Tag-Archive for » Holy Spirit «

Degree Mill

Monday, April 01st, 2013 | Author:

“But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.”  John 14:26  NASB

Teach – In academic circles, a “degree mill” is a company that offers you pieces of paper that claim you have a university degree, from a B.A. to a Ph.D.  For a price, these pseudo-institutions send you credentials without requiring any of the hard work of accredited centers of learning.  You just pay your money and hang the bogus degree on your wall.  While I do not believe that all real education must come through accredited institutions, I certainly know what it takes to produce true scholarship.  It takes real work.  Real time commitment.  Real struggle.  Real study.

Except, of course, if you are guided by the Holy Spirit.

Today I received an email in response to my correspondence with a reader who suggested that the Song of Solomon was an allegory about the Church and Christ.  This is a very old Christian interpretation that conveniently ignores the erotic elements of the ancient poetry.  It is also an interpretation that requires the reader to suppose that no one who read the poem prior to the death of Yeshua really understood it.  The one who proposed this allegorical interpretation claimed that “God showed me to interprete [sic] the Bible several ways:  1) literally at face value, 2) as compared to other scriptures 3) as an allegory when apropriate [sic], as Jesus and the writers sometimes did, 4) as the Holy Spirit would interprete [sic] it, sometimes that is literally, allegorically, however He would choose.  I try not to limit the Holy Spirit.”  In other words, since the Holy Spirit tuaght this reader that Song of Solomon is an allegory, we don’t need to investigate any further.  We can by-pass all the contextual, linguistic, cultural and historical research and simply meditate and pray.  The Holy Spirit becomes a private, personal instructor.  And, presto-chango, I receive my official interpreter’s degree from the Holy Spirit degree mill (best of all, I don’t have to pay for it because Jesus already did).

Let’s see how this works out historically.  Based on the idea that men can receive private instruction from the Holy Spirit, we must conclude that The Holy Spirit guided the early Church fathers to reject Messianic Judaism.  The Holy Spirit inspired Augustine and Aquinas to propose the philosophical God of the via negativa.  The Holy Spirit led the Church to persecute the Jews for 1500 years.  The Holy Spirit enabled Martin Luther to see that Jews needed to be exterminated.  The Holy Spirit taught ante-bellum theologians that Negroid people were cursed by God.  The Holy Spirit instructed the Catholic popes to change the day of Sabbath.  The Holy Spirit guided David Koresh to establish the Branch Davidian ministry.  The Holy Spirit leads some current television preachers to teach that God wants to make you rich (if you just send your tithe to me).  You get the idea.  My reader might object to all of these as “not really being from the Holy Spirit.”  But I would ask, “How do you know?”  What is the difference between your claim for private instruction and any of these other claims?  What grounds do you offer for me to trust your Holy Spirit insight?  And as soon as you offer reasons, then I would point out that you are no longer relying on the Holy Spirit as the basis of your claim.

The Greek word didasko in its widest sense means to impart instruction and practical knowledge.  Its Hebrew parallel is lamad.  From an Hebraic perspective, the object of such teaching is to do the will of God.  By the first century, this Hebrew word most often meant instruction in the Torah for the purpose of living according to the commandments.  This implies context, not private spiritual inspiration.  Instruction in godly living is a public, communal  process.  Even Yeshua’s statement is addressed to the disciples (plural), not to individuals.  In the Hebraic community, learning and teaching demand correspondence with Torah and plenty of debate and discussion.  Yeshua would never have suggested that the Holy Spirit is the personal and private revealer of uncontestable truth.  It takes a Greek orientation and a lazy mind to pretend that all I have to do is let the Holy Spirit inform me.

But it’s oh-so-tempting to choose this Holy Spirit escape path.  Then I don’t have to really study.  Then I can claim “divine” authority for my interpretation.  Then I will always be right.

But no one should listen to you.

