Tag-Archive for » worldview «

Adam’s Taxonomy

Wednesday, August 03rd, 2011 | Author:

Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name.  Genesis 2:19  NASB

Name – Adam must have worked overtime.  Can you imagine how long it would take to name all the living creatures?  Considering that there are approximately 30 million species of insects alone, Adam’s task would have taken more than his lifetime.  Obviously, this verse is not about identifying a Genesis taxonomy.  But if it’s not about giving names to every living creature, what is it about?

To answer this question, we need to investigate the difference between our view of the structure of the world and the ancient Near Eastern view of the structure of the world.  Our view is based on individualization and identification of things.  A taxonomy is a list of individual creatures according to identifiable similarities and differences.  Our Western worldview sees the world as a collection of entities, causally related within a closed box called the universe.  The categories we use to define the world rest on this idea of individual peculiarity.  From a linguistic point of view, we see the world as nouns tied together by verb relationships.

But that’s not the way the ancients saw the world.  In the ancient worldview, the cosmos is the functional expression of the gods.  What mattered was not the existence of individual things but rather the function and role assigned by the gods to various entities.  In fact, according to ancient cosmologies, existence itself was tied to function and role.  In other words, something came into being when it had a function in the world.  This means the existence is defined in terms of external relationships, not in terms of internal concepts.  What exists is what can be seen in its function in the world.  We actually see this perspective in Genesis 1.  The sun does not come into existence until it has a role to play (a sign in the sky), but light comes into existence when it separates.  That’s why light can exist without the creation of the sun.  Read the opening verses again and you will see that each step of creation is about function.  What exists exists because it does something, and that “something” can be observed!  Nothing exists without purpose.

When Adam names the living creatures, he does something that is not found in other ancient cosmologies.  He functions in the role usually assigned to the gods.  He brings into existence what he names because he identifies function.  Usually only the gods can do this, but in Hebraic thought, Man cooperates with God in determining the function of other living creatures.  In other words, what Adam names expresses the relationship of that creature to Man.  What Adam names is what that creature does for him.  The point of the verse is not to provide a taxonomy but rather to establish a relationship.  Living creatures named by Adam play a role in Adam’s life.  Those not named simply don’t “exist” for him.  This ancient Near Eastern concept is crucial for understanding the statement that Adam names Havvah.

We tend to think that the Hebraic view of naming is about identifying the essence of the thing named, but what we imply is that naming identifies some internal inherent property of the thing.  This is a Greek worldview.  What we must realize is that Hebraic naming establishes the external function of the thing named.  Naming gives the thing purpose in relationship to the one who names.  Naming is about what the thing does because what it does is what it is.  It does not exist apart from its purpose.  And that purpose can be observed.

Did you get that?  Do you see the difference between our Western view and the ancient Semitic view?  Now apply this difference to Genesis 1:26.  What does it mean to be made in the likeness of God?  What does it mean to be named male and female?  In other words, what is your purpose?  How are you related to the One who named you?  What do you do for Him?  What are the external, observable functions you fulfill?

Our typical religious language about internal changes and heart relationships, about hidden transformations and spiritual restoration of the soul has no meaning in an Hebraic worldview unless it is accompanied by external, functional, observable evidence.  In Semitic thought, no man is saved because his soul is saved.  Men are rescued when their lives demonstrate clear differences.  Men are verbs, not nouns, and verbs are actions.  If you have been rescued, you will act differently because your purpose has changed.  It will be obvious to others.  You can’t go in two directions at the same time.

Topical Index:  name, purpose, function, worldview, Genesis 2:19

 

Category: Today's Word  | Tags: , , , ,  | 16 Comments

Conversion

Wednesday, September 23rd, 2009 | Author:

“. . . to open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the authority of Satan to God; in order that they may receive forgiveness for sins, and an inheritance among those being sanctified by faith in Me.” Acts 26:18

To Turn – It’s quite common for Christians to speak of Paul’s conversion on the road to Damascus. Unfortunately, that’s imported theology. The Greek verb epistrepho is consistently used for the conversion of Gentiles, never for the conversion of Jews. Paul’s mission was to bring the Gentiles into the house of Israel through Yeshua. He explains that mission to Agrippa in this passage. He says Yeshua instructed him to open the eyes of the Gentiles and enable them to convert from a life dictated by the demands of Satan to a life under the benevolence of God. That mission statement could hardly be ascribed to the Jews. They were not under the authority of Satan. Jews did not convert to the God of Scriptures. They already believed in the one true God. What they needed to see was the truth about the Messiah Yeshua. But nowhere in the New Testament (the Ketuvim Netzarim – writing of those who follow the Nazarene Yeshua) is this ever called a conversion.

