What is God's Glory? Devastating Love
Are we sure we recognize God's Glory when we see it?
I ask the question because most often when we hear God's glory taught we are led to think of the Shekihnah Glory. - the great, awesome, fearsome, totally overwhelming phenomenon of God's visible presence. It is described as a 'shining', a 'light' - it is effulgence in its most perfect and absolute form. And all of these things would be true according to the manner in which God revealed Himself in the Old Testament as well as in the Revelation given to the Apostle John.
But in the New Testament as a whole, this is no longer presented to us as the ultimate expression of God's Glory. Of course we do have the event on the Mount of Transfiguration, where for a moment Jesus is clothed again with His heavenly splendor before His death, resurrection, and ascension. But interestingly enough it isn't this event that the Apostle John highlights as the ultimate example of God's glory.
The event that John held forth as the ultimate expression of God's nature - His glorious nature - was of a very different kind - something that we would never of have guessed on our own.
It's a good reminder to us that unless God reveals Himself to us, we can't know who and what He is. The recognition of this helps us to separate the wheat from the chaff of our thoughts and impressions about God. It helps us from straying into a God dishonoring theology based on logic rather than revelation.
Some who would honor 'god' seek to do so almost exclusively based upon judgement of sin. Islam comes to my mind first and foremost for this view, although there are pseudo-christian sects (lowercase 'c') that do the same thing against whatever thing they hate the most: It could be homosexuality; it could be merely a certain ethnicity such as being Jewish or of African descent that invites attack.
Others would seek to honor 'god' exclusively for his love. This could be folks that would be called 'universalists' - those that believe a good, loving god would never send anyone to hell so therefore since we know God is loving - everyone must in the end be A-OK.
Yet others get closer to the truth and understand that God speaks of both His love for sinners and His justice against sin, so surely any 'ultimate' expression of His nature must involve at least both of these things.
This is very, very close to what God has revealed - but it isn't yet quite right. We have the building blocks in place but the question of emphasis remains.
Among the many threads that run through the Gospel of John: the eternity and Deity of the Logos (Jesus), His role as the Creator God and sustainer (the One who works 'sunistemi' - literally, 'to hold together so that existence is possible') of everything that exists, His role as light in the darkness so that all men can believe, among others... in and among all of these threads (which are themselves expressions of God's Glory), we come to the very best, the very brightest, the most shocking display- what in his Gospel the Apostle John points out as the very greatest - public display of God's Glory.
Do you know what it is? :-)
John 12:23-32 (NIV)
God has determined that the ultimate expressions of His glory are to be found in the sacrificial death and bodily resurrection and ascension of His Son. And all of this motivated by the truth of His love as expressed in John 3:14-21.
The Holy Spirit through the writer to the Hebrews brings this point home by pairing Jesus as the ultimate image of God's glory with His death on the cross as the ultimate applied expression of that glory.
Hebrews 1:1-4 (Amplified Bible)
And through Isaiah and John the Baptist - Isaiah 40:3-5 (NIV)
In all of the ways that God has ever spoken to us about Himself, Jesus is the clearest and finest description He has ever and will ever provide this side of Heaven. This ultimate message from God drives home the truth of His loving nature with the exclamation point of the cross.
I believe William Temple probably said it best - from "Readings in St. John's Gospel" (1950), London: MacMillan - Notes on John 1:14):
This of course begs the question: is what William Temple said correct?
After all, we can look at a passage of Scripture like Romans 3:25-26 (NIV):
Great truth here right? In the cross God is indeed really doing two things in acting out His nature: He is being 'just', and He is being 'the One Who justifies those who have faith in Jesus'. 'Just' in that He isn't letting sin go unpunished - because if He did that He would instantly become sinful Himself, and the 'Justifier' in that by faith in Christ's death on the cross we can accept God's justice against sin that fell on Christ and we can go free.
And if we didn't look at or know anything else, we might be led to believe that these are the only two things going on, and that they get equal billing. God being 'just' against sin, and God being 'the Justifier' in regards to sin and Jesus on the cross. Perhaps a 50/50 split with God being if you will (and yes, these are inaccurate and gross terms - stick with me ) 50% justice against sin and 50% love for the sinner?
I just bring this up because one comes across this idea so much when discussing theology and the cross. God's love is made just another one of His attributes like perhaps His justice, and some make it seem there is this tension in God (or what we perceive as tension) - this spirit says things like: 'God's seething ocean of wrath being held back by the damn of His love' - stuff like that - things that seem to indicate God is in tension with Himself and therefore one can extract a theology full of 'tensions' and we're told we should just live in those tensions because that's how God is, or that's the only way we can understand Him in our state as fallen creatures. I think you know what I mean.
