The First Three Letters of the Bible

 

In Genesis 1:1, the first word of the Bible, in Hebrew, is בְּרֵאשִׁית which is transliterated as bare sit or b'rei-sheeth.  The first letter is ב (bet), the second letter is ר (resh), and the third letter is א (alef). The English-language name of the book is Genesis, from its Greek name, Γένεσις. Its Hebrew name is the same as its first word, Bereshit, “in beginning.”

Some Christian commentators have noticed and commented on this as a statement of the Trinity in the first word of the Bible. Others see it as merely an interesting coincidence.

            בן         Ben (son)

            רִיחַ       Ruach (spirit, breath, wind)

            אֱלֹהִ֑ים    Elohim (God, a name in plural form)

            Religious Jews reject this understanding as heretical, believing that the very essence of their religion is monotheistic; God is one, not plural. They understand the plural name of God, Elohim, as expressing the majesty of God, as in the phrase "holy, holy, holy," with each "holy" adding to the emphasis or strength of the word.

            An objection to the idea of Jesus or the Trinity being mentioned in the Old Testament is seen here:  https://gsgriffin.com/2017/07/29/the-bereshit-jesus-in-genesis-argument-has-no-merit/#:~:text=Both%20assert%20the%20following%20meanings,covenant%2C%20mark%2C%20cross)

by writer Garrett S. Griffin. Griffin is a Democratic Socialist activist and political writer.

Can You Respond to These Criticisms?

Christian Apologetics is the study of defending the faith against intellectual attacks and explaining biblical truths and concepts to non-believers in ways which they can understand.  It also attempts to give believers a rational footing on which to base their faith.  Some of the attacks are quite harsh.  See how you would respond to these ten criticisms … if you can.  If you cannot, don’t expect that our critics will be swayed by “because the Bible says so.”

http://con-w.com/top-ten-signs-youre-a-fundamentalist-christian/

The Voice of the Bible

The process of understanding films is like the process of understanding any other human knowledge.  The key is repetition and quantity of exposure until one begins to see patterns.  This is why a skilled physician sometimes knows what is wrong with you before you finish describing your symptoms.  The offensive tackle on the line of scrimmage in an American football game knows the play the other team is about to run by the way in which the opposing team’s players are standing.   The chess master knows the next six moves you are about to make and how he will respond to each.

In film theory, a theory popularized by director/actor Francois Truffaut is the auteur theory.   The theory posits that the author of a film is the true author of a film, putting his or her unmistakable stamp on the final product.  The theory holds that while great actors or producers can, and occasionally do, elevate films, the major artist of a film is the director.  The “voice” of a director is discernable when viewing the director’s output as a whole over the course of their career.

When you listen to Mozart every piece of music is different but every piece is also the same, and every piece yells “Mozart!”  It is the same with film directors: Alfred Hitchcock (an innocent is caught up in events outside of his control), Akira Kurosawa (the master and disciple, heroic champions, and cycles of extreme violence), Jean-Luc Goddard (Marxist themes), Luis Bunuel (opposition to organized religion and to traditional morality),  Naruse Mikio (female protagonists caught in bleak and pessimistic situations, with emotions raging under a calm surface), Martin Scorscese (morally ambiguous protagonists who are often prone to violence and feelings of guilt),  Ingmar Bergman (mortality, loneliness, sexual desire, religious faith),  Tim Burton (the misunderstood outsider who unintentionally hurts those for whom he cares),  David Cronenberg (the uncomfortable merging of mankind and technology),  Jacques Tati (the humor in normal everyday events), etc.

Just like a film director's body of work, the Bible has an identifiable voice, even though it was written by at least forty different people.  It is remarkably self-consistent.  Doctrine derived from the Bible can be judged as to its orthodoxy by its consistency with the total body of scripture.  It truly can be said that the Bible has multiple authors and one author.

Those who claim that the Bible contains contradictions fail to understand a basic principle: God's ways are not our ways.  Our understanding is limited; God's is infinite.  Rather than contradictions, the Bible is full of paradoxes in which both answers are true.  The Bible has multiple authors and one author. True freedom comes from submitting oneself as a slave to the Lord.  Both free will and predestination are clearly taught in the Bible.  Christians are strict monotheists but God exists as Three Persons.  Jesus is fully human and fully divine.  Jesus was at the same time a poor man and also the king of the universe.  God demands perfection but we are incapable on our own of ever fulfilling the demand. We are to be in the world but not of the world.

Book Comment: If the Church Were Christian, Chapter 1, Part 1

If you are joining this book review series mid-stream , you can read the comment from the beginning by going to the LABELS section following the last post on this page and clicking on PHILIP GULLEY

If the Church Were Christian. Chapter 1, Part 1; in a chapter by chapter series of posts in response to the book by Pastor Philip Gulley. Chapter One: Jesus Would Be a Model for Living Rather Than an Object of Worship.

" ... the era of uncritical acceptance of Jesus stories is past ..."

There are numerous extant apocryphal Jesus stories and gospels, many about His childhood and early adulthood, before (and after) his three year public ministry. These are not the stories Pastor Gulley is questioning. The ones he doubts are in the Bible. He believes that we cannot "assume that the gospel versions of the Jesus story are historically accurate" and that some sayings biblically attributed to Jesus (ie. Matthew 16:18 and 18:17, for example) probably did not come from His mouth.

Gulley questions the rationality of a belief in the Virgin Birth and doesn't accept the divinity of Jesus. In fact, he thinks Jesus, as a monotheistic Jew, would have been offended to be thought divine. Jesus' miracles Gulley sees as "pre-Enlightenment affirmations of the transforming presence of Jesus."

Insisting that jesus wasn't about His own glorification (this is correct; see John 8:54) and that rather, He was about humility and modesty. Gulley says that making Jesus God is an excuse not to be like Him.

Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God: John 8:54

Some perhaps would use Jesus' deity as an excuse not to be like Him, but actually, this is one of the paradoxes of the Christian faith. We can't be like Jesus but are expected to be like Jesus. We wouldn't be expected to be like Jesus if we couldn't do it in the power of the Holy Spirit. In his excellent book, After You Believe, N.T. Wright, the Anglican Bishop of Durham speaks of the development of Christian virtue, the process of sanctification.

But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, [even] as by the Spirit of the Lord. 2 Corinthians 3:18 

There will be more to follow.