Excessive Righteousness 2: Monotheism

 

Pharisees … asked Him a question … “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?” Jesus said … “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ This is the first and great commandment.”

(Matthew 22:34-38)

 

Matthew 5:20 (NKJV) records Jesus’ warning: “Unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.” If one would have righteousness that exceeds the righteousness of the Pharisees (and righteousness can be defined as “fulfilling the commandments”), it is prudent to begin with what both Jesus and the Pharisees agree is the greatest commandment. Matthew 22:37, Mark 12:30, and Luke 10:27 all record the saying of Jesus cited at the first of this post. While the saying of Jesus in Matthew and Luke is truncated from the full command from Deuteronomy, Mark and the Jews emphasize the full text of what they call the Shema. The term Shema is translated “Hear!” and the entire Shema is as follows: “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one! You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength” (Deuteronomy 6:4-5 NKJV). Jews believe that their righteousness with regard to this command exceeds the righteousness of Christians because of the emphasis of the Shema on monotheism: The LORD our God … is one. They suggest that Christian teachings of the Trinity set up three Gods, rather than just the one. Before we consider how to fulfill the greatest commandment, we need to, first, tackle the question of who God is.

 

The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit

 

Henry Fischel, my (Jewish) major professor of Hebrew at Indiana University pointed out to me that the word “Trinity” appears in neither the Old Testament nor the New Testament. Nevertheless, the words “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit” do appear together in the baptismal formula of Matthew 28:19 (NKJV): “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” On the day of Pentecost, Peter, however, used a somewhat different baptismal formula: “Then Peter said to them, ‘Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit’” (Acts 2:38 NKJV). Paul was told by Ananias in Acts 22:16 (NKJV) “Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.” And, Paul simply mentions baptism into “Christ Jesus” in Romans 6:3-4 (NKJV): Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore, we were buried with Him through baptism into death.” It seems to me that any of these baptismal formulas is acceptable—so long as it is Jesus into whom one is baptized. Acts 19:1-5 recounts Paul’s rebaptism of twelve individuals in Ephesus who were baptized only with John the Baptist’s baptism—a baptism of repentance, with no reference to Jesus or the Holy Spirit. Paul baptized them “in the name of the Lord Jesus.” Then Paul (an apostle) laid hands on them and they received gifts of the Holy Spirit—tongues and prophecy. Spiritual gifts were conferred only by the laying on of the hands of apostles (Google: “Stan.Point Logic of Christianity 17”). Yet, all Christians who are baptized “in the name of Jesus Christ … receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38 NKJV). What exactly that “gift of the Holy Spirit” is will be considered momentarily.

Another passage that uses the words meaning Father, Son, and Holy Spirit together is actually not in the earliest texts; it is a later textual addition—1 John 5:7 (NKJV): “For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.” Although Christians often cite this passage as evidence of a doctrine of Trinity, the words “the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit” are not in the earliest texts of 1 John. The vast majority of recent translations recognize this fact by excluding the terminology from this passage--Holman Christian Standard Bible, English Standard Version, New American Standard Bible, New International Version, New Living Translation, New Revised Standard, American Standard Version, Common English Bible, The Complete Jewish Bible, The Darby Translation, Good News Translation, GOD'S WORD Translation, Lexham English Bible, New Century Version, New International Reader's Version, Revised Standard Version, World English Bible, and Weymouth New Testament. The SBL Greek New Testament and even The Latin Vulgate have also eliminated the language.

As cited above, the New King James Version retains the language, as it seeks to remain close to the old King James Version, published in 1611 (before modern textual criticism demonstrated that the words were a late addition). Other old translations--Wycliffe published from 1382 to 1395, Tyndale published c. 1522–1535, the Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible published 1582, and the Webster Bible published 1833—have the Trinitarian language, along with lesser known recent translations--Jubilee Bible 2000, Third Millennium Bible, and Young's Literal Translation. One should not base one’s Trinitarian doctrine on the 1 John 5:7 passage. It was not in the original text.

 

The Holy Spirit

 

It is not blasphemous to suggest to a Jew that the Holy Spirit exists. There are more than sixty passages in the Hebrew Old Testament explicitly mentioning the Holy Spirit (aka the Spirit of God, the Spirit of the LORD, Your [i.e., God’s] Spirit, the Spirit, My [i.e., God’s] Spirit, Your [i.e., God’s] good Spirit, a new Spirit, the Spirit of wisdom and understanding, the Spirit of counsel and might, the Spirit of knowledge and the fear of the Lord). These passages mentioning the Holy Spirit begin in Genesis 1:2 with the Spirit of God hovering over the face of the waters at the beginning of Creation. Furthermore, Jews understand that the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of prophecy. That means the Holy Spirit is that which God placed in His prophets to deliver His messages to humans. The Pharisees believed that the operation of God’s Holy Spirit to inspire prophecy ceased with Malachi—which they assumed to be the last inspired book of the Bible. For this reason, they could not accept John the Baptist as a prophet, let alone accept the early Christian prophets. Nevertheless, they still believed that God could speak to humans through the occasional words of children and the mentally handicapped (indelicately called “fools” by the Jews). This was still the Holy Spirit operating. Jesus alluded to this phenomenon on Palm Sunday in Matthew 21:15-16 (NKJV): “But when the chief priests and scribes saw … the children crying out in the temple and saying, ‘Hosanna to the Son of David!’ they were indignant and said to Him, ‘Do You hear what these are saying?’ And Jesus said to them, ‘Yes. Have you never read, “Out of the mouth of babes and nursing infants You have perfected praise” [Psalm 8:2]?”

Pharisees also believed that God’s spirit continued to speak to humans through what they called a Bat Qol (or Bat Kol: a mysterious voice from Heaven). According to “Bat Kol: A Divine Voice | My Jewish Learning”:

 

[B]at kol, literally “daughter of a voice,” refers to a heavenly voice that proclaims God’s will or a divine judgment in a matter of legal dispute. The term itself doesn’t appear anywhere in the Hebrew Bible, though God’s voice is heard frequently in the Bible. Later sources indicate that there were bat kols in biblical times that were not recorded in the text, as in the Talmud’s declaration that a bat kol announced the death of Moses. The clearest statement of the nature of the bat kol is the Talmud’s declaration that the bat kol served as a means of communication between God and humankind after the end of the prophetic era. Though this teaching clearly connects a bat kol to the prophecies of the Bible, instances of the latter indicate explicitly in the text that it is God speaking, while the language of “daughter of a voice” concerning a bat kol suggests it is some sense a lesser (yet still divinely originating) voice. The Tosafot, commenting on a passage concerning a bat kol in Tractate Sanhedrin, distinguishes it from a voice that descends directly from heaven (which might refer to traditional prophecy), comparing it instead to an echo, a voice that emerges from within another voice. 