The issue at hand though, is to make sure we represent God correctly. What we must not do is slander Him by saying something about Him that He hasn't said about Himself. If you ever listen to any of my preaching you'll recognize this as one of my 'tag phrases' I bring in all the time. I'm very incensed about it, and I am so because I know my Bible and I know my God. I hate to see Him misrepresented, but most especially in a way that hurts those who need Him the most.
That would be horrible, because the reason we are still here - the reason we are still on Earth and not in Heaven - is to be a witness to Who God is and What it is that He has done. We are to witness and teach in the very name of God. 'Name' means His nature and character. If we misrepresent or distort that, we've totally failed at the job He gave us to do, and to make things worse - it will have been unnecessary because He gave us enough information that we didn't have to make that mistake.
We don't have to be like Job's group of well meaning but eventually worthless friends - you know, the ones that God got so angry with because they attributed things to Him that He had not attributed to Himself - I call it the sin of Eliphaz, but whatever. We don't have to be on that road. We get to be like the Old Testament prophets and the New Testament Apostles, in the sense that God has given us enough through them so that we know how God Himself defines where the different emphases should go.
I kind of think this latter approach is a better idea. Instead of guessing, instead of trying to derive something with a logical approach that may or may not be ultimately rational (ultimately true), why not just read what God has said?
Please consider:
In the Old Testament we have Moses asking to see "God's Glory".
Exodus 34:5-7 (NIV):
(Here God proclaims His name twice - 'the LORD, the LORD' is 'Yahweh, Yahweh' - this is God's personal name. He is emphasizing through repetition that He is a personal God. He isn't some metaphysical force or simply a set of moral concepts - He is a person. He made us in His image as persons and He relates to us on a personal level.
(Just as an aside, what one finds going forward in all of God's revelation is that this means He doesn't deal with us on a 'cause and effect' level. That is reserved for objects, not people. How He has determined to deal with us, because of His nature and the nature He gave us, is 'influence and response'. These two approaches are drastically different and the realization of that will have profound implications for which body of theology one perceives as correct. All I'm asking is that we see what God has said so that we can see correctly.)
He says He is 'compassionate' (Hebrew rachum).
He says He is 'gracious' (Hebrew chanun).
He is 'slow to anger' (that's an excellent thing in someone both Holy and omnipotent, no?) - (Hebrew 'areke 'ap - literally 'slow to the face' - 'slow to be hot in the face' - 'slow to flush with fury'. What makes God angry? Sin.
He says He is 'abounding in love' (Hebrew rab chesed) - literally 'super-abounding in unfailing, loyal, devoted, and kind love' (also something wonderful in One omnipotent - praise the Lord that He isn't Allah).
He says He is 'abounding in faithfulness' (Hebrew rab 'emet) - literally 'super-abounding with faithfulness, reliability, and trustworthiness. As compared to everything that is false and bad, this expression of Himself says that He is everything that is true and good, and completely so' - crying as I type this by the way. Isn't God wonderful?
If you study Torah, and I really think that's something that mature Christians should maybe do if they ever have time, you can learn some really interesting things about Hebrew and what God has said about Himself (and this offered of course with all the appropriate caveats for those in Christ reading those who aren't). I'm a newbie at it but I do really like it. Please let me share with you what God has shown me.
Take our first two words above: compassionate (rachum) and gracious (chanun).
Rachum (compassionate) has a really specific meaning. It means compassion that is exercised before a crisis arises. It can anticipate a crisis - and most usually does, but it is compassion that is perhaps lying under the surface. It is the positive face - the attitude of being willing to love as a verb (which is what mercy is - applied love) that leaves one open to respond favorably should the situation arise. I think of it as love on its toes but not yet in action. It's love coiled to strike.
Then we come to chanun (gracious). Again, a really specific meaning. It means compassion that is exercised during a crisis. But more than that, it is the compassion that acts in a time of crisis to positively rescue the one who cries out for mercy. It is, as the Hebrews describe, the word in their language such that when one cries out for mercy to one who can provide it, and such is the cry - and such is the one who is rachum - poised to strike with love, that he cannot and will not ignore the request for mercy. To do so would be to deny Himself and His glory, His very nature of saving love.
This doesn't override God's Sovereignty, it doesn't somehow even influence God's Sovereignty, for He is the one who has decided to be rachum. Rachum both invites and waits for the cry for mercy that results in chanun.
