The Number Three
- Thread starter Chica
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Here is the background of Moses unusual privileged access to God. I hope this will help you put that event in perspective.
By oldhermit
I. The Severity of Israel's Sin, 1-7
A. God gives instructions for the day of departure from Sinai, 1-2. Although instruction is given for their departure here in chapter 33, they do not actually depart Sinai until Numbers 10:11-13. They remain camped at Mt Sinai for ten months.
1. "Take them to the land." It is clear from this command that in spite of Israel's sin, God still intends to give them the land.
2. "I will drive out the inhabitants from before you." It is clear from this promise that in spite of Israel's idolatry God still intends to clear the land of its occupants but, this was to be accomplished through dispatching of an unidentified angel which is so designated by the use if the indefinite article without any definition of attributes such as were used in 23:20-23. The Lord himself will no longer go before them. God has now distanced himself from the presence of the people.
B. The immediate impact of Israel's sin, 3-7 - Will God renew the covenant? How will God restore the relationship?
1. Loss of consecration results in broken fellowship. God withdraws his presence from the people. Israel has made their presence intolerable. "I will not go up in your midst because you are an obstinate people and I might destroy you along the way."
2. The people obeyed the command of the Lord to put off of their ornaments as they await the decision of the Lord concerning them.
a. "If I were to go in your midst for one moment, I would destroy you."
b. "Put of your ornaments from you that I may know what I shall do with you." This is to be a long term statute. They did not wear their jewelry from that day onward as a constant sign of repentance.
3. The tent is moved outside the camp. This is not the Tabernacle but apparently a tent owned by Moses that served as a temporary tent of meeting. The tabernacle has not yet been built. LXX "and Moses took his tent...and called it the tent of meeting."
a. Israel's communication with God is cut off.
b. Everything has now been put on hold.
* The plans for the building of the tabernacle
* The appointment of the priesthood
* God's instruction to Moses from the Mt.
* Even their system of tabernacle worship is halted until God decides how to resolve this matter.
II. Moses and the Tent of Meeting Outside the Camp, 7-11
A. Now, those who sought the Lord must go outside the camp to him for he will not come into the camp lest they be destroyed.
B. The impact of this separation upon the people seems to have been profound.
1. Whenever Moses left the camp to go out to the tent of meeting, the people stood and watched in reverence until Moses entered the tent. The people now seem to have a whole new respect for this man Moses.
2. The Pillar of cloud would then descend and stand at the entrance of the tent and the people would again stand and worship. There is a renewed reverence for the Lord.
C. The Lord spoke to Moses "face to face," or friend to friend. In other words, God is not speaking to Moses from out of heaven but in a very direct and intimate face to face encounter. There is no separation here. What do you think God and Moses were discussing in in the tent of meeting? Moses is in mediation for Israel over the question of whether or not God will renew the covenant. We are not told how long this continued. Just from the language of the text it seems to have continued for a numbers of days.
D. In the absence of Moses from the tent, Joshua would always remain, apparently as thesentinelor guard of the tent of meeting.
III. Moses' Pleads With God, 12-23
A. Moses pleads with God to change his mind and go before the people. You have said:
1. You have known me by name.
2. I have found favor in your sight.
If this is true, then let me know your ways. Also, consider the fact that these are your people.
B. God relents and promises that his presence will go with Moses, 14. "My presence will go with you." Or, "My face will go and I will give you rest."
1. "Face" = the personal presence of Jehovah. This is understood from Isaiah 63:9, "In all their affliction he was afflicted and the angel of his presence (face) saved them; In his love and in his mercy he redeemed them and he lifted them and carried them all the days of old."
2. Moses is not willing to be satisfied with this. He continues his pleading on behalf of the people, 15.
"If your face / presence is not among us, do not lead us up from here. For how then can it be known that I have found favor in your sight, I and your people? Is it not by your going with us, so that we, I and your people, may be distinguished from all the other people who are upon the face of the earth?" God relents and changes his mind. He now agrees to go before the people. God promises to do this thing for Moses based on the intimate relationship he has with Moses. "This thing I will do also." "Also," represents an additional clause to the agreement. In addition to going before Moses, he also agrees to go before the people. In all of this, Moses fulfilled his function as the mediatotial type. He has petitioned the Lord on behalf of the people and God had accepted.
