The Kingdom of God (part 1 of 2)

     In his epistle to the Thessalonians, Paul exhorts the members of the assembly there, “Do not reject prophecies, yet test all things; hold fast to the good, hold back from every appearance which is evil” (1 Thess. 5:20-22). Unfortunately, modern Christianity has adopted the exact opposite viewpoint, seeing prophecy and eschatology as something that is impossible to fully understand and to be avoided. Others simply idealize prophecy so that it has little to no literal application, something which is also condemned in scripture (1 Pet. 1:19-21).

    Instead of adopting these unbiblical and, frankly, detrimental attitudes toward prophecy, in this series of articles we will look at all of the biblical evidence so as to make a determination about the different eschatological viewpoints held today, using a grammatical-historical hermeneutic [1]. This post will begin by looking at the argument between amillennialists and premillennialists surrounding the nature and timing of the “kingdom of God”, an argument which has far-reaching implications throughout all of the Bible. Many see the kingdom of God as a current reality, a ‘spiritual’ kingdom, whereas others believe that it will find a physical existence on earth following the second coming of Christ, and still others see it as a mixture of the two. Which is correct?

    The Kingdom of God in the Old Testament

In the Old Testament, there were two different meanings to the phrase “kingdom of God”. In the first case, it is though that because God created the universe, His kingdom encompasses the entire universe at all times as He sits enthroned and sovereign over it (e.g., Ps. 103:19; 145:11-13; Dan. 4:3, 34). However, in a more limited sense, Israel is the kingdom of God. Yahweh first promised to Moses that Israel would become a kingdom for God:

“All the earth is Mine, but you shall be for Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. These are the words which you shall speak to the sons of Israel.” (Exod. 19:5-6)

In accordance with this promise, God told David that he and his descendants would rule over His kingdom:

Your [David’s] house and your kingdom shall endure before Me for the age; your throne shall be established for the age.” (2 Sam. 7:16)

“But I will settle him in My house and in My kingdom for the age, and his throne will be established for the age.” (1 Chron. 17:14)

Judah became His sanctuary, and Israel His kingdom. (Ps. 114:2)

We see, then, that David’s descendants and the kingdom of Israel may also be considered the kingdom of God. The kingdom of God was a literal, physical polity which existed in the land of Israel. From this point forward, the kingdom of David and his descendants is frequently interchanged with the “kingdom of Yahweh”. See the following examples:

“Of all my sons (for Yahweh has given me many sons), He has chosen my son Solomon to sit on the throne of the kingdom of Yahweh over Israel.” (1 Chron. 28:5)

“Then Solomon sat on the throne of Yahweh as king instead of his father David; and he prospered, and all Israel obeyed him.” (1 Chron. 29:23 cf. 1 Kings 2:12; 8:20)

Then Abijah stood on Mount Zemaraim, which is in the hill country of Ephraim, and said, “Listen to me, Jeroboam and all Israel: Do you not know that the Lord God of Israel gave the sovereignty over Israel forever to David and his sons by a covenant of salt?... So now you intend to assert yourselves against the kingdom of Yahweh which is in the hand of the sons of David.” (2 Chron. 13:4-5, 8)

Unfortunately, because Israel and the descendants of David did not listen to God and follow His law (cf. 1 Kings 9:6-7), the kingdom was taken away from them and Babylon took over the land of Israel, followed by Persia, then Greece, then Rome, and even today Israel is still not ruled by a descendant of David. However, God promised that even if the descendants of David failed to listen to His commands, He would not forsake them forever, but would return the throne to a descendant of David - namely, the Messiah - because God cannot forsake His own promises (Ps. 89:30-37).

    The hope of this promise, that God would eventually place a descendant of David on the throne of Israel again, and that the physical kingdom of God would one day be restored, is found all throughout the prophetic books of the Old Testament. They believed that the kingdom of God would return to Israel and be a physical, visible polity which would fill the entire earth.

