People, Places, Things
In the beginning was the Word, . . . John 1:1
Word – There is no doubt at all that John does not use logos as the Greeks used logos. First, John deliberately structures his thought so that we are reminded of the opening verse of the Tanakh. Everyone knows that. Second, John replaces YHWH with logos in his opening. That alone should tell us John is not thinking of the Greek divine principle. He is thinking of a living God who acts. In fact, John isn’t even thinking of “God” in the same sense as the Greeks think about the gods. John’s God is a verb – divine activity manifest in creative power. If the Hebrew thought patterns perceive the world primarily as verbs (actions), then why would we think that “God” is anything like our Greek concept of “person”? This is a case where we need radical reorientation. We are so used to thinking of persons in terms of “things” that we can’t even imagine what it would be like to see persons as actions. But let’s give it a try.
The Word, logos, is manifested action. Yes, the Word is the person Yeshua but Yeshua is the active incarnation of the divine agency. The Word is YHWH, a form of the verb “to be.” If we want to see who God is, we must look at the actions of the Word (God manifest in human form) for God is displayed and understood in what He does in the person of Yeshua. And the first thing we discover is this: God speaks. The divine spoken word is the manifestation of God’s essential being. He is the speaking God. He is the only speaking God. All idols, all false gods, are not speaking gods. They are blind, deaf and dumb. They are not alive. Any appeal to a god who does not speak is deception and idolatry. The Word is first and foremost the speaking of God in the form of a human being.
Of course, since human beings carry the “image” of God, now we know that this image is not a particular set of attributes but rather the potential for actions. Human being is the manifestation of action modeled after the divine activity. Human being is following after God’s being by doing what He does. The Word expresses what He does perfectly because the Word is the divine agency manifest in the exact expression of God’s actions. The Word is God’s speaking in flesh and blood. To be human in the sense of Genesis 1 is to be the manifestation of the speaking God. How do we do that? By acting as He instructs us to act. Why do we do that? Because acting in these ways manifests His image in our flesh and blood. In other words, obedience is the activity of revealing the God who acts in this world. Each act of obedience speaks God into this place and creates a manifestation of His righteousness. Each act of obedience alters forever the face of the earth because it creates “God speak.”
This reorientation is not as strange as we might think. Don’t we say, “Actions speak louder than words”? What do we mean? That we see the true perspective in what another person does, not in what he says. Imagine if that other person is God. Then His actions are His words. There is no possibility that He would say one thing but do another. His word is His manifested being. That is why He is utterly reliable. God always does what He says.
When the Word became manifest in flesh and blood, that Word was not simply God incarnate in a human being. That Word exhibited verbally who God is. The same activity that brought everything into being is the same activity now manifest in physical form. No longer are our concepts going to be “fleshed out” by people, places and things. Now we will have to see the God who is in the God who acts.
Topical Index: verbs, logos, John 1:1
(Writer 1) Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the Heavens an the earth.
(Writer 2) John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word: the Word was with God and the Word was God.
(Writer 3) Skip – There is no doubt at all that John does not use logos as the Greeks used logos.
Hi Skip,
My problem with John, in the passage above, is twofold.
For me, words are abstractions; “signs” that point to persons, places, things, or actions.
And good writing is supposed to be as clear and concrete as is possible.
In the examples above, two sentences are very clear and concrete and one is not.
It seems to me that John is saying, in very abstract language, that in the beginning was God, and the Word with God was Jesus, and therefore Jesus was God.
I’m not crazy about the implied logic, but do like John’s focus on language (signs) as the way we learn about and communicate with God.
And it seems to me that John is saying that was both God and
Michael,
There is much more to John’s midrash on Genesis 1:1 than meets the eye, but unless you can read Genesis in Hebrew (or have someone explain it to you) you’ll never see it. I’ll try to be brief. It will help if you can remember PaRDeS (Pashat, Remez, Drash, Sod – the four levels of Hebrew interpretation of Scripture).
