1

In the Old Testament, Justice was meted out immediately by God, when Uzza touched the Ark, was this LORD the tripartite Godhead or the pre-incarnate Jesus.

All Scripture is quoted from the King James translation unless otherwise noted.

1st Chronicles 13:10 (New revised King James version) And the anger of the LORD was kindled against Uzza, and he stroke him, because he put his hand to the ark: and there he died before God.

Revelation 20:11-12 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

Jesus said:

John 5:26 and 27 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; 27 And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man.

and also:

John 5:25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.

It is hard for me to determine if the Trinity or the pre-incarnate Jesus was the judge in the Old Testament, because of Jesus statement that he is the son of man, and whether that would be applicable prior to his earthly existence.

my question is not concerned with the immediate judgment, but who is making the judgment. In my use of the Old Testament quote was not to emphasize the quickness, but rather the fact that Uzza was killed by the 'LORD' while in the Revelation it is clear that it is Jesus who is judging. And if these are the same.

The use of the word 'LORD' in the Old Testament seemingly does not have the same connotation as it does in the new. Since in the New Testament it is used for Jesus also.

Old Testament:

Genesis 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

New Testament:

Matthew 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Matthew 24:42 Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.

In Matthew 24:42 it can only be referring to Jesus since it refers to his second coming.

  • Judgment was not always meted out immediately in the Old Testament. Man's wickedness was exceedingly great before the flood, and then God waited another 120 years. Sodom and Gomorrah were not destroyed until their depravity greatly increased. Egypt did not receive immediate punishment for their mistreatment of Israel. Furthermore, justice was, indeed, meted out immediately in the New Testament. For instance, Ananias and Saphira immediately received judgment for their sins. – Narnian Sep 18 '14 at 14:07
  • @Narnian perhaps I have mislead you it is not the immediacy of judgment that confounds me, but the who is the judge, and it is to be remembered that Jesus had given the authority to Peter to either bind or loose in Heaven. If Peter had determined that they were not deserving of Heaven then it would still be Jesus who judged and meted out justice. – BYE Sep 18 '14 at 14:34
  • However, in the New Testament physical death is delayed until its natural happenstance, and judgment is delayed until: is a false premise cf. Acts 5. – user13992 Sep 18 '14 at 20:57
  • To FMS' point, also Acts 12. – dleyva3 Sep 23 '14 at 14:15
1

I draw your attention to the past tense in:

For the Father judges no one, but has committed all judgment to the Son - John 5:22 KJV (emphasis added)

This said pre-resurrection and glorification; Together with the implications of -

For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. - John 3:17 KJV

ie Judgment was not part of Jesus' mission during his 'first coming' (the incarnation); and also:

Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever. - Hebrews 13:8 KJV

It should be fairly clear that the one who is referred to in:

Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead. - Acts 17:31 KJV

was, is and will be the judge of all mankind from the very beginning and until the very end of all ages.

  • You appear to be misunderstanding my question, my question is not concerned with the immediate judgment, but who is making the judgment. In my use of the Old Testament quote was not to emphasize the quickness, but rather the fact that Uzza died before God, while in the Revelation it is clear that it is Jesus who is judging. The true question which I suppose I miss-stated is actually when did the Father give Jesus all judgment, and since he stated that it was because he was the son of man was it before or during his Earthly body existed. – BYE Sep 18 '14 at 17:32
  • @Bye I've answered your question according to what you've written and have stated that judgment was committed to Christ by the Father prior to his utterance in John 5:22. The preamble addresses your implication that there was a substantial change in the nature of judgment between Old and New Testament - you overstate that. The scriptures I quote indicate that the Son was given authority to judge before John 5:22 and if you consider John 3:17 as well, it shoud be clear that it was done pre-incarnation. – bruised reed Sep 18 '14 at 17:41
  • I have rewritten my question in hopes that this will negate misunderstandings and explain why I felt that your answer and comments do not apply to what I had thought my question asked. – BYE Sep 19 '14 at 18:15
  • @bye when you have to tell four different people that they aren't answering your question how you'd like them to and then you actually re-write it to prove that point, doesn't that give you some sense that maybe, just maybe, you yourself might be the one who actually misunderstood the words you originally wrote? Of course no-one can gainsay what you actually meant to say, but that's quite a different matter. In any event, it's extremely poor form to dramatically change your question to invalidate multiple answers that have been correctly given to the original formulation. – bruised reed Sep 20 '14 at 19:06
  • I cannot argue with your assertion that it might have been me that misunderstood, but in rereading my question it seemed that it made perfect sense to me. It was after finding that four people misunderstood the question in the same way that I rewrote, my question. It was not an attempt to demean anyone. The reason for asking the question was to get help understanding Scriptures. I could not delete the question after it had been answered, and entreated the monitors to delete it for me. they did not do that only deleted my comments and marked the answers as acceptable.(continued). – BYE Sep 20 '14 at 19:37
0

Your first statement makes an incorrect conclusion; there are many other instances where God's judgment is delayed in the Old Testament: Genesis 15:16 ("...the sin of the Amorites has not yet reached its full measure") & 2 Kings 20:16-19 (Judah's captivity by Babylon is prophesied to occur after Hezekiah's lifetime) among them.

