In Daniel 9 we find Daniel on his knees. He had been reading Jeremiah, apparently, and was reminded that God had told Jeremiah that they would be in captivity for 70 years (Jer 25:11-12). Well, they had been in captivity now for some 66 years, so Daniel thought he'd pray. It's a magnificent prayer (Dan 9:4-19). It contains all the necessary components, as it were. He pays close attention to the character of God (Dan 9:4). Then he confesses sin (Dan 9:5-14). He confesses the sin of the people in terms including "we" because he found himself guilty of sin. He admitted that their enslavement was the just punishment for them. He recalled God's power and mercy in rescuing them from Egypt (Dan 9:15) and calls on God to save them not on account of any merits of their own, but on His great compassion and for His name's sake (Dan 9:16-19). A magnificent prayer, and a model for any of us.
There is, however, an error, a mistake, if you will. It's in his confession of sin. While we know now that sin is just a faux pas, a boo-boo, a little slip up, as it were, Daniel sees it as something else. He says it was rebellion (Dan 9:9). He calls it treachery (Dan 9:7). He makes it sound ... so bad. So bad, in fact, that Daniel thinks that their punishment of being hauled off to Babylon was a righteous act on God's part (Dan 9:16). Not us. We're much more benign than that. We're not greatly upset by sins. We're not too worked up over our breaches of God's commands. "Rebellion"? "Treachery"? No, of course not. God would be unfair if He simply failed to forgive us our minor errors and overlook our "missing the mark." He's a big God. He doesn't need to act so harshly ... does He?
Scripture, of course, is on Daniel's side. God cannot stand sin. Treachery against the Most High is Cosmic Treason. And God Himself calls our sin "treachery" (Lev 26:40). Daniel's prayer, then, is a model prayer for us. Recognize God for Who He is. Doing so will help us to see who we are -- sinners. Remember His goodness. Then, with God in His proper place and we in our proper place, we can ask of Him and He will answer. If we don't recognize the God of the Bible or ourselves as treacherous sinners against Him, why would we expect kindness and mercy from Him?
15 comments:
Because we have elevated our status and lowered God's status, we can easily come to the conclusion that sin simply isn't that bad. But if we really examine the Old Testament, and passages as this, or of Nadab and Abihu, or Uriah, we see that God takes His holiness very seriously. I want to ask Christians 2 questions: what do you think is God's most important attribute, and what do you think God thinks is His most important attribute? I doubt very many Christians will have the same answer for both.
David,
I suspect that you are absolutely correct. I think that my answer to both would be His holiness, but I don't think that I necessarily live that out as well as I should.
This is a good reminder of my need to be absolutely honest with myself and about myself before God. I might try to “dance around” my sinfulness, like the world does (i.e. sins are only “poor choices” or “I’m only human”), but God does not take my rebellion lightly. I can hide some of my inequities from those around me but not from God, who knows my heart and every action I make. When I admit my sinfulness and confess my regular blunders, then I can receive God’s forgiveness and mercy--so there is really no reason at all for me not to “come clean.”
David, Through reading a book many years ago about God’s attributes (I can’t recall now if it was “The Attributes of God” by Arthur Pink, “The Knowledge of the Holy” by A.W. Tozer, or something else), I learned this: “God’s attributes are held by Him in infinitely full and complete measure, with no aspect of His nature and character in conflict with or subservient to any other quality; His attributes are the whole rather than parts of God.” After reading that book, I can’t deem any one attribute as “most important.” So I do have the same answer to both your questions: “all of them.” :)
I don't think anyone lives that out as well as they should. I'm really hung up on church music right now and so much of it focuses on anything but His holiness, and I go to a Reformed church. How much wider is the divide between people's view of God's attributes in less rigorous churches?
It is true that all of His attributes are the whole rather than the parts. But when God discusses His attributes, His holiness is the only attribute raised to the third degree, ie He is holy, holy, holy, not love, love, love or mercy, mercy, mercy. When He struck down Nadab and Abihu or Uriah, it was because His holiness was violated. Can we separate His attributes? No. But when we lose sight of them, we diminish Him and cease to worship Him in spirit and truth.