In Revelation, Jesus said to John, “I am the alpha and omega…” (at least that’s what we have in our English/Greek Bibles), but to me, to hear 2 Jews talking to one another in Greek would be really strange. It seems much more likely (to my simple mind) that Jesus would have spoken to John in Hebrew, in which case He would have said, “I am the aleph and the tav…”
That is really important. Why? Because the Hebrew word אֵת (Alelph-Tav, et) appears something like 611 times in the Hebrew scriptures but is never translated into any other language. In the plain (pashat) sense of the text, it serves as the “direct object pointer”, telling us that the action of the verb is on the object (always the very next word), not the subject, but there is a deeper level of meaning that has had Jewish sages asking for centuries, “Who or what is the Aleph-Tav?”
We have the answer given in Revelation (already mentioned above) – it represents Jesus (Yeshua). In every passage where it appears by itself (rather than attached as a suffix to another word) that passage tells us something about Messiah Yeshua.
What does this have to do with Genesis 1:1? Lets look at the Hebrew:
בְּרֵאשִׁית בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְאֵת הָאָֽרֶץ׃ – B’reshiyt bara elohim et hashamayim v’et ha’aretz
In the beginning (b’reshiyt) created (bara) elohim (God) ET the heavens (hashamayim) and (va) ET the earth (ha’aretz).
The Aleph-Tav appears twice. The first time, before the heavens, standing alone. The second time it is between, or joining the heavens and the earth. The letter “vav” is a picture of a hook (it is literally the conjunction “and”) joining two things together. It is also a picture of a nail. Thirdly, it has the numerical value of 6 – the number of man.
So the first time we see the Aleph-Tav, representing the Messiah, it is in the act of creating the heavens and the earth. The second time we see Him He is joined to the vav, having taken on the form of man, being pierced with a nail to join heaven and earth. Some Jewish sources also say that the vav represents a pillar, and that because this vav is the only one to appear in this verse that it represents the pillar of creation, whom they say is HaMoshiach (the promised Messiah).
Do you think John knew all that? He would have learned it from the age of 3. John 1 (the whole chapter) is an amazingly detailed midrash on Genesis 1:1. There is much more symbology in that verse than we have time to discuss here (for example, if you change the spelling of v’et from vav-aleph-tav to aleph-vav-tav you have the word “oht” which means light – who is “the light of the world”?). In fact, from the letters of the single word “בְּרֵאשִׁית – bereshiyt” you can extrapolate the entire gospel story from creation to redemption to restoration! Truly our God has “told the end from the beginning”, lit. “מֵֽרֵאשִׁית – m’reshiyt – out of the beginning” (Isaiah 46:9-10).
Worthy of an article posted for all to read. If you want to write it up, I will be glad to send it out.
Skip
It is something that has been on my heart to write for a while. I was going to do it as a series of articles on my own blog but I’m happy for it to be posted here when I get it done. Thanks for the offer. Looks like I’d better start working on it…
“It will help if you can remember PaRDeS (Pashat, Remez, Drash, Sod – the four levels of Hebrew interpretation of Scripture). ”
Hi Rodney,
Thanks for responding; I appreciate the time and the effort!
I don’t know much about midrash myself, but your analysis and knowledge of Hebrew is impressive.
Would I be correct in thinking of your analysis as a little “midrash” on John in its own right?
Actually, I have been thinkinga lot about the “four levels” in the last few days in relation to Skip’s comments on “time and space.”
Based on my experience, I would say that the “four levels” is the “key” to any narrative code.
Unfortunately, this universal, formal, structure (“cross hairs”) is Greek and allegorical.
The Bible begins and ends in time but the “four levels” turn time into space into a static picture.
Very easy to understand and teach.
Maybe Hebrew and Greek are like Yin and Yang or love and marriage.
You can’t have one without the other 🙂
No, quite the opposite. PaRDeS is a very Hebrew concept, which basically boils down to the idea that “God is smarter than we are and is perfectly capable of teaching more than one thing from any given scripture” (to quote Brad Scott). Paul uses these teaching methods in his own writings, as do other NT writers.
To refresh our memory:
Pashat – the plain (“black and white”) meaning on the text, the “face value’ if you like.