You will find the same Greek verb used in Acts 11:21 concerning the Gentiles in Antioch, in Acts 14:15 for the appeal to men in Lystra, in Acts 15:19 where James specifically refers to the Gentiles and in James 5:19 and 20 where it is applied to returning sinners. This Greek verb is the equivalent of the Hebrew shuv, the most important verb in the Tanakh for returning to the one true God of Israel.  But in the Ketuvim Netzarim it is never applied to the house of Israel, even to those who are disobedient members of the house.

Almost all of us are converts. We came from Gentile backgrounds. We served false gods, perhaps not intentionally but certainly willingly. We chased the dreams the world offered. We subscribed to religions of man-made dogmas. We were far from the house of Israel. So, epistrepho applies to us. Somehow God touched us and brought us into the company of His people. We are converts. Unfortunately, in this age many ethnic Jews also need to be converted because in spite of their heritage, they are really Greek in the way they think and act. They are just as much citizens of the world as we were. But when Sha’ul wrote his letters and when Luke wrote his chronicle, there was a clear distinction between those who were faithful followers of God (Jews) and those who were outside the house of Jacob. Conversion meant becoming an adopted son or daughter of Israel’s God, not of some new religion called Christianity. Sha’ul was never a Christian. Neither were any of Yeshua’s closest disciples. They were all Jews who believed Yeshua was the promised Messiah.

Why is this so important? What difference does it matter now that Christianity is well-established as a religion that also worships the one true God? The reason it matters is simple: Sha’ul thinks, speaks, writes and preaches as a Messianic Jew. In fact, every author of the New Testament has the same worldview – Jewish. As soon as we start to treat the words of these men as if they were something other than the words of Messianic believing Jews, we misunderstand them. They do not share the worldview of the Greeks. They do not employ Scripture in their letters the way that Greek thinkers do. They do not have the same view of social responsibility, government, ethics, money, power, religion or the “church.” Their worldview comes from second Temple Judaism, massaged by rabbinic thinking. If we want to understand them, we must resist all attempts to “convert” them to a new religion. They never left Judaism. They just saw their Messiah come.  Conversion is for us, the outsiders.  A Gentile  converts.  A Jew just believes.

Topical Index: conversion, epistrepho, shuv, Judaism, worldview, Acts 26:18

For today’s photo,  click here – Oxford

Category: Today's Word  | Tags: , , , , ,  | 19 Comments

Pattern Recognition

Thursday, August 27th, 2009 | Author:

and do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect. Romans 12:2

Conformed – Let’s go to visit the blacksmith. Of course, today you might have to travel a long way to find one. Most of the operations of a blacksmith have been given to machines. But we all know what a blacksmith does. He takes metal and shapes it into something useable. He heats, bends and pounds on the metal until he produces a sword, a plow or a horseshoe. That takes real effort and a lot of beating. And that’s what Paul has in mind with the Greek word suschematizo. Literally, it means to shape according to a pattern. It is “to fashion with.” The verb implies a schematic. This is constructing by blueprint.

Paul instructs us not to be shaped with the pattern of this age. But we wont’ be able to identify the pattern without adopting Paul’s worldview. Why didn’t Paul spell out the pattern to avoid? Why isn’t the next verse something like this: “Don’t smoke, drink or go to wild parties?” Why did Paul feel confident that his readers would know what he meant without mentioning the details?

The answer is built into the culture of the early church. When I became a Messianic believer in the first century, I entered into the commonwealth of Israel. As James points out in Acts 15, I heard Moses taught every week. My culture was the culture of Torah. The people of my congregation were practicing Torah. I prayed, learned and lived Torah. And Torah was radically different from the patterns of behavior in the surrounding world. My conversion brought me in touch with an entirely different way of living, a way that challenged my previous patterns at home, at work and at worship. Paul doesn’t have to spell it out because the ways of the “new” man were an obvious part of the community.

