was unlearned and lacked an academic foundation, I was often left confused and dumbfounded by these observations. However, I had a large amount of zeal (that sometimes got me in trouble…), which I funneled towards studying the Bible intensely.

Fun enough, I found out that every contradiction that was pointed out was either a misunderstanding of the historical context (how can we be pro-life when God told King Saul to kill babies? [1 Samuel 15:2-3]), language (how can “jealousies” be a work of the flesh [Gal 5:20] and God be a “jealous” God? [Ex 34:14]), sheer misunderstanding (how can God be 1, yet exist in 3 persons? Many claim this is an illogical contradiction. However, plurality within God can be traced historically within Jewish theology that existed before 70 CE, but that is for another post), the nature of God (how can God be love [1 Jn 4:8] yet actively hate sinners? [Ps 5:5; Ps 11:5]) or more importantly, the result of dead religion (every atheist or agnostic that I have conversed with has left the faith on the basis of no experience with the Divine. Experience is very important in Christianity; “knowing” God is not only assenting to intellectual doctrines, but “knowing” Him as a husband does his wife. This is not sexual, but one sees the nearness that needs to exist between mutual spouses. In the same way, their unique relationship is a metaphor for what our relationship should look like with God).

After doing this for many years, I found out that I loved to study and to relay that information by either teaching or preaching. While I did enjoy music ministry, evangelism, discipleship or other various and legitimate forms of ministry, I noticed that I was being “filled up” when I either studied, taught or preached.

In closing, in order for a house of prayer or a local church to truly flourish, people individually must blossom. I agree that everyone needs to uphold and pursue a general agenda. However, if individuals are placed in the wrong areas, the entire structure will slowly fall apart. You do not put a door in the middle of a room or a staircase in a closet. You do not put the steering wheel of a car in the trunk or the exhaust pipe in the interior of the vehicle. In the same way, find out where you fit best. Chances are, it will take time and you will learn a lot of lessons along the way. These are good – we only learn to walk after we fall trying several times. We only learned to ride a bike after we tipped it over. We only learned to run after losing our balance while attempting.

After you have found where you fit (where you feel “filled up” and “energized”, therefore empowering you to do it with focus and zeal), invest your time, money and energy into that particular place. Help out where help is needed, but understand that a steering wheel only helps the windows as much as it can – it was designed to STEER the car, not enclose the vehicle from the outside.

Since I love to study, I buy a lot of books and read often (perhaps too much – my wife and I are working through this :) ). I write concerning my findings and teach them. If you like to evangelize, learn various apologetics pray and fast a lot, and structure your time to witness to as many people as possible. If you love to cook, find out ways to minister to the poor or offer to contribute to various events where that skill is needed.

Every person has something value they can contribute. YOU have something so precious and important to give to the Body of Jesus that Mike Bickle cannot replicate. Find out what that is, and once you’ve got it, keep it and never let go. Every person is important, and without everyone’s contribution (whether big or small), the Body will not function at full capacity.

]]> https://www.extollinghim.com/encouraging-houses-of-prayer/feed/ 0 Joe’s Invitation to Reinhard Bonnke’s School of Evangelism https://www.extollinghim.com/joes-invitation-to-reinhard-bonnkes-school-of-evangelism/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=joes-invitation-to-reinhard-bonnkes-school-of-evangelism https://www.extollinghim.com/joes-invitation-to-reinhard-bonnkes-school-of-evangelism/#comments Fri, 06 Apr 2012 21:27:09 +0000 Joe Meyer http://extollinghim.com/?p=1466

Through an exciting series of unforeseen events, Joe has been officially invited to participate in Reinhard Bonnke’s first School of Evangelism in Orlando, Flordia! This is an honor too great to articulate and an opportunity of a lifetime.

The school has hand selected 100 people from the United States to participate. A leader at IHOP-KC nominated Joe to go, and through a filtering process, he was finally selected to attend along with 9 other individuals.