But it gets even better.
Rachum (compassionate) has a flavor to it in that it contains within it the idea of logical reasoning... meaning that it takes mitigating circumstances into account. It is love on its toes and coiled to strike, but love that has eyes, and love that has a brain, and it is considering how and when, and how much it will do, and what it will do. Its openness to act has a plan. It is the father of the prodigal out on his porch each and every night - staring down the road to destruction, tears streaming down his face as he waits for his wayward son to turn and cry for mercy.
Chanun (gracious) has a flavor to it in that it does not consider logical reasoning. It is love that when let loose, sweeps in like a tsunami burying everything in its wake. It is the passion, it is the rush, it is the trigger of rachum being pulled and all of the loving planning being actualized at once in a sudden expression of overwhelming, completely sufficient action that is pure, devastating love.
It is the plan of love made real. It is the father of the prodigal hiking up his robe and in the most undignified manner possible for an ancient Jewish man, RUNNING to his son who has turned... FALLING upon his son not with anger but with forgiveness and love... pulling him to himself, kissing him on the head, on the neck, on the face... not even letting his son finish his speech of repentance before he shushes him with his lips.. restoring his son to his rightful place, and doing so with tears of joy.
It is the father that has been planning for the son in the event he returned. The fatted calf is ready, the runners are ready to fetch his friends. All of the planning and the waiting are over and chanun has come and is realized. Not because the father made the son turn, the son had to do that himself. But chanun was possible because the father left open the possibility for turning because he exercised rachum. And when the son turned, the father broadsided him with chanun.
I ask you: how great is our God?
Our great God says He maintains this stance to 'thousands' (Hebrew 'elef - objectively it means 'thousand', but subjectively it means 'a whole, whole bunch'. It's the largest category for numbering and can be repetitively extended to represent large numbers. In our day and age we would probably have to say billions or trillions - the largest numbering groups that people know - to get the same effect as the Hebrew here). Maintain (Hebrew natsar - actively guarding, maintaining, preserving this stance so that when the time for action comes all will be ready to forgive each and every type of sin and rebellion that can exist - God here gives a comprehensive list showing that in His rachum and His chanun, there is nothing so bad for which He will not answer the cry for mercy.. absolutely nothing. There is no color of sin that cannot be washed away in the blood provided by God's rachum and chanun).
And after all of this.. this utter multitude of love and care that God expresses toward us from within Himself. After all of this flood comes a single word concerning judgment. The massive expression of love comes first and is primary - overwhelmingly so. The single word of judgment comes last and is secondary - overwhelmingly so.
Yet, says the Lord, literally 'He does not leave the guilty unpunished'. And "He punishes the children for the sins of the fathers to the third and fourth generations".
I'll set aside the first clause for a moment so I can address something that's very important. It's critical to understand what God is saying here, and it is tied in with the first clause all the way to the cross of Jesus Christ: the very Glory of God about which we are speaking.
The full expression of this troubling phrase is found in Exodus 20:5-6 (NIV):
This is actually part of the Ten Commandments and it is an explanatory note that God is giving for the second commandment where He prohibits idolatry - the worship of anything but Himself.
In verse 5 above God explains that if Israel entertains idolatry the result will be generational apostasy - a falling away from the faith across generations. This was born out in Israel's history - in fact, it IS their history.
God further qualifies what is going on here. Look at the end of verse 5:
God explains that those who sow to the wind, reap the tornado. Walking away from God to serve other gods invites disaster, and God will see to it that it happens. "Those that hate me", and "those that love me", are to be understood in the normal, Hebraic poetical sense - this particular example is an elliptical phrase that is comparing and contrasting opposites. 'Hate' means not to prefer, not to choose, not to be in relation with; whereas 'love' means to prefer, or to choose, or to be in relation with.
God is saying that if Israel finds serving Him uncomfortable or unprofitable, and they decide to have other gods - if they decide not to prefer him, then they are ruining themselves and their children across generations as well. And this is sadly true. History shows that it only takes one generation for a God fearing people to fail to train their children in the way they should go before apostasy and disaster strike. In the US it was the 1960s. And these types of events have ripple effects that are not quickly reversed. They lead to things like rampant infant murder, Columbine, and one crazed naked guy eating another naked guy's face. Most usually, things must get very, very bad before they get better. This is effectively the story of Israel in the Old Testament.
But to those that 'prefer God' above all others (and prove it by keeping His commandments), He shows love ('asah chesed - He definitively and without doubt makes unfailing and completely trustworthy love happen). And this isn't to the few as is the punishment for rebellion. It is to the many, 'thousands' - the largest category for counting things ancient Hebrew had (elef).
