The
birth of the Son of God did not occur in a historical and cultural vacuum;
rather, there is a “prehistory” of the incarnation in God’s historical dialogue
with Israel. To investigate the mediation of Jesus Christ within the context of
historical Israel is in keeping with Torrance’s scientific approach to
theology, wherein the reality under study is investigated, not in isolation,
but within the matrix of relations that constitute its being and identity. On
the other hand, to view Jesus apart from ancient Israel is to obscure the
interrelations within which the mediation of revelation and reconciliation
becomes intelligible.
Torrance’s
view of Israel as the “womb of the incarnation” provides a number of useful
insights into the mediation of revelation and reconciliation. Particularly
helpful is his conception of Israel as a “community of reciprocity” elected by
God to establish a two-way movement of divine revelation and human response,
wherein knowledge of God might be revealed in basic concepts, categories, and
beliefs amenable to human understanding. Within the law and liturgy of Israel,
God introduced permanent structures of thought and speech by which God may be
appropriately known. By developing these “conceptual tools” within the matrix
of Israel, God prepared mankind to apprehend the full self-disclosure of divine
revelation in the incarnation of the Son of God. Torrance’s regard for these
conceptual tools as the “essential furniture” of our knowledge of God is,
perhaps, his greatest contribution to the understanding of Israel’s role in the
mediation of divine revelation.
In
order for Israel to know God, its communal life and worship had to be
transformed; therefore, God provided Israel a liturgical system of sacrifice
and worship, so that a sinful people could come before God forgiven and
sanctified in their covenant partnership and consecrated in their priestly
mission to the world. Torrance’s description of the cultic liturgy as the
“covenanted way of response,” that is, a divinely prepared “middle term”
between the polarities of the covenant, highlights the gracious, loving condescension
of God in providing Israel an appropriate means whereby even a sinful,
rebellious nation might draw near to him in intimate, communal fellowship. Jesus Christ is the embodiment of the middle term between the polarities of the
covenant; that is, as both high priest and victim, he embodies the cultic
liturgy of Israel and constitutes in his incarnate union of divine and human
natures the covenanted way of response between God and humanity foreshadowed in
Israel.
The
law and sacrificial liturgy embedded in the covenanted way of response was painfully
written on the heart of Israel, and carved into the flesh of the people, as
symbolised by circumcision, so that it might be incorporated into their daily
life and thought. Torrance describes Israel’s agonising ordeal as mediator of
revelation and reconciliation as the “pre-history of the crucifixion” of Jesus
Christ. In fulfilling its role as the suffering servant of God, Israel
prefigured the suffering of Jesus Christ, the true Israelite, who recapitulated
in himself the plight of the suffering servant for the benefit of all humanity.
By penetrating the ontological depths of Israel’s existence, where humanity was
estranged from God, and meeting humanity at the nadir of human rebellion, the
incarnate Son used human sin and unworthiness to bind humanity to himself
forever in unconditional love. In accomplishing his reconciling purpose in the
face of the sin and betrayal of the cross, God revealed that he elected Israel
to reject the Messiah, so that through its rejection of Jesus Christ, all
humanity might be saved.
Critique
Torrance’s
discussion of Israel as the “womb of the incarnation” is consistent with
important tents of his scientific theology, including the integration of form
and being or the proper relation between epistemology and ontology. Moreover, his
discussion of the tumultuous relation between God and Israel sheds light on the
troublesome topic of the wrath of God. Finally, his discussion of the
covenanted way of response foreshadows his discussion of the “vicarious
humanity” of Jesus Christ.
Integration of Form and Being
Taking
a cue from Chung (2011:6, 7), we may note that the intertwining of revelation
and reconciliation in Israel constitutes the “integration of form and being”
that is a characteristic aspect of Torrance’s scientific theology. As Chung
suggests, if we regard the conceptual-linguistic tools of revelation as “form”
and the corporate heart of Israel as “being,” then we may regard form and being
as intrinsically related in Torrance’s view of divine mediation in Israel. For
Torrance, the integration of form and being constitutes the totality of the
mediation of revelation (“form”) and reconciliation (“heart” or “being”) in
historical Israel. Divine revelation (“form”) in Israel transformed the inner “being”
of the nation, as the cultic liturgy was carved into the flesh of the people, as
symbolised by circumcision. Moreover, the covenanted way of response to divine
revelation, as expressed in the law and cultic liturgy, affirms Torrance’s
assertion that faith, piety, and worship are integral to the epistemological
process. As
Torrance argues, we cannot know God apart from personal-communal faith, piety,
and devotion.
In
addition, the relation between form and being can be viewed from a different
angle in Torrance’s discussion of divine mediation in Israel. In Torrance’s
scientific theology, epistemology follows ontology, that is, “knowing” follows “being.”
This principle is historically realised in ancient Israel as the knowledge of
God penetrates deep into the communal heart of the people, radically
transforming the nation at the depths of its corporate being. Torrance’s
discussion of the displacement of naturalistic and pagan concepts of God by the
light of divine revelation in Israel affirms and complements his assertion that
epistemology arises a posteriori in
obedience to the demands of its object of inquiry. For Israel to know God, the
alien concepts and antecedent conceptual frameworks of the nation’s corporate
mind had to be burned away by the searing light of divine revelation in order
for it to be the bearer of the oracles of God.