The cost to participate in such a rich atmosphere is around $2,500. The school’s cost is $2,000, but airfare, breakfast and dinner are not included.

In light of this invitation, Joe has declined two ministry trips (one of which was international and the other in the US) in order to go. Traveling is a major contributor towards their family’s budget to continue in full time ministry. He feels that training in evangelism is worth the cost, and is asking for those who believe in Joe to prayerfully consider investing into Joe’s ministry by contributing towards the $2,500 total. Additionally, spreading the word of this post via mouth, facebook or e-mail is another practical way to support Joe and his ministry.

His deepest desire is to know God and to make Him known. Will you please prayerfully consider helping Joe attend this once-in-a-lifetime school?

If you are interested in financially enabling him to go, please click here. Thank you!

If you are not able to invest financially, please pray for him that he would receive everything from God during these 5 days as He would give to him. Additionally, please ‘share’ this post using the ‘share’ tool below.

Thank you for reading;

God bless!

Joe and Sarah Meyer

]]> https://www.extollinghim.com/joes-invitation-to-reinhard-bonnkes-school-of-evangelism/feed/ 0 Yeshua – A Guide To The Real Jesus And The Original Church https://www.extollinghim.com/yeshua-a-guide-to-the-real-jesus-and-the-original-church/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=yeshua-a-guide-to-the-real-jesus-and-the-original-church https://www.extollinghim.com/yeshua-a-guide-to-the-real-jesus-and-the-original-church/#comments Tue, 20 Mar 2012 19:58:20 +0000 Joe Meyer http://extollinghim.com/?p=1419 About the Author:

Dr. Ron Moseley has studied the Jewish roots of the Christian faith at Princeton, University of Texas, Oxford Graduate School, and Oxford University. He spent twelve years studying at the Hebrew and Jerusalem Universities in Jerusalem, Israel during the summers, and has lectured throughout America, Europe, and the Middle East. Moseley is the president of the American Institute for Advanced Biblical Studies in North Little Rock, Arkansas, and has a Master of Divinity, a Master of Jewish Studies, a Ph.D. in Second Temple History, a D.Phil. in Religion and Society, and a D.Litt. in Research. He has written numerous books and over eighty courses for Bible colleges in eighteen countries. He has been awarded both the status of Fellow and Scholar by the Oxford Society of Scholars.

Premise of the Book:

Many have thought of Jesus as a blue eyed, brown haired caucasian who is speaking to 21st century Americans in the modern English language. In other parts of history, Jesus is depicted as a victorious ruler, triumphant over the Jewish religion (during the Byzantine Empire [CE. 330 - 640]), or as a sorrowful victim hanging on a cross (see Medieval Period murals [CE. 476 - 1450). In New Age circles, He is seen as an 'embodiment of divine consciousness' - a model in which mankind ought to resemble and replicate. In rabbinic Judaism, Jesus is seen as a rightful blasphemer who got exactly what he deserved: death on an execution stake. In Islam, Jesus is a Muslim (which literally means, "submission [to God]“. He is a mere man with a prophetic message to Jews, who rejected his proclamation.

Who is the real Jesus?

This book addresses the most important aspect of defining who Jesus really was – a pious Jewish rabbi (yea, God Himself!), in the culture of 1st century Judaism, under the banner of 2nd Temple rabbinic thought, using Jewish language tools (such as Hebraic idioms, parables, parallelisms and more), preaching a long awaited message that would have struck at the very heart of the day’s messianic expectation, “The Kingdom of God is at hand!”

Dr. Ron Moseley discusses the historical backing of the Jewishness of the Early Church, Jewish idioms in Jesus’ teachings (compare to English ones such as, “that come out of the blue“, or, “Man! You threw me under the bus!”), misconceptions concerning Torah and grace, the difference between the “Old” and the “New” Covenants, the place of the Pharisees and their importance on the biblical text, Hebraic textual underpinnings (Matt 2 and John 1 are not understood in depth outside of Jewish tradition) and much more.