C. Moses seeks confirmation from God as a sealing of the terms of the agreement. "Show me your glory." This is not a simple matter of curiosity on the part of Moses. This was a means of confirming the restoration of covenant. God always confirms covenant. What Moses requested was a revelation of Jehovah himself that went beyond any encounter Moses had previously had with God. He wanted to see God without any protective barriers between himself and the unshielded presence of the Almighty. Moses did not simply wish to see another manifestation of God. He wanted to see God in his actual glory, not just a representational form of God. Moses is not requesting to see some anthropomorphic form or some form that accommodates the frailness of the human frame such as the burning bush or the pillar of cloud or of fire. Moses wants to see God himself. God agrees. So, just what is it that God shows Moses?
IV. God Reveals Himself to Moses yet, in Very Limited Expressions, 33:19 - 34:9.
Moses needed to first develop a visual aid to represent the nature of God.
A. What Moses asked to see was the glory of God. What God said he would show Moses to satisfy his request was:
1. "I myself will make all my goodness to pass before you."
2. "I will proclaim the name of Jehovah before you."
3. God would then declare his graciousness and his compassion. These are all extended moral attributes that are characteristic of his glory.
B. The prohibition - “You cannot see my face, for no man can see Me and live!”
In his natural state, God does not have a back or front as we understand the use of these terms. Since back and face are anthropomorphic terms, how should they be understood in the context; the lesser as opposed to the greater? How is back defined in the context?
1. Face - the greater - intrinsic attributes - These cannot be seen
2. Back - the lesser - extended attributes - These can only be seen provisionally.
C. God's provision to shield Moses from the presence of the Lord
"Behold, there is a place by me, and you shall stand there on the rock; and it will come about, while my glory is passing by, that I will put you in the cleft of the rock and cover you with my hand until I have passed by. “Then I will take my hand away and you shall see my back, but my face shall not be seen.” The rendering of "back" - אֲחֹרָ֑י - offers two possibilities.
1. "The back of me, or back parts." In other words, Moses would be permitted to see only the least glorious of God's attributes. These would be the moral attributes of God, representing the "back" or lesser of God's glory.
2. "That which is left behind." Moses would not be permitted to see even the least glorious of God's attributes but, would only be allowed to see where these attributes had "passes by" witnessing only the residual glory from those attributes. Whatever God allowed Moses to see would be all that Moses would be able to endure in the flesh. This seems to be thus defined in the text.
3. What Moses could not see were those attributes that characterize God's intrinsic nature.
D. God passes before Moses.
"So he cut out two stone tablets like the former ones, and Moses rose up early in the morning and went up to Mount Sinai, as the Lord had commanded him, and he took two stone tablets in his hand. The Lord descended in the cloud and stood there with him as he called upon the name of the Lord. Then the Lord passed by in front of him and proclaimed, “The Lord, the Lord God, compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in loving kindness and truth; who keeps loving kindness for thousands, who forgives iniquity, transgression and sin; yet He will by no means leave the guilty unpunished, visiting the iniquity of fathers on the children and on the grandchildren to the third and fourth generations.”
1. Moses ascends the mountain to the place the Lord instructed.
2. God then descended in the cloud just as he had at other times.
3. God stood there with Moses as Moses called upon the name of the Lord.
4. Then the Lord "passed by in front of him."
5. As he "passed by in front of him" the Lord places Moses in the cleft of the rock and shielded him with his hand against the glory that was passing before him.
6. Then the Lord begins to declare his name and his extended attributes of goodness.
a. His compassion
b. His graciousness
c. His slowness to anger
d. His abundance of loving kindness
e. His abundance in truth
f. His forgiveness
g. His justice and judgment
E. Moses Response to the glory of God
"Moses made haste to bow low toward the earth and worship. He said, if now I have found favor in your sight, O Lord, I pray, let the Lord go along in our midst, even though the people are so obstinate, and pardon our iniquity and our sin, and take us as your own possession.” This is a plea to renew the fellowship and the covenant - "Take us as your own possession." God sealed and ratified the bargain with Moses by the revelation of his own presence in a very unique way that had never been seen before by any man and has never been seen by any man since. This is an unparalleled event in human history. All natural boundaries between the two worlds have been suspended for one man.