But this all ties in with "He does not leave the guilty unpunished".
In light of Exodus 20 and God's expansion of what these paired phrases mean, I believe we are talking about the very New Testament message of faith verses unbelief.
God does not leave those guilty of 'not preferring Him' - not believing in Him - unpunished. This sin of 'passing over God for something else' will be punished, and the nature of it will carry on to subsequent generations.
But to those that 'prefer Him to all others' - those that put faith in Him as He has indicated we should - these receive all the blessings of God's rachum and chanun.
But how can God plan love (rachum) and exercise love (chanun) for those we know are sinners? If God must punish the guilty, why is there even the possibility of God's blessing?
Because of God's nature. His Glory is a saving glory - that's what His glory means. He devises ways to save sinners (2nd Samuel 14:14), and He delights in doing so. He is an equal opportunity savior. Towards this end He created the principle of a substitute. Where a proper substitute exists, God has made it possible for sin and its guilt to literally be passed from one entity to another, so that the innocent can take the place of the guilty - and the guilty can take the place of the innocent.
This 'great exchange' was foreshadowed in the Old Testament sacrificial system (rachum), but actualized in the cross of Jesus Christ for all who turn and cry for mercy to the Father. When that happens, chanun is freed to rampage in the wild abandon of unhindered love - because the price of justice has been paid, the separating wall has been torn down - and the God who planned love, and unleashed love upon the sinner's cry for mercy - this One is now a friend, not a foe. And all of this by His rachum: His calculating, planning, broadcasted love.
Look again at what we've seen from God's Word. Please tell me, from your heart, where God puts the emphasis.
Is it on His judgment? Or is it on His planned and applied love that we call grace?
Tell me please, how from this or anywhere else in God's Word one can get the idea that there is anything resembling even a moderately equitable split between God's judgement and His saving love as it pertains to us? You see, God has decided in His Sovereignty to make His justice work on our behalf, rather than against us, so that we can be saved. God's rachum puts Him in our corner, even in His judgment - if only we will cry to Him for salvation.
The Apostle James tells us, he rather exults in telling us - and this is the Holy Spirit speaking because this is Scripture, that for those that will accept it - "mercy triumphs over judgment!":
And in closing, the great verses that are life:
Those that 'prefer God and His rachum' may have it, simply by crying out to the Lord for salvation - for everyone who calls upon the Lord will be saved (chanun).
Those that refuse to 'prefer God and His rachum', who turn their back on the Son, will not have it. They will receive, from a broken-hearted God - balanced on the balls of His feet, ready and willing with rachum to save yet never asked, they will receive all that He has left: the very thing God calls 'His strange, not normal, and alien task of judging those He wishes to save'. His judgment will fall, and they will be lost - and this without remedy. How sad, and how utterly stupid.
I hope this has broken your heart, and I hope you use it to break the heart of someone you love.
For a broken and contrite heart please God. Through that shattered lens His rachum can be clearly seen. When this happens, turning is possible. God's offer of grace is made known. And when turning happens, the very nanosecond it happens, God's chanun springs into action to save, and THAT without remedy.
God bless.
I ask the question because most often when we hear God's glory taught we are led to think of the Shekihnah Glory. - the great, awesome, fearsome, totally overwhelming phenomenon of God's visible presence. It is described as a 'shining', a 'light' - it is effulgence in its most perfect and absolute form. And all of these things would be true according to the manner in which God revealed Himself in the Old Testament as well as in the Revelation given to the Apostle John.
But in the New Testament as a whole, this is no longer presented to us as the ultimate expression of God's Glory. Of course we do have the event on the Mount of Transfiguration, where for a moment Jesus is clothed again with His heavenly splendor before His death, resurrection, and ascension. But interestingly enough it isn't this event that the Apostle John highlights as the ultimate example of God's glory.
The event that John held forth as the ultimate expression of God's nature - His glorious nature - was of a very different kind - something that we would never of have guessed on our own.
It's a good reminder to us that unless God reveals Himself to us, we can't know who and what He is. The recognition of this helps us to separate the wheat from the chaff of our thoughts and impressions about God. It helps us from straying into a God dishonoring theology based on logic rather than revelation.
Some who would honor 'god' seek to do so almost exclusively based upon judgement of sin. Islam comes to my mind first and foremost for this view, although there are pseudo-christian sects (lowercase 'c') that do the same thing against whatever thing they hate the most: It could be homosexuality; it could be merely a certain ethnicity such as being Jewish or of African descent that invites attack.