Now it will come about that in the last days the mountain of the house of Yahweh will be established as the chief of the mountains, and will be raised above the hills; and all the nations will stream to it. And many peoples will come and say, “Come, let us go up to the mountain of Yahweh, to the house of the God of Jacob; that He may teach us concerning His ways and that we may walk in His paths.” For the law will go forth from Zion and the word of Yahweh from Jerusalem. And He will judge between the nations, and will render decisions for many peoples; and they will hammer their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not lift up sword against nation, and never again will they learn war. (Isa. 2:2-4)

Then the moon will be ashamed and the sun be put to shame, for Yahweh of armies will reign on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, and His glory will be before His elders. (Isa. 24:23)

On that day Yahweh will thresh from the flowing stream of the Euphrates River to the brook of Egypt, and you will be gathered up one by one, you sons of Israel. It will come about also on that day that a great trumpet will be blown, and those who were perishing in the land of Assyria and who were scattered in the land of Egypt will come and worship Yahweh on the holy mountain in Jerusalem. (Isa. 27:12-13)

“For I know their works and their thoughts; the time is coming to gather all the nations and tongues. And they shall come and see My glory. And I will put a sign among them and send survivors from them to the nations: Tarshish, Put, Lud, Meshech, Tubal, and Javan, to the distant coastlands that have neither heard of My fame nor seen My glory. And they will declare My glory among the nations. Then they shall bring all your countrymen from all the nations as a grain offering to Yahweh, on horses, in chariots, in litters, on mules, and on camels, to My holy mountain Jerusalem,” says Yahweh. (Isa. 66:18-20)

“Behold, the days are coming,” declares Yahweh, “When I will raise up for David a righteous Branch; and he will reign as king and act wisely and do justice and righteousness in the land. In his days Judah will be saved, and Israel will dwell securely; and this is his name by which he will be called, ‘Yahweh is our righteousness.’” (Jer. 23:5-6)

This is what Yahweh of armies, the God of Israel says: “Once again they will speak this word in the land of Judah and in its cities when I restore their fortunes, ‘The Lord bless you, O place of righteousness, O holy hill!’ Judah and all its cities will live together in it, the farmers and those who travel with flocks. For I give plenty of water to the weary ones, and refresh everyone who languishes.” (Jer. 31:23-25)

“Behold, days are coming,” declares Yahweh, “when I will fulfill the good word which I have spoken concerning the house of Israel and the house of Judah. In those days and at that time I will make a righteous Branch of David sprout; and he shall execute justice and righteousness on the earth. In those days Judah will be saved and Jerusalem will live in safety; and this is the name by which it will be called: ‘Yahweh is our righteousness.’” (Jer. 33:14-16)

“Then the sovereignty, the dominion, and the greatness of all the kingdoms under the whole heaven will be given to the people of the saints of the Highest One; His kingdom will be an everlasting kingdom, and all the empires will serve and obey Him.” (Dan. 7:27)

“Then you will know that I am Yahweh your God, dwelling in Zion, My holy mountain. So Jerusalem will be holy, and strangers will pass through it no more. And in that day the mountains will drip with sweet wine, and the hills will flow with milk, and all the brooks of Judah will flow with water; and a spring will go out from the house of Yahweh to water the valley of Shittim. Egypt will become a waste, and Edom will become a desolate wilderness, because of the violence done to the sons of Judah, in whose land they have shed innocent blood. But Judah will be inhabited for the age and Jerusalem for all generations. And I will avenge their blood which I have not avenged, for Yahweh dwells in Zion.” (Joel 3:17-21)

“In that day I will raise up the fallen house of David, and wall up its breaches; I will also raise up its ruins and rebuild it as in the days of old; that they may possess the remnant of Edom and all the nations who are called by My name,” declares Yahweh who does this... “Also I will restore the captivity of My people Israel, and they will rebuild the ruined cities and live in them; they will also plant vineyards and drink their wine, and make gardens and eat their fruit. I will also plant them on their land, and they will not again be rooted out from their land which I have given them,” says Yahweh your God. (Amos 9:11-12, 14-15)

The deliverers will ascend Mount Zion to judge the mountain of Esau, and the kingdom [of Israel!] will be Yahweh’s. (Obad. 21)