By oldhermit
I. The Severity of Israel's Sin, 1-7
A. God gives instructions for the day of departure from Sinai, 1-2. Although instruction is given for their departure here in chapter 33, they do not actually depart Sinai until Numbers 10:11-13. They remain camped at Mt Sinai for ten months.
1. "Take them to the land." It is clear from this command that in spite of Israel's sin, God still intends to give them the land.
2. "I will drive out the inhabitants from before you." It is clear from this promise that in spite of Israel's idolatry God still intends to clear the land of its occupants but, this was to be accomplished through dispatching of an unidentified angel which is so designated by the use if the indefinite article without any definition of attributes such as were used in 23:20-23. The Lord himself will no longer go before them. God has now distanced himself from the presence of the people.
B. The immediate impact of Israel's sin, 3-7 - Will God renew the covenant? How will God restore the relationship?
1. Loss of consecration results in broken fellowship. God withdraws his presence from the people. Israel has made their presence intolerable. "I will not go up in your midst because you are an obstinate people and I might destroy you along the way."
2. The people obeyed the command of the Lord to put off of their ornaments as they await the decision of the Lord concerning them.
a. "If I were to go in your midst for one moment, I would destroy you."
b. "Put of your ornaments from you that I may know what I shall do with you." This is to be a long term statute. They did not wear their jewelry from that day onward as a constant sign of repentance.
3. The tent is moved outside the camp. This is not the Tabernacle but apparently a tent owned by Moses that served as a temporary tent of meeting. The tabernacle has not yet been built. LXX "and Moses took his tent...and called it the tent of meeting."
a. Israel's communication with God is cut off.
b. Everything has now been put on hold.
* The plans for the building of the tabernacle
* The appointment of the priesthood
* God's instruction to Moses from the Mt.
* Even their system of tabernacle worship is halted until God decides how to resolve this matter.
II. Moses and the Tent of Meeting Outside the Camp, 7-11
A. Now, those who sought the Lord must go outside the camp to him for he will not come into the camp lest they be destroyed.
B. The impact of this separation upon the people seems to have been profound.
1. Whenever Moses left the camp to go out to the tent of meeting, the people stood and watched in reverence until Moses entered the tent. The people now seem to have a whole new respect for this man Moses.
2. The Pillar of cloud would then descend and stand at the entrance of the tent and the people would again stand and worship. There is a renewed reverence for the Lord.
C. The Lord spoke to Moses "face to face," or friend to friend. In other words, God is not speaking to Moses from out of heaven but in a very direct and intimate face to face encounter. There is no separation here. What do you think God and Moses were discussing in in the tent of meeting? Moses is in mediation for Israel over the question of whether or not God will renew the covenant. We are not told how long this continued. Just from the language of the text it seems to have continued for a numbers of days.
D. In the absence of Moses from the tent, Joshua would always remain, apparently as thesentinelor guard of the tent of meeting.
III. Moses' Pleads With God, 12-23
A. Moses pleads with God to change his mind and go before the people. You have said:
1. You have known me by name.
2. I have found favor in your sight.
If this is true, then let me know your ways. Also, consider the fact that these are your people.
B. God relents and promises that his presence will go with Moses, 14. "My presence will go with you." Or, "My face will go and I will give you rest."
1. "Face" = the personal presence of Jehovah. This is understood from Isaiah 63:9, "In all their affliction he was afflicted and the angel of his presence (face) saved them; In his love and in his mercy he redeemed them and he lifted them and carried them all the days of old."
2. Moses is not willing to be satisfied with this. He continues his pleading on behalf of the people, 15.
"If your face / presence is not among us, do not lead us up from here. For how then can it be known that I have found favor in your sight, I and your people? Is it not by your going with us, so that we, I and your people, may be distinguished from all the other people who are upon the face of the earth?" God relents and changes his mind. He now agrees to go before the people. God promises to do this thing for Moses based on the intimate relationship he has with Moses. "This thing I will do also." "Also," represents an additional clause to the agreement. In addition to going before Moses, he also agrees to go before the people. In all of this, Moses fulfilled his function as the mediatotial type. He has petitioned the Lord on behalf of the people and God had accepted.