Others would seek to honor 'god' exclusively for his love. This could be folks that would be called 'universalists' - those that believe a good, loving god would never send anyone to hell so therefore since we know God is loving - everyone must in the end be A-OK.
Yet others get closer to the truth and understand that God speaks of both His love for sinners and His justice against sin, so surely any 'ultimate' expression of His nature must involve at least both of these things.
This is very, very close to what God has revealed - but it isn't yet quite right. We have the building blocks in place but the question of emphasis remains.
Among the many threads that run through the Gospel of John: the eternity and Deity of the Logos (Jesus), His role as the Creator God and sustainer (the One who works 'sunistemi' - literally, 'to hold together so that existence is possible') of everything that exists, His role as light in the darkness so that all men can believe, among others... in and among all of these threads (which are themselves expressions of God's Glory), we come to the very best, the very brightest, the most shocking display- what in his Gospel the Apostle John points out as the very greatest - public display of God's Glory.
Do you know what it is? :-)
John 12:23-32 (NIV)
23 Jesus replied, “The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified.
24 I tell you the truth, unless a kernel of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains only a single seed. But if it dies, it produces many seeds.
25 The man who loves his life will lose it, while the man who hates his life in this world will keep it for eternal life.
26 Whoever serves me must follow me; and where I am, my servant also will be. My Father will honor the one who serves me.
27 “Now my heart is troubled, and what shall I say? ‘Father, save me from this hour’? No, it was for this very reason I came to this hour.
28 Father, glorify your name!” Then a voice came from heaven, “I have glorified it, and will glorify it again.”
29 The crowd that was there and heard it said it had thundered; others said an angel had spoken to him.
30 Jesus said, “This voice was for your benefit, not mine.
31 Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this world will be driven out.
32 But I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself.”
God has determined that the ultimate expressions of His glory are to be found in the sacrificial death and bodily resurrection and ascension of His Son. And all of this motivated by the truth of His love as expressed in John 3:14-21.
The Holy Spirit through the writer to the Hebrews brings this point home by pairing Jesus as the ultimate image of God's glory with His death on the cross as the ultimate applied expression of that glory.
Hebrews 1:1-4 (Amplified Bible)
1 IN MANY separate revelations [ each of which set forth a portion of the Truth] and in different ways God spoke of old to [our] forefathers in and by the prophets,
2 [But] in the last of these days He has spoken to us in [the person of a] Son, Whom He appointed Heir and lawful Owner of all things, also by and through Whom He created the worlds and the reaches of space and the ages of time [He made, produced, built, operated, and arranged them in order].
3 He is the sole expression of the glory of God [the Light-being, the out-raying or radiance of the divine], and He is the perfect imprint and very image of [God’s] nature, upholding and maintaining and guiding and propelling the universe by His mighty word of power. When He had by offering Himself accomplished our cleansing of sins and riddance of guilt, He sat down at the right hand of the divine Majesty on high,
4 [Taking a place and rank by which] He Himself became as much superior to angels as the glorious Name (title) which He has inherited is different from and more excellent than theirs.
And through Isaiah and John the Baptist - Isaiah 40:3-5 (NIV)
3 A voice of one calling: “In the desert prepare the way for the LORD; make straight in the wilderness a highway for our God.
4 Every valley shall be raised up,every mountain and hill made low; the rough ground shall become level,the rugged places a plain.
5 And the glory of the LORD will be revealed, and all mankind together will see it. For the mouth of the LORD has spoken.”
In all of the ways that God has ever spoken to us about Himself, Jesus is the clearest and finest description He has ever and will ever provide this side of Heaven. This ultimate message from God drives home the truth of His loving nature with the exclamation point of the cross.
I believe William Temple probably said it best - from "Readings in St. John's Gospel" (1950), London: MacMillan - Notes on John 1:14):
"The Incarnation was an act of sacrifice and of humiliation - real however voluntary. But that is not the last word. For the sacrifice and the humiliation ARE the Divine Glory. If God is love (1st John 4:8, 4:16), His glory most of all shines forth in whatever most fully expresses love. The cross of shame IS the throne of glory."
This of course begs the question: is what William Temple said correct?
After all, we can look at a passage of Scripture like Romans 3:25-26 (NIV):
25 God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished 26 he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.