And it will come about in the last days that the mountain of the house of Yahweh will be established as the chief of the mountains. It will be raised above the hills, and the peoples will stream to it. Many nations will come and say, “Come and let us go up to the mountain of Yahweh and to the house of the God of Jacob, that He may teach us about His ways and that we may walk in His paths.” For from Zion will go forth the law, even the word of Yahweh from Jerusalem... As for you, tower of the flock, hill of the daughter of Zion, to you it will come — even the former dominion will come, the kingdom of the daughter of Jerusalem. (Mic. 4:1-2, 8)

For the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of Yahweh, as the waters cover the sea. (Hab. 2:14)

And on that day living waters will flow out of Jerusalem, half of them toward the eastern sea and the other half toward the western sea; it will be in summer as well as in winter. And Yahweh will be King over all the earth; on that day Yahweh will be one, and His name one. (Zech. 14:8-9)

Although there are far more passages than even these which show that the hope of the Israelites which was promised by God was a physical, earthly kingdom to be returned to Israel centered in Jerusalem, the glory and power of which would fill the entire earth, these should suffice to show that they believed it to be a literal kingdom that would exist on the earth. In fact, the prophet Ezekiel provides a detailed description of the boundaries of this kingdom and the temple that would exist in Jerusalem during the Messianic age (chaps. 40-48).

    But was this view, that the kingdom would be a physical polity led by a descendant of David (Jesus) which would be returned to Israel, the view of the kingdom of God in the New Testament as well? Let’s take a look at what Jesus and the writers of the New Testament had to say about the kingdom of God.

    The Kingdom of God in the New Testament

One of the very first things that the messenger Gabriel told Mary about her future son, Jesus, is that “the Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob for the ages, and there will not be an end of his kingdom” (Lk. 1:32-33). This is entirely in line with the hope of Israel that we have seen so far: that a promised descendant of David would one day arise and would restore God’s kingdom to the house of Jacob (Israel).

    When the Jews of Jesus’ day heard that the “kingdom of God” (also, by metonymy, called “the kingdom of the heavens”) was coming, they would have understood this to mean that the promised restoration of the Davidic kingdom over Israel would soon come. This is supported by the reactions of certain Jews in the book of Luke - we are told that, when they saw Jesus, they were hoping that Israel and Jerusalem would soon be redeemed (Lk. 1:65-70; 2:34, 38; 24:21).

    Certainly, it is possible that they were wrong about this; after all, they thought that He would redeem Israel from the Romans at His first coming, even though this will only occur at His second coming. However, the prophecies above are absolutely clear that at some point Israel and Jerusalem will be saved from their enemies, and that the physical kingdom of David will be restored via his descendant, the Messiah. This is supported by the equation of the kingdom of God with Israel in several passages of the New Testament:

“Happy the poor in spirit, for the kingdom of the heavens is theirs... Happy the gentle, for they will inherit the land... Happy those having been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for the kingdom of the heavens is theirs.” (Matt. 5:3, 5, 10)

Through parallelism, this passage equates “the kingdom of the heavens” (= kingdom of God) with “the land [of Israel]”.

Now Jesus said to them, “Verily I say to you, that you who followed me, in the regeneration, when the Son of Man may sit upon [the] throne of his glory, you also will sit upon twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. And everyone who has left houses, or brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or fields, for the sake of my name will receive a hundredfold, and will inherit age-during life.” (Matt. 19:28-29)

The context of this statement is about entering into the kingdom of God (v. 24). This passage, therefore, tells us two things: (1) that the disciples will judge the twelve tribes of Israel in the kingdom of God, and (2) that this will occur in the “regeneration” when the Son of Man sits on the throne of His glory. The disciples, knowing the prophecies in the Old Testament regarding the restoration of the Davidic kingdom over Israel, would have understood this “regeneration” to be the promised restoration of the kingdom of God over Israel, in which they would be taking part. Since the “regeneration” or “restoration” will occur when Christ is bodily received from the heaven in the same way in which He went up (Acts 3:21 cf. 1:11), the kingdom of God (or at least this aspect of it) will not occur until that time.