Secondly, the Old Testament has only a few references to the idea of there being different aspects of God (Psalm 110:1-"YHWH says to my Lord..." is one of the explicit ones, though it implies a relationship without specifically defining it as, say, Father to Son); the emphasis in the Old Testament is on God being 'one' as opposed to many gods. This is best articulated in the Judaic Shema of Deut 6:4-"Hear O Israel, YHWH our God, YHWH is One." The New Testament continues with the idea of God being one god, articulated in the gospels by Jesus (cf Mark 12:29) and in the epistles (Paul, cf 1 Cor. 8:6a); but the New Testament also explicitly references different aspects of the essence of the one God in the Father, Son, and Spirit. Jesus, his disciples, and Paul all speak to this directly throughout the New Testament. The gospels are clear about God being Jesus's Father (cf Matthew 11:27), that Jesus is the Son (cf Mark 14:61-62), that there is God the Spirit (cf Matthew 3:15-17), and that these different aspects have distinct personalities and roles (as in John 14, for example). When you ask which Old Testament verses reference a particular aspect of the triune God, you are taking an explicit definition of Christian tradition ('trinity' does not occur at all in either Old or New Testament; the Trinity is a concept to explain the 1x1x1=1 essence of God portrayed in the Bible), then using it as a measurement against the Old Testament verses that did not concern themselves with which aspect did what. It is effort fraught with futility to ask which Old Testament actions were performed by the Son vs the Father when the text does not denote it. We would be implying intention where there is none.

As to the Son's role articulated in the New Testament, it does say in John 5:27 that God the Father has given the Son authority to judge, but Paul says further in Romans 8:34 that Christ is both judge and intercessor: though the Son passes judgment, he also intercedes and defends humanity. We have no human legal equivalent for this, one person acting as both judge and defending counsel. There is a social/colloquial example of mothers disciplining their children but also extending grace and arguing on their behalf in the face of judgment. Analogy only helps us touch the edges of God's character, though. We should guard against using our experiences as a way of defining who God (any of of his aspects) is or will be. [explanations of the Trinity and references paraphrased from Norman L. Geisler's reference work, "Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics" entry on 'Trinity'; my references are examples and far from exhaustive. Geisler's work is far more extensive on this.]

  • This does not address my question. – BYE Sep 18 '14 at 20:48
  • This part answers your question: "It is effort fraught with futility to ask which Old Testament actions were performed by the Son vs the Father when the text does not denote it." – Steve Sep 19 '14 at 2:33
  • @Steve I have rewritten my question in hopes that this will negate misunderstandings and explain why I felt that your comment did not apply to what I had thought my question asked. – BYE Sep 19 '14 at 18:06
  • @SJStanley I have rewritten my question in hopes that this will negate misunderstandings and explain why I felt that your answer did not apply to what I had thought my question asked. – BYE Sep 19 '14 at 18:08
-1

Your question necessarily depends upon the Father being separate from the Son, so any group of Christians who subscribe to the Nicene Creed, which would include Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans, Lutherans, Methodists, and perhaps Reformed communities reject this notion as heresy, believing that as the Creed says [emphasis added]:

"I believe in ONE GOD, the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth..."

and

...being of ONE SUBSTANCE with the Father, God of God, light of light, very God of Very God...".

  • Your answer appears to assume that I am not a Trinitarian, which is untrue. my use of the term God for the old testament is meant to include all three of the Trinit5y while the use of Jesus in the new is meant to emphasize that the Father and Holy Spirit have acquiesced and have given their judgment to Jesus as enumerated in John 5:27 ( because he is the Son of man.) – BYE Sep 18 '14 at 17:20
  • No, I don't make any assumptions about whether you hold trinitarian views. But as worded, your question depends upon dividing God and Jesus, and that can't be done. There was one God in three persons in the Old Testament, and the same One God in three persons in the New Testament. So the same God judged both in the Old Testament and in the New Testament, as one cannot separate one part of the God (Jesus) from the other two parts (the Father and the Holy Spirit) in either the Old or New Testaments. So whatever manifestation he is thought to have taken, it is God who judges. – brasshat Sep 18 '14 at 17:40
  • I agree with you; but I am perplexed by Jesus saying he was the son of man which can only mean after he is in his Earthly body. – BYE Sep 18 '14 at 18:35
  • Have you looked at question 4966, 'Why does Jesus refer to himself as the “Son of Man”?', and the answers to that question? – brasshat Sep 18 '14 at 18:47
  • I have rewritten my question in hopes that this will negate misunderstandings and explain why I felt that your answer did not apply to what I had thought my question asked. – BYE Sep 19 '14 at 18:17

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.