C. Moses seeks confirmation from God as a sealing of the terms of the agreement. "Show me your glory." This is not a simple matter of curiosity on the part of Moses. This was a means of confirming the restoration of covenant. God always confirms covenant. What Moses requested was a revelation of Jehovah himself that went beyond any encounter Moses had previously had with God. He wanted to see God without any protective barriers between himself and the unshielded presence of the Almighty. Moses did not simply wish to see another manifestation of God. He wanted to see God in his actual glory, not just a representational form of God. Moses is not requesting to see some anthropomorphic form or some form that accommodates the frailness of the human frame such as the burning bush or the pillar of cloud or of fire. Moses wants to see God himself. God agrees. So, just what is it that God shows Moses?
IV. God Reveals Himself to Moses yet, in Very Limited Expressions, 33:19 - 34:9.
Moses needed to first develop a visual aid to represent the nature of God.
A. What Moses asked to see was the glory of God. What God said he would show Moses to satisfy his request was:
1. "I myself will make all my goodness to pass before you."
2. "I will proclaim the name of Jehovah before you."
3. God would then declare his graciousness and his compassion. These are all extended moral attributes that are characteristic of his glory.
B. The prohibition - “You cannot see my face, for no man can see Me and live!”
In his natural state, God does not have a back or front as we understand the use of these terms. Since back and face are anthropomorphic terms, how should they be understood in the context; the lesser as opposed to the greater? How is back defined in the context?
1. Face - the greater - intrinsic attributes - These cannot be seen
2. Back - the lesser - extended attributes - These can only be seen provisionally.
C. God's provision to shield Moses from the presence of the Lord
"Behold, there is a place by me, and you shall stand there on the rock; and it will come about, while my glory is passing by, that I will put you in the cleft of the rock and cover you with my hand until I have passed by. “Then I will take my hand away and you shall see my back, but my face shall not be seen.” The rendering of "back" - אֲחֹרָ֑י - offers two possibilities.
1. "The back of me, or back parts." In other words, Moses would be permitted to see only the least glorious of God's attributes. These would be the moral attributes of God, representing the "back" or lesser of God's glory.
2. "That which is left behind." Moses would not be permitted to see even the least glorious of God's attributes but, would only be allowed to see where these attributes had "passes by" witnessing only the residual glory from those attributes. Whatever God allowed Moses to see would be all that Moses would be able to endure in the flesh. This seems to be thus defined in the text.
3. What Moses could not see were those attributes that characterize God's intrinsic nature.
D. God passes before Moses.
"So he cut out two stone tablets like the former ones, and Moses rose up early in the morning and went up to Mount Sinai, as the Lord had commanded him, and he took two stone tablets in his hand. The Lord descended in the cloud and stood there with him as he called upon the name of the Lord. Then the Lord passed by in front of him and proclaimed, “The Lord, the Lord God, compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in loving kindness and truth; who keeps loving kindness for thousands, who forgives iniquity, transgression and sin; yet He will by no means leave the guilty unpunished, visiting the iniquity of fathers on the children and on the grandchildren to the third and fourth generations.”
1. Moses ascends the mountain to the place the Lord instructed.
2. God then descended in the cloud just as he had at other times.
3. God stood there with Moses as Moses called upon the name of the Lord.
4. Then the Lord "passed by in front of him."
5. As he "passed by in front of him" the Lord places Moses in the cleft of the rock and shielded him with his hand against the glory that was passing before him.
6. Then the Lord begins to declare his name and his extended attributes of goodness.
a. His compassion
b. His graciousness
c. His slowness to anger
d. His abundance of loving kindness
e. His abundance in truth
f. His forgiveness
g. His justice and judgment
E. Moses Response to the glory of God
"Moses made haste to bow low toward the earth and worship. He said, if now I have found favor in your sight, O Lord, I pray, let the Lord go along in our midst, even though the people are so obstinate, and pardon our iniquity and our sin, and take us as your own possession.” This is a plea to renew the fellowship and the covenant - "Take us as your own possession." God sealed and ratified the bargain with Moses by the revelation of his own presence in a very unique way that had never been seen before by any man and has never been seen by any man since. This is an unparalleled event in human history. All natural boundaries between the two worlds have been suspended for one man.