“And then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and much glory. Now [when] these things begin to come about, raise up and lift your heads, because your redemption is coming near... when you see these things coming about, know that the kingdom of God is near.” (Lk. 21:27-28, 31)

This confirms that the kingdom of God will come as a future reality at the second coming of Christ.

And to the [apostles] he presented himself alive in many proofs after his suffering, being seen by them for forty days and speaking the [things] about the kingdom of God... Indeed, then, having come together, the [ones] were asking him, saying, “Lord, at this time are you restoring the kingdom to Israel?” Yet he said to them, “It is not yours to know times or seasons which the Father established in His own authority.” (Acts 1:3, 6-7)

The most important thing to note about this passage is that the apostles believed that the “kingdom of God” was something that needed to be restored to Israel. If, as amillennialists believe, the kingdom of God refers solely to the spiritual realm of the ‘Church’, then it would be an entirely new development - not something to be restored, and certainly not to Israel. But if, as the overwhelming testimony of both the Old and New Testaments indicates, the kingdom of God is the Davidic kingdom which will be restored to Israel under Jesus, this statement makes much more sense.

    Although many amillennialists make the assertion that the apostles were still holding an incorrect ‘carnal’ or ‘worldly’ view of the kingdom of God, this is inconceivable. They had just been taught “the things about the kingdom of God” for forty days by Jesus Himself! And even if they had been wrong, why would Jesus not have corrected them? The very gospel which they were preaching depended on a correct understanding of the kingdom of God [2], so if the apostles’ understanding of it had been this blatantly misguided, He certainly would have corrected them before ascending to the heaven. Thus, we must conclude that the apostles’ understanding of the kingdom of God as a literal, physical polity to be restored to Israel was correct.

“Therefore repent and return toward the erasure of your sins, that seasons of refreshing may come from [the] face of the Lord, and that He may send to you the appointed one, Christ Jesus, whom it is indeed necessary for heaven to receive until [the] times of restoration of all things, of which God spoke through the mouth of His holy prophets from an age.” (Acts 3:19-21)

According to this passage, Peter still understood the coming of God’s kingdom to be a restoration even after Pentecost, and to be a future event associated with the bodily return of Jesus from the heaven (cf. Acts 1:11). Furthermore, Peter states that this restoration was spoken of by God through the holy prophets; as shown above, the only restoration spoken of by the prophets was the restoration of the Davidic kingdom over (literal) Israel. Although some amillennialist interpreters have argued that the “times of restoration of all things” began at Pentecost (for example, see here), this is clearly false; Peter, speaking after Pentecost, indicates that this is a future time, and that Jesus will be received by heaven until that time (meaning that those times will only begin once Jesus is no longer in heaven).

    These are not the only passages that show that Jesus and His disciples believed the kingdom of God to be a future reality, in physical Israel. Throughout Jesus’ earthly ministry, He repeatedly presented the kingdom of God as something that had not yet come (e.g., Matt. 6:10; 16:28; 18:3; 20:20-23; 26:29; Lk. 22:30), and the coming of which would be associated with the future judgment (Matt. 7:21-23; 13:39-42; 25:31-34) and the resurrection of the patriarchs (Matt. 8:11-12; Lk. 13:24-28).

    And in stark contrast to amillennialism, which argues that the kingdom began at Pentecost, it is still presented as something that had not yet come even long after that day (Acts 14:22, 26:6-7). Paul and the other writers of the New Testament call the kingdom of God an “inheritance” which we will receive in the future, at the resurrection and second coming of Christ (1 Cor. 6:9-11; 15:50-54; 2 Thess. 1:5-10; Heb. 12:28; 2 Pet. 1:11; Rev. 11:15-18) [3].

    The Millennium of Revelation 20

And I saw a messenger coming down out of the heaven, holding the key of the abyss and a great chain upon his hand. And he seized the dragon, the ancient serpent who is the Adversary and the Satan, and bound him a thousand years. And he cast him to the abyss, and shut and sealed [it] above him, so that he may deceive the nations no longer, until the thousand years may be finished. After these [years], it is necessary [for] him to be loosed a little time.