If you are interested in deepening your faith by exploring the world and times that Jesus lived and was thoroughly familiar in, then I highly suggest you buy this book. Many difficult concepts and misunderstandings of the Bible will vanish like fog on a hot day as you read through highly insightful pages, carefully constructed by Dr. Moseley. He provides the depth of academic scholarship at the reach of normal lay people like you and me.

Buy Now

Interested in deepening your faith? Buy this book today!

 
 

]]> https://www.extollinghim.com/yeshua-a-guide-to-the-real-jesus-and-the-original-church/feed/ 0 Envy – The Subtle Killer https://www.extollinghim.com/envy-the-subtle-killer/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=envy-the-subtle-killer https://www.extollinghim.com/envy-the-subtle-killer/#comments Fri, 17 Feb 2012 22:04:00 +0000 Joe Meyer http://extollinghim.com/?p=1383 Envy is like the Mc Donald’s menu; no matter what you eat – whether it’s a deceptive salad or a juicy burger – it will always take a toll on your body, if not eventually kill you.

In my own experience, envy has taken residence in very subtle forms. This is no less damaging than its obvious counterparts. In fact, it can be more dangerous, because it acts like a toad being cooked in a pan: the temperature slowly increases so the amphibian does not notice the water warming up. Eventually, the toad is slowly killed without even knowing it! The water warmed at a very slow – yet very real – speed, which deceived the creature, eventually leading it to its death. Envy, if not taken care of, will ultimately kill its victim.

Since I was 12, I was placed in several different musical contexts, so I had many opportunities to grow jealous, embittered, condemning, irrationally exalt myself and envious. In our 5th grade band class, I was the only drummer, and thereby the “best”. This threw me into the mire of non-competition. Inevitably, this created a superiority complex related to my drumming. During the next year, I moved to a much larger public school and barely passed auditions to enter their small percussion ensemble. I quickly realized I was not the only kid my age interested in drumming, and most importantly, I was not the best. I learned that I would have to work hard, practice diligently, and submit to my teacher’s authority if I wanted to grow in my skill as a musician.

Moving forward nearly a decade, I have learned from many mistakes that I have made throughout my youth. There are many more that are still waiting to be learned. I desire, however, to share with you those that I have personally touched so you will not have to touch them. This is the essence of wisdom: someone does something stupid and tells someone else not to do it. If that person applies the information, they will not make the same mistake. However, if they only listen but do not do, then they will make the same mistake. Please be the person who both listens and does!

I will share with you three paths that I have traversed. They are named, “Worse”, “Better” and “Interim”, respectively. In reading, please imagine you are walking and learning from my mistakes so you do not have to repeat them; wear this wisdom as a lace around your neck!

Let us walk on “Worse” first. It is muddy and rugged, so be forewarned.

As I transitioned onto the IHOP-KC stage to play drums for the next prayer set, I heard complex and complicated rhythms flow from the clear and plastic drum cage. They were smooth and elegant; no mere amateur could have produced such extravagance! Upon analyzing this drummer’s abilities, I was faced with the daunting truth, “He is better than me.” To one’s pride, this realization feels like a serrated dagger plummeting into the depths of one’s being.

The honest comparison of this person’s ability against mine was not wrong. The hurt I felt in response to my conclusion was not wrong. However, my very next choice was: “He is too busy. This beat doesn’t fit the song at all. Man, even though he may be better, I have a better ear.”

Instead of rejoicing that God sent a skilled drummer to serve at IHOP-KC, I rejected him by finding a way to exalt myself over him! I may have had a better ear at the time, but my motive for my second comparison was selfishly designed to condemn him and retain my “former status” (which was only a construct in my own head – most people at IHOP-KC do not care who is “the best”).

The question is begged to be asked, “What should I have done?” The exact opposite of what I did. Instead of an irrational and emotionally driven reaction to keep my “dominance”, I should have:

Never placed myself on any sacred hierarchy of musical ability.

