Knowing God is (Part Four)

So far we have established, inter alia, that God, the social tri-unity, is relational both in His nature and His intent. This sense of relationship is further substantiated by Him being seen as Creator involved with what He has created, i.e. Creator and creation (Genesis 1&2).

It is no co-incidence then that secular society would rather speak of ‘mother nature’ and ‘nature’ thus corrupting (via counterfeit) the idea of Divine relationship with creation, and He being the source thereof, in favour of a pagan representation.

The opening lines of the ‘Apostles’ Creed’ states, “I believe in God, the Father Almighty, the Maker of heaven and earth, ...”  What does it mean to confess faith in the creator God?

Firstly, it is an acknowledgement that creation was a Divine act. Secondly, it is an awareness of our role and relationship as a consequence of that Divine act.

The act of creation was a ‘free’ act. In other words, God was not acting under compulsion or necessity. In fact, creation was not necessary. God alone is sovereign, so if there were an exterior compulsion the source of that would, in fact, be more powerful than God.

What of an interior compulsion?  Again, no such compulsion existed. If it had, God would be bound up in His creation. He would need the creation in order to be who He is. In other words He remains transcendent while being immanent.

God is continually involved in and with His creation. This is known theologically as ‘Providence’.

Divine providence

What does this mean?

The continuing action of God in preserving His creation.

·         His continual guidance of creation towards His intended purpose.

·         Included within providence is the concept of ‘government’.

·         Government implies that God is actively engaged in creation achieving His purposes and sin cannot thwart those purposes.

Providence then is seen in two aspects: Preservation and government. Seeing the difference between preservation and government is vital. However, they should not be seen as sharply separated acts of God, but part of His unitary work.

·         Preservation = Maintaining and sustaining creation (Nehemiah 9:6; Colossians 1:17; Hebrews 1:3; cf. Matthew 6:26). It is helpful to remember at this point that creation is not self-sustaining nor did God cease from His work within creation after the original act of creation (Genesis 1&2).

·         Government = Guiding and directing the course of events to fulfil His ultimate purpose (Psalm 103:19-22; Daniel 2:21).

God is sovereign; therefore His purposes cannot be defeated. If this is so, and it is, then God’s purpose for and in creation cannot be thwarted. Creation, and all it contains, then has a purpose. Creation then is His originating work. Providence is His continuing relationship to it.

The word ‘providence’ is derived from the Latin providere which literally means to foresee. This word carries with it the understanding not only seeing the future, so to speak, but acting prudently or making preparation for that future.

Providence means that as Christians we are able to live in the full assurance that God is present and active in our lives regardless of the circumstances. We are assured that we are in His care and things are not just happening by chance. Therefore, we can face danger knowing that God is aware and involved (Matthew 24:15-31; Luke 22:42; I Peter 1:6, 4:12; cf. Philippians 4:11).

Providence makes it certain that creation and us within it are heading somewhere, there is a plan and it is being worked out by God Himself who is maintaining the means of that plan (Romans 8:18-25; II Peter 3:10-13).

One can see God’s power over the natural creation (governmental activity) in such events as His interaction with Elijah (I Kings 18:41-46). Further examples can be found in Job 9:5-9, 37; Psalm 104:14; 147:8-15; Matthew 6:25-30; Mark 4:39.

This government also impacts upon the animal kingdom (Psalm 104:21-29; cf. I Kings 17:4).

Human history and the destiny of nations fall within the authority of God’s governance (Acts 17:26; Daniel 2:21, 4:24&25 cf. Isaiah 10:5-12).

So much for the nations, God’s governance directly impacts each individual human life (I Samuel 2:6&7; Luke 1:52; I Corinthians 4:6&7; Galatians 1:15&16). This remains applicable even within the Body of Christ (Romans 12:3-6; I Corinthians 12:4-11).

Providence and prayer.

It is vital not to assume that some form of fatalism is the consequence of Divine providence. So, what does prayer accomplish in the light of the above? To answer this one must consider the interaction of the following, seemingly contradictory, two facts:

·         Scripture teaches that God’s plan is fixed and definite.

·         Believers are commanded to pray and are taught the value of such in James 5:16.