The term appears only twice in the Mishnah, but it is found frequently in the Talmud.

 

Bottom Line:  Pharisees also believed that God’s Spirit was/is active in the Bat Qol. Christians will note: a Bat Qol occurs at Jesus’s baptism and another at his transfiguration. Furthermore, a Bat Qol of Jesus’s voice speaks to Saul of Tarsus at his conversion. The fact that Christians believe that the Holy Spirit is still active (though, like the Jews, believing that the age of prophecy is now ceased) does not suggest that Christian doctrine concerning the Holy Spirit is blasphemous or even inferior to the views of the Pharisees. The Jews have no problem believing that the existence of the Spirit of God does not compromise their doctrine of monotheism. Why should they contend that Christian belief in the Holy Spirit would compromise a doctrine of monotheism?

The “Talmud’s declaration that the bat kol served as a means of communication between God and humankind” (emphasis mine) is a fair description of all activity of the Holy Spirit (not just the Bat Qol). The Holy Spirit spoke through prophets, children, the Bat Qol, angels, the written word, and directly (from God to humans). Jewish scholar G. F. Moore links three terms together in his chapter entitled, "The Word of God:  The Spirit," Moore states, "God's will is made known or effectuated in the world not only through personal agents (ANGELS), but directly by his WORD or by his SPIRIT" (emphases mine). The Apostle Paul, in Ephesians 6:17 (NKJV), is in agreement with Moore’s observation: “And take … the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.” Although the English is confusing, the word “which” in this passage cannot be referring back to the term “sword,” since, in the Greek, “sword” is a feminine noun and “which” is a neuter pronoun. The only neuter noun “which” could refer back to is the neuter noun “Spirit.” The Spirit is the word of God, just as Moore demonstrates. (Incidentally, the Greek word for “word,” here, is not logos, but rhēma, from the same root as “rhetoric.” This might indicate that in the armor of God, His Spirit of persuasion is the sword we wield; whereas, God’s Word/Logos in John’s Gospel might refer more to His powerful spoken fiats of creation. (Since my Ph.D. is in Communication, I pay close attention to such distinctions.)

Since Jesus emphasizes that God is spirit (John 4:24) and the facts that the “Spirit of God” is hovering over the face of the waters and God is speaking “words” are all found in Genesis 1:1-3, the possibility of the Word/Logos of John chapter 1 being identified as the Spirit of God is a distinct possibility.  God and His Word are one and the same. There is no threat to the doctrine of monotheism when God and His Spirit are mentioned as existing together any more than there would be the implication that my words when uttered are somehow different from me as a single human being. Later in the first chapter of John, the Logos-becomes-flesh (as Jesus) and dwells among us.

The fact that God (His Spirit) speaks to the darkness (creating light), to the waters (creating a firmament and, later, creating sea creatures, birds, beasts, cattle, and creeping things), to the land (creating vegetation), etc., does not preclude God from communicating with humans, as well, through His Holy Spirit. 2 Corinthians 13:13 (NKJV) states: “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all. Amen.” While Jesus purchased “grace” for us, and God so “loved” the world that He gave Jesus to us, the Holy Spirit offers us “communion with Him.” The word translated “communion” is the Greek word koinōnia (frequently, translated “fellowship”). It means, sharing or having things in common. The English words “common,” “communion,” and “communication” have the same root. As a professor of “communication,” I can assure you that you will have great difficulty in “communicating” with another human, unless you have things in common with that individual (especially, a common language). Japanese-speaking and English-speaking individuals have great difficulty communicating until they learn each other’s language. In John 14:16-18 (NKJV), Jesus promises: “I will pray the Father and He will give you another Helper [paraclete, literally: one whom you call alongside you, such as a friend or companion], that He may abide with you forever—the Spirit of truth … you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you.” This is what Peter meant on the day of Pentecost, when he promised that those who are baptized will receive the “gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38 NKJV). God doesn’t need to give you miraculous gifts of prophecy, healing, miracles, tongues, etc. for you to simply enjoy His company and communicate with Him. Everything you would hope to find when communicating with your best friend—liberty, righteousness, peace, and joy—you will find in God’s companionship through His Holy Spirit. “Where the Spirit of the Lord is there is liberty” (2 Corinthians 3:17 NKJV). Romans 14:17 (NKJV) states that there is “righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.” Galatians 5:22-23 (NKJV) even adds to the benefits of being the companion of the Holy Spirit: “the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control.” The words of the genie in the Disney movie “Aladdin” should more accurately be applied to the Holy Spirit: “You ain’t never had a friend like me!” Not only is He our friend, He is our teacher, the One who reminds us of things God has commanded us. “He will teach [us] all things, and bring to [our] remembrance all things that [Jesus] said to [us].” (John 14:26 NKJV). He will guide us “into all truth” (John 16:12). That’s true communication. That’s communion. That’s the Holy Spirit.

 

The Father and the Son

The Pharisees would have no problem believing in God the Father. Several Old Testament passages—Deuteronomy 32:6, Isaiah 64:8, Jeremiah 3:19, Psalm 68:5, Jeremiah 31:9, Isaiah 63:16, and Malachi 2:10—all refer to God as Father. Several other passages refer to (especially Israel as) His son/s. To say that Christians believe in God the Father is not problematic, although, most frequently, the father-son relationship of God in the Old Testament is with Israel as His son. Perhaps, the reason some Jews might shy away from the “Father” language—except to say that Abraham is their father—is that Christians use the terminology in connection with His relationship to Jesus. This is the stumbling block over which two millennia of Jews have tripped. When the New Testament refers to Jesus as the Son of God, Jews consider that to be polytheistic rather than monotheistic. This Pharisaic thought process is encapsulated in John 10:33-36 (NKJV):

The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.” Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, “You are gods”’? If He called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?”

 

Jesus is, here, defending Himself for claiming to be the “Son of God.” To defend Himself, Jesus cites Psalm 82 (NKJV):

 

God stands in the congregation of the [gods, re: LXX];
He judges among the gods.