Celebrated with this new gift that will make some worship leader very happy.

Set my heart to learn from this new arrival.

If you are in a similar circumstance, do the above; it will save you a lot of trouble in the future and will align your heart in a way that is healthy and positive. If you have not experienced this yet, you can still plug these three points into your mental grid. Moreover, this applies to the workplace, family life, friendship circles and academics as well. A simple way to say this is to be humble.

Let us walk on “Better” second. It is slippery and slimy, so be forewarned.

While we may never be the best, we will probably always be better than someone. This provides different dangers than the first path, but dips into the same dark divide of death. Instead of using someone’s lack of skill to act as a throne to sit on, let it be a hall of learning. While you may be “better” than someone in general, at say, playing the drums, that does not mean you excel over them in every area.

As I am typing this blog in the prayer room, I am listening to a drummer who I can learn from, regardless of how our skill levels compare. He plays aggressively, with passion, and smiles as he hits the kit. This is a great combination for intercession drumming. I can apply this very analysis the next time I play an intercession set, which is next Tuesday at 6am in the morning. Secondly, ask Jesus to humble you. He will. This will keep your heart in check as you grow in your ability, regardless of immediate context.

Let us walk through the weeded path of “Interim” now. It is the final path, but the most tricky to traverse.

I was on a ministry trip, traveling to another state to serve in worship as their drummer. I come to find out that I am playing with a percussionist, who was primarily a drummer. It was in this context that my heart went through a jungle-jim of emotions, “is he better than me?” (insecurity) and “am I better than him?” (pride). Perhaps even more unhelpful way my tendency to “overplay” when worship would commence. Y’know, playing the ‘new fill’ that I was working on, or playing the sub-divided fusion groove that I have been working on during “How Great is Our God”. This tension, that I succumbed to, drove me to show off! I am a bit shocked God kept me alive during worship. Imagine – the drummer is trying to point to himself during the music, when the songs that he is building is pointing to God! This is backwards, and I fell for it.

How could I have responded better? Some would say, “Expect that he is better than you; this may keep you humble.” The issue with this response is that it does not solve the issue. While this may result in humility, it may not. It also may breed insecurity, which is crippling. The tool I suggest to wield in this situation is humility. This, perhaps, is the most difficult of the 3 paths to travel down. Nothing is established. You know and they know that both person plays the same instrument. You hear compliments of his particular style and approach of the instrument and he hears you play. Ambiguity is the best context to reveal if one is truly humble. This tool is the hardest to buy, but once it is received and kept (it can go away), it will act as a steel breastplate on the fields of medieval warfare. I would much rather have steel equipped than using a wooden buckler.

I encourage you to look into your life and see where these failures of mine can apply. If – if you act and strive to pursue humility, you will be saved from unnecessary pain and embarrassment. There are other perks too, but the mitigated pain often results in enjoyed benefits. Instead of trying to determine who is best, you forget about yourself and worship Jesus! Instead of defiling yourself and sinning against a brother by condemning them, you are to strengthen your gifts by learning from them.

]]> https://www.extollinghim.com/envy-the-subtle-killer/feed/ 0 Musical Excellence or Spiritual Power? https://www.extollinghim.com/musical-excellence-or-spiritual-power/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=musical-excellence-or-spiritual-power https://www.extollinghim.com/musical-excellence-or-spiritual-power/#comments Tue, 20 Dec 2011 01:22:23 +0000 Joe Meyer http://extollinghim.com/?p=1281 It was a cool, early-spring day as I woke to my fan abruptly turning off and the flash of my bedroom lights shining through my translucent eyelids.

“Remember!” My Mom reminded, “today is the beginning of your SAT tests!” As we arrived at school, we were prepped for sheets of paper that were bound to determine the rest of our educational years. After we were informed of the interesting details (when lunch was and when we could take a break or a snack), they sent us off to our respective locations and initiated the examination of our IQ’s limitations.
As soon as our eyes hit the page, we were confronted with the following question:

Pick the BEST answer: 2 + 2 = 4; 1 + 3 = 4.

