#34. Romans 1:28-31 – The Hebrew Crash Course Concerning Unrighteousness, Part 3
Part II: The Conduct of Humanity
And according as they do not test God, to have Him in recognition, God
gives them over to a disqualified mind, to do that which is not befitting, filled with all injustice, wickedness,
evil, greed, distended with envy, murder, strife, guile, depravity,
whisperers, vilifiers, detesters of God, outragers, proud, ostentatious,
inventors of evil things, stubborn to parents, unintelligent, perfidious,
without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful…
Tet/Depravity
The ninth of the Hebrew letters is ‘tet,’ and makes the ‘t’ sound. This letter has some controversial/unclear meaning, but it typically represents an open container. I use “container” very broadly – some see it as a basket, or an open surrounding. Some even see this letter as an open womb, as this is the ninth letter in the alphabet, and it takes nine months for a baby to be born.
In relation to Christ, we may see the letter as an open crypt, or open sepulcher, denoting His resurrection into life. This ties into His statement to Nicodemus, that one must be born again, or begotten anew (CLV) to take part in Christ’s upcoming terrestrial kingdom.
Others interpret the letter as a snake. The use of the snake is generally a dark premonition of sorts, or a representation of something wrong or hostile to God. It is indeed true that, with the resurrection of Christ, apart from the Sin He was correlated with, the serpent was hurt in the head (Gen. 3:15.) That the serpent can be realized in this letter highlights how necessary evil is for God. In order for Christ to be victorious over sin, sin must first be established as the greatest villain of all time. It is no mistake, then, that the same letter contains imagery for the greatest adversary and the greatest victory against said adversary.
This is, simply, the summation of the walk Christ began back in the third letter of the alphabet, the “gimel.” He descended, and this is the conclusion – an open crypt. A freedom from death, from the serpent, and thus, a freedom to live.
This Hebrew letter’s antitype is found in Paul’s next term, “depravity.” This is, surprisingly, the only time that this word appears in the Greek scriptures, old and new. So, basing our understanding solely off the word of God alone, we see the Greek elements “EVIL-CUSTOM.” When we first saw “evil” as the third example in Paul’s list here, and, when we considered it in relation to the Hebrew alphabet, we saw that “evil” is representative of our journey, or walk – our “gimel.” Now, here with the letter “tet,” we see the result of our “evil” walk, being evil customs.
In our walk, the evil
becomes customary – embedded into the way we walk. The way we talk. The
way we think, feel, and act has been uprooted by sin, leaving only a poor man’s
worship. It is to be depraved of all constructive, foundational spiritual
understanding – instituting traditions to deflect themselves and
their lineage from experiencing this freedom to live.
Yod/Whisperers
This is the first letter for the name of God – Yahweh, pictured to the right. When we read the word, from right to left, we see a complete picture of God, through His word: the “yod,” or the might of God, the “hey,” or the declarations, or truth, of God, and a “waw,” or the sacrifice, or love, of God. There are two “declarations,” just as there are two separate evangels – one of the circumcision, manned by Peter, and one of the uncircumcision, manned by Paul (Gal. 2:7-8, Matt. 15:24, Rom. 15:8-9.) They are separated by the sacrifice – Peter’s evangel builds to the sacrifice, while Paul’s evangel stems from the sacrifice. You may also perceive the two uses of “hey” as the old covenant and the new covenant (covenant, not testament.)
The “hey” and the “waw,” however, are set about by the right hand of God – hence why His name begins with the letter. The right hand dictates the shape of the rest of the story. Sure enough, upon His resurrection, Christ has been seated at the right hand of God (Eph. 1:19-20,) with the express goal of reconciling all living creatures in the universe to Himself (Col. 1:19-20.) This is a righteous, earned position which stems from the authority of God.
This letter pairs with the previous letter – the “tet,” by displaying the effect of Christ’s victory over sin – reward. Bountiful rule, and a proper position by which to enforce this rule. We can appreciate, then, the accomplishments of God, His careful order for all events to occur (Ecc. 3:1-8, 17.) We also see God’s goal, of conciliation (Eph. 1:10-11, Phil. 2:9-11, Col. 1:20,) stand affirmatively here. By this point in the story, He’s firmly established the problem, and can now begin effecting the goal, which we will observe in the next letter, and concluding with the final letter, the “tav.”
This is contrasted with the tenth antitype from Paul: whisperers. These are people who work in the shadows – they slander. They spread defamatory statements, damaging reputations or other’s works in crafty and underhanded ways (our media outlets are great at this.) If we were to take this contrast in the other direction, and actually consider this deed in contrast to the right hand of God and His honest deeds, we would find that men are dishonest in their whispering. This is, unfortunately, weak. It takes a strong-willed person to keep from whispering. One must have the utmost self-control.