 How long will you judge unjustly,
And show partiality to the wicked? …

I said, “You are gods,
And all of you are [sons] of the Most High.

But you shall die like men.

 

Michael S. Heiser (2008, page 3) states: “many scholars consider Psalm 82 to be either a vestige of polytheism overlooked by monotheistic redactors or perhaps a deliberate rhetorical use of Israel’s polytheistic past to declare the new outlook of monotheism. After the exile, so it is put forth, the gods of the nations are relegated to the status of angels.” Jesus and John, apparently, did not get that memo. Even “angels” is not an appropriate translation for “gods” in this passage for Jesus, John, and, implicitly, their Jewish audience. I discuss both the John 10 and Psalm 82 passages in my book Angels and Demons (page 82):

 

Jesus is quoted in John 10:33-36 as clearly implying that the term “sons of the Most High” (from Psalm 82:6 …) refers to “human judges.” Human judges are even called “gods/ELOHIM” in both Psalm 82:6 and Exodus 22 ... Jesus was making the point that it was not blasphemous for him to be called “god” or “son of God,” if even humans (judges) could be called “gods” and “sons of the Most High.”

 

Those whom God has called “gods” and “sons of the Most High” in Psalm 82 will “die like men.” There are no accounts in the Bible of gods or angels dying.” Isaiah 14:15 does say that Lucifer will die, but Lucifer is not an angel or any kind of divine being. In Angels and Demons (page 96), I observe: “Granted, if we begin reading in the middle of [Isaiah chapter 14], at verse 12, Lucifer can appear to be a powerful angel who has fallen because of his attempt to rebel against ‘the Most High.’ That is, until we reach verse 16 (where it is clear that Lucifer is a man): ‘They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, [and] consider thee, [saying, Is] this the MAN that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms?’  Verses 18-20 (KJV), furthermore, point out that Lucifer is a ‘king.’”

On page 108 of his book, Bauckham states: “Jewish, Christian and Islamic traditions … always accepted the existence of … [other] supernatural beings: angels … demons.” Without further belaboring this point, I will direct any interested readers to my book Angels and Demons, where I dispute the unambiguous existence of fallen angels in the Bible and point out that the Gospel representations of demons are misunderstood. Fallen angels and demons exist in non-canonical writings between the Old and New Testament and (later) in the patristic writings, however. Jewish scholar Bernard Bamberger admits that point, but concludes in his book Fallen Angels (page 55): “The astounding thing is that, after some centuries of experimentation with this idea, [by the first century AD] the authoritative teachers of Judaism dropped it altogether.  … The main line of Jewish thought returned to an uncompromising monotheism in which there was no room for satanic rebels.”

Certainly, according to Jesus and John, the 82^nd Psalm is not to be taken to suggest that there are other “gods”—the various gods of the nations who meet from time-to-time in congregation with God Almighty. Such an interpretation is polytheistic; it also would make absolutely no sense for Jesus to use such a passage (with such a doctrine) to defend himself against a charge of blasphemy. From Jesus’s statement in the John 10 passage, alone, one might even infer that Jesus saw Himself as a mere human (judge?) and not as a divine being at all. However, John who records the event, sees something quite beyond a mere human judge in Jesus. John chapter 1 will be discussed momentarily.

Another tack one might make concerning a Christology of Jesus is found in Revelation 4-5. While Jesus identifies Himself as the “Son of God” to the church at Thyatira in Revelation 2:18, typically Revelation refers to Him as the Lamb. (Note that Revelation 14:1 refers to the Lamb and His Father.) Just looking at Revelation 4-5, however, Jesus is presented as newly worthy of praise along with the Father—a new development in Heaven. I point out on pages 116-118 of my book Apocalyptic Apologetic:

 

No Jew would object [to Revelation chapter 4] … All are agreed that all creation should “worship” the Lord God Almighty because of his creation of all things. The Baruch Atah prayer of the Jews from the time of the Mishnah (Ber. 6:1) unto the present time attests to that. The Shema of Israel attests that the Lord our God is One.

Then comes Jesus, in chapter 5 … the great stumbling block for many Jews. Chapter 5 has the audacity to explain how Jesus, like the Lord God Almighty, is now also “worthy” of praise and worship and blessing. … “every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea” [Revelation 5:13] … say: “Blessing, and honor, and glory, and power, be unto him that sits upon the throne, and to the Lamb forever and ever” (KJV).

…

What made him worthy? He “was slain and … redeemed us to God by [his] blood out of every kindred and tongue and people and nation” (verse 9). Therefore, … angels, living creatures, and elders … proclaimed: “Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honor, and glory, and blessing” (verse 12).

Jesus and God are, thus, now both worthy of worship. This is what Jews stumble over. Christians worship both God and Christ.

 

Even so, perhaps, these two chapters could be taken to suggest that God Almighty is the only God. In my book Revelation: The Human Drama (page 127), I point out: “Jesus is never referred to as pantokratôr (the Almighty)” in Revelation. Perhaps, it could be argued that Jesus (as a man) is worthy of worship because He “was slain and … redeemed us to God by [His] blood out of every kindred and tongue and people and nation” (Revelation 5:9). God is worshiped as Creator. Jesus is worshiped as our supreme sacrifice who redeemed us.

On the other hand, Jesus is explicitly identified as the “beginning (archē) of the creation of God” in Revelation 3:14. Some translators interpret this passage to suggest that Jesus was the first being whom God created. Possibly, sensing that viewing Jesus as the “beginning” of the creation of God, in Revelation 3:14, presents problems for Christology, G. K. Beale (p. 298), elaborately takes archē in the verse as the equivalent of prōtotokos [first-born] of all creation in Col 1:15 and prōtotokos [first-born] from the dead in Col 1:18). Beale admits that “most commentators think … the titles in 3:14 … link Jesus to the original creation.” Nevertheless, Beale argues, that the beginning of God’s creation in Rev 3:14, instead, designates “Christ as the sovereign inaugurator of the new creation … not over the original creation.”  However, the terms archē/beginning and telos/end, are used by Revelation to refer to both God and Jesus (21:6, 22:13). In 21:6, the archē and the telos is a title for God. In 22:13, the archē and the telos is a title for Jesus. Since Revelation would never suggest that God had a “beginning/efficient cause” or an “end/final cause,” John is probably referring in these archē and telos formulas, instead, to a process that has a beginning/efficient cause [archē], namely, God’s creation (3:14).