And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given to them. Also [I saw] the souls of the [ones] having been beheaded because of the testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and whoever did not worship the beast, nor his image, and did not take the mark upon the forehead and upon their hand. And they lived and reigned with the Christ a thousand years. The rest of the dead did not live until the thousand years may be finished. This is the first resurrection. Happy and holy [is] the [one] having part in the first resurrection! The second death does not have authority upon these, but they will be priests of God and of the Christ, and will reign with him the thousand years.

And when the thousand years may be finished, the Satan will be loosed out of his prison, and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth, the Gog and Magog, to gather them to the battle, of whom the number of them [is] as the sand of the sea. And they went up upon the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the Beloved City. But fire came down out of the heaven and ate them. And the Adversary, the [one] deceiving them, was cast to the Lake of the Fire and of sulfur, where also the beast and the false prophet [are], and they will be tormented day and night for the ages of the ages. (Rev. 20:1-10)

This is perhaps the most critical passage in the debate between amillennialists and premillennialists. This is because amillennialists believe that the “thousand years” repeatedly referred to in this passage is a figurative time period describing the ‘Church age’, which (supposedly) began at Pentecost - as we will see, this interpretation is riddled with eisegesis. In contrast, premillennialists believe that this thousand years is yet future, and refers to the coming Messianic age during which the Davidic kingdom will be restored to Israel and the promises of an earthly kingdom made to the prophets in the Old Testament will be fulfilled.

    The first thing which we are told in this passage is that the “thousand years” will be a period during which the Adversary is bound, unable to deceive the nations. This simply cannot be the ongoing state of affairs - elsewhere, Paul tells us that the Adversary is the “god of this age” (an age which will end at the second coming of Jesus), and that he has the authority to blind the minds of all unbelievers (2 Cor. 4:4). The Adversary has been very active since Pentecost, certainly not prevented from deceiving anyone: for example, see Acts 5:3; 26:18; 1 Cor. 7:5; 2 Cor. 2:11; 11:14; Eph. 2:2; 6:11; 1 Thess. 2:18; and 2 Tim. 2:26. If the Adversary were currently bound, how could it be said that he is prowling about like a lion (1 Pet. 5:8), and that the whole world is under his control (1 Jn. 5:19)?

    Furthermore, we are told that at the beginning of this thousand years, “they” will sit on thrones and judgment will be given to “them”. Who are “they”? By interpreting scripture with scripture, we can see that at least some of “they” refers to the twelve apostles, who will sit on twelve thrones and judge the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:28). However, as noted earlier, this is said to take place at or just after the bodily return of Christ from heaven (cf. Acts 3:21). Therefore, the thousand years of Revelation 20 must also take place after the bodily second coming of Jesus, something which (obviously) did not occur at Pentecost.

    We are then told that the resurrection of believers, including those who were executed for not taking the mark of the beast’s name, is called the “first resurrection” and will occur a thousand years prior to the resurrection of the rest of the dead. Amillennialists claim that this refers to the ‘spiritual resurrection’ of believers which occurs upon conversion. However, the noun αναστασις which is used here is only ever used of physical resurrection (see for example this concordance), and literally means “rising again”. Although the conversion of believers might perhaps be described as a ‘rising’ of some sort, it certainly would not be said to be a “rising again”. Thus, this must be a literal resurrection which will occur a thousand years before the Great White Throne judgment.

    Finally, the last section of this passage also refutes the amillennial interpretation. Amillennialists interpret Revelation through what they call ‘progressive recapitulation’, as they argue that the book of Revelation describes the course of history between Christ’s ascension and second coming at least seven times using different imagery. Because they see the Millennium as occurring before Christ’s second coming, they require one of these chronological breaks between chapters 19 and 20. However, according to Rev. 20:10, at the time that the Adversary is cast to the Lake of the Fire, the beast and false prophet are already there. Since the beast and false prophet were case to the Lake in the previous chapter (Rev. 19:20), there must be a chronological sequence between the two chapters, and the Millennium must occur after the second coming of Christ.

