The "Hand" of the Lord: A Reflection on Communication by Analogy in Scripture

 

The “Hand” of the Lord:

A Reflection on Communication by Analogy in Scripture

By Neo

 

“And I will stretch out my hand, and smite Egypt with all my wonders which I will do in the midst thereof: and after that he will let you go.” Exodus 3:20

I have written two short op-eds that appeared on this blog concerning whether God has a body. The titles are “A Brief Meditation on God’s Transcendence” and “The Transcendence of God and the Ontological Nose.” My position is that God in his essence does not have a body and the Old Testament language that suggests that is just a type of metaphor called anthropomorphism. But does this view excoriate God and the Bible in some way – perhaps raising the issue of misrepresentation? Some may think so and this third op-ed is a clarification of my view – a view which is really the mainstream Christian view.

My viewpoint is that the verse cited above does not mean that God has a hand as a part of his essential nature. And my viewpoint requires some qualification. There are a couple of questions that should be asked as a beginning point for this reflection. If God says he has a hand and he actually has no hand, isn’t that lying? If the Bible states that God has a hand and he really has no hand, does that not make the Bible a non-literal document?

First, if God says he has a hand and he actually has no hand, isn’t that lying? The answer is “No.” There are at least two conditions under which God may correctly use this reference to a hand. First, at the time he spoke the words in this verse, he may have been presenting himself as a theophany. A theophany is a form that God may use to appear to human eyes. In a theophany God may appear in a number of different forms including a human form, a pillar of fire, a burning bush or a whirlwind. If he were presenting himself in human form at the time he spoke these words then he could rightly be said to have a “literal” hand. But having a literal, yet theophantic hand is different from having an essential hand. (We could argue about the difference between the terms “literal” and “essential” but not now.) Second, God may have been using this reference to a hand as a metaphor. The hand is a symbol of his power and ability to act in the Cosmos. God can use metaphorical language to communicate. He used anthropomorphism regarding himself throughout the Old Testament. That is his prerogative. That is how he decided to communicate with human beings for optimal effectiveness. Metaphors create pictures in our minds that we can understand. It’s like if someone said “As soon as I heard the bell, I flew down here as fast as I could.” Everybody knows the person can’t fly but the image communicates, it depicts. In this case, the hand is not literal but literary. The communication is rhetorical but it aptly conveys truth.

Second, If the Bible states that God has a hand and he has no hand, does that not make the Bible a non-literal document? The answer is “Yes.” That should come as no surprise. The Bible is full of literary constructs. “The Lord is my shepherd” makes you into a sheep. But you are not really a sheep. That is only a metaphor. Otherwise, you might be just another hooved herd animal in God’s eyes. 

 

And, in some cases, what was contemporary language to the ancients may now be literature to us. For instance, in the first chapters of the Book of Genesis, God does not speak of String Theory, Quantum Mechanics, Dark Matter and Black Holes. Instead we find a scenario that seems a lot like ancient Semitic cosmology. That is how God chose to communicate to ancient Semites – communication in context, communication encultured, communication humanized. The point is God can communicate to us as he wishes. Literalism implies that we have created a standard in the use of language and we are going to sit in judgment on the words of God using that humanly devised standard. Where do the proponents of literalism acquire that authority? 

 

Herbert W. Armstrong did not recognize theophany or metaphor. He thought anthropomorphism was accurately describing the essence of God. Likely, he mistakenly thought literalism and truth were the same thing. So he converted God into an analog – an analog that was actually used only to enhance communication. HWA sought objective reality but found metaphor. (This statement may alarm some but everything we know about God we know through analogy.) And HWA’s belief that analogy is essence unintentionally demoted God to mere superhuman status. HWA’s theology did not measure up to his vision, I believe. He envisioned an awesome, great God but his theology pointed to a much smaller version of god that is both immanent and contingent. And his followers do not have a process of doctrinal review and revision so they are left to defend the indefensible.