Jesus is not just a man—He is the archē of creation, for John. What does that mean? Craig Koester tries a translation taking archē to mean “ruler” (of creation), but that does not work, because John’s word for “ruler” is archōn (see Revelation 1:5), not archē. Furthermore, since John employs the polar opposites archē and telos in 21:6 and 22:13 in parallel with the polar opposites alpha and the omega, plus in parallel with the polar opposites first and last in 22:13, John’s use of archē as “ruler” does not make sense. What would be the polar opposite of ruler? Servant, perhaps, but not telos/end.

Some New Testament passages suggest that Jesus was the creator of the universe. Related to 1 Corinthians 8:6, Richard Bauckham (Jesus and the God of Israel, p. 29) sees something entelechial in his discussion of Rom 11:36a, wherein “from him, and through him, and to him [are] all things”  “refers to God.” Yet, “in 1 Corinthians 8:6, Paul has divided it between God and Christ, applying to God two of the prepositions that describe God’s relationship as Creator (“from” and “for” or “to”) and the third of these prepositions (“through”) to Christ. …That God is not only the agent or efficient cause [understand: archē]  of creation (“from him are all things”) and the final cause or goal [understand: telos] of all things (“to him are all things”), but also the instrumental cause [which also figures in entelechy] (“through him are all things”) well expresses the typical Jewish monotheistic concern that God used no one else to carry out his work of creation, but accomplished it alone, solely by means of his own Word … Paul’s reformulation in I Corinthians 8:6 includes Christ in this exclusively divine work of creation by giving to him the role of instrumental cause.” Similar language is also used in Colossians 1:16-17, with the agent or efficient cause (understand: archē), the instrumental cause, and the final cause (understand: telos) all being applied to Christ.

Furthermore, that most important Logos Hymn of John states that all things were made by the Logos. As discussed earlier in this blogpost and quite frequently in several of my previous posts, I am inclined to understand Logos as the Holy Spirit or Word of God. But God’s Holy Spirit also took on flesh and dwelt among us in the person of Jesus (John 1:14). How is it possible that Jesus took on flesh somewhere around 4-6 BC and yet was present en archē to create the universe? Through the principle of entelechy:

 

1.      Consider the way that one-celled amoeba/protozoa reproduce by simply dividing themselves. There is no way of knowing which of the two “daughter cells” thus produced is the parent and which is the child, and yet both of them were active in the actions of the original amoeba/protozoa. If God and Jesus were active together “as one” en archē, they both participated in creation, even if Jesus took on flesh at a later date.

2.      Consider the various passages that suggest that children, grandchildren, great grandchildren, and beyond are active in the loins of their fathers (John 3:3-4, Hebrews 7:1-10, Romans 5:12-21, and 1 Corinthians 15:22). If all of Adam’s offspring preexist in the loins of Adam and are somehow held accountable for the actions of their father Adam, because they participated in his sin, then God and Jesus were active together “as one” en archē, as they both participated in creation even if Jesus took on flesh at a later date.

3.      Consider that, mystically, when they become husband and wife, two individuals—man and woman—become one flesh. In like fashion, when Jesus’s life in the flesh is completed, He returns to God and becomes “one” with Him again (John 10:30, 14:10-11, 20).

 

Since entelechy observes that all endings (telos) are implicit in their beginnings (en archē), and since the Father and Son are both called archē by John in Revelation, and the Logos is present en archē  in John 1, verses such as the following are much easier to understand from the perspective of entelechy: 

 

•      Eph 1:4: “He chose us ἐν [en] Him before the foundation of the world.”

•      John 17:24: “You loved Me before the foundation of the world.”

•      1 Pet 1:20: “He indeed was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times.”

•      Matt 25:34: “inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.”

•      Matt 13:35: “I will utter things kept secret from the foundation of the world.”

•      2 Tim 1:9: “grace which was given to us ἐν [en] Christ Jesus before time began.”

•      Heb 9:26: “He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.”

•      Acts 15:18:  "Known to God from eternity are all His works.”

 

Not only are all of God’s works known to Him from eternity, but they are also known to Logos and Logos-become-flesh. If, therefore, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit know absolute truth, concerning everything, there is no point of disagreement between them concerning anything.  People do not disagree about things that are considered “known facts.”  (The only room for rhetoric—the art of persuading someone that something is “probably or possibly” true, as opposed to simply stating that something is “definitely” true—is if there are questions that have at least two possible-but-unknown answers.) If people have trouble understanding how the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit can rule the universe, without any conflict among them, it is because they never argue; they never disagree, they don’t have differing opinions, because they know “absolute truth” for certain. The great theological danger of polytheism is not the idea that God has a Son and a Spirit (explainable by entelechy). It is that he had a divine rival, an opponent, a Lucifer, a Beelzebub. This is where one’s theology begins to approach committing the “unforgiveable sin” (Matthew 12:24-32, Mark 3:22-30, Luke 11:15-20).  This is a very important area in which one’s righteousness must exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees. More on that in my next post: “How to Love God.”

The Logic of Christianity 17: And, Batting Cleanup: The Holy Spirit

The link in the syllogistic chain I presented in the previous post pertains to the argument that, even if the Bible were considered a thoroughly human book—written by humans without divine aid and collected and canonized by humans without divine aid—still (logically) the Bible is trustworthy.  But, why do we tie our hands behind our back?  Why would logical individuals restrict their arguments to some such arbitrary presumption—simply because scholars operating under a now-defunct, now-bankrupt modernist philosophy that demanded that we doubt everything that can be doubted prescribed such a presumption?

In an earlier post, I argue:

It is altogether CONSISTENT that LOGOS THE AGENT used LOGOS THE AGENCY to self-actualize in the ACT of creating a LOGICAL UNIVERSE capable  of  sustaining  LIFE  and,  consequently,   leading  to  a  SCENE  in  which SOCIAL PURPOSE motivated the AGENT to create a CREATIVE, COMMUNICATIVE, ACTION-BASED life form with which LOGOS THE AGENT could communicate.

I continue my argument:

It seems that, since the God we seek to identify uses “rational communication” for the purpose of developing “social” relationships with the only species to whom that God has given the ability to engage in creative “action”—namely, the human—the God we seek to identify should have, at least at some point, “communicated socially” with this human species.  … Logically, a God capable of and motivated to communicate socially with a species that that God designed and formed to be capable of similar communicative action would be expected to engage in such social communication.