Old Hermit, Your post is ridiculously loooooooooong! I never read posts that long. I loose interest before I'm half way through.
My question was pretty simple. Microscoped said:
And I replied:
So what did Moses and the others think they saw in in Ex.24:10.
Could they have been allowed to see God the Son, because Jesus said no man has seen God at any time.
My question was pretty simple. Microscoped said:
And I replied:
So what did Moses and the others think they saw in in Ex.24:10.
Could they have been allowed to see God the Son, because Jesus said no man has seen God at any time.
You have his the nail on the head Dan. This is exactly what the Greek conveys. Consider John's choice of words.
By oldhermit
The Logos is the source of enlightenment - something is lacking on the part of man; something is not understood. In order for man to expand his understanding of God, he must first be given access to the mind of God. The function of the Logosis to link the mind of man to the mind of God so that man might be able to think the way God thinks: to reason the way God reasons. (Bearing in mind of course, this is only after a limited fashion. After all, man is still a finite creature). What will be needed on the part of man is the realization that his thinking and reasoning processes are veiled in the darkness of intellectual blindness; not just about God, but about his own place within the eternal continuum, and even his relationship to the natural world of which he is a part. In verse 18, John says, “no man has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.” The word ἑώthat is translated here as ‘seen’ in most of the English translations is third person singular of ὁά which, according to Thayer, has three basic definitions. First, it means to see with the eyes. Secondly, it means to see with the mind, to know, to perceive. Thirdly, it means to become acquainted with throughpragmaticexperience (The 1981 New Thayer’s Greek English Lexicon, p 451).
If John is arguing from the first definition, this needs to be understood in the light of pragmatic Old Testament examples. We know from the many examples of theophonic manifestations in the Old Testament that God has repeatedly presented himself to man in a number of ways. At times, God availed himself only to man’s auditory senses. He spoke to Adam, to Cain, to Noah, to the Hebrew patriarchs, to Moses, to the prophets, and to others. Sometimes he visited himself upon man in the form of dreams or visions as to the prophet Isaiah in Isaiah chapter six. Other times, he appears as objects such as the cloud or the pillar of fire that went before Israel in the wilderness. Still, there are other times when he visited man in human form. There are some eight accounts of this type of theophany found in the Old Testament.
The word ‘theophany’ is derived from two Greek words, ὸmeaning God and ήmeaning sound or voice. A theophany then is a hearing of the voice of God. Theophonic experiences in scripture assume many forms, yet all seem to have a singular function. They communicate the will of God to man. They provide man with a point of reference that man can comprehend. In so doing, God is demonstrating compassion for the limitations of the human mind to understand things that are beyond his ability to comprehend. In some theophonic experiences, God will accommodate only man’s sense of hearing. One only heard the voice of God. God speaking to Noah in Genesis 6 is just such an example. Another is Genesis 12 where God spoke to Abraham. Sometimes, these theophanies would be accompanied by some type of material phenomenon such as fire, wind, or earthquake as in the cases of Moses in Exodus 3, the nation of Israel in Exodus 13 and Elijah in 1Kings 19. Each of these accompanying natural phenomena would appeal to a broader range of physical senses as God sometimes chose to speak in these things. Still, at other times, God chose to assume an anthropomorphic form as in Genesis 18 when he appeared to Abraham in the company of two angels, all in human form. For further reference, one might examine these examples of anthropomorphic theophanies. What appears in each of these is the repeated phrase “The Angel of Jehovah” 22:15-18; 31:11-13; 48:15-16, Joshua 5:13-15, Judges 6:11-24, and Judges 13:15-23.
In each example where the phrase “The Angel of Jehovah” is used, God is represented as the messenger of Jehovah. The phrase “The Angel of Jehovah” is only used to describe the spokesman of deity. This term is never applied to anyone else in scripture. He is always functioning as the spokesman of the divine triad. In each case, this is deity appearing in human form. In every example, those to whom The Angel of Jehovah appeared always understood, at some point, that he was God and they honored him as such. The Angel of Jehovah will always assume divine authority in each of these Old Testament exemplars. He will always be seen serving as the agent of communication, hence the term “The Angel of Jehovah.” He is angelic not in nature but in function. In nature, he is God. In function, he is the messenger in the triadic unity.