Great truth here right? In the cross God is indeed really doing two things in acting out His nature: He is being 'just', and He is being 'the One Who justifies those who have faith in Jesus'. 'Just' in that He isn't letting sin go unpunished - because if He did that He would instantly become sinful Himself, and the 'Justifier' in that by faith in Christ's death on the cross we can accept God's justice against sin that fell on Christ and we can go free.
And if we didn't look at or know anything else, we might be led to believe that these are the only two things going on, and that they get equal billing. God being 'just' against sin, and God being 'the Justifier' in regards to sin and Jesus on the cross. Perhaps a 50/50 split with God being if you will (and yes, these are inaccurate and gross terms - stick with me ) 50% justice against sin and 50% love for the sinner?
I just bring this up because one comes across this idea so much when discussing theology and the cross. God's love is made just another one of His attributes like perhaps His justice, and some make it seem there is this tension in God (or what we perceive as tension) - this spirit says things like: 'God's seething ocean of wrath being held back by the damn of His love' - stuff like that - things that seem to indicate God is in tension with Himself and therefore one can extract a theology full of 'tensions' and we're told we should just live in those tensions because that's how God is, or that's the only way we can understand Him in our state as fallen creatures. I think you know what I mean.
The issue at hand though, is to make sure we represent God correctly. What we must not do is slander Him by saying something about Him that He hasn't said about Himself. If you ever listen to any of my preaching you'll recognize this as one of my 'tag phrases' I bring in all the time. I'm very incensed about it, and I am so because I know my Bible and I know my God. I hate to see Him misrepresented, but most especially in a way that hurts those who need Him the most.
That would be horrible, because the reason we are still here - the reason we are still on Earth and not in Heaven - is to be a witness to Who God is and What it is that He has done. We are to witness and teach in the very name of God. 'Name' means His nature and character. If we misrepresent or distort that, we've totally failed at the job He gave us to do, and to make things worse - it will have been unnecessary because He gave us enough information that we didn't have to make that mistake.
We don't have to be like Job's group of well meaning but eventually worthless friends - you know, the ones that God got so angry with because they attributed things to Him that He had not attributed to Himself - I call it the sin of Eliphaz, but whatever. We don't have to be on that road. We get to be like the Old Testament prophets and the New Testament Apostles, in the sense that God has given us enough through them so that we know how God Himself defines where the different emphases should go.
I kind of think this latter approach is a better idea. Instead of guessing, instead of trying to derive something with a logical approach that may or may not be ultimately rational (ultimately true), why not just read what God has said?
Please consider:
In the Old Testament we have Moses asking to see "God's Glory".
Exodus 34:5-7 (NIV):
5 Then the LORD came down in the cloud and stood there with him and proclaimed his name, the LORD.
6 And he passed in front of Moses, proclaiming, “The LORD, the LORD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness,
7 maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation.”
(Here God proclaims His name twice - 'the LORD, the LORD' is 'Yahweh, Yahweh' - this is God's personal name. He is emphasizing through repetition that He is a personal God. He isn't some metaphysical force or simply a set of moral concepts - He is a person. He made us in His image as persons and He relates to us on a personal level.
(Just as an aside, what one finds going forward in all of God's revelation is that this means He doesn't deal with us on a 'cause and effect' level. That is reserved for objects, not people. How He has determined to deal with us, because of His nature and the nature He gave us, is 'influence and response'. These two approaches are drastically different and the realization of that will have profound implications for which body of theology one perceives as correct. All I'm asking is that we see what God has said so that we can see correctly.)
He says He is 'compassionate' (Hebrew rachum).
He says He is 'gracious' (Hebrew chanun).
He is 'slow to anger' (that's an excellent thing in someone both Holy and omnipotent, no?) - (Hebrew 'areke 'ap - literally 'slow to the face' - 'slow to be hot in the face' - 'slow to flush with fury'. What makes God angry? Sin.
He says He is 'abounding in love' (Hebrew rab chesed) - literally 'super-abounding in unfailing, loyal, devoted, and kind love' (also something wonderful in One omnipotent - praise the Lord that He isn't Allah).
He says He is 'abounding in faithfulness' (Hebrew rab 'emet) - literally 'super-abounding with faithfulness, reliability, and trustworthiness. As compared to everything that is false and bad, this expression of Himself says that He is everything that is true and good, and completely so' - crying as I type this by the way. Isn't God wonderful?
If you study Torah, and I really think that's something that mature Christians should maybe do if they ever have time, you can learn some really interesting things about Hebrew and what God has said about Himself (and this offered of course with all the appropriate caveats for those in Christ reading those who aren't). I'm a newbie at it but I do really like it. Please let me share with you what God has shown me.