How does the Judeo-Christian God communicate with humans? 

The only ways that God still spoke freshly to humans, for Rabbinic Judaism, were through children, fools, and the BAT QOL (or mysterious voice from Heaven).  Jesus alludes to the proofs of God speaking through children during his Palm Sunday entry into Jerusalem (Matthew 21:15-16).  And, while Christianity disagrees [with the Jewish view] that the age of prophecy had ended (there are plenty of Christian prophecies), it certainly affords the proof that was still acceptable to Jews:  The BAT QOL.

It seems that both children and fools were considered innocent, because they lack the good inclination.  Therefore, the Holy Spirit (which inspires prophecy) is able to dwell inside these humans—they are innocent—in the same logical move that prompted Acts 2:17-18 to report that (after Jesus’ death and resurrection) “the Spirit” could be “poured out” on all flesh.  Once Jesus’ death provided the forgiveness, the “NOW innocent” believers could receive the Holy Spirit.

In Chapter 23 of my book Angels and Demons: The Personification of Communication, I explain:

Jewish scholar G. F. Moore (in Volume I, page 414, of his book Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era) links . . . three terms . . . together quite easily.  In his chapter entitled, "The Word of God:  The Spirit," Moore states, "God's will is made known or effectuated in the world not only through personal agents (ANGELS), but directly by his WORD or by his SPIRIT" (emphases mine). 

According to the Bible, God has spoken to humans through his own voice, his own handwriting, the BAT QOL, angels, and the Holy Spirit/Spirit of God.  Many of such messages are recorded in the Bible.  The Holy Spirit, according to Judaism, was—in times past—found in prophets, children, and fools.  After Jesus’ death and resurrection, the Holy Spirit could be “poured out” on all “flesh” (KJV).  This is predicated on a prophecy given through the Old Testament prophet Joel—Joel 2:28: "And afterward, I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your old men will dream dreams, your young men will see visions.”  Acts 2:16-18 in the New Testament, claims that this prophecy was fulfilled on the day of Pentecost (fifty days after the death and resurrection of Jesus): 

¹⁶ [T]his is what was spoken by the prophet Joel:  ¹⁷ “In the last days,” God says, “I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh.  Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams.  ¹⁸ Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days, and they will prophesy.” 

But was it literally poured out on ALL flesh?  Not if, by all flesh, we mean animal flesh.  (Hence, the NIV translated “flesh” (the literal translation of both the Greek [SARX] and Hebrew [BASHAR] terms) as “people.”  Not if, by all flesh, we mean all “people”—including non-Christian humans.  Not even if, by all flesh, we mean that every Christian is able to prophecy.  Paul asks rhetorically, in I Corinthians 12:29-30 (ASV): “Are all apostles?  Are all prophets?”  The clearly implied (rhetorical question) answer is “No.”  Not even can it be said that every Christian in New Testament times possessed a spiritual gift that would allow him or her to be a medium of God’s messages.  Rather, these miraculous spiritual gifts are given by the “laying on of the hands of apostles.”  In my book Psychotic Entelechy: The Dangers of Spiritual Gifts Theology, I observe:

Christianity . . . believes that God continued to speak through the visitation of angels (as when Gabriel announced John’s and Jesus’ births) and through prophets and prophetesses such as Simeon and Anna (Luke 2:25-38) and especially through John the Baptist who lived at the time of Jesus.  Christianity also teaches that God spoke through those (such as apostles and prophets) who had received spiritual gifts in the first generation of the church.

According to Catholic.com: 

Catholics hold that public or “general” revelation ended at the death of the last apostle (Catechism of the Catholic Church 66, 73), but private revelations can be given still—and have been, as Marian apparitions at such places as Fatima and Lourdes testify (CCC 67).  Such revelations can never correct, supplement, or complete the Christian faith (“Distinctive Beliefs of the Mormon Church,” Catholic Answers.  Available:

http://www.catholic.com/library/Distinctive_Beliefs_of_Mormon.asp (10/15/05).

Protestantism as defined by Martin Luther claimed that God’s communication with humans ended with the canonical Old and New Testaments.  Luther’s mantra, “Sola Scriptura,” emphasized the point that even the Catholic Church in its various offices were not considered capable of credibly offering new messages from God (pp. 98-99).

I continue, in Psychotic Entelechy:  The Dangers of Spiritual Gifts Theology, pages 110-112:

Those who are “filled with the Spirit” are at [the] time [of the New Testament—the time that the Book of Acts refers to them] actually in the process of receiving messages from God.  In addition to using the mediation of angels and mysterious voices,  God   (in  the   New  Testament   period)   used  a  variety  of  methods  to communicate with humans.  These methods are termed “spiritual gifts” by the apostle Paul.  Yet, each method or gift was designed to provide communication from God.

The spiritual gifts listed by the apostle Paul in three separate writings feature prophets prominently (Romans 12:6, I Corinthians 12:28, Ephesians 4:11).  In the last two lists, prophets are listed second only to apostles.  In the first list, apostles are not mentioned; prophets are listed first.  Both apostles and prophets had miraculous powers.  Their messages, whether written or spoken, were considered by the Church to have come from God just as surely as the messages of Moses, Elijah, and David did.  The early Christians met weekly to devote themselves not to the Torah (as the Jews did in the Synagogue), but to the apostles’ doctrine (Acts 2:42).  Of the twenty-seven books in the New Testament canon, at least seventeen were thought to have been authored by apostles.  The Book of Revelation was written by a prophet.  Luke and Acts were both written by the evangelist Luke, and Mark is attributed to the evangelist John Mark.  In the Ephesians 4:11 list, evangelists are mentioned as (spiritually) gifted, immediately following apostles and prophets.

Hebrews and the three epistles of John were at one time thought to have been authored by the apostles Paul and John, respectively.  None of the four epistles make the claim of apostolic authorship, however.  Second and Third John claim to be written by “The Elder.”  If he is not the apostle John himself, the Elder is probably a prominent disciple of the apostle John.  Given its Pauline elements, Hebrews may well have been written by a prominent disciple of the apostle Paul.  James and Jude claim to have been written by Jesus’ physical relatives:  his brothers.  All of the authors of New Testament books not authored by apostles or prophets could easily be authored by individuals who had other spiritual gifts.  Paul seems to assert that he conveyed a spiritual gift of prophecy to Timothy at the time he laid hands on him to set him apart for eldership (I Timothy 4:14 and II Timothy 1:6).  It is possible that the Elder of the epistles of John (if not the apostle John) also received a spiritual gift at his ordination as elder.  The author of Hebrews claims to be a companion of Timothy (Hebrews 13:23).  Hence, some think Paul is the author.  If the author is not Paul, he may have received a spiritual gift from Paul as Timothy did.  Jesus’ brother James is depicted in Acts 15 as the presider among the apostles in Jerusalem.  Paul lists James along with Peter and John as the pillars of the Jerusalem church (Galatians 2:9).  Apparently, James had some form of inspiration, as his brother Jude may have.