Remez – the allegorical meaning (it alludes to something else but doesn’t state it succinctly)
Drash = the “practical application” or principle level (“midrash” is literally, “out of the principles”) – how does the text apply to me, what principles can I draw from it that apply to other areas.
Sod – the “mystery” level – that which is hidden and waiting to be discovered deep in the text. This takes into account the pictoral meanings of the individual letters, anagrams, acrostics, gematria (the numeric values of the letters and words) and so on. It is not based on kabbala (Jewish occultic mysticism), although kabbala does use this to derive some pretty strange stuff.
Solomon alludes to this when he says, “It is the glory of God to conceal a thing, the privelege of Kings to search it out” (my paraphrase).
No, rather they open up a much wider vista of meaning within the text. The scriptures come alive when you begin to dig deeper and find the hidden treasures.
One caveat though – the things discovered through digging deeper can never contradict the pashat (plain reading) meaning of the text. They may add to it, provide links to other seemingly unconnected phrases and passages, clarify, explain or reveal otherwise hidden truths but they will never contradict.
Hi Rodney,
Maybe I opened a can of worms and now I’m not quite sure how to close it.
I agree PaRDeS is a very Hebrew concept; I was thinking “layers” of texts (time/space).
Would you agree that the Torah is a physical text with a beginning and an end?
That it says exactly what God wants it to say; nothing more or nothing less?
That when I dig a weed out of my lawn, I alter the landscape.
But that I never really “dig” anything out of the Torah.
And that one should never want to alter the language of the Torah.
So when a Rabbi interprets the Torah, he is really creating a “new” text.
This new text “sits” on top of the sacred text; illuminating it (obviously a metaphor).
That the interpretation occupies a separate space and was written at a different time.
In that sense PaRDeS seemed somwhat “Greek” to me.
My turn. Because Hebrew is unique as a pictographic and phonetic language at the same time, it displays more than one level of meaning. Furthermore, because Hebrew is a “constructed” language built around the architecture of consonants, it displays relationships within the structure that other languages do not. Finally, because Hebrew is a consonant-only written language, it allows a built-in fluidity (by substituting vowels) that other languages cannot. These factors contribute to the “layers” of meaning in the text. They are not added to the text but rather already contained within the text, kind of like opening a box inside a box inside a box. PaRDeS is a way to get at these boxes, but it is not the only way.
Hi Skip,
First let me say that what you are saying above is perfectly clear and makes sense to me.
But I’m not making my point very clear, and maybe it is not worth making 🙂
Please bear with me.
Seems to me that we have three things here:
1. pictographic and phonetic language (the physical Hebrew text)
2. our common language to communicate (English)
3. our mind / consciousness + intellect
When we speak of “boxes” and “levels” it seems to me that we are talking about linguistic conventions that are in or minds or in our documented explanations of the text rather than in the test itself.
Please take this with a grain of salt 🙂
Hi, I was responding to this comment.
My turn. Because Hebrew is unique as a pictographic and phonetic language at the same time, it displays more than one level of meaning. Furthermore, because Hebrew is a “constructed” language built around the architecture of consonants, it displays relationships within the structure that other languages do not. Finally, because Hebrew is a consonant-only written language, it allows a built-in fluidity (by substituting vowels) that other languages cannot. These factors contribute to the “layers” of meaning in the text. They are not added to the text but rather already contained within the text, kind of like opening a box inside a box inside a box. PaRDeS is a way to get at these boxes, but it is not the only way.
Are you familiar with Benjamin Lee Whorf, Language, Thought and Reality. Boxes and Levels are elements of a paradigm that sees the world in a certain way. Language is the projector we use to display our view of the world. Language does not exist apart from the worldview that frames it. So, the conventions are really part of the frame. Change the frame = change the conventions.
So, the conventions are really part of the frame
Thanks Skip,
I can’t remember much about Whorf at this point, but am familiar with his work.
And I think that was the point I was trying to make 🙂
“the Messiah, it is in the act of creating the heavens and the earth.’
