 |  |
When Saul of Tarsus stricken down to the earth by the brightness of the vision on the
road to Damascus, said `Who art thou, Lord?' it must be remembered that he was at that
moment a bigoted persecuting Pharisee and the last thing that he would tolerate would
have been the ascription of the divine title to Jesus of Nazareth. He believed that Jesus
was an impostor, and that it was for the glory of God that his disciples be stamped out as
a menace. When a Jew like Saul of Tarsus looked up to heaven and said `Lord', only the
Most High God, the God of Israel and the God of the whole earth could have been
intended by him in the use of the term. To his amazement he heard from heaven that
`The Lord' was "Jesus", and his conversion was immediate and complete. Without a
word of debate and without a moment's hesitation he continued `trembling and
astonished' by saying "Lord, what wilt Thou have me to do?" (Acts 9: 3-6). In his
epistles, the Apostle uses the same word `Lord' for the God of the O.T. and for the Christ
of the New. He quotes Psa. 32: 1, 2 in Rom. 4: 8; Isa. 28: 22 in Rom. 9: 28;
Isa. 1: 9 in Rom. 9: 29; Joel 2: 32 in Rom. 10: 13; Isa. 53: 1 in Rom. 10: 16; Isa. 40: 13
in Rom. 11: 34; Deut. 32: 35 in Rom. 12: 19; Isa. 45: 23 in Rom. 14: 11 and
Psa. 117: 1 in Rom. 15: 11.
Here, the references in this one epistle provide
overwhelming evidence that the `Lord' in the writings of Paul refers to Jehovah, the God
of Israel. Not only so, the context of several of these passages actually use the title `God'
as an extension or alternative, thus removing the smallest doubt as to Paul's meaning.
"God imputeth righteousness . . . . . the Lord will not impute sin" (Rom. 4: 6-8).
"Lord, who hath believed . . . . . faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of
God" (Rom. 10: 16, 17).
"O the depth . . . . . knowledge of God . . . . . Who hath known the mind of the Lord?"
(Rom. 11: 33, 34).
In Rom. 14: we have a complete association of the names Christ, God and Lord:
"We shall all stand before the judgment seat of CHRIST, for it is written . . . . . saith
the LORD, every knee shall bow to ME, and every tongue shall confess to GOD"
(Rom. 14: 10-12).
This combination of titles is all the more remarkable, for the passage cited comes at
the conclusion of a chapter in Isaiah which reiterates the solemn fact that the One who
swears that every knee shall bow to Him, is the LORD, and GOD, and none else, there
being `none beside' Him. Yet, not only does Rom. 14: 10-12 appear to use the titles
`Christ', `Lord' and `God' as synonymous, Phil. 2: is just as explicit:
"That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow . . . . . every tongue should confess
that Jesus Christ is LORD to the glory of God the Father" (Phil. 2: 10, 11).
"Jesus Christ is Lord." Unto Him every knee shall bow, and this will be to the glory
of God the Father, yet the one who wrote these words knew full well that beside `The
Lord' there was `none else' (Isa. 45: 6). How impossible all this reads when looked at
through the spectacles of orthodoxy; how simple it becomes if we perceive that
`Jehovah' the God of Israel and the `Jesus' of the N.T. are one and the same. In the O.T.
Jehovah is `God manifest', in the N.T. Jesus is "God manifest in the flesh". The problem
which these facts present is great, and in subsequent studies we hope to show that a true