As I referenced earlier in the Seeking What They Sought podcast of the Sanctuary Doctrine interview with Richard Davidson Part 2 there is a particularly strange part where Dr. Davidson says God made a covenant with God. I have snipped the section of the podcast below, which starts at around 38 minutes and runs for about 4 minutes. You can see that here
Transcripted edited for clarity starting at 37:50:
But the fact that Abraham is never mentioned here.
Yeah. He's put to sleep. And then there are two parties that walk between the a torch and a bowl of flame. Yes. And those two are mentioned, those same two words are mentioned later in Exodus 19, the Godhead who's on Mount Sinai. And so they act, and Ellen White is clear. The father and the son were both on the mountain there. And the we have throughout Genesis we have Yahweh, and then we have the angel of the Lord who comes, and when he comes as a messenger, he says I am Yahweh. So you have two Yahweh's throughout Genesis. And so and so the two Yahweh are walking the two light sources the two divine light sources are walking together through the pieces. And so the real covenant which we fail to look at too often it's not between God and us which we break so often. It's between God and God. Saying if we break I'm going to be faithful. May we be torn with God from God. If we break it. Wow. And so God is offering to have the self-destruction of the Godhead. . And that's exactly what happens because in Isaiah 53, it takes them it takes the same word here as the pieces and says that refers to Jesus. And then Psalm 22.
Wait, sorry. You're referencing the metaphor of the suffering servant in Isaiah 53. Yeah.
Isaiah 53, the suffering servant. And it talks about in his death and it says he will be cut off and uses the language of the pieces of Genesis 15. that he is the one that is he is the one that is u experiencing this covenant being broken. Wow. What happens then? Yeah, I'm trying to figure out where that is. Is this verse 8? Let's see. Oh, that he was cut off out of the land of the living. That part. Um just a minute here.
Let's go. while you're looking for
that, I think just to describe to people that if they haven't already
caught it, the crazy part about this is when God makes that covenant
with Abram, I'm going to make you a great nation. It's wild because
he's saying this is not dependent on like, I am going to be faithful.
This is not dependent on you. which is a wild thing to so then when
you carry this into the other sacrificial systems even though humans
have a part to play there is a covenant that God makes with them
later which is keep my law keep my covenant keep the things that I'm
asking you to it always ends up getting applied back to God is God is
the one who is faithful consistently that's right which is really and
the word is yes in verse eight it's the word gezer which is the same
word in [clears throat] Genesis 15 verse 17 to describe the pieces
Wow. And so then you go to the cross and you get the capstone on this
when Jesus on the cross, the sins of the world have just separated
him from God. And he cries out, "My God, my God, why have you
forsaken me?" It happens. God has cut from God. He's ripped from
God. And they feel that he feels the eternal separation that the
that those who aren't saved are going to keep are going to experience
for eternity. So, so for me when I talk about covenants, I always go
to this text first because it shows that the covenant is ultimately
between the father and the son, not between him and him and his
people. And so that will never fail.
I encourage you to look at the original podcast or my snipped portion because there are interjections that make the transcript somewhat difficult to follow. But as Davidson ends the covenant is ultimately between the Father and the Son. What covenant you ask? Well the real and most important covenant that we fail to see is between God and God! You likely then again ask, what is that covenant that is so important and is not stated at all?
Let us refresh our memories about Genesis chapter 15. It is summed up here.
“The covenant with Abram in Genesis 15 employs גֶּזֶר to establish an immutable promise grounded in divine initiative. God alone walks between the severed pieces, demonstrating unilateral commitment. The severing underscores the certainty that God will fulfill land, seed, and blessing promises (Genesis 15:18–21). Later prophetic literature echoes this ritual language when indicting covenant breakers (Jeremiah 34:18–20), showing that the meaning attached to גֶּזֶר became a juridical touchstone for covenant faithfulness. “ https://biblehub.com/hebrew/1506.htm
,
My previous blog showed that in EllenWhites version of Genesis 15 Abram was part of the covenant ceremony, though it was not mentioned in the actual Gen. 15 story from the Bible. Davidson probably realizes he is disagreeing with the Adventist prophet, so earlier at the beginning of minute 37 he says:
“...He cuts them in two, places them beside each other and then there's no mention of his walking in between. Interestingly, I mean, he may have done that, but that's not the point of the story.”