The basis upon which Christians believe the books of the New Testament were inspired of God is that all books were written by authors who had spiritual gifts.  Various lists of spiritual gifts mentioned in the New Testament include: 

·         apostles (I Corinthians 12:28-29, Ephesians 14:11), 

·         prophets (Romans 12:6, I Corinthians 12:10, 28-29, 14:1-40, Ephesians 14:11),

·         evangelists (Ephesians 14:11),

·         teachers (I Corinthians 12:28-29, 14:6, Ephesians 14:11),

·         healers (I Corinthians 12:9, 28-29),

·         miracle workers (I Corinthians 12:10, 28-29),

·         pastors (Ephesians 14:11),

·         deacons/servants (Romans 12:7),

·         encouragers (Romans 12:8),

·         contributors to the needs of others (Romans 12:8),

·         leaders (Romans 12:8),

·         mercy givers (Romans 12:8),

·         helpers of others (I Corinthians 12:28),

·         administrators (I Corinthians 12:28),

·         revealer (I Corinthians 14:6)

·         messengers of wisdom (I Corinthians 12:8),

·         messengers of knowledge (I Corinthians 12:8, 14:6),

·         believers--with the gift of faith (I Corinthians 12:9)

·         speakers in tongues (I Corinthians 12:10, 28-30, 14:1-40), and

·         interpreters of tongues (I Corinthians 12:10, 30).

Also listed by Paul among the spiritual gifts in Romans 12:7, some of the early deacons on whom the apostles laid hands were apparently prophets, healers, and miracle workers, as well (Acts 7:56, 8:5-7, 13).  Some of the abilities listed as spiritual gifts could be interpreted as the equivalent of typical aptitudes without respect to any miraculous abilities.  Many teachers, pastors, servants, encouragers, contributors, leaders, mercy givers, helpers, administrators, and believers have existed throughout the history of mankind without respect to any specific spiritual giftedness.  But, then, what would be the point of calling them spiritual gifts?  The miraculous element is implicit in the way Paul discusses spiritual gifts.

Incidentally, the receiving of spiritual gifts is not identical with what Acts describes as “baptism of the Holy Spirit”—an event that occurred on only two occasions.  For a discussion of that phenomenon, which was accomplished by a separate act of God, consult my book Psychotic Entelechy:  The Dangers of Spiritual Gifts Theology, pages 117-118.  But, how were spiritual gifts conferred?  I answer the question on pages 113-116: 

If spiritual gifts provide miraculous messages from God, it is important to know how they are conferred.

. . .  

[T]he phenomenon referred to by the apostle Paul as “spiritual gifts” may be referred to by other New Testament writers with different terminology.  While never using the phrase “spiritual gifts,” Luke points out in Acts: “The apostles performed many miraculous signs and wonders among the people.  . . . Crowds gathered . . . bringing their sick and those tormented by evil spirits, and all of them were healed” (Acts 5:12, 16).

The Laying On of Apostles’ Hands

In the early period of the church, seven deacons were chosen to assist the apostles.  Luke states: “They presented these men to the apostles, who prayed and laid their hands on them” (Acts 6:6).  Afterwards, one of those deacons, “Stephen . . . did great wonders and miraculous signs among the people” (Acts 6:8).  Another of the deacons, “Philip went down to a city in Samaria . . . the crowds heard Philip and saw the miraculous signs he did . . .    [E]vil spirits came out of many, and many paralytics and cripples were healed” (Acts 8:5-7).  Although Luke never refers to these special abilities of the apostles and deacons as “spiritual gifts,” their abilities seem to be identical to the abilities of the healers and miracle workers in Paul’s lists of spiritual gifts.  Although Philip baptized many Samaritans, Philip was the only Christian in Samaria capable of performing miraculous works.  Luke states: “[T]he Holy Spirit had not yet come upon any of them; they had simply been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus.  Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit” (Acts 8:16-17).  One must assume that receiving the Holy Spirit in Luke’s terminology means that the Samaritan Christians were capable of miraculous works, as was Philip.  A sorcerer named Simon noticed the method by which these gifts were transferred:  “When Simon saw that the Spirit was given at the laying on of the apostles’ hands, he offered them money and said, ‘Give me also this ability so that everyone on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit’” (Acts 8:18-19).  His request was denied.

The laying on of the hands of an apostle seems to be the method by which spiritual gifts were conferred in the apostle Paul’s writings.  In Romans 1:11, Paul tells the Romans: “I long to see you so that I may impart to you some spiritual gift.”  Why was it necessary for the apostle to see the Romans in order to confer spiritual gifts?  Could he not just pray that they would receive spiritual gifts?  Apparently not.  Did they not automatically receive spiritual gifts upon being baptized?  The Samaritans who were baptized by the deacon Philip did not receive spiritual gifts at baptism.  The Roman church was in a unique position.  Apparently, some Roman Christians did have spiritual gifts or Paul would not have written in the twelfth chapter of his epistle:

We have different gifts, according to the grace given us.  If a man’s gift is prophesying, let him use it in proportion to his faith.  If it is serving, let him serve; if it is teaching, let him teach; if it is encouraging, let him encourage; if it is contributing to the needs of others, let him give generously; if it is leadership, let him govern diligently; if it is showing mercy, let him do it cheerfully.  (Romans 12:6-8)

Luke informs us that Jews and proselytes from Rome were in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:10-11).  Some of these Romans were surely converted to Christianity by the apostles on that day.  It is fair to assume that some of them received the laying on of the hands of apostles.