Scripture shows that God does work in something approaching a partnership with His people (cf. Mark 6:6, 14:22-42). What arises here is that when God wills the ends, He also wills the means. Therefore, prayer does not change what God has purposed to do. It is the means by which He accomplishes that goal.

“Prayer is in large part a matter of creating in ourselves a right attitude with respect to God’s will.” [i] (cf. Matthew 6:9-13). Prayer is not about us getting our will done, but wanting to see that God has His will done.

To this end we are called to pray persistently (Luke 11:9&10) and to be aware that we will not always receive what we pray for (Luke 22:42; II Corinthians 12:9&10), having said, the following Scripture should be borne in mind: Psalm 84:11 (cf. Psalm 81:13,14&16).

---

[i] Erickson, Millard. Christian Theology. Grand Rapids. Baker. 2003. Pg. 431

Knowing God is (Part Three Of Four)

The God who relates (I John 1:3).

It is the confession of the believer that through Christ we have come to know God who is Father, Son (Jesus Christ), and Holy Spirit. This expression of tri-unity manifests the relational nature of God. Relationship is at the very centre of who God is, a ‘oneness’ (unity) of three (Matthew 28:19; John 14:26, 15:26; II Corinthians 13:14; I Peter 1:2). The tri-unity of God then is a social ‘trinity’, the supernatural dance of the Divine.

While the aforementioned Scriptures clearly underpin the truth of the existence of God as triune, John 14:16-31 places the Three in a dramatic representation of triune relationship:

·         Vs. 16 – Conversation.

·         Vs. 18 – Orphan status for man does not gel with who God is.

·         Vs. 20 – In the Father, in each other.

·         Vs. 21 – Personal disclosure, the basic building block of relationship.

·         Vs. 23 – Sharing life together through abiding.

·         Vs. 28 – Going away from (temporary) and coming back to = The to-and-fro of relationship.

A God who is manifested through relationship within Himself, must, as a matter of nature, continue in relationship with that which He has created. In fact, the act of creation was an act of love. Love, in turn, demands the arena of relationship in order to express itself. So, God’s express desire as recorded in Genesis 1:26 sums up His intention as love (I John 4:8).

Therefore, the revelation we seek is the self-disclosure of God in relation.

In order to develop our understanding of the relational God whom we serve, it is necessary to clearly define two very important terms:

·    Transcendence – To go (be) beyond normal or physical human experience. To exist apart from and not subject to the limitations of the material universe (Ecclesiastes 5:2; Isaiah 6:1).

·     Immanence – Existing or operating within. With regard to God; to permanently pervade (i.e. to be present and active throughout) the universe (Acts 17:27&28; Job 34:14&15; Psalm 104:29&30; cf. Matthew 5:45, 6:25-30, 10:29&30).

This wondrous dichotomy represents an element of the awesomeness of God. Although he comes to us beyond the realm of the material (and the comprehensible), He enables Himself, by an act of His will, to enter into our experience of the material universe, thus making relationship possible  (cf. Genesis 3:8 [pre- ‘the fall’]; Hebrews 2:14-18, 4:14-16 [post-redemption]). However, He remains over it and self-sufficient from it, while remaining with us.

As physical beings, it is vital to understand just what the Bible means by describing God as spirit (John 4:24; cf. John 1:18; I Timothy 1:17, 6:15&16).

In the Old Testament the Hebrew word for spirit is ru’ach, meaning ‘breath’ or ‘wind’. A secondary meaning  is “the life principle in a human person.” [i]

This secondary meaning arose as the ancients recognized breathing as a normal sign of life. The Hebrews developed this idea by acknowledging God as the source of the ‘life principle’ (Genesis 2:7). This source of life principle brought about a third meaning for ru’arch: Spirit is the divine power which creates and sustains life.

In the New Testament the Koine Greek for spirit is: pneuma. Like its Old Testament counterpart this word reflects the interconnectedness of meanings. Pneuma also speaks of ‘breath’ and ‘wind’. Furthermore, it speaks of ‘life’ as well, and, it too, came to mean “the life creating power.” [ii]

These two words speak into God’s relationship to creation – He is the source and sustainer of all life, but, most significantly, human life.

This understanding of God as ‘spirit’ must also be understood within the dynamic of the tri-unity in terms of relationship. God then is dynamic movement (John 5:26). God is spirit = God is relational.