But things changed. The “church” adopted a Greek worldview. In the process, it moved from a Torah-oriented culture of radical difference to a culture that embraced, accommodated and, in some cases, even promoted patterns that would have been considered anathema in previous centuries. That syncretization is still going on today. Now we are so far removed from the culture of Torah that we no longer know the difference between the patterns of this age and God’s point of view. Because the “church” has adopted the world’s ways a little at a time over nineteen centuries, we have moved away from God’s worldview in incremental steps. We are like the proverbial frog in the heated pot. Since the change is only one degree at a time, we don’t notice the difference until it kills us.

You can get your cold slap in the face by reading Deuteronomy seriously. Any reading shows us the dramatic contrast between Paul’s view of godly patterns and our view of syncretism. It is impossible to read the exhortations in the New Testament for godly living if we remove those exhortations from the culture of Torah. That is why the church today has nothing really radical to say to the world. The church is the world, wrapped in God-language. It is not radically different. It does not compete with the culture of the world. It does not offer a completely different way of life. No wonder we are so confused and impotent. We can’t be transformed because we are trying to tweak the world’s blueprints instead of throwing them in the trash.

So, what can we do? Well, we can start by changing what we are able to change, right now. We can stop trying to accommodate to the world’s timetable, expectations and attitudes. We can start with one step from Deuteronomy today, and add another tomorrow. We can be willing to be different. The patterns of this age are no friends to the righteous no matter how well they have been shaped to fit the pew.

Topical Index: syncretism, suschematizo, fashion, conform, Romans 12:2, worldview

Category: Today's Word  | Tags: , , , , ,  | 13 Comments

Paradigm Shift

Sunday, May 03rd, 2009 | Author:

I will bless YHWH who counsels me. Indeed, my mind instructs me in the night.  Psalm 16:7

My Mind – Would a Hebrew poet say that his “mind” instructs him in the night? Think about it. Even though the contemporary translation includes the word “mind,” the word does not appear in the Hebrew. Oh, you might say, “Well, that’s because the word in Hebrew would be lev – heart.” But guess what? That word isn’t in the text either. In fact, the text says simply, “who counsels me, also in the nights my kidneys teach me .” What in the world does this mean? Does it mean that I have to get up in the middle of the night to go to the bathroom and then I contemplate God’s goodness? I hardly think that’s what David means.

We begin with the Hebrew word kilyah. In Hebrew thought, the kidneys, not the mind, are the seat of emotions. They are the most inward part of me, the place where my deepest feelings lie. Investigation of this word shows that it comes from the root kilah which means “to complete, accomplish, end, finish, consummate.” This is an interesting connection with the idea of emotions. Do emotions bring something to an end? We usually think of emotions as propelling an action, initiating rather than completing. But maybe we have it wrong. Maybe the Hebrew view, where emotions are the last in the series of obedient acts, is more in line with reality than the Greek view, where emotions are the uncontrollable initiators of action. It’s worth considering. What would happen if you saw your emotions as the final stage of obedience rather than the opening disruption of temptations for disobedience. Maybe James’ first chapter would read a little differently too.

So, why do contemporary translations remove the word for kidneys and replace it with something like “mind?” The answer is obvious. The paradigm of the translator is Greek. When I assume that the only place of instruction is in the mind, then anything that speaks about teaching must be a rational exercise. So, I change the word to fit my assumptions, and in the process, I import an alien worldview. Does my mind instruct me in the night? For a poet who has just extolled the unsurpassed virtue of YHWH’s direct counsel, would it make sense to immediately suggest that his own mind is the source of nightly instruction? No, the introduction of the thought “my mind” comes from a different worldview, one not compatible with the Hebrew perspective.

This verse tells us something very important about the Hebrew worldview – and consequently about how we operate within God’s Kingdom. God instructs our emotions. They are not run-away step-children of human existence. They are not something to fear because they cause us to careen out of control (the Greeks believed this). They are direct links to the ways of God. In the night, when I am most at home with myself, God teaches me how to feel. And the reason He does is so I can complete the human interaction with Him. My experience with God is not a head-trip. It is not simply rational control over my circumstances or a stoic resignation to my situation. I feel – and God uses those feelings to help me close the door on one thing and open it on another. The Hebrew word-picture for kilah helps us see this. It portrays “what comes from controlling the open palm.” Emotions do not run me. They are part of the way God made me in order that I might experience what comes when He is controlling the open palm. Then, as David says, “I will bless YHWH who counsels me.”

Topical Index: emotions, feelings, kidneys, kilyah, kilah, Psalm 16:7, worldview

Category: Today's Word  | Tags: , , , , , ,  | 17 Comments