In Acts 19, Luke records another incident in which an apostle laid hands on some individuals and they received spiritual gifts.  Paul discovered at Ephesus some disciples who had received only the baptism of repentance taught by John the Baptist, not Christian baptism.  They were unaware of any Holy Spirit connection.  Paul had them rebaptized in the name of Jesus.  After the baptism, Luke reports: “When Paul laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied” (Acts 19:6).  Observing Luke’s symbol system, the terminology he used in Acts 19--“receiving the Holy Spirit” and “the Holy Spirit coming on” individuals—is identical to the terminology he used in Acts 8:16-17, at which time the apostles Peter and John laid their hands on the first Samaritan Christians after their baptism.  In the Acts 8 text, Simon the Sorcerer observed that (miraculous) gifts were given by the laying on of apostles’ hands (Acts 8:18).  Speaking in tongues is not clearly defined in the Acts 19 instance.  Perhaps, it was the spiritual gift of prophecy discussed by Paul in I Corinthians 12-14.  Prophecy, which is also mentioned as a result of the laying on of Paul’s hands in Acts 19, is definitely a spiritual gift.

Paul informs Timothy that Timothy’s spiritual gift was conferred when Paul laid hands on him: “For this reason I remind you to fan into flame the gift of God, which is in you through the laying on of my hands” (II Timothy 1:6).  Some have suggested, based on I Timothy 4:14, that spiritual gifts were conferred by the laying on of the hands of non-apostles.  Paul tells Timothy:  “Do not neglect your gift, which was given to you through prophecy by the laying on of the hands of eldership.”  The proposed interpretation suggests that the gift was conferred when the body of elders laid their hands on Timothy.  While that interpretation of the text is possible, it is also possible that the text should be interpreted:  The prophetic gift was conferred on Timothy when Timothy was set apart as an elder through the laying on of hands.  II Timothy 1:6 argues strongly for this second interpretation.  Paul clearly tells Timothy his gift was conferred when Paul laid hands on him.

If we accept this second interpretation, we do not have a single instance in the entire New Testament of someone receiving a “spiritual gift” except by the laying on of an apostle’s hands.   This observation, of course, does not apply to the conferral of the gift of apostleship. 

So, then, if spiritual gifts are only conferred by the laying on of an apostle’s hands, how does one become an apostle?  I answer on pages 119-120:

Requirements for Becoming an Apostle

According to the Revelation to John, Jesus praises the church at Ephesus for testing “those who claim to be apostles but are not” (Revelation 2:2).  Revelation, however, does not spell out how false apostles are detected.  Luke’s writings identified . . .  the method by which spiritual gifts were conferred—by the laying on of apostles’ hands.  It is suitable, then, that we turn to Luke for information regarding how men became apostles.

In Acts 1:12-2:4 . . . Luke details the choosing of a new apostle to take the place of Judas Iscariot.  He quotes Peter in listing the qualifications for the office:  Therefore, it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us.  For one of these must be a witness with us of his resurrection. (Acts 1:21-22)

If, in order to be counted an apostle, one must have been a personal disciple of Jesus for at least three years and an eye witness of his resurrected body, it seems impossible that a modern-day apostle could exist.  Even Paul apparently had those who questioned his apostleship.  Clearly, Paul was not a personal disciple of Jesus during his ministry from John’s baptism to Jesus’ ascension.  He could, however, on the basis of his conversion experience on the road to Damascus, claim to be a witness of the resurrected Jesus.  He asks rhetorical questions to the Corinthians: “Am I not an apostle?  Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?  Are you not the result of my work in the Lord?  Even though I may not be an apostle to others, surely I am to you!”  (I Corinthians 9:1-2).  In his epistle to the Galatians, he offers his apostolic credentials as they pertain to the three-year discipleship issue: 

I want you to know, brothers, that the gospel I preached is not something that man made up.  I did not receive it from any man nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.  . . . When God . . . was pleased to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not consult any man, nor did I go up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before I was, but I went immediately into Arabia and later returned to Damascus.  Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Peter and stayed with him fifteen days. (Galatians 1:11-18)

Paul claims here that he was indeed a personal disciple of Jesus, although he does not make clear how that instruction proceeded.  Whether his specific mention of a three-year-time-period is significant or not is debatable.

To the Corinthians, he even claims to have learned specific details of Jesus’ earthly life events directly from Jesus:

For I received from the Lord that which I also passed on to you:  The Lord Jesus, on the night in which he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.”  In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; this do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” (I Corinthians 11:23-25)

Paul asserts that he received this historical narrative from the Lord, not from others.  Paul also points out that his apostleship is recognized by the other apostles: “James, Peter, and John, those reputed to be pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship . . .   They agreed that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the Jews” (Galatians 2:9).  If Paul’s apostleship is recognized only after some difficulty, we should certainly not lightly accept the apostleship credentials of anyone living today.  It is relatively safe to say that there are no modern-day apostles.  That being said, it is safe to say that, since spiritual gifts were conferred by the laying on of apostles’ hands, there are no modern-day spiritual gifts.

As I point out on pages 123-124 of Psychotic Entelechy:  The Dangers of Spiritual Gifts Theology,

The process of disseminating gifts would end when the last living apostle lays his hands on the last gift recipient before dying.   . . . The process is complete (teleios).  It will not be repeated in the future.  The recipient has no power to pass on the gift to anyone else.  The New Testament contains no hint that anyone (other than an apostle) who possessed a spiritual gift could pass it on to someone else. . . . Following deductive reasoning, I assert the following: 

·         Major Premise:  Spiritual gifts are only conferred by the laying on of apostles’ hands.

·         Minor Premise:  There are no apostles living in the twenty-first century.

·         Conclusion:  There are no spiritual gifts in the twenty-first century.

On pages 95-98 of Psychotic Entelechy:  The Dangers of Spiritual Gifts Theology, I offer a brief history of God’s communication with humans:

I defined spiritual gifts as the receipt of messages from God. . . this is “history” as communicated from presumed spiritually gifted sources.  The presumption is that much of the historic detail included would have relied on messages from God to certify its accuracy.  Certainly, the Jewish Bible (the Christian Old Testament) accepts the premise that God spoke to and through certain individuals.  That God spoke directly to Moses is the fundamental premise upon which Jewish Law is founded.  The first five books of the Bible (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy) are known as the Torah, the Hebrew word for Law.  According to tradition, Moses is the essential author of all five books.

