I've been doing my best to read material by learned trinitarians lately. This coming up weekend I'm engaging in a debate with a Messianic Jewish Rabbi on the doctrine of the Deity of the Messiah. When dealing with Messianics you do at times encounter teachers who have no qualms with professing what classic trinitarianism already holds to. At other times the verbage Messianics use is somewhat hazy compared to modern scholarship in the area of defining just how "many" Yahweh really is.
----------------------------- I was talking to my oldest daughter yesterday (almost 10) about the Trinity. She was telling me that her school cirriculum has trinitarian teachings within it. I knew this of course, and my wife and I pretty much have the children skip right over this kind of "Biblical" teaching. I asked her if she understood anything she had read about the Trinity. "All I know Dad," she said, "is that they believe there is one God in three persons." I then asked her if she believed this contradicted the shema. She answered quickly and directly, "Yes Sir." I teach my children to quote the shema at least twice daily. I want to engrain the teaching of Deuteronomy 6:4 into my children's minds. I want them to really believe in the Mighty One of Israel, Yahweh, and in doing so believe He is all alone; believe He is really one. To my children though, this is no great task. When they read Deuteronomy 6:4 they have no problem understanding the meaning of the verse. One really does mean one to them, but it seems that Christian theology today, one can sometimes really mean two or three. I have to ask that if one really means three, what does three really mean? Maybe a dozen? It is nothing short of bizarre what theologians attempt to do with the Hebrew word for one: echad. In Hebrew this is the numeral one. Brown, Drivers, and Briggs Hebrew-English Lexicon (a standard authority for Bible study) defines the word as follows: 1) one (number) 1a) one (number) 1b) each, every 1c) a certain 1d) an (indefinite article) 1e) only, once, once for all 1f) one...another, the one...the other, one after another, one by one 1g) first 1h) eleven (in combination), eleventh (ordinal) According to this lexicon (and others I might add) the word echad means a numeral one. When small Jewish children learn to count today they are taught to begin counting by saying, echad. There are several crystal clear examples in the Tanak (Old Testament) of the numeral oneness of the word echad. One of my favorite examples is Ecclesiastes 4:9-12. "Two are better than one; because they have a good reward for their labour. For if they fall, the onewill lift up his fellow: but woe to him that is alone when he falleth; for he hath not another to help him up. Again, if two lie together, then they have heat: but how can one be warm alone? And if one prevail against him, two shall withstand him; and a threefold cord is not quickly broken." Here we see the word echad being translated as "one" and "alone." Are people really going to argue about the word alone too? Arguments for a "compound unity" about echad stem from somewhat of a "flim flam" by the presenters of the teaching. "One flock" to them indicates that the word echad somehow is speaking of a compound of sorts, a "uni-plural" in the verbage of certain teachers. However, it is the collective noun "flock" that is plural, while the word one retains its meaning of numeral oneness. "One flock" most certainly means one flock and not two flocks. "One cluster of grapes" doesn't mean "two clusters of grapes" and so on. The Hebrew word echad functions pretty much like our English word one. The word "one" in English means a numerical one, but it can be used in certain contexts to denote a unity between persons. For instance Genesis 2:24 says that the husband and wife are "one flesh" (not two fleshes). This means that the husband and wife are unified in marriage. Nothing in this dismisses the numerical oneness of the word one, it only shows how the word one can be used in a different context. Our English versions of the Bible show forth this meaning in 1 Corinthians 3:8 (KJV) were both he that planteth (the spiritual seed) and he that watereth are one. They are united. Trinitarian theology believes that God is one in being or essence but three in person or subsistence. Some trinitarian theologians are meticulously careful to define the word person in their declaration. They do this in a great attempt to maintain strict monotheism (belief in one sole God). However, the Bible just does not teach that Yahweh is three in "subsistence." Rather the teaching of Scripture is that God is one in being and one in person. What I mean can be somewhat illustrated by recognizing your "being" and your "person." I am a human being, that is "what" I am. Who I am is Matthew Janzen; I am one person. This illustrates to some degree what the Bible teaches about Yahweh. He is "God being" but at the same time He is one person - the Father. This is why passages such as 2 Kings 19:15a state: "O Yahweh God of Israel ... thou art the God, even thou alone..." You know, theologians can argue "till the cows come home" about what "echad" means in Deuteronomy 6:4, but let us not forget that the Bible is its own best commentary. Many times we find the Scriptures stating a commandment and then later on in Scripture the commandments meaning or greater definition is given. Such is the case with the shema. Go and read Mark 12:28-32 where a Judahite (Jewish) scribe comes to Yeshua and asks him what is the most important commandment. Yeshua quotes the shemaand the scribe responds by saying, "Teacher, you've answered correctly, for there is one God, and there is none other but He." Notice that this Judahite scribe believed the shema gave a numerical oneness, an alone-ness, to Yahweh. Yeshua did not argue with the scribe, He rather complimented the scribe on his understanding. Deuteronomy 6:4 most assuredly doesn't have two or three persons being unified, it rather has Yahweh proclaiming to be one in number. Take note that the scribe did not believe Yeshua was the Yahweh of the shema. The scribe believed the shema spoke of someone other than Yeshua. Yeshua agreed with the scribe. Yeshua thus did not believe that He was really Yahweh, the one God of Israel. Do you agree with Yeshua and the scribe? Matthew Janzen
0 Comments
I meet alot of people each week. The business I'm in probably leads me to an average of meeting 8 to 10 people each day. If I follow the Bible's admonition to witness about the truth to others (Isaiah 43:10-13; Acts 1:8; Luke 14:15-24), I must make it a point to speak to others about their eternal destiny, and this includes knowing Yeshua the Messiah, and knowing who He really is and what He really stands for.