The inherent unitary relation Torrance sees between epistemology and
ontology, revelation and reconciliation, and form and being will be fully
realised and enacted in Jesus Christ, who, in his incarnate constitution as God
and man eternally joined in reconciling union, “embodies” the unitary movement
of revelation and reconciliation in historical Israel. Torrance’s discussion of
the covenanted way of response as a “middle term” between the polarities of the
covenant, that is, as a “vicarious” means through which a sinful nation could
respond appropriately to a holy God, foreshadows his discussion of the
“vicarious humanity” of Jesus Christ, who, as God and man joined in reconciling
union, “vicariously” embodies and enacts the covenanted way of response between
God and humanity, in place of, and on behalf of, all.
Divine Wrath in Israel
God’s
provision of the means of response to the divine initiative facilitates greater
appreciation for divine grace in God’s relations with humanity, as revealed in
Israel. As Torrance argues, God’s unswerving commitment to Israel was not
dependent on any salutary quality that made Israel worthy of communal
relationship with a holy and righteous God; rather, divine graciousness toward
Israel was prior to, and independent of, any worthy response by the people.
God’s
faithfulness toward stiff-necked, rebellious Israel, coupled with his divine
love, unconditioned by the response of his covenant partner, may bring
reassurance to believers, for God’s love is not constrained by any particular
unworthiness that would prevent our entering relationship with him. Such is in
keeping with the New Testament teaching that God reconciled us to himself at
the cross while we were still sinners (Rom 5:8). In light of God’s unswerving
faithfulness toward Israel, believers can be assured that God’s commitment to
us is steadfast, despite human sin, and is in no way conditioned by our
response.
Moreover,
Torrance’s description of Israel as the “bearer of the oracles of God,” broken
time and again on the wheel of divine providence, sheds light on the
troublesome topic of the “wrath” of God, seemingly poured out so frequently on
Israel. Torrance shows us that divine wrath towards Israel was not merely
punishment for idolatrous disobedience to God’s commands. Rather, underlying
the wrath of God was his determined plan for Israel, as mediator of revelation,
to be not only a light to the nations but also the matrix of interrelations, or
corporate “womb,” for the incarnation of Jesus Christ; thus, in order to safeguard the incarnation, Israel’s
idolatry had to be thwarted. The wrath of God unleashed on Israel, therefore, served
God’s greater, loving purpose for all
nations. Even the difficulties associated with perennially troublesome topics
like the slaughter of the Canaanite children (Dt 7:1-2; 20:16-17) can be eased
somewhat by Torrance’s view of Israel as the mediator of divine revelation. In
order for the fallen mind of Israel to be healed of its inherent tendency to
idolatry, Israel needed to be safeguarded from the pagan practices of its
neighbours, so that it would not learn their “abominations” (Dt 7:19) and
threaten its role as mediator of the knowledge of the true God. Thus, the
slaughter of the pagan inhabitants of Canaan was in the service of God’s
greater revelatory, salvific purpose for all humanity. Israel’s failure to
follow God’s command to destroy the pagan inhabitants of the land contributed
to their recurring idolatry and repeatedly brought God’s righteous anger and
judgement upon the nation.
Preparation for the Light Coming into
the World
Perhaps
the most compelling feature of Torrance’s view of Israel as the “womb” of the
incarnation is his discussion of the divinely provided permanent structures of
thought and speech necessary for the mediation of the knowledge of God. As
Torrance rightly argues, without the crafting of “the essential furniture of
our knowledge of God” in historical Israel, the revelation of God in Jesus
Christ would have been incomprehensible. Israel’s role as light to the nations
is finally fulfilled in the coming into the world of the one true Israelite,
Jesus Christ. The early Church arose first among the Jews, people who were
intimately familiar with the words, concepts, and thought forms that arose in
response to God’s gracious self-revelation in Israel; thus, they were
historically and culturally prepared for the incarnation of the Son of God.
While the nation as a whole rejected him, the first followers of Jesus Christ
recognised their Messiah, particularly after the resurrection. When he talked
with the two disciples on the road to Emmaus, for example, the risen Jesus
explained to them all that the scriptures (i.e.,
the Old Testament) had said concerning him, thereby setting his mission
squarely in the context of ancient Israel. Finally, in the breaking of bread, the
Emmaus disciples recognized him (Lk 24:13-35). Such a revelation would not have
been possible had not God prepared in Israel a conceptual matrix of thought and
speech, both oral and written, by which they could apprehend the coming of the
Son of God among them. In subsequent years, the disciples would declare that
the scriptures that arose in ancient Israel, that is, the Old Testament, bear
witness to Jesus Christ (e.g., Acts
2:25ff).
Torrance
helps us to see that all the trouble and travail of Israel was in the service
of God’s eternal plan to bring the True Light to the nations in the person of
Jesus. As Torrance argues, Israel’s puzzling vacillation between faithfulness
and idolatry, with concomitant blessing and punishment, was the inevitable
result of divine revelation pressing for understanding and articulation in the
corporate mind of a sinful and rebellious people. The history of God’s dialogue
with ancient Israel, therefore, must be regarded as the tumultuous preparation
for the reception of the incarnate Word of God in the midst of a recalcitrant nation.
To be sure, the incarnate Son of God is the central character of the Old
Testament record of God’s dealings with Israel, for these scriptures bear
witness to Jesus Christ (Jn 5:39). Jesus is the pivot point of salvation
history. The Old Testament points forward, in anticipation, to the Light that
was coming into the world (cf. Jn
1:9), while the New Testament bears witness to that Light.
References
forthcoming
Great summary, Dr. Martin! It is comforting to know that our Triune God uses His sovereignty in love (how else? God IS Love!) for His purpose for all humanity. As my wife says, God works on a big canvas - your exposition helps us rise up a bit and see a portion of the Grand Panorama.
ReplyDelete