Okay, not really – but anyone who is reading this after being trained in the American educational system understands this conundrum. The two questions look different, but end at the same place. The decision then is determined by preference.

The result of this teaching philosophy results in the following tension posed to many Christian musicians:

Pick the BEST answer: anointing; (or) skillful playing.

This divide has caused a lot of confusion and has damaged creative expression for musicians. People feel drawn to choose ‘anointing’, because it somehow relates to God, yet have a desire to be excellent, but fear it may lead to selfish ambition, so they never traverse that beautiful, yet rugged path.

Let us explore ‘anointing’ first.

Anoint stems from nine (some translations have 10 unique terms) different Hebrew words and six (sometimes 7 depending on translation) unique Greek vocables; meanings ranging from ‘fat place’ to the equivalent of waxing your floor, and being used as a personal noun (in reference to the Holy Spirit), a verb (anoint him!) or an adjective (grab the anointing oil). It is as old as the Patriarchs (the first reference is when Jacob poured oil over the rock he slept on; Gen 28:18) and is still being used today, thousands of years later!

The general idea of ‘anoint’ when used in Christian contexts is God’s presence (even though it’s rarely used that way in the Bible!). When applied to music, the connotation is that God fills the music with His power, working through it to accomplish His purpose in that particular context. That’s super cool, and any musician ought to have God permeate their expression. However, no one could ever earn God’s power or His nearness. Therefore, we have to carefully weigh both loving God through our music and observing what He may or may not be doing during worship on the scales of our hearts.

How then do we approach skillful playing?

While we cannot guarantee or determine God’s involvement in our music, we can directly effect how we represent God. People go to incredible lengths to ensure they embody their company, family, or values adequately, but how often do Christians spend time, money, and energy ensuring they epitomize their God and exemplify Him to the world through every aspect of their lives?

Since music is one of the greatest mediums of communication, it ought to be one of the most aggressively targeted platforms to communicate the Gospel. Unfortunately, while it has been utilized, it has likewise been damaged due to the knee-jerk reaction of the spiritual leadership of the ’60s when rock ‘n roll thundered forth. This infection has resulted in boring Christian-pop that hardly anyone notices, except to acknowledge that it sounds like the standard and shallow popular music in the secular arena.

This has to change, and we are the ones through which it begins. After all, we are all that God gets to work with!

If He surrounds Himself with (presumably) the best angelic choirs and orchestras, should not we use this as a model to communicate Him to this dying world?

]]> https://www.extollinghim.com/musical-excellence-or-spiritual-power/feed/ 4 Which pair of glasses are you wearing? https://www.extollinghim.com/which-pair-of-glasses-are-you-wearing/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=which-pair-of-glasses-are-you-wearing https://www.extollinghim.com/which-pair-of-glasses-are-you-wearing/#comments Sun, 02 Oct 2011 01:45:58 +0000 Joe Meyer http://extollinghim.com/?p=1113

“WHAT is God?” asks a Greek to a Jew.

“WHO,” replies the Jew, “is God?”

This is the struggle most people face when they approach the topic of the attributes of God. For most of the Western World, our understanding of life has been shaped by the ancient Greek civilization (during the time of the famous philosophers).

People may not realize it, but since our youth, we have been given “Greek glasses” by which we view the world and interpret information. Most people in the Western world wear these glasses. However, people in Africa, the Middle East, Eastern Europe, Central Asia and Asia proper usually wear “Eastern glasses”. These glasses are called worldviews; simply – how one views the world around them.

“Is wearing Greek glasses bad?”, one would ask.