The only reason to say that Abram might have walked between the cut animal parts is that Ellen White says Abram did walk between and made a covenant with God. Of course, since the whole point of the story was for God to confirm to Abram his promise, Davidson is correct that the point of the story is not about Abram doing something that he did not do in the Bible story.
Now, the idea that God, who according to the Bible is ONE, made a covenant with another God is certainly problematic.
"Hear, O Israel: the LORD is our God, the LORD is One."
Listening
to Davidson is quite torturous as he tries to equate the use of the
same Hebrew words as his connecting points. Yes, smoke and fire are
seen moving through the severed animals of the covenant, and smoke
and fire are present upon Mt. Sinai because they are very often used
as symbols for the presence of God
There are roughly 7,000 to
8,400 unique words (or roots) in ancient Biblical Hebrew, so it is
very common to see them used in all types of stories, situations, and contexts. It is not an impressive connection; it is a necessity of
a limited language. The total English vocabulary is more than 1
million words, and a common daily English usage is 170,000 words
Davidson presents his key Hebrew word connections between Gen 15 and Isa 53
H1506 גֶּזֶר gezer (gheh'-zer) n-m.
1. something cut off.
2. a portion.
[from H1504]
KJV: part, piece.
Root(s): H1504
So the two halves of an animal cut apart do not mean that in Isa 53 it has the same meaning.
H1504 גָּזַר gazar (gaw-zar') v.
1. to cut down or off.
2. (figuratively) to destroy, divide, exclude, or decide.
[a primitive root]
KJV: cut down (off), decree, divide, snatch.
Isa 53:8 By oppression and judgment he was taken away;
and as for his generation, who considered
that he was cut off out of the land of the living,
stricken for the transgression of my people?
Here, Davidson thinks that being cut off from the land of the living is to be cut off from God, but
Jesus is God, so how does God rip Himself apart? Well, that is because
Davidson takes Psalm 22 out of its context of a Psalm that speaks of
tribulation to triumph and assumes that the first line of the psalm
My God My God why have you forsaken me, to not be how the psalm was
identified to people before there ever were chapter and verses, but
that it must mean God and the Godhead were broken apart. Why would
God be separated from God? The only reason Davidson gives is that Jesus would know what it was like to be eternally separated from God
for all eternity. Which was only a couple of days, and Jesus raised
Himself from the grave as He said He would do. So Jesus still had the
power of God to raise Himself from the dead, but He was ripped apart
from God, who Jesus is, in fact God. Do people like Davidson even
contemplate that the dead know nothing, they don't feel anything, no
shame, no remorse, no worms eating their flesh? Being dead is the same
as being eternally separated from God. The reason Christians don't
fear death is that they know the author of Life (see Acts 3:15, Jesus as
the author of life) can raise them from the dead, so death is not
their end. But Jesus knew He would rise again, He told others He
would rise again, and He even promised another being crucified with
Him that they would be together in Paradise.
There was no
reason for the Crucifixion to separate the Godhead. Jesus was guilty
of no sin. He did not die the second death because He had not even
died the first death, and the very definition of second death is no resurrection from that death (Revelation 20:14-15). Jesus did not suffer the wrath of God because
Jesus is God and God had no wrath for Jesus. There is not even one New Testament verse that tells us Jesus paid a penalty. Jesus life, death, and
resurrection were God's plan for reconciliation with mankind. That is
what atonement is all about: the mercy of God that forgives and
reconciles man back to God.
So Dr. Davidson has given us a view of God that is not sustainable. It denies who God is and, with his strange interpretation, claims that the Godhead was ripped apart even after God confirms a covenant between the Godhead that he never tells us what that covenant is, only that if they break it the Godhead will be ripped apart, and then Dr. Davidson tells us that the Godhead in fact was ripped apart. So, God did not even keep his covenant with Himself; it is too confusing and completely unnecessary unless one is trying to form a theology based upon some extra-biblical authority.
That Dr. Davidson is an SDA professor and the 2 people interviewing him are SDA pastors should serve as a warning to every Adventist member. Your University schools are corrupt, and your theology is incredibly faulty.
No comments:
Post a Comment