To only acknowledge God as ‘spirit’ would be to deprive the transcendent God of His immanence as a person. However, there is no Biblical text that explicitly states that God is ‘a person’. Having said that, the personhood of God naturally flows out of the Biblical witness as seen in the following examples of the attributes of personhood:

God is compassionate – Genesis 16:11; Psalm 78:38; James 5:11.

·        God is faithful – Deuteronomy 7:9; Psalm 36:5; I Corinthians 1:9.

·        God is gentle – Psalm 18:35; Isaiah 40:11, 42:3; II Corinthians 10:1.

·        God is longsuffering – Numbers 14:18; Psalm 78:38; II Peter 3:9.

It is not surprising then that the Holy Spirit inspired Paul to list the fruits of the Spirit required from the redeemed persons, i.e. the Church (Galatians 5:22&23).

19^th Century German philosophy gave rise to a debate concerning Divine personhood. The argument against such personhood stated that to be a person always entails comparison. In other words, to be a person presumes a counterpart which in turn is limited and finite. God, therefore, cannot be a person as He is infinite. However, a counter argument corrects this error: To be a person does not mean to be limited to one’s counterpart, but to be related to such.

The personhood of God is further reinforced by considering the following manner in which He relates to this world:

·         He is incomprehensible: Personhood is ascribed to human beings because of this very thing. We never plumb the depths of the existence of our fellows.

·         He has a will: Human beings are persons because we witness each other exercising self-determination. All of us have goals, purposes, and plans. God is self-determining and He lies beyond our control.

·       He is free: True personhood is connected to freedom. Humans are persons because they act beyond the total control of others. As such we see God as totally beyond our control. Having said that, He is also the source of our freedom.

In Exodus 3:14 God calls Himself “I am”. In so doing “He demonstrates that His not an abstract, unknowable being or nameless force.” [iii]

---

[i] Grenz. Stanley J. Theology for the Community of God. Grand Rapids. Eerdmans. 2000. Pg. 82.

[ii] ibid. Pg. 83.

[iii] Erickson, Millard. Christian Theology. Grand Rapids. Baker. 2003. Pg. 295.

The triune God - II Corinthians 13:14.

The triunity of God is perhaps the most difficult theological concept to grasp. Having said that, this concept is closest to the very heart of the mystery of God.

Christianity stands alone in stating that God is one in three persons of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

The commonly understood word 'trinity' is found nowhere in the Bible. Furthermore, the Bible never once attempts to delineate the concept.

Only the A.V. offers what appears to be an explicit reference to God as triune (I John 5:7).

The Doctrine of the Trinity, as it has become known, was not taught by the original New Testament community. However, the Church, during the patristic period, correctly began to realize that the formulation of this doctrine was necessary as a non-negotiable dimension of the Gospel. Why? The concept of tri-unity lies at the very heart of the Christian understanding of God and is therefore necessary in order to maintain the central message of the Bible.

The doctrine itself is the result of a lengthy process arising from the experience of the community of faith.

The journey towards a doctrine of tri-unity lies rooted in the Old Testament. However, the need only came into view when the first Christians needed to bring together three seemingly separate strands of belief:

1) Monotheism and the issue of the deity of the Father.

The early Church claimed, correctly, that their new movement was a continuation of what God had been doing in the Old Testament era, as the prophets had foretold. At the centre was the belief that God was one and the necessary rejection of the polytheism of the surrounding nations (Deuteronomy 6:4; Isaiah 45:18; cf. James 2:19).

The deity of the Father was accepted by the Church (I Corinthians 8:4, 6; I Timothy 2:5;6). This belief was, at least in part, based on Jesus’ teaching, both spoken and implied (Matthew 6:26-32). Therefore, as far as Jesus was concerned, ‘God’ and ‘Father’ were interchangeable expressions (cf. Matthew 19:23-26; 27:46; Mark 12:17, 24-27).

2) The confession of Jesus' Lordship.

Evidentially the early Church continued the worship of the 'one' God (Acts 3:1ff). However, this 'one' God had revealed Himself in Jesus, the head of the Church and the Lord of all creation (Colossians 1:15ff). The Church thus set forth the belief, that is the assertion of the Divinity and Lordship of Christ (John 1:1; 20:28; Romans 9:5; Titus 2:13).