A theophany or a metaphor does not make a statement about what God is in his essence. He is Spirit in his essence in the words of Jesus. The use of a theophany or metaphor does not make God a liar or the Bible a fraud. It rather makes the Bible communicate effectively to its human audience in a way that God chose.

LCG: Trials Are Testing Members Faith

One of the great hallmarks of the Christian faith is placing one's faith in Jesus Christ. When resting in that faith, trials and troubles tend to not be such a big issue that the COG claims them to constantly be. It has been ground into members' heads that God is constantly testing them to price themselves worthy to be able to squeak by into some glorious kingdom to come. Some church members love to trot out troubles and issues in life as badges of honor that they are being tested. It makes them look "strong" to other church members who need to be impressed by them.

Doug quotes this scripture but ignores the last part:

“Let no one say when he is tested (tempted), “I am tested (tempted) by God”: for God cannot be tested (tempted) by evil, nor does He Himself test (tempt) anyone” (James 1:13).

And this:

James 1:13-15
New International Version
13 When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.” For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; 14 but each person is tempted when they are dragged away by their own evil desire and enticed.15 Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin;and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.

Doug writes:

Trials Test Our Faith: The Apostle Paul warned, “Know this, that in the last days perilous times will come” (2 Timothy 3:1). Jesus predicted that the end of the age would be marked by increasing trials and turmoil on a global scale (Matthew 24), and He wondered aloud, “when the Son of Man comes, will He really find faith on the earth?” (Luke 18:8). When the challenges of life begin to mount, we need to remember that faith is one of the fruits of God’s Spirit (Galatians 5:22) and that God gives His Spirit to those who trust Him and obey His instructions (Acts 5:32). However, we must also do our part to stir up God’s Spirit (2 Timothy 1:6–7). We need to remember that we can ask for more faith (Luke 17:5), and that faith comes from hearing (and studying) God’s word (Romans 10:17). God is faithful (Deuteronomy 7:9), and He is like a rock and a fortress that protects His faithful people (Psalm 31:3, 23). James wrote, “the testing of your faith produces patience” (James 1:3–4). Let’s remember to study the examples of faith in Hebrews 11 as we work through the trials we face in our lives. 

 

Have a profitable Sabbath, 

Douglas S. Winnail

In Church of God speak, whenever God is testing you it is because you have sinned and need to be corrected. 

Dave Pack "...has unashamedly led his membership on a wild farcical Adventist ride that has been nothing short of shameful"

WHAT ABOUT THE TRUTH said...

I was just cleaning my desk out and found an old CD of one of Dave's sermons. I miss Dave, so I had to play it.

What did Dave have to say? He asked do you know what makes God's church different than all the other Christian churches? We obey all that God commands us to do including obeying the traditions established by the righteous servant and apostle Herbert Armstrong.

He then went on to explain that a number of ministers and members had left the church in the last two weeks. One of the ministers was found to be quite bad in his conduct but Dave and headquarters never knew.

To fix this situation from never happening again, he went on to quote Paul who told the brethren to mark them that are disorderly and sow division. This is a command the THEY have to obey he told them, even if that person is a minister.

It only takes one quick glance into the RCG to see who is perpetrating great disorder and division.

For the past 10 years the "all brethren reunited" and "greatest story never told" series has amounted to at least half of all of those sermons being either completely thrown away or completely reinterpreted. I would say that is division.

For the past 10 years Dave has defined himself as the person or role fulfillment of at least a dozen named individuals in the Bible. That means 12 people just got kicked out of the Bible to make way for Dave. I would call that division.

How many marriages, how many families and how many homes did Dave divide in half for his take of the money via "Common"? That is called division.

How many people were terminated, excommunicated and publicly humiliated for calling out his lies? That is disorder.

Who has unashamedly led his membership on a wild farcical Adventist ride that has been nothing short of shameful? That is a disorder which creates much disorder.