    In summary, the amillennial position is entirely untenable. In the Old Testament, the kingdom of God was considered to be the Davidic rule over Israel, which (although lost at the Babylonian captivity) would one day be restored to Israel, centered in Jerusalem, and the authority of which would extend over the entire earth. The writers of the New Testament confirm these prophecies, describing the kingdom of God as the physical kingdom over Israel which will be restored upon the second coming of Christ, and is as of yet entirely unfulfilled. This is confirmed by Revelation 20, which shows that this earthly kingdom will last for one thousand years after the second coming of Jesus. Some might say that this view of the kingdom is ‘carnal’ or ‘worldly’. This, however, is a gnostic view which sees the physical earth as evil; from a biblical perspective, the earth is “very good.” Even if it were 'carnal,' though, so what? If God has promised that this is what will happen in the future, then we can be sure that it will.

Part 2: https://universalistheretic.blogspot.com/2022/08/the-kingdom-of-god-part-2.html

______________________________

[1] For an explanation and defense of this hermeneutic, see this article by Abner Chou. Since all of the prophecies regarding the Messiah’s first coming were fulfilled in Jesus according to this hermeneutic, there is no reason to believe that the prophecies regarding His second coming will be fulfilled any differently.

[2] After all, the gospel which was preached to Israel was called “the gospel of the kingdom” (Matt. 4:23; 9:35; Lk. 16:16 cf. Acts 8:12).

[3] That is not to say that the body of Christ will reign on the earth along with Israel; Paul makes clear that our destiny during the oncoming ages is to rule with Jesus in the heavens (2 Cor. 5:1-2; Eph. 1:3; 2:6-7; 3:8-11; 6:11-12; Php. 3:19-20; Col. 1:5; 2 Tim. 4:18). However, our hope and expectation is the same as Israel in the sense that we, too, will be citizens of the Davidic “kingdom of God” (cf. Acts 26:6-7; 28:20). This is because the authority and rule of Jesus, the Messiah and Davidic king, will extend throughout the heavens as well as the earth (Rev. 12:10 cf. Col. 1:15-20).

Is 1 Cor. 8:6 a modified Shema?

    A trinitarian claim that I have been encountering more and more often as of late is that 1 Corinthians 8:6, which is perhaps one of Paul’s clearest declarations of his unitarian faith, is actually meant to include Jesus in the Israelite “Shema” - and therefore declare that He is Yahweh (for example, see here for a trinitarian making this claim). However, this claim goes directly against the immediate context of this passage. Let’s take a look at why 1 Cor. 8:6 is not proof that Jesus is God, and instead is one of the clearest passages that shows that the Father alone is the one true God, Yahweh.

    Here are the two passages in question:

Hear, O Israel! Yahweh [is] our God, Yahweh [is] one. (Deut 6:4 cf. Mk. 12:29)

Yet to us [is] one God, the Father, out of whom [are] the all things, and we for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom [are] the all things, and we through him. (1 Cor. 8:6)

Trinitarians correctly note that the Greek title κυριος (“Lord”) is the translation of the Hebrew name YHWH (Yahweh) as it is used throughout the New Testament. However, their claim is that when Paul states that “there is one God, the Father... and one Lord, Jesus Christ”, he is modifying the Shema to include Jesus Christ, and is using the title “Lord” to mean Yahweh. They argue that it should be read as

Yet to us [is] one God, the Father... and one Yahweh, Jesus Christ.

However, this claim completely fails to stand up to the surrounding context. If we look at the larger context before and after Paul’s claim in 1 Cor. 8:6, we see that the interpretation of “one Lord” as “one Yahweh” completely misunderstands and ruins Paul’s argument here.

Concerning, then, the eating of the [things] offered to idols, we know that an idol [is] nothing in [the] world, and that [there is] no God except one. For even if there are [those] called gods, whether in heaven or upon earth, just as there are many gods and many lords, yet to us [is] one God, the Father, out of whom [are] the all things, and we for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom [are] the all things, and we through him. But not in all [is] this knowledge. (1 Cor. 8:4-7)

According to Paul, although the pagans acknowledge the existence of many gods and many lords, there is in reality only one true God - the Father - and one true Lord, Jesus Christ. The one God, the Father, is used as a direct parallel to the “many gods” that the pagans acknowledge, and the one Lord, Jesus Christ, is used as a direct parallel to the “many lords” that the pagans acknowledge. If, as those who take 1 Cor. 8:6 as a modified Shema argue, this is describing Jesus as Yahweh, we would have to understand this passage as saying that

Just as there are many gods and many Yahwehs, yet to us [is] one God, the Father... and one Yahweh, Jesus Christ.

Clearly, this is an absurdity. The κυριοι, or human lords, of the pagans are certainly not Yahwehs, whatever that would mean; and neither do the pagans acknowledge the existence of many “Yahwehs”, but at most one god whose name is Yahweh among many other gods.

    Furthermore, if the “God” of the Shema is understood to be the Father and the “Yahweh” of the Shema to be Jesus Christ, per the trinitarian interpretation of this verse, then we would have to understand the Shema as saying: “Jesus Christ [is] the Father, Jesus Christ [is] one”. This completely backfires on trinitarians; instead of supporting the doctrine of the Trinity, we now have a prooftext for modalism (the belief that the Father, Jesus, and the holy spirit are all one person). Otherwise, we would have to exclude the Father from being Yahweh, which is also clearly false, as Jesus repeatedly identifies His Father with the one God of Israel, Yahweh (Mk. 12:29-30; Jn. 8:54; 20:17). So then, even if 1 Cor. 8:6 is to be understood as a modified Shema (which is completely contradicted by the context), this would prove modalism, not trinitarianism.

    So then, what was Paul trying to say in 1 Corinthians 8:6? It should be rather obvious from the context: just as to the pagans, there are many gods - divine rulers - to us there is only one God or divine ruler, the Father; and just as there are many lords - human rulers - to us there is only one Lord or human ruler, Jesus Christ. The Greek word κυριος translates three separate Hebrew words: adoni (human lords), Adonai (the Lord God), and YHWH (Yahweh). Since the human lords of the pagans are adoni (certainly not Adonai or YHWH) so also our one Lord, Jesus, is an adoni [1]. This is confirmed by Psalm 110:1, which characterizes the future Messiah as an adoni, and is quoted or referenced no less than twenty-four times in the New Testament [2].

    Rather than being a trinitarian statement, 1 Cor. 8:4-6 is clearly one of the most unitarian statements made by Paul in his epistles. In it, he identifies the one God of the Shema with the Father alone, and makes it clear that there can be no other God than Him; after all, “there is no God except one”. Furthermore, he contrasts the human lords (adoni in Hebrew) of the pagans with our one Lord Jesus Christ, thus showing that Jesus is the only human who can properly be called our Lord; He is our one adoni, not Adonai. This passage provides some of the strongest evidence that Paul was a unitarian and not a trinitarian as modern Christians claim.

[EDIT: After writing this in early May, I have now (mid-June) become far more sympathetic to trinitarianism. Although I will not yet go so far as to say that I affirm the full deity of Christ, as I go through my earlier posts on the Trinity and Christ’s deity, I have noticed many inconsistencies and problems with my arguments. What follows is a rebuttal of my previous claims.]

    I stand by my previous assertion that 1 Corinthians 8:6 is not a Christian re-formulation of the Jewish Shema. It would be meaningless nonsense for Paul to claim that Jesus is the “one Yahweh” over against the “many Yahwehs” (?) of the pagans. However, I now see this passage as one of the strongest arguments for Paul’s belief in the deity of Christ. Let me explain...

    In the original version of this post, I appealed to the Hebrew (which Paul, being a Jew, would have been very familiar with while writing this) as possibly stating that Jesus is an adoni (human lord) like the multiple human lords of the pagans that Paul is contrasting Him with. However, what I missed while writing this is the clear parallelism between v. 5 and v. 6, which provides evidence that Paul was calling Jesus Adonai (i.e., Lord God) rather than adoni. Consider the following:

Just as there are many elohim and many adonai, yet to us [is] one Elohim, the Father... and one adoni, Jesus Christ.