Wherever I travel, I encounter this penchant for lazy exegesis.  The alternative often seems overwhelming.  Language study, history, culture, theology – all that stuff takes time and effort.  “Why can’t God just reveal it to me?” is the easy way out.  God could, of course, but then you would have to defend your views in the public arena and that would put you right back to square one.  Learning (lamad) is hard work.  It requires many opinions and considerable debate.  Avoid the “Holy Spirit told me” claims like the plague.  They are probably closer to Pharaoh than to Yeshua.

Topical Index:  teach, didasko, lamad, Holy Spirit, John 14:26

Category: Today's Word  | Tags: , , , ,  | 22 Comments

A Word from the Lord

Tuesday, June 26th, 2012 | Author:

And as for you, the anointing which you received from Him abides in you, and you have no need for any one to teach you; but as His anointing teaches you about all things, and is true and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you abide in Him.  1 John 2:27  NASB

Have no need – Let’s just read this verse without its context, culture or theological history.  Why not?  Many do.  Doesn’t it clearly say that you don’t have to study or debate or concern yourself with all the scholarship?  All you need is the “anointing.”  In fact, doesn’t John guarantee that you already have this anointing, and therefore you “have no need” for any teachers?  You’re saved.  You have the Holy Spirit (is He a “possession” of yours?).  What more do you need?  Apparently, nothing!

Did John really endorse what I call the “Holy Spirit epistemology” in this verse?  Did John really mean that no further instruction is necessary?  Just pray and wait for illumination, right?  Perhaps we need to back up a few verses and look at John’s opening statements.  What we find changes the meaning of this very convenient verse.

Let’s start with verse 24.  It’s obviously connected since John is introducing the topic of abiding.  In verse 24 he writes that we abide because we continue to exercise a faith based on what we heard from the beginning.  In fact, John implores us to let the original message have its full impact in our lives.  Of course, John uses Greek terms to express Hebrew ideas.  So when he says “heard,” you can be sure that he doesn’t mean “just listen.”  To hear is to obey.  So abiding is not merely acknowledging or taking notes or storing information away for a rainy day.  It is doing what you have heard.

Clearly this is an allusion to the path of the Tanakh.  In fact, when we realize that John had no other Bible than the Tanakh, when we put aside all of the New Testament documents, then we are left with the obvious conclusion that what his readers heard “from the beginning” could only be the teaching of Moses, as James clearly states in Acts  15:21.  Put the verse in its context.  The reason John’s readers can abide without teaching is simply because they have God’s instructions in hand.  They have the Tanakh and the community.  Furthermore, John’s statement echoes the proclamation of Yeshua in the gospel (John 14:26), “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my Name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.”  If the Spirit is sent from the Father, can we imagine that He would not carry the Father’s message?  If He comes in order to bring the teaching of Yeshua to mind, can we imagine that Yeshua’s views of the Tanakh’s instructions would somehow be altered by the Spirit?  Of course not.  The Father, the Son and the Spirit teach the same thing.  John insists that any teacher who does not convey this consistent message is a false teacher (see verse 23).  His readers have no need of anyone who contradicts the same message preached from the beginning.

The context suggests that John is referring to those who are teaching contrary to what his readers already know to be true.  His readers have no need of any of these kind of teachers.  They have the Spirit, and the promise of the Messiah, to countermand anything such false teachers would say.  The Greek indefinite pronoun, tis, can also be translated “someone,” as in “you have no need of someone to teach.”  But this is not the same as saying that they have no need of any instruction at all.  John’s polemic against those who claim to be teaching the truth, but who in fact are denying the message of Yeshua, does not eliminate all teaching, as the translation “someone” demonstrates.  “Holy Spirit epistemology” that denies the need for instruction is fallacious, especially if it stands in contradiction to “what you heard from the beginning.”

