Opus 2026-290: So There!

Recently I was subjected to cruel and unusual punishment.  I was in a situation where I was forced to sit and listen to someone read.  Have I ever told you I hate being read to?  I hate being read to.  My mind wants to gallup and readers tend to trot at best.  I endured.  I hope I had a good demeanor because my grandchildren were watching.

The torture came from the opening chapter of Tom Sawyer.  It was well written.  I was caught up in the attempt by Tom to pick a fight.  It was a long series of “I dare you” and “Well, of yeah” Time and time again the debate went on about who would whip the other.  Older brothers were referred to.  Eventually it resolved in a slugfest.  What emerged in my mind this morning was how similar this is to the disagreements we have about theology and what we believe.

We like to take verses, throw them down in the dust and say, “So there!”  We think our enthusiasm is impressive.  We know we are right because someone told us it was right.  We don’t remember whom.  It was probably many whom’s.  We are standing on solid ground.  The verse in front of me today is,

(Rom 9:15 KJV)  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.

This is supposed to prove several of the points to the TULIP theory.  Total depravity, undeserved election and irresistible grace come to mind.  It provides a powerful bit of ammunition.  It occured to me that it might be more beneficial to look at its foundations before we build a house of theology on it.

The cross reference given is Exodus 33:19.  Keep in mind that the little letters directing you to other passages are editorial additions, not the original inspired text.  They are subject to the theological biases of the editor.  In this case it seems like a solid referral.

(Exo 33:19 KJV)  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 shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy.

This takes place in a context you will recognize.  Moses and God had been having a discussion.  The concept of grace was thrown around a lot.  Moses is asking for God’s assurance and God promises to be with him.  There is no reference to God making capricious choices of who will be saved.  In the verse before this you have the familiar words of Moses,

(Exo 33:18 KJV)  And he said, I beseech thee, shew me thy glory.

Moses is asking for a special favor.  He wanted to see the face of God.  He was denied because to see God’s face would kill him.  But God, whom the TULIP people want to portray as never bending to human will says He will let Moses see His back as He passes by.  

Then Moses proceeds to cut tablets of stone to remake the Ten Commandments.  

This is a great passage, but it has nothing to do with how God interacts with us.  The context in Romans is Paul pointing out that being born a descendent of Jacob did not guarantee them a place at the table in eternity.  It is the opposite of how modern theologians like to apply it.

So there!

homo unius libri

Opus 2024-445: Is Glory Survivable

One of the concepts that we find throughout the Old Testament, is the way in which God communicated that sinful man could not come into His presence without being consumed.  We see it in Moses as he asked God if he could see his glory.

(Exo 33:18 KJV)  And he said, I beseech thee, shew me thy glory.

(Exo 33:20 KJV)  And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.

We see it and Isaiah as he came into the presence of God.

(Isa 6:5 KJV)  Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts.

At the same time, we seem to have Adam and Eve being face-to-face with God, and having no problem.  What was the difference?  Adam and Eve face God before sin came into the world.  Moses and Isaiah lived when sin reigned.

I assume that in eternity we will be in the presence of God and will glory in that moment.  But it will be so marvelous that I expect to spend a couple million years just basking in His Holiness.  It sounds boring now, but I think it will be more than enough to make it hard to sleep.  The rabbit trail of my brain today is asking would we be able to come in the presence of God now having been washed by the blood of Jesus, and filled with the Holy Spirit.

Just asking for a friend.

Happy New Year.

homo unius libri

Opus 2024-311: Don’t Look Now

What is there about the face of God that would strike a human being dead?  Take, for instance, the request of Moses to see God’s face.  Actually, he asked to see His glory.  God refused because He said to see His face would kill Moses.

(Exo 33:20 KJV)  And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.

We also have the case of Isaiah coming into the presence of God, and knowing that he was going to die having seen God.

(Isa 6:5 KJV)  Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts.

What is there about the face of God that would cause death in a human being?  Later on, we have God speaking to Moses out of a cloud.  That seems to be enough to ensure Moses survival.  What is the nature of God‘s face that, covering it up with a cloud, will save your life?  It can’t be the concept of holy fire as His righteousness.  That would tend to shine through any cloud you could throw in front of it.

I’m thinking that it is the total, absolute purity of God’s countenance that would be deadly.  Why?  It’s possible that seeing such purity would cause us to have such a deep longing in our souls that we would die in grief.  Have you ever wanted something so bad you could feel it?  Has that feeling ever been so intense that you wanted to die if you couldn’t have it?  I’m not sure I have, but I’ve read about it, usually in fiction.