The problem is that the vast majority of mankind cannot do this. I certainly can’t always do it. You can’t, either. Shoot, our president is a whisperer (both Trump and Biden, though I think Biden whispers for a different reason.) Most of those Clueless type girls can’t do it. Rappers can’t do it. Actors can’t do it. Bosses can’t do it.
...No one can do it, you get it.
And it’s not for lack of trying, folks, yeah? Paul will especially cover this point in Romans 7, but it’s clear that man generally strives to do the right thing. It’s internal (emotional) and external (environmental) pressures which invoke this degradation – hence, why the prior word is depravity. The evil customs make defamatory little assholes out of all of us. What can you do, right?
This is our weakness, contrasted against God’s power: the lies (Rom. 3:4, 7.) And boy, do we wield them. How often has an advertisement met your expectations? Nice! Now how often has an advertisement failed to meet your expectations? How often have we bought the new Assassin’s Creed game, only to find that there are extra purchases that must be made within the game in order to play on? How often have we bought the used car off the lot, only to have it break down a few months later? How often have we manipulated others’ perceptions to enforce our own agenda? Politically? Religiously? Commercially?
The result of “envy, murder, strife,
guile, and depravity” is shame, which must be hidden with whispers. We
have the motive, and we have the Cause. In our weakness, our imperfection, our
flaw, we deflect with lies – a spiritual “sleight of hand.” This is our
“right hand,” which we will wield until our consummation, which Paul
reveals in verse 32.
Kaf/Vilifiers
This letter, simply, represents the evangel of Paul. Paul refers to the evangel found within his letters as a propitiatory shelter, and, to prove that this mercy is occurring apart from man’s works, he quotes Psalm 32–
Happy he whose transgression is lifted away, whose sin is covered
over!
Here we see the two fundamental ideas of “kaf.” We see the transgression being lifted away, as the palm of your hand is used to lift something, and we see sin being covered over, which I believe is as clear as you could get, there.
As such, we should especially be paying attention to this letter and its anti-type, as we are alive during this part of the story – being constituted just on the basis of Christ’s faith (Romans 3:21-26.) This is God’s greatest work, which is why it follows the “yod.”
Paul’s antitype is that we are vilifiers. This is one of those fancy-schmancy concordant words. The term in Greek is katalalos, and its elements are “DOWN-TALKER.” It is, literally, to talk down to others – to slander them from some feigned place of superiority, moral, social, or otherwise. The KJV uses the term “backbiter” here, and this is fitting for the term.
Boy, never have I ever related to a word so strongly! This is probably where I most prominently find myself (and it may be why I talk about this one a bit longer than I otherwise would.) I’ll admit that slandering my enemy is probably my favorite hobby (though, to be fair, I would at least slander them to their face; I’m not a complete asshole – only sort of an asshole.) You may call it a sickness; I would agree. Sin is indeed poison running through our veins.
I
do feel that there should be a notable separation between criticism and
backbiting. Backbiting is never constructive; slandering someone (especially
without reason) simply won’t accomplish anything. This is greatly shown in the
life of Abraham Lincoln, summed up greatly in Dale Carnegie’s How to Win
Friends & Influence People, p. 9, where he writes–
“[When Lincoln became] a
practicing lawyer in Springfield, Illinois, he attacked his opponents openly in
letters published in the newspapers. But he did this just once too
often.
In the autumn of 1842 he
ridiculed a vain, pugnacious politician by the name of James Shields. Lincoln
lampooned him through an anonymous letter published in the Springfield Journal.
The town roared with laughter. Shields, sensitive and proud, boiled with
indignation. He found out who wrote the letter, leaped on his horse, started
after Lincoln, and challenged him to fight a duel. Lincoln didn’t want to
fight. He was opposed to dueling, but he couldn’t get out of it and save his
honor… he and Shields met on a sandbar in the Mississippi River, prepared to
fight to the death; but, at the last minute, their seconds interrupted and
stopped the duel.
That was the most lurid
personal incident in Lincoln’s life. It taught him an invaluable lesson in the
art of dealing with people. Never again did he write an insulting letter. Never
again did he ridicule anyone. And from that time on, he almost never criticized
anybody for anything.”
I would take Carnegie’s assessment further – had Lincoln properly published a respectful letter in the Springfield Journal, the town would probably have considered Shields’ perspective in a more humanitarian light, and he wouldn’t have felt like the butt of a joke. If the criticism were factual, with a true aim to correct, then Shields would only have had himself to blame if he remained ignorant to the presented information. With that, Lincoln would never have to “save his honor,” for Lincoln would not be considered an aggressor.
Criticism can be harsh. It can have an in-your-face attitude. It can have a shock value. In fact, you could argue that God’s indignation is a firm criticism against Sin. This isn’t always the best route to take, and it can be situational, but it is not slander. Slander is far beyond criticism, because, at the end of the day, criticism aims to tear down false notions and build up true concepts, whereas slander reverses these two.