David, I was curious about your statement, “But when God discusses His attributes, His holiness is the only attribute raised to the third degree….” This is from Got Questions: “The phrase ‘holy, holy, holy’ appears twice in the Bible, once in the Old Testament (Isa. 6:3) and once in the New (Rev. 4:8). Both times, the phrase is spoken or sung by heavenly creatures, and both times it occurs in the vision of a man who was transported to the throne of God: first by the prophet Isaiah and then by the apostle John.” I was surprised that those three-fold words are not recorded in scripture more than just those two times. It is also interesting that when God Himself says, “I am holy” (Lev. 11:44; 19:2; 20:26; 21:8), He does not triplicate it. In any event, I do not disagree with you that God’s holiness is blatantly violated by sinful humans, and from your final statement above I see that you comprehend my response to your hypothetical questions: all of God’s attributes are important--"to the nth degree”! :)
Lorna, there is a Hebraic trick they use. It is similar to our "underline" and "bold print" tricks. In Hebrew writings, if they wished to emphasize something, they'd say it twice. Jesus did this in His teaching. Sometimes He'd say, "Verily I say," but other times He'd say, "Verily, verily I say ..." Meaning "Pay attention; this will be on the test. It shows up in a variety of places in Scripture, but the most obvious is this 3x "holy" where the point is being made (in Hebraic terms), "He is the holy, holier, holiest."
Thanks, Stan, for the information (which I did know). In my comment, I addressed a specific statement made by David, which I felt was not correct as it read. If I made an inaccurate or unclear assertion in my remarks to him, I hope that David will feel free to inform me, so that I can clarify it for him.
I figured it was a reference to "God's Word" in which all that is in the Bible is what God says about Himself, verbally or not.
I'm pretty sure if God didn't want His holiness elevated to the highest, He wouldn't have allowed the angels to sing the trice hagion. Not sure what the limitations of it being mentioned twice, in the visions of men, and in His throne do to minimize it's importance. I've always got the impression that the angels are singing it constantly. And I think it is most important because it is the one that seems to be most forgotten in the church.
David, As I mentioned in my follow-up comment above, I was specifically addressing your statement, “But when God discusses His attributes, His holiness is the only attribute raised to the third degree….” Please note that I was replying only about that particular assertion of yours--and not whether God’s holiness is important or blatantly violated, etc. (which I did affirm was obviously true). I took your words, “when God discusses His attributes,” literally and not as in a general revelation of Himself in His Word (as Stan says he took it)--since your wording very much suggested that to me (rather than if you wrote something like, “when God’s character is revealed to us in scripture.” So I pointed out to you that when God does speak of (i.e. “discusses”) His holiness--as He did literally and specifically in the verses from Leviticus that I referenced--He did not raise it “to the third degree” as you asserted. It was the two instances mentioned in the Got Questions quote that use the triplicate form. No, there is no “limitation” implied in that--it was merely a factual point related to your statement--i.e. the triplicate form was not used “when God discusses His attributes” but appears in a different context in scripture. Again, I was not implying anything beyond what I actually said--i.e. nothing along the lines that God’s holiness is not paramount or that the scriptures don’t contain a “God is holy, holier, holiest” thread running through them or that the world and even believers deny and diminish His character to our grave detriment, etc.
I will point out in closing that my original comment to you was in reply to your questions to “Christians.” Assuming that you were genuinely interested in the viewpoints of others, I offered my personal answer. I easily got your point right at the start; I’m sorry that even after additional discussion, I didn’t make mine clear to you. In the interest of time (I am preparing for another imminent road-trip out west), I think we’ll need to leave it at that.
I typically take anything that is special revelation as God speaking because it is Him revealing something about Himself. My fault for not being clear. Hope you have a good trip.
Thanks, David.
As a P.S., I must say that the “He is the holy, holier, holiest” tribute contrasts so greatly with the video clip that is currently going around where Kamala says something along the lines, “We must be woke, woker, wokest.” How wonderful to raise our eyes, hearts, and hands to the Lord rather than to politicians who make silly comments like that!
Post a Comment