Hi Rodney,
Just to clarify my view and “criticism” of John.
Whatever John’s intentions were, his words are used to argue that Yeshua is God.
In my view, just because the Messiah was with God at the creation does not mean he is God.
Ah, but if he is there with God, but not God, then do we have two gods? OR a God and a demi-god?
“OR a God and a demi-god?”
Hi Skip,
Looks like a God and demi-gods to me:
Job 1:6 One day the Sons of God came to attend on Yahweh, and among them was Satan.
You won’t find that translation in Hebrew.
Michael, the scriptures are full of evidence to suggest, nay even scream, otherwise.
For a detailed explanation of the evidence can I suggest that you have a listen to Eddie Chumney’s teaching Is Yeshua YHVH? I think you’ll find it interesting and it will give you some more food for thought, if nothing else. There is also a transcript available here.
Blessings.
“the scriptures are full of evidence to suggest, nay even scream, otherwise”
Hi Rodney,
Let’s just start at the beginning:
Matthew 3:16 As soon as Jesus was baptised he came up from the water, and suddenly the heavens opened and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove on him. And a voice spoke from Heaven, “This is my Son, the Beloved; my favor rests on him.”
There are two main characters in this story, one is Yahweh God and the other is Yeshua, the Son of God.
Yeshua, the Son of God, never says he is Yahweh God or God the Father.
In this story, God sends his Son to earth to help save mankind.
The Son of God is killed by other men.
Yahweh God is not a man and he cannot be killed.
Eddie Chumney is not for real IMO.
Actually, when you read the Gospels from a Hebraic perspective (and even sometimes in Greek and English), you can’t miss the constant allusions and images of Yeshua as God. For example, the gospel of John uses the Greek phrase ego eimi (sometimes translated “I am he”) which literally means “I AM” and is a direct allusion to Exodus. Hard to miss if you are Jewish. There are many more, especially in Yeshua’s use of quotations from the Tanakh.
Skip I am glad that you added commentary regarding “the methods”!
Undoubtedly there is (as Sha’ul stated) MUCH BENEFIT in being a Jew … and this counts for the adopted grafted in members that go all the way and embrace the Jewish heritage as one’s own …. culture, mind-set, language, etc. … I can not argue or debate this issue since I personally understand this dynamic and praise The Lord for such blessings.
However …. there are other ways to get to deeper levels of truth within The WORD! With the right heart attitude and thirst for haEmet (truth), The LORD will provide discernment. As we have stated in the past … if a donkey can be made to speak then our minds can be enlightened!
I think we should view matters in terms of opportunity and personal passion. We happen to have the luxury of living now. A time wherein the tools for development are readily available and virtually free for our utilization. It is sad that so few take advantage of such blessings. Yet conversely there are folks that even with the right gumption and pursuit remain challenged. As we know everyone is not destined to be a scholar or teacher
But more important than a deep understanding of many matters is pulling the scales off the eyes to see what is right in front of us. Seeing the important matters that are not complex. Matters such as the integral perfection of The WORD from start to finish. The eternal covenant … who is Israel … how are we supposed to live? … what is our purpose? … should we embrace Torah? … how do we fit into the plan? How can I jump start my relationship with Yeshua?
OK … so PaRDeS is cool and the Hebrew methods are quite useful indeed … yet at the end of the day these things represent blessings above and beyond. What is crucial is that we abide within Yeshua in a manner that gets us all “home”. We need to understand that what is required is a humble and repentant heart that seeks to lovingly obey and please ELOHIM through HIS Spirit! At the end of the day the mark of an Israelite and the community is obedience to what G_D demands … not elegant thoughts. The mark of an Israelite is action … not understanding! Obedience is action and these are actions that will deliver blessings, joy and strengthen our relationship with ELOHIM!
Ultimately we must keep in mind that Abraham is our model … not Hillel the Elder (founder of the House of Hillel School for Tannaïm – Sages of the Mishnah) … or Maimonides aka Rambam … while keeping in mind as well that Yeshua was the greatest of all Jewish Rabbis.
Praise Yeshua the ONE WHO provides what is needed to all and is no respecter of persons! He blesses abundantly those that live on milk and those that live on meat! 🙂
Totally agree. Study to show yourself is the direction for all, but obedience comes before everything else. These things are not too difficult for you to do. That promise prevails.
Hi Skip,
I understand and agree.
I see what Yeshua says and understand that brilliant people can argue persuasively that Jesus is God.
But when I read the Bible that’s not what I see.
In my view, Jesus is a Master of language.
And Jesus can be very clear when he wants to be; one word describes the Pharisees: Hypocrites!
There is no question the Yeshua wants us to see him as being “One with God.”
But why would Jesus talk to God the Father and tel us to pray to God the Father, if he is God the Father?
The story would make no sense.
How could the greatest story ever told make no sense? 🙂
Good question. But, of course, the story wasn’t written for us, was it? It was written for an audience that understood all the Hebraic idioms, the implications and the issues. Which is exactly why many were so upset and wanted him dead.
“Being” human is therefore humans “being” God on this earth to others. (I am not saying we are God) We, being human, made in His image, allow God to become flesh and blood to others and ourselves as He is manifested in us, as we “do” what He does…thus “being” human is naturally a constant state of “doing”.
So therefore if we are not “doing” what God directs us to do, we are not “being” human, made in His image, because His image is a contant state of “doing” what He directs us to do and “being” Him to others. This is what makes us “alive” in Yeshua Messiah, our “being”.
So therefore if we are not “being” we are not alive but dead. So does that make us “human been”? 🙂 (sorry I had to)
This is one of those…I got! No I don’t! Yes, I got it….I think!?
Thanks Skip.
“Your actions speak so loudly, I can’t hear what you say.”
I’ll “weigh-in” with this-
“Even a child is known by his doings, whether his work be pure, and whether it be right.” (Proverbs 20.11)
Kabod (glory) is the (very) Hebrew word for “weight.”
“Weigh” these words:
We we do speaks louder than what we say.
Who we are speaks louder than what we do.
Whose we are speaks louder than who we are. kavod (weight)
One thing we should notice- when YHWH speaks- life happens! The words of (the) Christ do carry a bit of weight- do they not? (Are we listening, yet?)
Hi Carl,
Very interesting!
Thanks for weighing in 🙂
Shalom,
And the first thing we discover is this: God speaks. The divine spoken word is the manifestation of God’s essential being. He is the speaking God.
Skip continues on and makes the case that ELOHIM, (perfectly Righteous), through Yeshua is defined by HIS WORD … because HIS actions reflect HIS WORDS without fail. Ahmein!
Now before we go off and decide that there is little importance in what we say versus what we do … let us think twice. Speaking is critically important from a Hebraic perspective.
Most folks are aware of James’ declarations about the tongue:
1:26 If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man’s religion is vain ….
3:5 Even so the tongue is a little member, and boasteth great things. Behold, how great a matter a little fire kindleth! 3:6 And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell. 3:7 For every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the sea, is tamed, and hath been tamed of mankind: 3:8 But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison.
And of course Yeshua declared that what defiles a person “spiritually” is what comes out of their mouth as an exposure of their heart attitude.
Moreover .. a cursory look within Scripture contains numerous entries detailing the problems with tongues: riv l’shonot; lashon seter; leshon tarmit; leshon mirmah; leshon remiyyah; lashon hara; leshon tahpukhot; leshon arumim and so forth … these represent various “bad uses” of the tongue and sadly the bad tongue entries far outweigh the good tongue entries within Scripture.
Perhaps it is not coincidental that Shav’ot brought “tongues of fire” upon the believers! 🙂 (This is a different commentary most assuredly)
Anyway …. our actions are certainly important … but what we say is important as well. Words can create or destroy … in Hebraic thought there is indeed power in words and speech is not trivialized at all. So let us copy our master …. let us speak well and act accordingly! Or rather let us speak a whole lot less and act! 🙂
Nice commentary Skip!
Ah, yes, and a lot more to say about the false statement, “Sticks and stones can break my bones but words can never hurt me.” Words have power. They are not simply phonetic descriptors. They are real. They are actions. They are compressed essence.