Take our first two words above: compassionate (rachum) and gracious (chanun).
Rachum (compassionate) has a really specific meaning. It means compassion that is exercised before a crisis arises. It can anticipate a crisis - and most usually does, but it is compassion that is perhaps lying under the surface. It is the positive face - the attitude of being willing to love as a verb (which is what mercy is - applied love) that leaves one open to respond favorably should the situation arise. I think of it as love on its toes but not yet in action. It's love coiled to strike.
Then we come to chanun (gracious). Again, a really specific meaning. It means compassion that is exercised during a crisis. But more than that, it is the compassion that acts in a time of crisis to positively rescue the one who cries out for mercy. It is, as the Hebrews describe, the word in their language such that when one cries out for mercy to one who can provide it, and such is the cry - and such is the one who is rachum - poised to strike with love, that he cannot and will not ignore the request for mercy. To do so would be to deny Himself and His glory, His very nature of saving love.
This doesn't override God's Sovereignty, it doesn't somehow even influence God's Sovereignty, for He is the one who has decided to be rachum. Rachum both invites and waits for the cry for mercy that results in chanun.
But it gets even better.
Rachum (compassionate) has a flavor to it in that it contains within it the idea of logical reasoning... meaning that it takes mitigating circumstances into account. It is love on its toes and coiled to strike, but love that has eyes, and love that has a brain, and it is considering how and when, and how much it will do, and what it will do. Its openness to act has a plan. It is the father of the prodigal out on his porch each and every night - staring down the road to destruction, tears streaming down his face as he waits for his wayward son to turn and cry for mercy.
Chanun (gracious) has a flavor to it in that it does not consider logical reasoning. It is love that when let loose, sweeps in like a tsunami burying everything in its wake. It is the passion, it is the rush, it is the trigger of rachum being pulled and all of the loving planning being actualized at once in a sudden expression of overwhelming, completely sufficient action that is pure, devastating love.
It is the plan of love made real. It is the father of the prodigal hiking up his robe and in the most undignified manner possible for an ancient Jewish man, RUNNING to his son who has turned... FALLING upon his son not with anger but with forgiveness and love... pulling him to himself, kissing him on the head, on the neck, on the face... not even letting his son finish his speech of repentance before he shushes him with his lips.. restoring his son to his rightful place, and doing so with tears of joy.
It is the father that has been planning for the son in the event he returned. The fatted calf is ready, the runners are ready to fetch his friends. All of the planning and the waiting are over and chanun has come and is realized. Not because the father made the son turn, the son had to do that himself. But chanun was possible because the father left open the possibility for turning because he exercised rachum. And when the son turned, the father broadsided him with chanun.
I ask you: how great is our God?
Our great God says He maintains this stance to 'thousands' (Hebrew 'elef - objectively it means 'thousand', but subjectively it means 'a whole, whole bunch'. It's the largest category for numbering and can be repetitively extended to represent large numbers. In our day and age we would probably have to say billions or trillions - the largest numbering groups that people know - to get the same effect as the Hebrew here). Maintain (Hebrew natsar - actively guarding, maintaining, preserving this stance so that when the time for action comes all will be ready to forgive each and every type of sin and rebellion that can exist - God here gives a comprehensive list showing that in His rachum and His chanun, there is nothing so bad for which He will not answer the cry for mercy.. absolutely nothing. There is no color of sin that cannot be washed away in the blood provided by God's rachum and chanun).
And after all of this.. this utter multitude of love and care that God expresses toward us from within Himself. After all of this flood comes a single word concerning judgment. The massive expression of love comes first and is primary - overwhelmingly so. The single word of judgment comes last and is secondary - overwhelmingly so.
Yet, says the Lord, literally 'He does not leave the guilty unpunished'. And "He punishes the children for the sins of the fathers to the third and fourth generations".
I'll set aside the first clause for a moment so I can address something that's very important. It's critical to understand what God is saying here, and it is tied in with the first clause all the way to the cross of Jesus Christ: the very Glory of God about which we are speaking.
The full expression of this troubling phrase is found in Exodus 20:5-6 (NIV):
5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,
6 but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.
This is actually part of the Ten Commandments and it is an explanatory note that God is giving for the second commandment where He prohibits idolatry - the worship of anything but Himself.
In verse 5 above God explains that if Israel entertains idolatry the result will be generational apostasy - a falling away from the faith across generations. This was born out in Israel's history - in fact, it IS their history.
God further qualifies what is going on here. Look at the end of verse 5:
"for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,"Now look at verse 6:
but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.
