with Bob Condly
Tag

theology

Translation Surprises, Part 3

(https://cdn-icons-png.flaticon.com/512/6786/6786223.png)

“I have not learned wisdom, nor have I attained to the knowledge of the Holy One.” – Proverbs 30:3

We learned in the first post of this series that the Hebrew adjective qadosh, translated “of the Holy One” in this verse, is plural, not singular. Yet most Bible translations and versions opt for the singular. (The verse above is from the NIV and that’s the version I’ll be using in this post unless otherwise noted.) There’s no grammatical reason for such a move, so this translation must reflect a theological concern.

Last week, we explored the other verses in the Old Testament that have the plural form of qadosh. We organized these in three categories:

  • Holy Ones
  • Holy ones
  • Holy things

The first describes God in the plural, the second characterizes either angels or wise people, and the third refers to anything set apart for godly purposes (like feasts and sacrifices).

Since the book of Proverbs says little about the third category, we can confine our attention to the first two. In this book, only two verses use the plural of qadosh: Proverbs 9:10 and 30:3. Whom did the writers (Solomon and Agur) have in mind when they composed these thoughts? God? Angels? Sages?

Proverbs 30:4 gives us an inkling about who Agur intended.

“Who has gone up to heaven and come down? Whose hands have gathered up the wind? Who has wrapped up the waters in a cloak? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is his name, and what is the name of his son? Surely you know!” – Proverbs 30:4

By asking these questions, Agur could be humbling people by reminding them they have little control over the natural world.

But he could also be leading us to acknowledge that God does. This is supported by the fact that verses 5, 6, 7, and 9 in chapter 30 mention the Lord.

If Agur is contrasting human insight with divine wisdom, it makes sense to apply the plural of qadosh in verse 3 to the Lord. But why go with the plural? Since God is one (see Deuteronomy 6:4), why not stick with the singular?

Because Agur mentions His son.

And while neither he nor anyone else in ancient Israel had worked out a theology of the Trinity, the phraseology Agur uses is consistent with a trinitarian understanding of God.

This observation also works for Proverbs 9:10. While this verse is the only one in chapter 9 that speaks of God, it’s clear that Solomon is treating as synonymous the wisdom we get from fearing the Lord and the understanding we get from knowing Him. Notice how he structures the verse:

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, 

and

knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.

Again, qadosh is plural, so “the Holy One” isn’t an accurate translation. It looks like Solomon is discussing the Lord in the language of plurality. 

Through the gospel of Jesus Christ, we know God to be triune: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. One God exists for all eternity as three persons. Relational dynamism characterizes who God is. He isn’t isolated, and He’s never lonely. The Lord created the world out of His love, not out of any sense of need.

But Scripture also reveals that God as King operates with a heavenly court. Bible scholars call this assembly “the divine council.” The angels not only carry out the decrees and decisions of the Lord, they also contribute to His governance. For example, the prophet Daniel revealed a vision he had of the fate of the Babylonian king:

“This sentence is by the decree of the angelic watchers, and the decision is a command of the holy ones, in order that the living may know that the Most High is ruler over the realm of mankind, and He grants it to whomever He wishes and sets over it the lowliest of people.” – Daniel 4:17 (NASB20)

The situation here was that Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, was quite proud of himself for controlling a vast empire, but God wouldn’t tolerate such arrogance. This ruler needed to learn that the Lord governs human affairs.

But God’s judgment wasn’t arrived at or carried out by Himself. He involved His council. The angelic watchers, also labeled as holy ones (that’s plural!), oversaw the events on earth. Under God’s jurisdiction, they declared a verdict against Nebuchadnezzar and executed it.

To do all this required wisdom; the angels had to know what was going on in Babylon, assess the moral condition of its leader, determine an appropriate intervention, and enact the decision. But they didn’t do this apart from the Lord; the whole process lined up with His will.

So this leads us back to the question about the plural of qadosh in Proverbs 9:10 and 30:3. Are these references to the Trinity or to angels or wise elders?

I lean toward the triune God.

Proverbs 9:10 seems to identify the (plural) qadosh with God. And the (plural) qadosh of 30:3 is the Creator described in 30:4, the Creator who has a Son. These verses hint at the Trinity.

I sympathize with the translators who decided to treat qadosh as singular. It seems to me they wanted to protect the Old Testament notion of the one God of Israel as the true God over all. A plural translation could damage that belief. But the Trinity doesn’t posit three Gods. Christians believe in one God revealed in three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. We shouldn’t be nervous if the Old Testament contains suggestions of God’s plurality. In fact, we should expect them.

Even if they surprise us!

Thoughts on the Fruit of the Spirit, Part 2

(https://cdn.pixabay.com/photo/2020/06/21/16/47/fruit-5325813_1280.png)

“But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.” – Galatians 5:22-23

(As I did with the previous post, I’ll be quoting the NASB version of the Bible.)

Last week we sought to define the fruit of the Spirit. When Paul uses that phrase in Galatians, what does he mean? Since the fifth chapter of the letter gives equal emphasis to Christ and the Holy Spirit, we concluded that fruit is the character of Christ grown in believers by the Spirit. 

The next question deals with numbers. Is the fruit of the Spirit singular or plural? How many are there? There are three ways to address this.