Skip … “words are compressed essence” …
Sums it up beautifully! 🙂
Michael,
Define “killed”. If our body dies, do we cease to exist? Or does it mean that our flesh dies but our “nefesh” lives on? Do we merely cease to exist as a “mortal being” or do we cease altogether?
If YHVH takes on/took on the form of man i.e. became one of us and chooses to lay down the life of His physical form, can He not therefore be “killed” as you or I can be? Does the fact that He dies mean that He ceases to exist until His resurrection? I suggest not.
You’re entitled to your opinion, of course. At least read the transcript, look up the scripture references that he quotes (too many for this forum) and consider whether or not your beliefs align with scripture. I’m not going to judge one way or the other. I know what I believe, and that we don’t necessarily agree – that’s OK. To quote an old Jewish adage, “when Messiah comes, he will interpret all things”. All I ask is that we all check ourselves against the plumb-line, once in a while (that being the scriptures, of course).
Actually, my Bible begins in Genesis, not Matthew ;-). Therefore, anything I read later on in the book has to be measured against the standard established “in the beginning” (ref. Isaiah 46:9-10).
In the end though, we can agree to disagree and not let the details get in the way of good fellowship. I think that’s the mature way. Blessings!
Michael,
Good morning Rodney,
I will respond inline.
Mike: “Yahweh God is not a man and he cannot be killed.”
Rodney: Define “killed”. If our body dies, do we cease to exist? Or does it mean that our flesh dies but our “nefesh” lives on? Do we merely cease to exist as a “mortal being” or do we cease altogether?
Mike: Understand and agree with your point.
Rodney: If YHVH takes on/took on the form of man i.e. became one of us and chooses to lay down the life of His physical form, can He not therefore be “killed” as you or I can be? Does the fact that He dies mean that He ceases to exist until His resurrection? I suggest not.
Mike: If you could show me textual evidence that Yeshua = YHVH + body of Christ, which seems to be your thesis, your logic would be valid. At this point, you have not provided any evidence to support your thesis, so the burden of proof is on you IMO.
Mike: “Eddie Chumney is not for real IMO.”
Rodney: You’re entitled to your opinion, of course. At least read the transcript, look up the scripture references that he quotes (too many for this forum) and consider whether or not your beliefs align with scripture. I’m not going to judge one way or the other. I know what I believe, and that we don’t necessarily agree – that’s OK. To quote an old Jewish adage, “when Messiah comes, he will interpret all things”. All I ask is that we all check ourselves against the plumb-line, once in a while (that being the scriptures, of course).
Mike: I did read the transcript and looked up the scripture. In my view, Mr Chumney is chumming for fishes and he provides very good bait. But he does not even try to prove his points IMO.
Mike: If a person believes Jesus is YHVH, I don’t argue with them. I’m arguing with you because I’m assuming you like to argue. 🙂
Mike: I want to know the truth and as much as I can about the Bible.
Rodney: Actually, my Bible begins in Genesis, not Matthew . Therefore, anything I read later on in the book has to be measured against the standard established “in the beginning” (ref. Isaiah 46:9-10).
Mike: Good point.
Rodney: In the end though, we can agree to disagree and not let the details get in the way of good fellowship. I think that’s the mature way. Blessings!
Mike: Thanks, I agree
John deliberately structures his thought??? What was written proceeded from Yahweh and not manufactured in John’s brain.
Unfortunately you ignore the cultural, emotional, historical and personal elements of the literature in your quip. Unless we read, “and God said” or something to that effect, we can be fairly certain that the HUMAN author of the words is expressing HUMAN relationship with a divine message. That means the author of the words, not the ORIGINATOR, has his own personality embedded in the text. Except for Revelation, no NT author claims to be writing canonized Scripture. They are all writing according to what they believed and were “moved” in some way by some means to write, but this does not erase their individuality. What you suggest implies some sort of dictation theory of inspiration, a theory that may be theologically motivated but is not supported by the actual facts of the text itself.