In keeping with the pattern set by Jesus, His Church differentiated between Him as Son, and the One whom He claimed to be His Father (Romans 15:5&6). It was these distinctions that led to the use of the terms Father and Son.

The idea of God as Father is not totally foreign to the Old Testament (II Samuel 7:14; Jeremiah 31:20; Isaiah 63:16 & 64:8&9). In so doing, the Old Testament saints were not implying a solely masculine deity, for they also spoke of God's motherly care.

Jesus not only spoke of the Father's parental care of creation, but something more filial in that He called His Father, "Abba". Jesus thus invited His Body into a ‘sonship’ participation. It is for this reason that the terms 'Father' and 'Son' became embedded in the language of the Church. To that end, the early Church developed a hymn that proclaimed the deity of Jesus. Paul uses this hymn to underpin his teaching of Christ to the Philippian believers (Philippians 2:5-11). N.B. One who is equal with God, must be God (cf. Hebrews 1:1-5; John 20:28).

3) The experience of the presence of the Holy Spirit.

In addition to all of the above, the early Church also asserted that God was now present among them in the Person of the Holy Spirit. This came about because of an ongoing experience of a personal, divine reality within the Church that was neither the Father nor the Son.

a) The writers spoke of the Spirit in personal terms.

b) They employed masculine pronouns for what in the Greek language was actually neuter.

c) They attributed aspects of personality to the Spirit: intellect, will, and emotion (I Corinthians 2:10; 12:11; Romans 8:26&27).

d) In addition to seeing the Spirit as personal, they also accepted the Spirit as divine (Acts 5:3&4).

e) While the early Church closely linked the Holy Spirit with Jesus Christ (II Corinthians 3:17&18), they also made a definite distinction between the Spirit and both the Father and the Son (II Corinthians 13:14; I Peter 1:2). This distinction was also evident in the baptismal formula (Matthew 28:19).

Jesus Himself made it clear that the Holy Spirit was God and that would become evident in His role after Jesus’ ascension (John 3:8; 16:8-11). Paul wrote of the role of the Holy Spirit with regard to the gifts (I Corinthians 12:4-11).

So, the early Church began to integrate into a composite understanding of these three dimensions of their experience. Therefore, the early Church confessed the one true God of the Old Testament. They proclaimed the Lordship of Jesus Christ who differentiated Himself from the Father. And they knew the reality of the ongoing presence of God through the Holy Spirit who is distinct from both Father and Son.

In spite of all the evidence and discussion above, we would be wise to heed the following:

“It appears that Tertullian was right in affirming that the doctrine of the Trinity must be divinely revealed, nut humanly constructed. It is so absurd from a human standpoint that no one would have invented it. We do not hold the doctrine of the Trinity because it is self-evident or logically cogent. We hold it because God has revealed that this is what He is like. As someone has said of this doctrine:

Try to explain it, and you’ll lose your mind. But try to deny it, and you’ll lose your soul.” [Erickson, Millard. Christian Theology. Grand Rapids. Baker. 2003. Pg.367].

The Apostles' Creed

The basic creed of Reformed churches, as most familiarly known, is called the Apostles' Creed. It has received this title because of its great antiquity; it dates from very early times in the Church, a half century or so from the last writings of the New Testament.

---

I believe in God, the Father Almighty,
    the Maker of heaven and earth,
    and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord:

Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost,
    born of the virgin Mary,
    suffered under Pontius Pilate,
    was crucified, dead, and buried;

He descended into hell. The third day He arose again from the dead;

He ascended into heaven,
    and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty;
    from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Ghost;
    the holy catholic church;
    the communion of saints;
    the forgiveness of sins;
    the resurrection of the body;
    and the life everlasting.

Amen.

Knowing God is. (Part 1 of 4)

A principle confession of faith is our acknowledgment of God. i.e. God exists (Isaiah 45:22). Not only does He exist, but He is ultimately in control of all creation. The first focus of any theology then has to be the doctrine of God. Doctrine, in this instance, means: The exploration of the reality of the God whom we have come to know in Jesus Christ (Colossians 2:9; cf. Hebrews 1:1-3).