God explains that those who sow to the wind, reap the tornado. Walking away from God to serve other gods invites disaster, and God will see to it that it happens. "Those that hate me", and "those that love me", are to be understood in the normal, Hebraic poetical sense - this particular example is an elliptical phrase that is comparing and contrasting opposites. 'Hate' means not to prefer, not to choose, not to be in relation with; whereas 'love' means to prefer, or to choose, or to be in relation with.
God is saying that if Israel finds serving Him uncomfortable or unprofitable, and they decide to have other gods - if they decide not to prefer him, then they are ruining themselves and their children across generations as well. And this is sadly true. History shows that it only takes one generation for a God fearing people to fail to train their children in the way they should go before apostasy and disaster strike. In the US it was the 1960s. And these types of events have ripple effects that are not quickly reversed. They lead to things like rampant infant murder, Columbine, and one crazed naked guy eating another naked guy's face. Most usually, things must get very, very bad before they get better. This is effectively the story of Israel in the Old Testament.
But to those that 'prefer God' above all others (and prove it by keeping His commandments), He shows love ('asah chesed - He definitively and without doubt makes unfailing and completely trustworthy love happen). And this isn't to the few as is the punishment for rebellion. It is to the many, 'thousands' - the largest category for counting things ancient Hebrew had (elef).
But this all ties in with "He does not leave the guilty unpunished".
In light of Exodus 20 and God's expansion of what these paired phrases mean, I believe we are talking about the very New Testament message of faith verses unbelief.
God does not leave those guilty of 'not preferring Him' - not believing in Him - unpunished. This sin of 'passing over God for something else' will be punished, and the nature of it will carry on to subsequent generations.
But to those that 'prefer Him to all others' - those that put faith in Him as He has indicated we should - these receive all the blessings of God's rachum and chanun.
But how can God plan love (rachum) and exercise love (chanun) for those we know are sinners? If God must punish the guilty, why is there even the possibility of God's blessing?
Because of God's nature. His Glory is a saving glory - that's what His glory means. He devises ways to save sinners (2nd Samuel 14:14), and He delights in doing so. He is an equal opportunity savior. Towards this end He created the principle of a substitute. Where a proper substitute exists, God has made it possible for sin and its guilt to literally be passed from one entity to another, so that the innocent can take the place of the guilty - and the guilty can take the place of the innocent.
This 'great exchange' was foreshadowed in the Old Testament sacrificial system (rachum), but actualized in the cross of Jesus Christ for all who turn and cry for mercy to the Father. When that happens, chanun is freed to rampage in the wild abandon of unhindered love - because the price of justice has been paid, the separating wall has been torn down - and the God who planned love, and unleashed love upon the sinner's cry for mercy - this One is now a friend, not a foe. And all of this by His rachum: His calculating, planning, broadcasted love.
Look again at what we've seen from God's Word. Please tell me, from your heart, where God puts the emphasis.
Is it on His judgment? Or is it on His planned and applied love that we call grace?
Tell me please, how from this or anywhere else in God's Word one can get the idea that there is anything resembling even a moderately equitable split between God's judgement and His saving love as it pertains to us? You see, God has decided in His Sovereignty to make His justice work on our behalf, rather than against us, so that we can be saved. God's rachum puts Him in our corner, even in His judgment - if only we will cry to Him for salvation.
The Apostle James tells us, he rather exults in telling us - and this is the Holy Spirit speaking because this is Scripture, that for those that will accept it - "mercy triumphs over judgment!":
And in closing, the great verses that are life:
Jn 3:14 Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up,
Jn 3:15 that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.
Jn 3:16 “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
Jn 3:17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.
Jn 3:18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.
Those that 'prefer God and His rachum' may have it, simply by crying out to the Lord for salvation - for everyone who calls upon the Lord will be saved (chanun).
Those that refuse to 'prefer God and His rachum', who turn their back on the Son, will not have it. They will receive, from a broken-hearted God - balanced on the balls of His feet, ready and willing with rachum to save yet never asked, they will receive all that He has left: the very thing God calls 'His strange, not normal, and alien task of judging those He wishes to save'. His judgment will fall, and they will be lost - and this without remedy. How sad, and how utterly stupid.
I hope this has broken your heart, and I hope you use it to break the heart of someone you love.
For a broken and contrite heart please God. Through that shattered lens His rachum can be clearly seen. When this happens, turning is possible. God's offer of grace is made known. And when turning happens, the very nanosecond it happens, God's chanun springs into action to save, and THAT without remedy.
God bless.
Comments