The apostle Paul points out in 1Corinthians 10:1-4 that Jesus was the Rock who followed Israel through the desert. Therefore, scripture shows us that man has after a limited fashion, experienced God in varying degrees at the sensory level. He has seen and heard God. However, if what John is talking about in verse eighteen is experiencing the essence of God, it is certainly true that man has never looked upon the unshielded essence of the Almighty. Of all men, Moses seems to have been granted the most intimate privilege of experiencing the presence of God in his essence. In Exodus chapters 33 and 34, God allows all of his goodness to pass before Moses while shielding him in a rock and covering him with his hand. After God had passed by and declared the name of Jehovah, he then removed his hand and the text says that Moses was allowed to see his back or hind parts. Perhaps more properly, he saw what was behind him. The LXX translation of this text reads καὶότεὄψειὰὀπίσωμου – “and then you see the back, behind, or after me.” The ὀπίσωdoes not refer to anything anthropomorphic but suggests the element of time. Moses would see only where God had been after he had passed by.
If ἑώis understood as an intellectual limitation, this would seem to fit better with the closing statement of this prologue. “He has explained him.” The Greek word ἐή is third person singular aorist first indicative active of ἐέ meaning to detail, to set forth in language, to make known or to reveal (George V. Wagram’s Analytical Greek Lexicon of the New Testament, 1983). This is the etymology of our word to ‘exegete’. In other words, “No man has understood or comprehended God at any time. The only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father, he has EXPLAINED him.” The Logos presents God to the mind of man through the medium of human language in such a way that man is now able to understand something of the nature and character of God that he could never know from his observation of the natural world. Only the one who came out of the very presence of God could have done this.
In the 1980 printing of The Expositors Greek Testament on the gospel of John p 692, the expositor makes an interesting observation in contrast to Meyer. He says that ἐήrefers to the “work” which Christ accomplished while he was on earth. This emphasizes a particular function of the Second Position. Having come from this eternal intimate relationship with the Father, he is thus “equipped” to translate the mind of God to the mind of man. The linking of these two minds is intended to create an isomorphic state of thinking. As we see in verses 10-12, this response on the part of man would be both positive and negative. As man begins the process of learning to think and reason as God, he will learn to re-symbolize his relationship both to God and to the natural world. He will have to learn to think differently, to speak differently, and to behave differently. Reality will take on a new definition. This would not be met favorably among the majority of humanity, not in that generation nor in this one.
By oldhermit
The Logos is the source of enlightenment - something is lacking on the part of man; something is not understood. In order for man to expand his understanding of God, he must first be given access to the mind of God. The function of the Logosis to link the mind of man to the mind of God so that man might be able to think the way God thinks: to reason the way God reasons. (Bearing in mind of course, this is only after a limited fashion. After all, man is still a finite creature). What will be needed on the part of man is the realization that his thinking and reasoning processes are veiled in the darkness of intellectual blindness; not just about God, but about his own place within the eternal continuum, and even his relationship to the natural world of which he is a part. In verse 18, John says, “no man has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.” The word ἑώthat is translated here as ‘seen’ in most of the English translations is third person singular of ὁά which, according to Thayer, has three basic definitions. First, it means to see with the eyes. Secondly, it means to see with the mind, to know, to perceive. Thirdly, it means to become acquainted with throughpragmaticexperience (The 1981 New Thayer’s Greek English Lexicon, p 451).
If John is arguing from the first definition, this needs to be understood in the light of pragmatic Old Testament examples. We know from the many examples of theophonic manifestations in the Old Testament that God has repeatedly presented himself to man in a number of ways. At times, God availed himself only to man’s auditory senses. He spoke to Adam, to Cain, to Noah, to the Hebrew patriarchs, to Moses, to the prophets, and to others. Sometimes he visited himself upon man in the form of dreams or visions as to the prophet Isaiah in Isaiah chapter six. Other times, he appears as objects such as the cloud or the pillar of fire that went before Israel in the wilderness. Still, there are other times when he visited man in human form. There are some eight accounts of this type of theophany found in the Old Testament.