It is not ‘bad’ as much as a hurdle when we approach the God of the Bible. Yahweh is a Jewish God, and is portrayed through “Eastern colors” and is expected to be understood through “Eastern glasses”. Most fascinating of all is that God thinks and speaks like an Easterner. However, that’s for another blog post. :-)

What, then, is the difference between these two pairs of glasses? (Now, it must be said, I’m over simplifying worldviews. There are hundreds, if not thousands of unique ways to view the world across the planet, but these two generally and properly summarize the whole). The Greeks focus on what God is, often describing Him categorically, abstractly, and in bullet point form. This results in a, “God is this, or that” conclusion, with words that you will not find in the Bible, even if some of them are true.

Additionally, they usually conclude God’s attributes based on what humanity is. Humans are corporeal (are composed of matter; having a material existence), so God must be ‘incorporeal’ (notice the prefix). Humans do not know everything, so God must know everything, making Him ‘omnipotent’; etc.

When you read the graph below, try and picture the words on the right. What comes to mind?

Study the image below for an example:

Did any image come up? For most of the words, probably nothing come to mind unless a subconscious jump was made (infinite simply refers to the size or the amount of an object, so picturing a being with no end is not true to the strict definition of the word, since infinite is an adjective, not a noun).

This is a major characteristic to the Greek styled glasses.

What about the Hebrew glasses, then?

The Jews saw and understood God very differently. They did not primarily refer to God as “God”, as many do in the West. This is the result of a misconception. Many assume God’s name is “God”, or that is what He desires to be called or referred to. This is not the case (thankfully!). God has a personal name, just like you and I. My name is Joseph (which, ironically, is the English translation of Hebrew’s Yosef); His is Yahweh.

Would it be strange if someone always called you, “human”, instead of “Joe”? One refers to the type of being (mammal) and perhaps, the material make-up (a massive collaboration of cells that is made up almost entirely of water) of the object. The other refers to WHO they are.

When someone thinks of “Joe Meyer”, they subtly imagine my history with them; my interactions in the past and what I represent/stand for. If we do this with each other, why do we do it differently with Yahweh?

Just as when someone thinks of me and may imagine Justin Rizzo’s drummer, someone’s kid, or something goofy I did in my teenage years, the Hebrews did the same with Yahweh. He was not an ambiguous Being in a far detached nebula with an abstract agenda who mysteriously floated around in a “supernatural realm”. Instead, He formed the worlds out of nothing; He is the One who banished Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden. He is the One who flooded the whole globe but mercifully saved Noah and his near family. He is the One who brought Israel out of Egypt with His mighty and out-stretch armed of signs and wonders. He is the only God who, likewise, alone is worthy of worship. He is the One who will make known His Name to all humanity in the future, and He is the sovereign ruler over all things. Later on, this same God was incarnated as Jesus (Yeshua).

If the God you worship is not this God, then you do not worship the God of the Bible – the only true God.

Back to the Jewish glasses themselves, the Jews used their surroundings to describe what God is like. Paul said God revealed Himself (partially) through nature (fully in Jesus), so this was not a primitive attempt to describe the unknowable. That is why in Jewish schools, the Rabbi will enter the room and give each student a Torah (first 5 books of the OT) and a dab of honey on a wax sheet of paper. The Rabbi will then say, “Eat the honey – that is what God is like, and never forget it!”

He is right!

What about God being an all consuming fire? The next time you go to a bonfire, think to yourself, “this is what Yahweh is like.” What about His righteousness being likened to the mighty mountains? The next time you go skiing, think to yourself, “This is what God is like”. What about the height of the clouds above the Earth communicating the amount of mercy He has for humanity? When you think about the clouds, think, “This is what God is like.” As you can see, nearly every aspect of nature communicates something about God, only if we would take the time to see it and apply it to our lives.

Compare the below image to the one above:

Do any pictures come to your mind after you were reading through this list? The Jews viewed God for who He is and what He is like, not what He is made up of.

In closing, when we approach this vast topic, let us be mindful of the glasses that we are viewing life through.

Also, the next time we look up at the clouds, let us remind ourselves, “this is what God is like.”

]]> https://www.extollinghim.com/which-pair-of-glasses-are-you-wearing/feed/ 0