This purity would not be the kind of characteristic that radiates.  He would not be a reflection of the statement that God is the light, at least, in our human sense of that.  We think of light as radiating.  We think of darkness is the absence of light.  Are those biblical statements or philosophical conclusions?  Maybe this is another one of those mysteries like the Trinity or the incarnation.  Maybe the concept is that there is a light that is so pure that it does not radiate.  I can’t comprehend that.  But then I can’t really comprehend God either.

homo unius libri

Opus 2024-181: Grace

(Exo 33:13 KJV)  Now therefore, I pray thee, if I have found grace in thy sight, shew 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.

When you read this out of context, it sounds like a glorious New Testament idea.  How wonderful to know His grace, how wonderful to follow, wonderful to be His people.  What doesn’t show up in the context is that this is immediately after Moses was given the law on the mountain.  Not only was it given to him by God once, but he had the carve it out by hand himself a second time.  I think the law was fresh in his mind.  I think he knew what it contained, and what it said.  And yet here we have him talking about grace, and about knowing God.

The New Testament focuses on grace.  Actually, Paul focuses on grace.  Jesus never mentioned it.  Paul’s emphasis is scripture.  But we need the balance of the entire Bible, and we need to realize that the law is not evil if we take it in the way in which it was intended.

It would also be good for us to realize that the grace talked about here is the same grace that we find in regard to Noah.  People like to talk about Noah, finding grace in the eyes of the Lord.  

(Gen 6:8 KJV)  But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.

It would seem that Moses also had found grace in the eyes of the Lord.  I sometimes wonder if Paul ever read his Old Testament in the original Hebrew, or whether he just listened to what the rabbis told him and quotes from the Talmud.  Grace was not a new discovery that he made.  He simply took a truth that was being ignored and brought it into the light.

Grace and peace.

homo unius libri

Opus 2024-179: Contradictions

I am reflecting on some scriptures I read several days ago.

Exodus 33:11 (KJV) And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, departed not out of the tabernacle.

Exodus 33:20 (KJV) And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.

The conflict struck me then and it has been in my mind since.  My first train of thought had to do with Moses, speaking to God, face-to-face as a friend.  I liked that.  It goes along with my questioning about the character of God, and the personhood of God.  It is a wonderful concept.  It is what we can strive for.  I believe this is a good way of expressing what prayer is all about.

All was in harmony in my world.

And then I come to this other verse that says, Moses cannot see God’s face.  How can you talk face-to-face and not see someone’s face?  I went back-and-forth on this a while, and finally in reading the verse before I noticed that God was speaking from the cloud.  Yes, I understand that you saw that immediately.  He was standing at the door of the tabernacle.  Moses is inside.  God is speaking to him as a friend.  Moses was not actually need to see God’s face.  Think of it more as an old fashioned telephone connection rather than Facetime.  

If you go back a few verses, you find that Moses did not actually ask to see God’s face, he wanted to see His glory.  

Exodus 33:18 (KJV) And he said, I beseech thee, shew me thy glory.

That’s a step above just seeing his face.  I don’t know if it’s possible that we can see God’s glory, but I know we can live in the glory of his presence.

homo unius libri

Opus 2024-033: The Ultimate UFO

There is a long list of Theophanies starting in the Garden of Eden.  Some are a voice from heaven, dream or vision.  Do those qualify as theophanies?  A theophony is the appearance of Jehovah in some sort of observable form.  He can appear as a man.  He appeared as a burning bush.  He spoke out of a storm.  The point is that God is spirit and His presence is so holy that it would kill anyone who saw Him directly.

We see this clearly in a conversation Moses had with God in Exodus 33.  God tells Moses,

(Exo 33:20 KJV)  And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.

This is why Isaiah was panicked,

(Isa 6:5 KJV)  Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts.

We have numerous times when God communicated with humans.  We have Him talking to Adam and Eve in the Garden.  He spoke to Cain.  From there we have a long list of communications.  It continues in the New Testament with Saul on the road to Damascus and Jesus appearing to John in the Revelation.  

You might think of Jesus as the ultimate Theophany but that would not work because He was fully man, God in the flesh.

I wonder if avatar an acceptable modern word for theophany?

Stay alert.  You may be the next to file a report.

homo unius libri