Acts 2:32-33—"God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of it. Exalted to the right hand of God, he has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit and has poured out what you now see and hear."
Acts 7:55-56—"But Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, looked up to heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. 'Look,' he said, 'I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.'"
Romans 8:34—"Who then is the one who condemns? No one. Christ Jesus who died—more than that, who was raised to life—is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us."
Colossians 3:1—"Since, then, you have been raised with Christ, set your hearts on things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God."
Hebrews 1:3—"The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven."
In the words of the New Testament, revisited more than once, Jesus indeed is at the right hand of God. This excludes him being God. Might someone think that Hebrews 1:3 is actually equating Jesus with God by calling him the former the exact representation of the latter? If they make assumptions, yes, they might believe this, but this verse does not contradict Jesus and God (and the Holy Spirit as well, if it is not simply a special extension of the Father's own power and hence not metaphysically separate) being distinct entities. People can believe anything, but they are in error unless they do so on the basis of logical proof. This is about necessary truths rather than words, traditions, persuasion, and so on.
It is easy to demonstrate using reason that Hebrews 1 does not quite identify Jesus with Yahweh. First, Hebrews still says Jesus sat down at God's right hand, a stark differentiation between the two. It is simply impossible to sit down literally or figuratively at one's own right hand. Second, a representation of something is not the same as the thing it represents. Words are linguistic constructs used to "represent" concepts in verbal and written communication, but they are not the concepts; they are assigned to the fixed ideas that are already governed by logical necessities. A sculpture of a person is not the same as a person, though it represents a generic or particular individual. A copy of a document is not the exact same document, despite the identical content, as the original. It is a copy, a representation.
Each of the other verses shown above is even more straightforward about how Jesus is a separate being honored by God by presiding at his right hand. There is in truth no ambiguity textually present other than that inherent in all language, for words have no inherent meaning and a non-omniscient/telepathic being could never know the intended meaning of another being's words. Romans 8:34 goes slightly further by hinting at how Jesus was not responsible for his own resurrection, something affirmed throughout the New Testament, which Acts 2:32 states openly. God resurrected Jesus [1], not Jesus himself (see also Acts 3:13-15, 4:10, Romans 10:9)!
In fact, the far more foundational issues broached by Hebrews 1:3 center on what things do not or could not possibly metaphysically depend on Jesus for their existence. Literally all things would include logical facts, empty space, and God himself. Logical axioms are true in themselves and thus dependent on nothing but their own self-necessity, which grounds other logical facts. The Bible could only be false wherever it genuinely contradicts logic, if it was to. Empty space, as dictated by logic, exists in the absence of matter and its divine creator [2]. There would always be a spatial dimension, itself matterless by nature, that could hold physical substance, though this is not the same as logic's self-necessary existence, as it is a matter of logic. As for God, who might have in fact created Jesus according to the Bible (for instance, John 3:16 is incredibly obvious about suggesting this), he is not subordinate to Christ or metaphysically lesser than him. It is the other way around (John 10:29, 14:28).
Moreover, not only do Genesis 1 and John 1 carefully avoid actually saying God, and Christ with him, created everything that exists (or that everything in existence needed to be created), but both overtly present God as necessarily existing prior to creation as the divine creator. In 1 Corinthians 15:23-28, Paul addresses an example of how "everything" can refer to everything in a particular group or everything other than certain exceptions. Hebrews 1 does not literally state that Jesus sustains the existence of himself or all things of all kinds other than himself. This is the sort of topic that would likely not even be considered at any level by the typical reader of Hebrews 1, evangelical Trinitarian or not, though anyone who rationalistically focuses on the relevance of Hebrews 1:3 to non-Trinitarianism can see that the representation, in this case Christ, is not the thing represented, in this case God.
[1]. See here for a more direct exploration of this:
No comments:
Post a Comment