Reasons to Study the Attributes of God
Originally posted on 1/2/2020
The following is chapter 1 of the new book I’m working on entitled, “Who Is the Lord That I Should Obey Him?” I left the comments section open, even though I know doing so will invite a ton of spam I will have to delete. Constructive criticism will be thankfully received and carefully considered. Everything else will be cheerfully ignored. :-)
_______________________________
Ask nearly any teacher of practically any subject and they will tell you that the most common question at the beginning of a new subject is “why.” Why do I need to understand fractions? Why should I read the Federalist papers?[i] Who cares about the war of Jenkin’s ear anyway?[ii] (answer: almost no one)
Fortunately, most Christians will not ask this type of question when beginning a study of the attributes of God. Most Christians, I believe, will intuitively understand that there is profit to be gained from studying the character and nature of God.
This being said, if one were to press these same people on exactly what is to be gained from such a study, more often than not the answer would be some vague generality accompanied by a somewhat puzzled look. But I think we all know this is hardly good enough. After all, I’m asking you, by reading this book, to invest your valuable time and energy (both in limited supply) to this study. If there is nothing practical to be gained from it, why bother?
Fortunately, God in his word has not only given us a remarkable amount of information concerning himself, but also about the benefits that come from such a study. The advantages that flow from a knowledge of who God is and what he is like is extensive.
The blessings cataloged below are hardly exhaustive. I should add that they are in no particular order, as all of them are important. It should also be noted that for the sake of readability, I’ve placed one reason to study God in a chapter by itself. Still, it’s my hope that these justifications for this study will be enough to pique your interest to do the (sometimes hard) work required to gain a greater understanding of God as a person.
God desires that we know him
Thus says the LORD: “Let not the wise man boast in his wisdom, let not the mighty man boast in his might, let not the rich man boast in his riches, but let him who boasts boast in this, that he understands and knows me, that I am the LORD who practices steadfast love, justice, and righteousness in the earth. For in these things I delight,” declares the LORD. Jer 9:23-24
No one likes a braggart. Braggarts shine all the attention upon themselves and their accomplishments. They swagger and boast about how important they are or, at the very least, how much better they are than the average person because of their (money, position, strength, beauty, abilities, etc.). Second cousin to these boasters is the name dropper. Their claim to fame is not what they have done, but who they know. The assumption is that if you were as important as they are you would know these celebrities as well.
This being said, being a name dropper (when it comes to the person of God) is exactly what God wants you to be. If you're going to boast about anything, God says, boast that you understand and know me.
The Hebrew word translated understand means to give attention to, or to ponder, or consider. It means to have insight or comprehension concerning a subject. It carries with it the idea of learning and understanding after having studied. It is this type of learning that gives insight into the complexity of a subject.
In contrast to the word translated understand, the word translated know means to learn to know, or to become acquainted with, or to know by experience. It is knowledge gained through the senses. Interestingly, even though these two types of knowledge are different, God desires that we possess both.
Perhaps an illustration might be helpful. It is one thing to read the biography of a famous person. It is another thing to ride to work with them every day. In the first instance you may learn where they were born, where they went to school, their accomplishments, even their interests and their hobbies. You may read what they have written and listen to their interviews and understand why they believe what they believe and feel the way they do. In the second instance, you will learn a different type of information. The time spent in casual conversation will reveal the intensity of their likes and dislikes, what makes them smile and what makes them frown. You will learn their sense of humor and what they talk about the most. In other words, instead of knowing about the person you will get to know them.
Now, lest we are tempted to believe that one type of knowledge is superior to the other, consider this: if the object is to become friends with this person, both types of knowledge are necessary. It is impossible to get to know someone without knowing anything about them. Similarly, merely knowing about someone is not enough to be familiar with the depths of their personality. Merely knowing about someone is like having the outline of their face without any of the shading or color. On the other hand, getting to know them without knowing about them is like having shading and color without an outline. To have a complete picture, both types of knowledge are required.
Fortunately, God's word provides both types of knowledge. In its pages we have objective, factual statements about the person of God. But we also have conversations between God and people just like us. He tells us what makes him laugh and what makes him angry. He tells us what he loves and what he hates. Put another way, the Bible allows us to learn about God but it also helps us get to know him, and possessing both types of knowledge is something to boast about. Not only so, but the more we learn of God in the pages of Scripture, the greater will be our desire to get to know him personally through prayer and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit.
A key element of God’s paradise is the knowledge of God[iii]
“And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest,” declares the LORD. “For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.” Jer 31:34
They shall not hurt or destroy in all my holy mountain; for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD as the waters cover the sea. Isa 11:9
And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent. John 17:3
The reason why a key element of God's paradise is a knowledge of God himself isn't immediately evident. To fully understand this, we require a more detailed understanding of the person of God himself. And to get that understanding we have to go back in time and learn a little bit about someone you probably haven't heard of.
Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109 A.D.) was an Italian monk, philosopher, and theologian. Some of his contributions to theology have been so well accepted as to be considered mainstream by both Protestants and Roman Catholics.