The word ‘theophany’ is derived from two Greek words, ὸmeaning God and ήmeaning sound or voice. A theophany then is a hearing of the voice of God. Theophonic experiences in scripture assume many forms, yet all seem to have a singular function. They communicate the will of God to man. They provide man with a point of reference that man can comprehend. In so doing, God is demonstrating compassion for the limitations of the human mind to understand things that are beyond his ability to comprehend. In some theophonic experiences, God will accommodate only man’s sense of hearing. One only heard the voice of God. God speaking to Noah in Genesis 6 is just such an example. Another is Genesis 12 where God spoke to Abraham. Sometimes, these theophanies would be accompanied by some type of material phenomenon such as fire, wind, or earthquake as in the cases of Moses in Exodus 3, the nation of Israel in Exodus 13 and Elijah in 1Kings 19. Each of these accompanying natural phenomena would appeal to a broader range of physical senses as God sometimes chose to speak in these things. Still, at other times, God chose to assume an anthropomorphic form as in Genesis 18 when he appeared to Abraham in the company of two angels, all in human form. For further reference, one might examine these examples of anthropomorphic theophanies. What appears in each of these is the repeated phrase “The Angel of Jehovah” 22:15-18; 31:11-13; 48:15-16, Joshua 5:13-15, Judges 6:11-24, and Judges 13:15-23.
In each example where the phrase “The Angel of Jehovah” is used, God is represented as the messenger of Jehovah. The phrase “The Angel of Jehovah” is only used to describe the spokesman of deity. This term is never applied to anyone else in scripture. He is always functioning as the spokesman of the divine triad. In each case, this is deity appearing in human form. In every example, those to whom The Angel of Jehovah appeared always understood, at some point, that he was God and they honored him as such. The Angel of Jehovah will always assume divine authority in each of these Old Testament exemplars. He will always be seen serving as the agent of communication, hence the term “The Angel of Jehovah.” He is angelic not in nature but in function. In nature, he is God. In function, he is the messenger in the triadic unity.
The apostle Paul points out in 1Corinthians 10:1-4 that Jesus was the Rock who followed Israel through the desert. Therefore, scripture shows us that man has after a limited fashion, experienced God in varying degrees at the sensory level. He has seen and heard God. However, if what John is talking about in verse eighteen is experiencing the essence of God, it is certainly true that man has never looked upon the unshielded essence of the Almighty. Of all men, Moses seems to have been granted the most intimate privilege of experiencing the presence of God in his essence. In Exodus chapters 33 and 34, God allows all of his goodness to pass before Moses while shielding him in a rock and covering him with his hand. After God had passed by and declared the name of Jehovah, he then removed his hand and the text says that Moses was allowed to see his back or hind parts. Perhaps more properly, he saw what was behind him. The LXX translation of this text reads καὶότεὄψειὰὀπίσωμου – “and then you see the back, behind, or after me.” The ὀπίσωdoes not refer to anything anthropomorphic but suggests the element of time. Moses would see only where God had been after he had passed by.
If ἑώis understood as an intellectual limitation, this would seem to fit better with the closing statement of this prologue. “He has explained him.” The Greek word ἐή is third person singular aorist first indicative active of ἐέ meaning to detail, to set forth in language, to make known or to reveal (George V. Wagram’s Analytical Greek Lexicon of the New Testament, 1983). This is the etymology of our word to ‘exegete’. In other words, “No man has understood or comprehended God at any time. The only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father, he has EXPLAINED him.” The Logos presents God to the mind of man through the medium of human language in such a way that man is now able to understand something of the nature and character of God that he could never know from his observation of the natural world. Only the one who came out of the very presence of God could have done this.