Hebrews 11:6 is the foundational Scripture to our discussion. For, when all is said and done, one must believe that He is God and that He does, in fact, exist. Our entire lives and the way we interact with the world is premised on the fact that we have come to know the only true God. As Christians we believe that we know, personally, the God who chooses to be known by His creatures (Genesis 3:8; John 14:23).

This position of faith is not isolated to each one of us as individuals, but it has marked the people of faith for generations and we are thus linked with the faith community that spans the generations (Hebrews 12:1).

Although our faith in God is based on personal experience and faith, our position is not universally shared. So, in pursuit of an apologetic position, it is necessary to consider the possibility of faith. To do so we will focus on two questions that are very much in vogue in our day:

1) Is there a God?
2) Can humans know God?

God's existence is foundational to the faith of the Christian community. It is this claim of the existence of God that is under attack from many quarters. Questioning the existence of God is nothing new (Psalm 14:1, 53:1). Here we must sound a cautionary note, the atheism of the ancient Near East cannot be equated with its intellectual counterpart of modern western philosophy. The latter was not an option in the ancient world. The atheism mentioned by the Psalmist did not focus on the intellectual, but on the practical and the moral, i.e. the fool lived as if there was no God. The Scriptures do not acknowledge the existence of atheism.

Having said that, they do recognize a wilfull and thus culpable suppressing of the knowledge of God (Romans 1:18). In the first-century Christians were considered atheists as they rejected the Roman pantheon (I Corinthians 8:5&6). As noted above, the modern intellectual scepticism was not the issue but rather the conflicts that existed between rival tribal gods. So the question of the existence of God focussed on which god was the most worthy of worship. The 'spiritual' climate of the ancient Near East was marked by the worship of many gods. The relative strength of this variety of deities was measured by world events. The mightier the god the mightier the works that were evident.

Knowing this adds insight into the Exodus account of the ten plagues (Exodus 7ff). Each of the plagues clearly displayed to all the superiority of Yahweh over the gods of Egypt. If that were not enough, Israel's Red Sea deliverance was a further sign of Yahweh's power (Exodus 15:11-16). A similar act at the River Jordan struck fear into the watching Canaanites (Joshua 5:1). A further 'comparative' act took place at Mount Carmel involving the prophet Elijah (I Kings 18).

One mighty act above all others stood out to the ancients and that was the granting of victory in battle. Such military clashes were so much more than a feat or arms, they were a clash between rival deities (cf. II Kings 18:32-35). Subsequent military reversals for Israel and Judah were explained by the prophets: Such defeats were not evidence of Yahweh's weakness as compared with the other deities, but rather His exercise of judgement upon their sin.

The Old Testament prophets were united in their mission to proclaim Yahweh as the true God. It was for this reason that they relentlessly spoke out against idolatry in the land (E.G. Isaiah 44:9-17; Ezekiel 6:1-14). They were eventually successful as the remnant of Judah that returned from Babylon were committed monotheists.

The issue of Yahweh appearing, as it were, as Judah's God posed a problem of its own: Was He Judah's alone, or was He for the whole of humanity. This problem was only able to raise its head as Israel had so clearly failed to be Yahweh's representative to the surrounding nations, a task for which they were chosen (Exodus 19:4-6; Isaiah 43:12). This issue was not resolved until the advent of the New Testament, but a post-exilic prophet did look forward to that time albeit through apocalyptic symbolism (Zechariah 14:16). 

The early Church inherited the debate as was highlighted in Acts 15. Paul built upon the fact established by the Jerusalem Council by writing that the idols were nothing (I Corinthians 8:4-7) or even demonic (I Corinthians 10:18-22). So, the Body of Christ affirmed that Yahweh was indeed the one and only universal God. He, the God of the patriarchs, was the Father of the Lord Jesus Christ. As such, He alone was worthy of universal worship. The question then has evolved from which tribal god is stronger, and thus worthy of worship, to the intellectual question concerning the very existence of God.

As Christianity spread west it encountered Greek philosophy. It found that the great philosophers embraced a type of monotheism, for they did acknowledge a creator God beyond the pantheon of gods that the common people worshipped. The immediate question that would have arisen among the philosophers was the nature of relationship between the God of the Christians and the 'First Cause' of the world that the Greek philosophers acknowledged. Paul obviously recognized this situation in his encounter upon Mars Hill (Acts 17:22-34).