For example, prior to Anselm the standard view of what happened on the cross was that Christ in his death paid a ransom to Satan for the souls of humanity. Put another way, when Adam and Eve sinned in the garden, they sold the human race to the devil. In order to free humanity, God had to pay a ransom to the devil to essentially buy us back. Christ paid this ransom when he died on the cross. This view is known as the “Ransom Theory of the Atonement."
Anselm found many problems with this understanding and taught instead the "Substitutionary Theory of the Atonement." According to Anselm, Jesus acted as a substitute for all mankind so that God's righteous judgment of sin fell on Jesus instead of sinful man, so that God's righteousness could be satisfied and humanity saved. The "substitutionary atonement" is now so well accepted that it may be considered the default view of both Roman Catholics and conservative Protestants.
For our purposes here, it is Anselm's argument for the existence of God that we are most interested in. Anselm's “Ontological Argument for the Existence of God”[iv] is a brilliant argument that has never been adequately refuted. That being said, the argument is complex and not immediately obvious. In fact, it can be downright confusing, so we won't discuss it here.
What is important for our discussion is the way Anselm defines God. Anselm defines God as "something-than-which-nothing-greater-can-be-thought.”[v] To put that in simpler terms, Anselm states that God is the greatest of all imaginable or conceivable beings. If you can imagine a being greater then God, then God isn't God.
Since God is the greatest of all conceivable beings, this must hold true in our world or in any other world. If you were writing a science fiction story and created an entirely different universe, God would still be, of necessity, God in that universe for there is no other being that can be conceived that is greater than he.
God is the sum of all perfections and the ultimate in beauty and glory. Therefore, he himself is the joy that we shall experience for all eternity. Put another way, when God will be our God, and we will be his people, and he will dwell in the midst of us (Rev 21:3) it will be God himself that will be our delight. It won't be a “mansion over the hilltop” or “streets of pure gold”[vi] that will thrill our hearts. No, it will be the person of God who will be our bliss. He will be the center of our rapt attention for he will be the most amazing thing that we have ever seen or, indeed, ever could see.
Understanding this to be true, it is only appropriate we begin to know God more fully in the here and now. For in the here and now, as in eternity, the more fully we know God the more complete will be our joy. When we think about him, we are thinking the most exalted thoughts that a person can think.
The rest of theology is dependent upon our knowledge of God
Have you ever heard a funny story about one of your friends when you had to reply, "that's just like him," or "that's so her?" Everyone has, I suppose. That's because the more we get to know someone, the more we can predict their behavior. Of course, the opposite is true as well. The less we know of someone the less we are able to identify what behavior is "in character" as opposed to “out of character." We won't be able to pick out a fabricated story by saying "that doesn't sound like him” or "that can't be true, she would never do that."
Well, the same is true of God. The more we understand of God, the greater our ability to understand why he does what he does.
Early in my ministry I was teaching an adult Bible class in the small Baptist church where I was ordained. During that lesson, I mentioned that Jeffrey Dahmer, the notorious serial killer and cannibal, had trusted Christ as his Savior while in prison and was baptized in the prison whirlpool.[vii] At that time I said something to the effect of, "That sounds just like God. He takes the most wicked among us and saves us to show the greatness of his grace.” Immediately, an older woman sitting near the rear of the class tossed her head, folder her arms and proclaimed, "God wouldn't save someone like him!"
I was stunned by that statement. I thought, "Have these people learned nothing from me?” Quickly pulling myself back together, I responded, "No, I'm afraid you are quite mistaken. That's exactly the type of people that God delights to save.”
What was the problem? How could this woman have been so terribly wrong when it came to the grace of God? The answer is quite simple. She didn’t know what God was actually like. She didn't understand his character. As a result, her beliefs about God — her theology — suffered.
When I say the word "theology," the majority of eyelids begin to droop. The word reminds people of musty libraries filled with thick books that almost no one can read. Or it draws to mind heated arguments that divide Christian people and distract them from what they should be doing. Most people, I fear, relegate important theological questions as nothing but “squabbles among monks."[viii] Unfortunately, there is (at least a little bit of) truth in these assertions. That being said, these overly general statements hardly tell the whole story. Caricatures seldom do.
"Theology," at its root, means "words about (or the study of) God" (from the Greek theos “god” + logia “words”). Thus, any time we are talking about God we are, by definition, doing theology.
Of course, the label “theology” is usually used to indicate a large group of subcategories. “Theology” may be subdivided into the study of Christ (Christology), the study of the Holy Spirit (pneumatology), the study of sin (hamartiology), the study of salvation (soteriology), the study of prophecy or “last things” (eschatology) and so forth. The list goes on and on. What all these subcategories have in common, however, is that they all have the person of God at the root of them.
Put another way, these various topics only have meaning when we place the person of God at the center of them. None of them make any sense at all unless we make God the starting point. All other bits of knowledge are traced back to him. As a result, the study of the person of God (technically known as “theology proper”) is foundational to the rest of theology. We need to realize that we are never going to get the rest of the “…ologies” right if we get this one wrong.