This is what I first claimed that Paul would have had in mind while writing this passage. According to my previous interpretation, Paul was contrasting the pagan human lords with the human lord of the Christians, Jesus Christ. However, in Hebrew, the plural of el (‘god’) is elohim, which is also the title of Yahweh - Elohim (lit. ‘gods’). Likewise, in Hebrew, the plural of adoni (‘lord’) is adonai, which is also the title of Yahweh - Adonai (lit. ‘lords’).

    Paul is consistent in contrasting the multiple gods (elohim) with the one God (Elohim). If Paul was merely calling Jesus a human lord, as I thought before, he would have been contrasting multiple lords (adonai) with one human lord (adoni). The parallelism is lost! But if Paul was calling Jesus the Lord God, and not merely a human lord, then he was instead contrasting multiple lords (adonai) with the one Lord (Adonai). Now, the parallelism is regained! Paul is contrasting elohim with Elohim, and adonai with Adonai (and not adonai with adoni).

Just as there are many elohim and many adonai, yet to us [is] one Elohim, the Father... and one Adonai, Jesus Christ.

Furthermore, earlier in the same context, Paul states that worshipping anyone except the one true God is simply idolatry (v. 4). Would it really make sense for Paul to then introduce someone who is not the one true God, who should nevertheless be worshipped? Not at all. But if he is introducing One Who, though not being the Father, is nevertheless the one true God (the Adonai), then consistency is restored to his logic! Worshipping any lesser god or lord is simply idolatry; only the one true God and Lord, Who is both the Father and Jesus Christ, is to be worshipped.

    So, is 1 Cor. 8:6 a re-formulated Shema? No. But neither is it a blatant statement of unitarianism, as I previously thought. Instead, Paul appears to be affirming something very similar, if not identical, to ‘orthodox’ conceptions of trinitarianism (or at least binitarianism); he is stating that the one true God (Elohim) and Lord (Adonai) is to be found in at least two persons, the Father and Jesus Christ, both of Whom should be worshipped instead of any lesser god or lord. The fact that the Father is consistently called God whereas Jesus is consistently called Lord does not show that Jesus is not God; rather, both God and Lord are titles of Yahweh. Indeed, the fact that two different titles are typically used by the Father and Jesus respectively is to be expected under trinitarianism, to avoid confusing these two separate Persons.

EDIT 2: After carefully looking at every passage that has been used to support trinitarianism, I no longer believe in the Trinity or the deity of Jesus (as of 24 December 2022). The fact is that neither of these doctrines can be found in the Bible.

With regard to 1 Corinthians 8:6 specifically, I was wrong to suggest that the Hebrew terms elohim, adon, and adonai were relevant at all; Paul was writing to a church of Greek-speaking Greeks, not Jews. So when he says that there is "one God, the Father, and one Lord, Jesus the Messiah," we should take it at face value — the Father just is the one God, and Jesus is our one human lord.

______________________________

[1] As Aaron Welch writes, “the very thing that allowed Paul to refer to Christ – but not the Father – as the “one Lord” in v. 6 is that Christ doesn’t have the same divine status as the Father. By virtue of not having divinity, Christ can’t be contrasted with the “many gods” of v. 5. Only the Father (who possesses divinity) is a suitable contrast to the “many gods” of v. 5. And yet Christ can be contrasted with the “many lords,” because he is the only non-divine person (i.e., the only person subordinate to the one God) who is our Lord.“

[2] Matt. 22:44, 26:64, Mk. 13:36, 14:62, 16:19, Lk. 20:42-43, 22:69, Acts 2:34-35, 5:31, 7:55-56, Rom. 8:34, 1 Cor. 15:25, Eph. 1:20, Col. 3:1, Heb. 1:3, 13, 8:1, 10:12-13, 12:2, 1 Pet. 3:22-24

Moving this blog

    Hi everyone! After some deliberation I’ve decided to move my blog over to a new address,  https://thechristianuniversalist.blogspot.com/...