"And in Lystra a certain man without strength in his feet was sitting, a cripple from his mother’s womb, who had never walked. This man heard Paul speaking. Paul, observing him intently and seeing that he had faith to be healed, said with a loud voice, “Stand up straight on your feet!” And he leaped and walked. Now when the people saw what Paul had done, they raised their voices, saying in the Lycaonian language, “The gods have come down to us in the likeness of men!” And Barnabas they called Zeus, and Paul, Hermes, because he was the chief speaker. Then the priest of Zeus, whose temple was in front of their city, brought oxen and garlands to the gates, intending to sacrifice with the multitudes. But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard this, they tore their clothes and ran in among the multitude, crying out and saying, “Men, why are you doing these things? We also are men with the same nature as you ("men of like passions with you" - kjv), and preach to you that you should turn from these useless things to the living God, who made the heaven, the earth, the sea, and all things that are in them, “who in bygone generations allowed all nations to walk in their own ways." (Acts 14: 8-16 nkjv)
When the Westminster Confession says God is “without passions,” it cites Acts 14:11, 15 as its proof for this. With that in mind, let us look at that passage.
In the above story Paul and Barnabas are thought to be the incarnation of the pagan gods Zeus and Hermes because of the healing of the lame man. In attempting to convince the pagans that they were not gods they argued that they were not gods because they were "men with the same nature as you," or as in the kjv, "men of like passions with you." The context is showing that Paul has two premises but only one is stated (being an enthymeme): 1. Overt: men have passions; 2. Not explicitly stated but implied: God does not.
The words "like passions" or "same nature" is from the Greek word homoiopathēs. Strong says it means "suffering the like with another, of like feelings or affections." It means to experience or suffer the same things. It is also used in James 5: 17 which reads as follows:
"Elias was a man subject to like passions as we are, and he prayed earnestly that it might not rain: and it rained not on the earth by the space of three years and six months."
There are, in my mind, however, two problems with this argument. First, Paul and Barnabas are not denying that the Greek gods, Zeus and Hermes, were of similar passions to mortal men, though they would seem to be doing so by this argument (unless, as I believe, they are not affirming that Zeus and Hermes were unlike humans in nature and passions, but that the true deity was so). Second, Jesus was the incarnation of God, and he was of like nature and passions as humans (for he was human, though without sin). But, it may be said that it was not the divine nature of Christ the Son of God who was of like nature with us, and had like passions with us (sinful passions excepted).
Said one writer on the text in Acts 14 (see here - emphasis mine):
"Paul and Barnabas explicitly reason there that they themselves are intrinsically unworthy of worship because they are men “of like passions” with the Lystrans and subject to the actions of others upon them. In their thinking, just as Hermes and Zeus are vain objects of worship, so would “the living God” be if he were subject to such passions. In other words, their point is not that the audience have made a mistake worshipping people who are not really Zeus and Hermes; their point is that even if they were Zeus and Hermes they would still be unworthy of praise, because Zeus and Hermes are also homoiopathēs, of like passions, and a God who is thus vulnerable to human passions is not worthy of worship. Greek gods were constantly falling in and out of love, getting angry or spiteful, experiencing ecstatic joy and other, more unworthy emotional outbursts. They would never have been described as impassible (incapable of suffering pain or feeling emotion). So, the doctrine of impassibility is not a Hellenisation of the biblical God but quite the opposite – to claim God was passible would be to import Greek categories into him."
I agree. The gods of the heathen were created by the imagination of men and made in their own image. They are as emotional as humans.
A Case Study
"In all their affliction He was afflicted, And the Angel of His Presence saved them; In His love and in His pity He redeemed them; And He bore them and carried them All the days of old." (Isa. 63: 9)
This is a text that if we took literally, and without qualification, then we would have to affirm that God is passible, subject to passions and capable of suffering. It says that God "was afflicted."
John Gill in his commentary on this passage wrote:
"That is, God, who said the above words; not properly speaking; for to be afflicted is not consistent with his nature and perfections, being a spirit, and impassible; nor with his infinite and complete happiness; but this is said after the manner of men, and is expressive of the sympathy of God with his afflicted people, and his tender care of them, and concern for them under affliction, as one friend may have for another..."
The words of God simply mean that he fully knows the sufferings of his people, that he has a certain state of mind towards them in their sufferings. We say that God cares, that he is concerned, for his people, but not in the same way that humans experience empathy or sympathy. It means the same thing as he said to Moses about the sufferings of his people in Egypt.
"And the LORD said, I have surely seen the affliction of my people which are in Egypt, and have heard their cry by reason of their taskmasters; for I know their sorrows." (Exo. 3: 7; and cited in Acts 7: 34)
So, the words "in all their affliction he was afflicted" means that he has "seen the affliction" of the people and he has merciful and kind intentions towards them. It does not mean that he was literally afflicted or experienced suffering. He has empathy and sympathy, though not as a human emotion, and not in a way in which he is shown to be mutable.
John Calvin in his commentary wrote:
"In this sense the Prophet testifies that God, in order to alleviate the distresses and afflictions of his people, himself bore their burdens; not that he can in any way endure anguish, but, by a very customary figure of speech, he assumes and applies to himself human passions."
Again, that is the way I understand it. We can no more understand that God has human passions than we can understand that God has wings; And yet the Psalmist wrote:
"He will cover you with His pinions,
And under His wings you may seek refuge;
His faithfulness is a shield and bulwark." (Psa. 91: 4)
God having wings is a metaphor, and is not to be taken literally. So too with God suffering affliction.
No comments:
Post a Comment