What this means, in simple terms, is that we will never understand the Bible if our theology proper is inadequate. Oh, certainly we might be able to memorize the books of the Bible in order and categorize them according to type — Law, history, wisdom, etc. But the reason behind the rest of theology will remain a mystery if we fail to understand the person of God. We might understand the "what" of various doctrines, but the "why" will remain a puzzle.
A case in point is the death of Uzzah in 1 Chron 13:5-14. Basically, what happened is this: King David desired to bring the Ark of the Covenant from its temporary home in Kiriath Jearim to Jerusalem. So, the ark was placed on a new cart pulled by a team of oxen. The people were celebrating “with all their might” before the LORD with singing and dancing. While all this was going on, at some point during the trip the oxen stumbled and the ark began to sway on the back of the cart. One of the drivers, Uzzah, reached out his hand to steady the ark. But the moment Uzzah touched the ark, God put him to death. The reason he touched the ark didn't matter. The simple fact that he touched it caused the LORD's anger to burn against him. And so, the result of an innocent action produced by good intentions was that Uzzah died.
God’s judgment of Uzzah provoked an intense anger against God in King David. The procession was immediately stopped and the ark was taken to what was evidently the nearest house available. The ark remained there for three months while King David tried to figure out what to do.
Now, the reason I told the story is this: if you really understand the attributes of God, particularly his intense holiness, then this story makes perfect sense. If you do not understand the holiness of God, you will be like David — angry at God for the death of an "innocent" man. The key to understanding this story, and countless others like it, is understanding who God is and what he is like.
Simply put, you will not understand why God does what he does unless you understand who he is. The key to solving the mystery of God's actions is understanding the attributes of God.
Conclusion
The attributes of God are laid out piecemeal fashion in the Bible. There is no single chapter or book to which we may turn to learn all there is to know about God. While this might strike some as odd, the reason for this is quite clear. God reveals certain parts of his character in specific situations so that we might change our behavior in the present. Put another way, God tells us what he is like so that we will become more like him in the here and now, not just in eternity.
As a result, a clear and systematic study of the attributes of God it is essential if we want to live correctly now. It is fundamental to understanding the rest of theology. If we are to please God as we walk through this life, we must understand and know him.
That's what this book is about.
[i] The Federalist papers are a series of 85 essays published between 1787 and 1788. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay authored these articles to persuade New York state voters to ratify the newly proposed constitution. “Federalist papers,” Britannica.com, accessed May 20, 2019.
[ii] In 1738, Captain Robert Jenkins appeared before a committee of the British House of Commons and displayed what he claimed to be his own amputated ear. According to his account, it was cut off in April 1731 in the West Indies by Spanish coast guards who boarded and pillaged his ship before setting it adrift. Jenkins’ story outraged British public opinion which was already inflamed against Spain for other attacks on British ships. This led to war between the two powers, which eventually merged into a larger series of wars known as the War of the Austrian Secession (1740-48). It was this larger struggle that helped set the stage for the First World War. “War of Jenkins’ Ear,” Britannica.com, accessed May 20, 2019.
[iii] As a dispensational premillennialist, I hold to a literal physical kingdom of 1000 years on this earth prior to the eternal state. But for this discussion, I am lumping both the millennial kingdom and the eternal state together since they are related. The Millennial kingdom technically doesn’t end as the King is never overthrown. It merely changes form and morphs into the eternal state (see 1 Cor 15:24). Both will be paradise for the child of God.
[iv] Actually, Anselm presented two ontological arguments, but since they are so similar they are usually counted as one. A simplified form of his argument goes like this: Nearly everyone—even non-believers—have a concept of God. This concept holds God as the greatest of all conceivable beings. People also recognize that “being” is greater than “non-being.” A real King Arthur is greater than an imaginary King Arthur. Therefore, for God to be the greatest of all conceivable beings, God must be real and not merely a concept, otherwise this universal concept of God would not exist. Anselm of Canterbury, “Proslogian” in The Major Works, Oxford World Classics, ed by Brian Davies and G. R. Evans, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998) 82-104. As I said, this argument isn’t immediately obvious, but it is a brilliant argument that has never (in my estimation) been adequately refuted.
[v] Ibid., 87.
[vi] “I've got a mansion just over the hilltop
In that bright land where we'll never grow old
And someday yonder, we will never more wander
But walk on streets that are pure as gold.”
Mansion Over the Hilltop, words and music by Ira F. Stanphill.
[vii] Elizabeth Gleick, “The Final Victim,” in People, Dec 12, 1994, accessed via people.com, June 5, 2019.
[viii] This phrase allegedly came from the lips of Pope Leo X, who, upon hearing of Luther’s 95 theses declared them to be a “contemptuous squabble among envious monks.” He is also reported to have said that Luther was a “drunken German who, when sober, would change his mind.” Neither quote has solid attestation, although both are entertaining.