Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Brady R. Johnson" <brady AT seanet.com>]

An interesting interpretation, but I don't think it stands up.  Each
reference that you offer in which the Targums reference "the word of the
Lord" is a translation of the Tetragrammaton.  The the Word or Name of the
Lord was too holy to pronounce and may well have been translated with the
euphemistic "word of the Lord", just as today it is translated "Adonai" or
in the Stone translation "Hashem".

It does not appear that the use of that phrase in the Targums supports your
thesis.

I'm no expert on Philo, but it would seem that by his time Greek and other
influences including the gnostic influences seen in the gospel of John may
well have crept in and be reflected in his comments.  However, it still
seems a stretch to view his comments as seeing the word of the Lord and God
Himself as distinct entities.

I'd be interested to know what others here think.  As a hobbyist in the
field I consider myself a lightweight on this list.  I hope that some
others will offer their views on this interesting topic.

Brady Johnson

>I don't know if this has been a thread in recent discussion.
>
>But I have noticed an "attempt" to explain the differences between
>El and Yah, the plurality in Genesis 1:26, etc.
>
>I am going to post some "trinitarian" information concerning the OT
>and was hoping to get some response as to its "validity".
>
>This is not information that I have written, but accumulated.
>
>The Teachings of The Targums
>
>       When the Jews returned from Babylonian captivity 450 years
>before the birth of Jesus, they had adopted Aramaic as their native
>language. Although it is a dialect of ancient Hebrew, Aramaic is
>about as different from it as modern Italian is from its classical
>Latin ancestor. Consequently, during the first and early second
>centuries A.D., Aramaic translations of the Hebrew Old Testament
>were made.
>
>
>       These translations, called Targums, were The Living Bibles of
>their day, an interpretive paraphrase of Scripture. They help us see
>how these first-century Jews understood their Old Testament.
>       One of the striking things these Targums show is that first-
>century Jews had come to understand the phrase "the Word of
>God" as referring to a divine entity within God Himself, yet
>distinguishable at times from God. J.W. Etheridge, in the
>introduction to his translations of the Targums of Onkelos and
>Jonathan, has given us a number of examples of this Jewish
>understanding of the term, "the Word" (Aramaic: Memra).
>       In Genesis 18:1, where the Hebrew Bible says Yahweh
>(Jehovah) appeared to Abraham, the Targum says, "The Word of
>the Lord appeared to Abraham." Further on, where the Hebrew
>reports "Yahweh rained down upon Sodom and upon
> Gomorrah brimstone and fire from Yahweh out of heaven," the Targum states
>that "the Word of the Lord sent down upon them sulphur and fire from the
>presence of the Lord out of heaven." (Genesis 19:24)
>       In Genesis 16, when Hagar sees "the Angel of the Lord," the Targum
>says she saw "the Word of the Lord." After seeing this "Word" (Memra) she
>says, "Here has been revealed the glory of the Shekineh of the Lord."
>Then, acc
>ording to the Jerusalem Targum, "Hagar returned thanks and prayed in the
>name of the Word of the Lord, who had appeared to her." Thus the Word not
>only is regarded as the presence of deity, but is in some manner personall
>y distinguishable from the Lord.
>       In Genesis 28:20 the Targum of Onkelos paraphrases Jacob's vow, "If
>God will be with me... then Yahweh will be my God" with the words, "If the
>Word of the Lord will be my help... the Word of the Lord shall be my God."
>Ag
>ain, the Angel of Yahweh who spoke to Moses at the burning bush (Exodus
>3:14) is designated by the Jerusalem Targum as "the Word of the Lord."
>       The distinct personality of this Divine Word is seen pointedly in
>Jonathan's Targum of Isaiah 63:7-10. There, where the Hebrew text speaks
>of Yahweh being their Savior, the Targum reads, "the Word (Memra) was
>their Redee
>mer." (vs. 8) When the Israelites continued to disobey, then "His Word
>(Memra) became their enemy, and fought against them" -- an action ascribed
>to Yahweh in the Hebrew text. Again in Isaiah 45:22 the Targum of Jonathan
>exhorts, "Look unto My Word and be saved."
>       While this personalizing of the Word was being expressed in
>Palestine in the Targums of Jesus' day, Philo, an Egyptian Jew and
>contemporary of Jesus, was expressing similar thoughts in even more
>distinct words. In his es
>say "On the Creation," Philo states that man was not made in the image of
>some creature, but in the image of God's own uncreated Word. He wrote:
>"for the Creator, we know, employed for its making no pattern taken from
>amo
>ng created things, but solely, as I have said, His own Word."
>       Philo continues: "Man was made a likeness and imitation of the
>Word, when the Divine Breath was breathed into his face. ("On the
>Creation," XLVIII: 139, Loeb Edition I, pp. 110-111)
>
>
>       In his work on Noah, Philo again expresses the teaching that man is
>made by "the First Cause" (that is, God) in the image of "the Eternal
>Word:" "Our great Moses likened the fashion of the reasonable soul to no
>created t
>hing, but averred it to be a genuine coinage of that dread Spirit, the
>Divine and Invisible One, signed and impressed by the seal of God, the
>stamp of which is the Eternal Word."
>       He continues: "...man has been made after the Image of God (Genesis