I might suggest that the NASB choice of “any one” rather than “someone” pushes the reader toward the belief that study and consultation is unnecessary.  I hope that this wasn’t the reason for choosing “any one.”  But our contemporary penchant for spiritual individualism and our tendency to ignore history feeds this idea, to our detriment.  John would never have suggested that study was unnecessary.  Neither would he suggest that a believer can be all that God intended if he is separated from biblical tradition and community.  We must shift the paradigm if we are to read the text in its context.  And shift we must!  Otherwise, we can all retire to the armchair and hope that God speaks personally to each of us.

Topical Index:  Holy Spirit, epistemology, instruction, teach, 1 John 2:27

 

Category: Today's Word  | Tags: , , , ,  | 32 Comments

Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit

Thursday, August 27th, 2009 | Author:

There are 3 passages that we have to consider. We will briefly look at the first two and then concentrate on the passage in Mark.

Matthew 12:31-32

Reference to the strong man’s house (Isaiah 49). The issue is about authority. Jesus comes with a sign that can only be interpreted as God acting among the people. Acknowledging this sign is a clear separation between those who understand who Jesus is and who He represents. To reject the implied authority is to reject the One who sent Him. As Jesus says, “If you are not with me, you are against me.”

Luke 12:10

The expression in Luke reminds us of many OT passages. Leviticus 24:11-23, Numbers 11:17 and 27:18, Numbers 15:30-31, Deuteronomy 34:9, Psalm 106:32-33.

The first thing we need to understand is what is blaspheme.

The Hebrew word that parallels the Greek for blasphemy is ne’asa. It signifies the action or attitude where the former recipient of favorable disposition and/or service is consciously viewed and/or treated with disdain. Consider the following synonymous parallels: mārâ “to rebel against authority” (Ps 107:11); ˒ābâ “to be unwilling and disinclined toward obedience” (Prov 1:30); śānē˒ “to hate” (Prov 5:12), not believing in the Lord (Num 14:1), to forsake God (˓āzab, Isa 1:4), mā˒as “to reject,” Isa 5:24, ḥārap “to say sharp things, reproach, scorn” (Ps 74:10).

Notice that it is not about swearing. It is actions, attitudes and words.

But God does forgive our disobedient actions, our sinful attitudes and our vile speech. So, what’s different about this particular sin?

Now we can look at the passage in Mark.

Mark 3:29

First notice the formula expression of this verse (Truly, truly – amen lego humin). What does that tell us? This is the first time that this formula is used in Mark.

This expression establishes authority. That is the real issue at stake in this passage. The authority of God manifest in His saving grace

We must understand the issue of authority before we can answer the next critical question: Who is the one who blasphemes in this verse?

We must look at the context

The passage begins in verse 20

What is the story? The scribes contend that Jesus casts out demons through the power of Satan. Why do they say this?

Jesus replies that if this were the case, Satan would already be defeated.

Then Jesus alludes to the lesson of the strong man and the strong man’s house.

Where does this metaphor come from?

Consider Isaiah 63:10: This is the only passage in all the OT that speaks of grieving God’s Holy Spirit. Here the Hebrew word is atsav, usually translated as sorrow and emotional agony. The same word is used in Genesis 3 to describe the results of the Fall. Here it is a Hebrew verb tense that indicates an active cause. In other words, what these people did had a direct effect on the Spirit of God. Their actions caused something to happen.

What is happening in this passage in Isaiah?

First, it’s a passage about the messianic Servant. Consider the context:

The One who comes to save, garments of red, alone, life blood sprinkled on His clothing, producing salvation by His own arm.

He is filled with lovingkindness and mercy. He appeals to His own people. He heals their affliction and redeems them.

But they rebel against Him. They grieve His Holy Spirit. As a result, He becomes their enemy rather than their savior.

Notice that the description of the messianic savior here echoes the character of God in Exodus 34:6. The character of God is merciful, except note the consequences of rejection of that mercy in Exodus 23:21. Notice that here God says He is sending a representative who carries the authority of His name. Rebellion against God’s representative leads to the impossibility of forgiveness. Why? Because this rebellion denies the authority of God by insulting His name. To deny the authority of the messenger is to deny the authority of the One who sent him.

When Jesus alludes to these OT passages, he shifts the question to one of authority. Just as there were rebellious members of Israel in the first exodus, now there are rebellious members of Israel in the second exodus. Jesus is the second Moses. He is sent in the name of the Father to bring rescue and redemption. But there are those among His own people who deny His authority by suggesting that His power is demonic. In the first exodus, God did not forgive the rebellion of the Israelites. The entire generation died in the wilderness.

Isaiah 63:17 fills in the picture. God hardened their hearts (note the Hebrew verb here)

There are three possibilities for understanding the Greek verb poroo as a Hebrew translation. We can see all three in the description of Pharaoh’s response to God. They are all translated “hardened” in English, but that only means that we don’t understand the nuances – and the nuances make a big difference. The first possible word is hazak. Although it is translated “hardened” in verses like Exodus 4:21, that translation doesn’t really communicate what is happening because hazak normally means “to strengthen” and is most often applied to the idea of “power” (as in “a mighty hand”). When this word is applied to Pharaoh, it means that Pharaoh is unyielding. God simply allows Pharaoh’s natural resistance to be strengthened so that Pharaoh does not relent. The second word is kaved. It means “to make weighty or heavy,” implying either honor or dullness (Exodus 9:7). God allowed Pharaoh’s heart to become dull, that is, to move in the direction of the natural man who does not discern the things of the Spirit, simply by withdrawing common grace. We can see the connection between hazak and kaved. Both involve God allowing the rebellious soul to act without spiritual intervention.

Then there is the third Hebrew word, the one that Jesus probably used. It is qashah. You will find it in Exodus 7:3. It means to become obstinate, resistant or stubborn. You’ll find it in Jeremiah 7:26. Why is it likely that Jesus used this word instead of the others? Because this is the word the prophet uses to describe the condition of disobedient Israel. It is the word for not paying attention to the power and majesty of God. It is applied to the children of Israel in the wilderness and prior to the Captivity. It is about a nation that didn’t listen to those who were sent to from God (see Jeremiah 7:23). When Jesus uses this word, the culpability falls directly on His audience. They resist what God displays.

As a result of this rebellion, they are put to death.

It is possible to reject Jesus as the Messiah during His earthly ministry. Jesus comments on this possibility in the Luke passage. But grieving the Spirit is more than rejecting the demonstration of Jesus as the Messiah while He is on the earth. Grieving the Spirit is the consistent and deliberate resistance to the power of God to save through His anointed One. In other words, while men may reject the Messiah during the time that Jesus brings the message of God’s grace and still be forgiven for that sin, anyone who continues to resist the Spirit excludes himself from the grace of God, with the result that he cannot be forgiven and becomes God’s enemy. To ultimately reject the Messiah by refusing repentance means that forgiveness is not available and can never be available. There is no other means by which we must be saved.

There is a parallel in Jeremiah 5:12 – a denial of the fact that God is the God of authority. The result is utter destruction. To suggest that Jesus’ authority is from Satan is to lie against God. The result will be destruction, just as the prophet said.

Furthermore, Jesus as the messiah is the final revelation of God’s mercy. To insult His authority is to reject the last hope of redemption. There is no other coming rescue, and therefore, no other possibility of forgiveness.

So, there is more here than simply to cut oneself off from future forgiveness by rejecting God chosen One. As Isaiah shows, this rejection turns God from one who provides redemption to one who brings vengeance. This makes God my enemy.

So, who is the one who blasphemes? Jesus points to the religious leaders (the scribes) who should have known the authority of God in the messenger but who denied that authority. For them, there is no forgiveness. God becomes their enemy.

Category: Articles  | Tags: , ,  | 4 Comments