Grammar

The first approach is to analyze the terms Paul writes. The word “fruit” is singular and has a singular verb (“is”) in verse 22, but he lists nine items. Also, the phrase “such things” in verse 23 is plural.

So which is it? Is the fruit of the Spirit singular or plural?

The grammar gives a slight edge to plurality, but not by much. I’ve heard some preachers stress that “fruit” in this passage is singular, but they don’t clarify why Paul would follow it with a multiple. I do recall one pastor trying. He explained that love alone was the fruit of the Spirit; the other eight served as love’s characteristics. That’s a nice thought but in no way does the grammar support this idea! 

Sorry, but vocabulary alone won’t answer our question. 

Philosophy

We can turn to rational analysis to settle the matter. Philosophers call this issue “the problem of the one and the many.” Here’s how Richard Hooker at the University of Massachusetts Boston explains it:

The problem of finding the one thing that lies behind all things in the universe is called the problem of the one and the many. Basically stated, the problem of the one and the many begins from the assumption that the universe is one thing. Because it is one thing, there must be one, unifying aspect behind everything. This aspect could be material, such as water, or air, or atoms. It could be an idea, such as number, or “mind.” It could be divine, such as the Christian concept of God or the Chinese concept of Shang-ti, the “Lord on High.” The problem, of course, is figuring out what that one, unifying idea is.

Theologian R. J Rushdoony points to trinitarian theology as a solution to this puzzle: 

The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are each a personality, and together they constitute the triune and exhaustively personal, totally self-conscious God. God is totally self-conscious, meaning that He has no hidden, unknown aspects of His being, no unexploited potentiality. He is actuality, self-conscious and personal. Each person of the trinity is equally God. Since both the one and the many are equally ultimate in God, it immediately becomes apparent that these two seemingly contradictory aspects of being do not cancel one another but are equally basic to the ontological trinity: one God, three persons.

He then applies the implications of trinitarian reality to the world around us: “Since temporal unity and plurality are the products and creation of this triune God, neither the unity nor the plurality can demand the sacrifice of the other to itself.”

Academics who ponder the problem of the one and the many seldom take the fruit of the Spirit into account. That’s not what they’re examining. And Paul follows the reverse pattern. He entertains no philosophical or theological abstractions as he instructs Galatian Christians.

To answer the question about the amount of the fruit of the Spirit, we have to consider a third option.

Discipleship

The apostle is attempting to correct and edify the Galatian believers in their understanding and application of the gospel. 

The verses preceding those about the fruit of the Spirit reveal the deeds of the flesh.

“Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality, 20idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, 21envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.” – Galatians 5:19-21

The word “flesh” (verse 19) is singular, as is “Spirit” in verse 22. But every other word is plural: “deeds,” “are,” “things like these,” and “such things.” The 15 deeds compare to the list of nine in verses 22-23. The deeds are plural; why should the fruit be, too?

Throughout the fifth chapter, Paul weaves together spiritual and social themes. Individuals respond to the offer of salvation in Jesus Christ. Individuals dedicate themselves to growing in Christ by the Spirit. But these commitments aren’t made or kept in isolation. The Christian life is as social as it is spiritual.

The fruit we bear expresses our personality in Christ. It’s singular because a key to psychological health is an established identity. As followers of Christ, our character bears the fruit of His Spirit.

And in a church, the Holy Spirit is the One who unites us all. Although our interests, skills, and experiences vary, we have the One Spirit in common. 

But when we drift from Him, we end up expressing our flawed nature in harmful and uncharitable ways. Selfishness is the source of the disunity in so many churches. Prioritizing oneself paves the way for the flesh to assert control and the results aren’t good. The flesh specializes in fracture and conflict. We see this intensified in our world today, especially in social media. We ought to see something different in the church: dynamic wholeness.

This is what we see in the triune God. Revisiting the philosophical question of the one and the many, we can pay heed to this comment by Rushdoony:

The one and the many is perhaps the basic question of philosophy. Is unity or plurality, the one or the many, the basic fact of life, the ultimate truth about being? If unity is the reality, and the basic nature of reality, then oneness and unity must gain priority over individualism, particulars, or the many. If the many, or plurality, best describes ultimate reality, then the unit cannot gain priority over the many; then state, church, and society are subordinate to the will of the citizen, the believer, and of man in particular. If the one is ultimate, then individuals are sacrificed to the group. If the many be ultimate, then unity is sacrificed to the will of the many, and anarchy prevails.

The flesh presents no good choice. Either society forces people to conform or individuals claim control over the culture. These are recipes for disaster!

But we have a better way in Christ. Through the fruit of the Spirit, we can appreciate and enjoy mutual growth and submission. More and more each day, we allow the Spirit to elicit the character of Jesus within us, but we don’t keep it to ourselves. We share His life with those around us.

Is the fruit of the Spirit singular or plural? From a biblical perspective, it’s both. God is triune and the church is one body with many members. Likewise, the fruit of God’s Spirit is the one character of Christ realized in nine different ways as we interact with fellow believers. And as God grows fruit on trees, so He will produce the fruit of the Spirit in us.

with Bob Condly

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Categories

Meta

Verified by MonsterInsights