One Scripture I use alot in teaching others about Yeshua is John 3:16. I choose this Scripture because it is very well known and often even non church goers can quote it in part and sometimes in whole. After either reading or quoting the verse I ask the people a few questions. "Who loved the world?" The reply: God. "Who did Yahweh (God) give?" The reply: His Son. "Must we believe in His Son according to this verse, in order to have eternal life?" The reply: Yes, that's what it says. This is typically how the conversation goes, and I think that if a conversation goes like this, you are on the right track. I would like to focus on one singular aspect of John 3:16 now and that is that Yahweh (whom the world generally calls God) gave His Son. Yahweh really did give us His Son. I have pressed this point with many people and up until I get into more detailed specifics people are always in agreement. Yet, when I ask the average church goer if "Jesus is God" they will almost automatically respond, "Yes," or "Absolutely!" Yet at the same time they will confess that "Jesus is the Son of God," or more properly, "Yeshua is the Son of Yahweh". So I then go back to John 3:16 showing them that the text does not say that "God gave God" or that "God gave Himself" but that "Yahweh gave His Son". It's quite plain. See, many people profess with their mouth that they believe Yeshua to be the Son of Yahweh, but their heart is far from such a belief. They rather stress the issue of what's commonly called the "Deity of Christ" believing that Yeshua's identity is "God". That's where the stress lies with most professing Christians. The stress is not placed on Yeshua being the Son of God, but rather God Himself. Is that the stress that Yeshua placed on His identity? I do not believe so. Yeshua asked His disciples a question about who He was. Matthew 16:13-18 records the episode for us. He basically stated, "Who do you say that I the Son of man am?" One of Yeshua's disciples was bold enough to answer the question and he (Peter) answered by saying "You are the Messiah the Son of the Living Mighty One (God)." Yeshua responded to Peter's answer by saying that flesh and blood did not reveal this to Peter, but rather, the Father in heaven. It was the Father in heaven, Yahweh, that revealed to Peter who Yeshua was. I'm going to say here that I do not for one second believe that the Father in heaven was wrong, inaccurate, or trying to pull the wool over the eyes of humanity. Yeshua really is the Son of Yahweh. Yeshua went on to say that the church would be built upon this foundation, and understanding this is critical. Peter's revelation, for it to be a foundation, had to be the most absolute revelation of who Yeshua was and is. In other words, this was not something partial; you do not build upon a partial foundation. The question had been asked by the Savior Himself, and the answer was given - the complete answer. Yeshua really was Yahweh's Son, not Yahweh. There is a distinct difference in saying: (1) Yahweh (2) Son of Yahweh Statement one includes one party, while statement two includes two parties. Yahweh really did give us His Son. John 3:16 really is telling the truth. You know, if you buy a new car and you want to know something about the engine you should flip the manual over to the section about the engine. Yes, you might learn something about the engine by reading about the car in general or by reading another section or two that's somewhat related. But the most complete and pertinent information you'll find about the engine is guess where? In the section about the engine of course. If we want to know who Yeshua is, wouldn't you think the best place to find out would be where He Himself actually asked people the question "Who am I?" Wouldn't you think that this would be the best place to go to find out who He really is or what His identity is? Especially in light of the fact that He applauded Peter for the answer given in Matthew 16? I hope and pray that people will really believe that Yeshua is the Son of Yahweh. Their eternal destiny depends upon it. Matthew Janzen I once heard a man give a speech in which he commented that in the early stages of his life the furthest subject from his mind was Christology. A person speaking this word to him may have caused his mind to jump to the study of crystals, or something other than what the word actually means.
Christology is the study of who "the Christ" really and truly is; His person and work. I've been accused at times of having a low Christology myself, but this accusation generally comes from people who have not made an honest attempt to ask me what I believe about the Messiah. It is true that I do not believe in the concept of the Trinity or in Trinitarian doctrine. I do not believe that the Almighty exists as one being in three distinct persons. I do not believe what many in the professing Christian world hold to: "Jesus is God." If that causes one to stop pursuing anything else I believe about Christ, I can only say that I feel this is because of what a person has been taught to believe, and not because of what a person believes based upon examination of Biblical text. What led me to write on this is a study I've been doing in Colossians recently, specifically Colossians 2. Within this chapter (as well as chapter 1) we find the preeminence of Christ and the centrality of Christ. We find Paul urging Christians in Colossae to not be deceived into thinking that their power, holiness, righteousness, etc. comes by other means than through Christ. I was reading through the text of Colossians 2 again the other morning and as I read, Colossians 2:9 stood out to me. It announces to us that in Christ dwelleth all the fulness of Divinity. This is an outstanding statement! How could the entirety of the Almighty dwell within humanity; I'm not sure, but that is what the Scripture says. This same strand appears in the earlier chapter of this epistle of Paul (Colossians 1:19) as well as in the words of John the Baptist when he said that the Spirit (of Yahweh) dwelt in the Messiah without measure (John 3:34). Truly, the Almighty was in the Messiah reconciling the world unto himself (1 Corinthians 5:17-21). Yahweh dwelt within Yeshua in a way in which no other had been indwelt before nor ever will be after; Yeshua really was the Son of Almighty Yahweh. Matthew Janzen |
AuthorBlog by Matthew Janzen. Lover of Yahweh, Yeshua, my wife and 5 children. All else is commentary. Archives
December 2023
Categories
All
|