   Genesis provides a rapid-fire account of more than two thousand years of human history prior to Israel’s four-hundred-year sojourn in Egypt.  Prior to the account of human history, Genesis offers a one-chapter account of the creation of heaven, earth, and the plant and animal kingdoms.  Presumably, if Moses authored the creation and human history accounts, he would need some inspiration from God to certify that his account was accurate.  Moses’ account has God speaking directly to Adam and Eve, warning them not to eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.  Following their Fall, God interrogates them and communicates to them their respective punishments.  To their children, God signifies his preference for the animal sacrifices (of Abel) to the vegetable sacrifices (of Cain).  Then, God warns Cain not to kill his brother.  After Cain murders Abel, God personally interrogates Cain and tells Cain of his punishment.  Later, God speaks to Noah, instructing him to build an Ark.  After the Flood, God provides Noah and his family a brief list of laws.  Then, God does not appear to communicate with humans until he begins to communicate with Abram, whom God renames Abraham.

   In the final three-fourths of Genesis, God communicates frequently with Abraham and his family.  God makes covenants with Abraham, his son Isaac, and Isaac’s son Jacob, whom God renames Israel . . .  Israel has twelve sons who become the patriarchs of the twelve tribes.  One of those sons, Joseph, God takes special interest in, communicating with him through dreams.  God has a special purpose in mind for Joseph, which takes Joseph to Egypt.  His brothers sell him into slavery, but God causes him to rise to leadership in that land.  Eventually, God uses Joseph’s position of influence to rescue his father and his brothers’ families from famine in the land of Canaan as they emigrate to Egypt.  The entire account of Genesis, if authored by Moses, would require that Moses be inspired by God to be certified historically accurate.  Moses’ perspective was four hundred years removed from the most recent historical circumstances he reports on.  The suggestion that Joseph may have written some accounts that Moses found in the Egyptian archives would argue for some historiographical accuracy, but none of the first five books make such an assertion.

   Exodus begins with the Israelites still in Egypt four hundred years later.  Now, the name of Joseph is long-forgotten by the Egyptians and the Israelites have become an enslaved people.  God raises up an Israelite named Moses, educates him in Pharaoh’s palace, and eventually speaks to him through a burning bush, commanding him to lead the Israelites out of Egypt and back to the Promised Land (of Canaan).  God infuses Moses with miraculous powers and, upon his successful campaign to lead the children of Israel out of Egypt, God gives Moses the Law on Mount Sinai.  The various laws and instructions God gives to Moses are detailed in Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.  These four books pertain to historical issues occurring during the lifetime of Moses.  The exception to this observation is the final chapter of Deuteronomy, which discusses the death of Moses.  The primary purpose of spiritual gifts theology in the final four books (of Moses) is to certify the accuracy of Moses’ messages concerning the Law.  The Law (Torah) comes from God.

   After Moses, there is a lesser profusion of spiritual giftedness throughout Jewish history.  God speaks to Moses’ successor Joshua throughout his leadership career in retaking the Land of Canaan.  He performed miracles through Joshua—such as causing the Walls of Jericho to fall.  After Joshua’s death, God inspires and speaks to various judges—Othniel, Deborah, Gideon, Samson, and others.  These judges receive miraculous abilities and counsel from God as they defend and protect Israelites in battle.

   Although Moses, following God’s Law, institutes the priesthood, it is not until later that the High Priest becomes the primary vehicle for God to communicate with humans.  After the time of the Judges, God speaks to Samuel, as a child, and calls him into the priesthood.  God continues to communicate messages to Samuel throughout his career.  Samuel, with God’s direction, anoints the first Israelite king, Saul.  Then, Samuel, with God’s direction anoints King David to replace Saul.  The anointing of Samuel as priest (and the sense in which Samuel’s anointing also made him a prophet) combined with the anointing of David as King (and the sense in which David’s anointing also made him a prophet) introduces a new era in God’s communication with humans.  The three anointed (messianic) offices—prophet, priest, and king—become God’s primary mouthpieces for Israel.  The Hebrew word meaning “anointed one” is “messiah.”  (The Greek word meaning “anointed one,” incidentally, is “christ.”)

   King David, under inspiration from God, writes many psalms.  His son King Solomon, with similar inspiration, writes many proverbs.  Later kings and priests are not considered to have equal inspiration.  Later prophets, however, become the voice of God to Israel.  The prophet Nathan was a contemporary of David.  Elijah, Elisha, Micaiah, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel are the most famous prophets.  Other prophets whose writings are included in the Bible are:  Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi.  Pharisaic and Rabbinic Judaism and Christianity accept the premise that God spoke through these prophets . . .  Pharisaic and Rabbinic Judaism believes that God's activity of speaking through prophets, however, ended with the canonical prophets of the Jewish Bible.  Ezra the scribe instituted a new way for God to speak to Israel—through reading the Torah aloud to the people. Even though the age of the prophets ended with the canonical Tanach (or Old Testament) for the Jews, Pharisaic and Rabbinic Judaism still allowed for the possibility that God might speak through infants and fools.

   Pharisaic and Rabbinic Judaism also taught that God could speak through a Bat Qol (or “mysterious voice”).  This type of communication is claimed by the early Christians on a few occasions.  When Jesus was baptized, a voice from Heaven said: “This is my son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased” (Matthew 3:17 NIV).  When Jesus was transfigured, his disciples were startled by a bright cloud.  A voice from the cloud said: “This is my son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.  Listen to him” (Matthew 17:5 NIV).  When Saul of Tarsus (who later became the Apostle Paul) was confronted on the road to Damascus, he was blinded by a light from heaven and heard a voice saying:  “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?”  Saul asks who is speaking and the voice responds: “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting . . .   Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do” (Acts 9:5-6 NIV).

   Christianity also believes that God continued to speak through the visitation of angels (as when Gabriel announced John’s and Jesus’ births) and through prophets and prophetesses such as Simeon and Anna (Luke 2:25-38) and especially through John the Baptist who lived at the time of Jesus.  Christianity also teaches that God spoke through those (such as apostles and prophets) who had received spiritual gifts in the first generation of the church.

The Holy Spirit bats “cleanup.”  The Bible is NOT a thoroughly human book—written by humans without divine aid and collected and canonized by humans without divine aid.  The logic of Christianity would be tenuous, indeed, if it were but a thoroughly human book.  We may “load the bases” by arguing the logic that the New Testament books were historically and prophetically accurate, even by human historiographical standards.  But, then the Holy Spirit steps up to bat.  He hits a grand slam home run and clears (cleans up) the bases by certifying that the Bible is to be believed because, while it was written by humans using their own symbol systems, it was “inspired” by God.  God must be true though every man be a liar (Romans 3:4--KJV).  Christianity is thoroughly logical!