In the 1980 printing of The Expositors Greek Testament on the gospel of John p 692, the expositor makes an interesting observation in contrast to Meyer. He says that ἐήrefers to the “work” which Christ accomplished while he was on earth. This emphasizes a particular function of the Second Position. Having come from this eternal intimate relationship with the Father, he is thus “equipped” to translate the mind of God to the mind of man. The linking of these two minds is intended to create an isomorphic state of thinking. As we see in verses 10-12, this response on the part of man would be both positive and negative. As man begins the process of learning to think and reason as God, he will learn to re-symbolize his relationship both to God and to the natural world. He will have to learn to think differently, to speak differently, and to behave differently. Reality will take on a new definition. This would not be met favorably among the majority of humanity, not in that generation nor in this one.
The number three is basic to human numbering. In Sumerian the sign for no 1 was man for no 2 was woman and for no 3 was everything else. In Egypt the no 3 indicated all else. Even civilisations which never expanded numbers used one, two and three. In tribes discovered in the last century a number only counted to three (e.g. the Abipones Indians)
My study bible says:
No man hath seen God: That is, no one has ever seen God in all His essence, since God is Spirit (4:24).
Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honor and power evelasting. Amen 1Tim.6:16
God is a spirit and no man can see Him, it has nothing to do with understand Him, God is spirit and not able to be seen with our eyes.
No man hath seen God: That is, no one has ever seen God in all His essence, since God is Spirit (4:24).
Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honor and power evelasting. Amen 1Tim.6:16
God is a spirit and no man can see Him, it has nothing to do with understand Him, God is spirit and not able to be seen with our eyes.
Last edited:
Man was not created as an eternal being, he was created with the potential to be eternal, but only if he eat of the tree of life. Man did not have wisdom, because he eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
So I am not sure your analogy holds up. I would argue that man has love at his core, but this does not work without communion with the Lord, who is the source of all love, who defines all reference points.
Our uniqueness is our ability to commune with God, to be brothers, friends and not just servants.
So I am not sure your analogy holds up. I would argue that man has love at his core, but this does not work without communion with the Lord, who is the source of all love, who defines all reference points.
Our uniqueness is our ability to commune with God, to be brothers, friends and not just servants.
I do not accept man will spend eternity in hell. I accept man will be destroyed in hell as the second death for eternity.
The idea of eternal torture for a mortal who knew nothing of his lostness, and could not save himself, sounds wrong.
I was suprised to learn the main support for eternal torture is the parable of Lazarus, but this is Hades, which will be destroyed in the lake of fire. Now christians often talk about justice so much, balancing out what you stole with how much you repay. So if the only known sin in your life is stealing, and you are in hell, is the torture less than if you murdered?
And what is the point of torture? If a mortal indulgence worth an eternity of suffering? Where is the love and justice in that?
Jesus and the apostles talked about eternal life, because another temporary life seemed so insignificant. The word eternal only makes sense if death is the end. And as soon as you make man an eternal spirit, it then becomes, did he exist before he was created, and can repeat life until he gets it right? Why not bounce from life to life, gaining spirituality until you reach perfection? So you get purgatory, torture for a time, until you learnt your lesson.
So I think this idea of success, earning your way to heaven or earning punishment of different levels leads to error.
The seed on the threshing floor, the husks are just burnt up, the weeds pulled up and burnt up. What is the point of making a mortal eternal to just torture them?
The idea of eternal torture for a mortal who knew nothing of his lostness, and could not save himself, sounds wrong.
I was suprised to learn the main support for eternal torture is the parable of Lazarus, but this is Hades, which will be destroyed in the lake of fire. Now christians often talk about justice so much, balancing out what you stole with how much you repay. So if the only known sin in your life is stealing, and you are in hell, is the torture less than if you murdered?
And what is the point of torture? If a mortal indulgence worth an eternity of suffering? Where is the love and justice in that?
Jesus and the apostles talked about eternal life, because another temporary life seemed so insignificant. The word eternal only makes sense if death is the end. And as soon as you make man an eternal spirit, it then becomes, did he exist before he was created, and can repeat life until he gets it right? Why not bounce from life to life, gaining spirituality until you reach perfection? So you get purgatory, torture for a time, until you learnt your lesson.
So I think this idea of success, earning your way to heaven or earning punishment of different levels leads to error.
The seed on the threshing floor, the husks are just burnt up, the weeds pulled up and burnt up. What is the point of making a mortal eternal to just torture them?