A fun example of slander is Aristophanes’ play, The Clouds (~423 BC.) In the play, Aristophanes slandered the great philosopher Socrates, effectively reducing his philosophical considerations to radical, crackpot ideas. Socrates’ reputation was irrevocably damaged, and he was ultimately sentenced to death by his peers for “disrupting the peace” in Athens.
Here, there is no building. There’s no room for Socrates’ growth, or honest reflections of his character, but a rally cry for the community to do something about a perceived problem. Humanity be damned – this one does not deserve to be one of us.
This
notion certainly opposes the “kaf.” There is no propitiatory shelter,
here. The “mercy seat” is nowhere to be found. In its place is spite and disdain,
and no love for the individual. Sins are not covered over, but mocked,
exposed, and highlighted for any to see. This verbal abuse achieves the
exact opposite effect of Paul’s evangel, and its roots are nowhere to be
found in righteousness. During our Lord’s turmoil on the cross, instead of slandering
His opponents, He prays over them, asking God to forgive them,
as they could not understand any other way. It is this lack of
slander which further highlights the true honorable contrast that is our
Lord, Jesus Christ, and why this evangel of God is truly as special as it is – patience,
kindness, truth, love… the very qualities that we neglect in our daily
lives are the exact solutions to our internal conflicts. But without these
internal conflicts, the superabundant blessings which we gain from experiencing
them would be unappreciated. With this evangel, God has a platform
by which He can communicate these gifts, and thus prepare all for
the permanent Resolution to all conflict, absolving us of our vain prattles
(Rom. 8:20-21.)
* * *
Let’s take a little breather, here. Hi! If you’ve been reading these all at once, then I’m supremely impressed. I know this is rapid, quickfire information, but the parallels here are astounding, no?? Don’t get me wrong, I’m probably not conveying everything perfectly or completely accurately, but I think you understand the concept. It’s amazing how perfectly designed scripture’s narrative is, down to the very literal language God used to weave it.
We have now considered the first half of the Hebrew alphabet. From the aleph to the kaf, we receive a clear depiction of Christ’s place, purpose, descent, message, death, entombment, resurrection, ascension, and authority. This first half ends with His goal – to lift away the law’s burden, and cover the sins of those believing.
The
second half of this alphabet is going to change things up a bit. From the lamed
to the tav, “Christ” will not solely consider Jesus Christ
(though He will still be front and center.) Believers in Paul’s evangel are
called the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12, while Jesus Himself is called the Head
of Christ (this will be important for later.) Paul writes in Ephesians 1:23
that the body is the complement of the Head. This term “complement”
means “that which fills.” The body fills the head (for, without the
body, there’s no need for a head.) Without us, Christ has no one to save, no
justifiable reason to hang on a cross so dishonorably. We complement the
Christ – just as the second half of the Hebrew alphabet complements the
first half. The first half is meaningless apart from its other half (who could
dream of removing half of the alphabet without destroying most
sentences??)
* * *
Lamed/Detesters of God
.png)
As promised, we can now perceive the meaning of the letter in relation to the ascended Christ, whose goal is to educate us on Paul’s evangel. You can see how necessary Christ’s body is, especially in His ascension. What is His use as a Teacher if there were no student to teach? He, the Head, is the Teacher, and we, the student, are the learner. He pokes, and we’re prodded, just as swiftly as our neurons transmit information between our nerves and our brain.
The previous letter, “kaf,” pairs well with the “lamed,” in that this propitiatory shelter is the basis for the teaching. This justification found in Paul’s evangel is so good that it places you on right footing with God – no questions asked – with a free, permanent, loving Mentor.
We may contrast this with Paul’s only listed action which directly confronts the divine: men are detesters of God. This is pretty cut and dry, but comparing it to the Hebrew letter gives us a new layer – we display this detestation in our unwillingness to learn from Him. No matter the culture, they superabound in ignorance toward Him. This stubborn race cannot stand their Maker, and do not realize that the human condition must begin by taking us to the end of ourselves – by utterly destroying the confidence in ourselves.
Most are in the early (premature) stages of this process. They do not seek to learn, because they do not like what God teaches – a true righteousness. This is why the backlash against Jesus was so strong at the time – if man currently detests God, then, when provided authority over His Image, they would savagely hang Him, bloody and beaten, and cheer His death.
Some may say that if God knows this about man, and designed man this way, then He has no right to charge mankind with this. I reply that if God doesn’t charge mankind with this, then mankind will never have an experience exemplifying a supreme act of unrighteousness. This is a problem, for, as we are seeing throughout our Romans study, an evangel of righteousness requires its recipients to be mired in this unrighteous reality.
(to be continued)
- GerudoKing
Comments
Post a Comment