>1:27), not however after the image of anything created... man's soul
>having been made after the image of the Archetype, the Word of the First
>Cause." ("
>Noah's Work as a Planter," I:11-20, Loeb III, pp. 222-223)
>       Thus, the eternal Word is in some sense distinguishable from God,
>and yet at the same time is, like God, uncreated, rational and the bearer
>of the divine image. This comes very close to the teaching of the New
>Testament
>that the Word was distinguishable from God, and yet was God. As John 1:1
>expresses it, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God,
>and the Word was God." It also appears similar to Paul's teaching that the
>Son is "the image of the invisible God" (Colossians 1:15); and the writer
>of Hebrews statement that the Son "is the exact representation of His
>being." (Hebrews 1:3)
>       Philo, however, goes further. He says that God is the king and
>shepherd of all creation, but rules and controls it through his eternally
>existing Word, whom Philo calls God's "First-born Son."
>       His "hallowed flock" of created things God directs by his divine
>laws, setting over it His true Word and first-born son, who shall take
>upon Him its government like some viceroy of a great king. ("On
>Husbandry," I:51, L
>oeb III, pp. 134-135)
>       Philo has God expressing Himself in this manner: "I alone...
>sustained the Universe to rest firm and sure upon the Mighty Word, who is
>My viceroy." ("On Dreams," I:241, Loeb V, pp. 424-425)
>       Therefore this eternal Word, God's first-born Son, is the upholder
>of the whole creation, "the everlasting Word of the eternal God is the
>very sure and staunch prop of the Whole. He it is, who extending Himself
>from the
>midst to its utmost bounds... keeps up through all its length Nature's
>unvanquished course, combining and compacting all its parts. For the
>Father who begat Him constituted His Word such a Bond of the Universe as
>nothing
>can break." ("Noah's Work as a Planter," I:8-9, Loeb III, pp. 216-217)
>       This reflects the same thought that Paul expressed about the Son as
>being the one "in whom all things hold together." (Colossians 1:17) It
>also reminds also reminds us of Hebrews 1:3, which depicts the Son as
>"sustaining
> all things by his powerful Word."
>       Philo continues his discussion of the Word by maintaining that to
>those incapable of seeing the supreme cause, God Himself, He appears to
>them in the form of His Angel, the Word: "For just as those who are unable
>to see
>the sun itself, see the gleam of the parahelion and take it for the sun,
>and take the halo round the moon for that luminary itself, so some regard
>the image of God, His Angel, the Word, as His very self." ("On Dreams," I:
>239, Loeb V, pp. 422-423)
>
>
>       This sounds very similar to the teaching that the Son is "the
>radiance (or outshining) of God's glory" (Hebrews 1:3), the only part of
>God's nature that people are allowed to see. This is true because "no one
>has ever se
>en God," but "the only begotten God... He has made Him known." (John 1:18)
>Thus, Jesus, the Son, can say, "Anyone who has seen me has seen the
>Father." (John 14:9)
>       Philo further explained that God, being light, is "the archetype of
>every other light." As such He is "prior to and high above every
>archetype." Thus He holds the position of "a model of a model," that is,
>He is the mode
>l for His Word, which Word becomes the model for creation. The
>Word, therefore, contains all the qualities of God. As Philo
>expressed it, "the model or pattern was the Word which contained
>all His fullness -- light, in fact."
>       ("On Dreams," I:75, Loeb V, pp. 336-337) Paul expressed a
>similar thought when he wrote that in the Son all God's fullness
>dwells. (Colossians 1:19; 2:9)
>       To Philo, therefore, the Word of God is the eternal, uncreated
>Word containing all the fullness of God and bearing His image.
>That divine image which the Word bears is the image in which man
>was created. The Word is further the sustainer, upholder and ruler
>of the world, carrying on the governing of all things, as God's
>viceroy, and containing all God's fullness.
>       While the Word is not a created thing and carries on all the
>functions of God, Philo is clear that there are not two gods --
>although he does not attempt to explain how this can be. Philo's
>teaching is, therefore, very close to the biblical doctrine of the
>Trinity. Philo reached his conclusions without the aid of the New
>Testament and certainly without deriving his ideas from pagan
>notions of deity. The Old Testament teaching that the Angel of
>Yahweh is really the presence of Yahweh Himself seems to have
>strongly influenced Philo's ideas.
>       To relegate the doctrine of the Trinity, therefore, to a fourth-
>century adaptation of paganism is to ignore the conclusions that
>several Jewish theologians and teachers had reached four
>centuries earlier, from God's revelations given to Israel before the
>time of the coming of Christ. At the very time that the Word was
>becoming flesh (John 1:1, 14), Jewish writers were already
>beginning to see that God's Word could in some way be
>distinguished from God the Father Himself, yet have all the fullness
>of God contained in Him.
>
>
>
>
>Pastor Dan Oglesby
>Community Revival Center Church
>Where God is Alive and Moving by His Spirit
>Ottawa, Kansas
>http://www.crcc-oca.org
>
>---
>You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: brady AT seanet.com
>To unsubscribe, forward this message to
>$subst('Email.Unsub')
>To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu.