The Old Testament, as is well known, was originally penned in the Hebrew language. Less well known is the fact that after the Babylonian Captivity (586 BC) the Jewish scribes started altering the texts to make the sacred records conform to their evolving theology.
But the truth has a way of shining through.
There is a great truth in those scriptures, a good many, but one I want to focus on for Christmas: That God The Father has a body of flesh and bones, and that His Son, God The Son, Jesus Christ, came to earth to receive His body from His Father, and to do the will of His Father in that holy body, namely to suffer and die for the sins of the world, and to rise from the dead triumphant.
Where, you ask, do the Hebrew scriptures teach that God has a body of flesh and bone? This is impossible to find if we search for the modern Western European style of teaching, "A + B = C", at least in the ancient tomes. However, this explicit form of clarity is precisely what The Lord did for us modern folk through Joseph Smith, as in The Doctrine and Covenants, Section 130:22: "The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man's; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit." The doctrine can be made no clearer.
The ancient Hebrews had a different way of sharing knowledge and doctrine. The ancient Hebrew manner of instruction often involved a narrative where every detail stated, and even the things not stated, carried the meanings. In Genesis 1:1 we read "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." But in verse 2 we read "And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."
It so happens that "The Spirit of God" is a translation of "Ruakh Elohim", which literally means "Spirit God". Now, by Hebrew grammar, if you put two nouns together you usually convey that the first noun belongs to the second, as in "Ben Elohim" 'Son of God', although the Hebrew writers did not actually record a word "of" between "Ben" and "Elohim", rather the meaning of possession was implicit in the juxtaposition of the two nouns "Son" and "God". However, there is another meaning conveyed by having two nouns together, namely that the first noun may serve as a title, as in "Angel Gabriel" or "King David".
Inasmuch as "The Spirit of God" in Hebrew literally reads "Spirit God", what distinction was Moses making between "Spirit God" and "God" who created the heaven and the earth? Imagine that two missionaries are standing next to each other and I ask, "What is the name of the Elder, the tall one?" By virtue of adding a modifier to one Elder, "the tall one", I as much as state that the other Elder "is shorter" by comparison. Thus, to say "Spirit God moved upon the face of the waters" Moses as much as told us that "God" who created the heaven and the earth has a body of flesh and bones.
The Old Testament Record on the Corporeality of God.
The Old Testament was penned in Hebrew. This is no surprise to most folks. What is surprising to discover is that the Hebrew scribes began making unauthorized alterations in the text after their Babylonian captivity (586 BC). The scribes accelerated the rate of alterations in the 200 years before the Savior's birth, but the Pharisees took the process to a relative fever pitch in the 100 years after the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem. This Hebrew text that was edited by the scribes and later the Pharisees is known as the Masoretic Text, and it is what most of the world now calls "The Hebrew original".
How do we know that changes were made? We know in two ways. One, the Sanhedrin (central Jewish authority after the Babylonian Captivity up to the Temple's destruction in AD 70) approved an official translation of the Hebrew scriptures to Greek in about 200 BC. This Greek translation, called the Septuagint, was quite close in sense to the Hebrew source text, only the Greek translation reads differently from the inherited Masoretic Text, that Hebrew text that passed through Pharisaic editing in the second century AD. More conclusive still, the entire Book of Isaiah was found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, in Hebrew, from about 250-200 BC, and this scroll reads differently from the Masoretic edition that we have since inherited. In several instances what looked like deviations or "sloppy" translation work in the Septuagint (as some allege) is now demonstrably proven to be accurate; it is not the Septuagint translation that is wrong, but the source Hebrew text that was later altered.
But why would the post-Babylonian exile Jews alter the Hebrew scriptures? For that matter, why would the post-Temple Pharisees also alter the Hebrew text? Because after Babylon the Jews, having lost prophets, began melding or fusing God The Father and God The Son as well as The Holy Spirit (Spirit Elohim) into one single God. The problem was that the scriptures clearly showed that all Three were separate, though One in purpose. So the Jewish scribes began altering verses to "correct" the scriptures or to ensure that the reader would form the "correct" understanding of the text. The Pharisees went on to alter the Hebrew text even further, but for a different reason: The Pharisees wanted to break the strong connection between the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John and The Old Testament. This severance was intended to prevent more Jews from coming to see Jesus as The Promised Messiah; if you alter Old Testament prophecies that were fulfilled in Jesus, maybe fewer Jews will see Jesus as the fulfillment of their promised Messiah.
With these changes in mind, I share with you Isaiah 61:1 from the King James Version of The Old Testament:
"The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me;
because the LORD hath anointed me
to preach good tidings unto the meek;
he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted,
to proclaim liberty to the captives,
and the opening of the prison to them that are bound."
From the Masoretic Hebrew text that all our Bibles are translated from the passage reads this way:
"Ruakh Adonai Elohim is upon me;
because Jehovah hath anointed me
to preach good tidings unto the meek;
he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted,
to proclaim liberty to the captives,
and the opening of the prison to them that are bound."
However, the translation Jews made to Greek in 200 BC reads slightly differently:
"The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me; he hath sent me to preach glad tidings to the poor, to heal the broken in heart, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and recovery of sight to the blind."
The Dead Sea Scrolls add critical dimension and context regarding the sacred titles used in Isaiah 61:1:
"Spirit Jehovah is upon me,
because Jehovah hath anointed me;
he hath sent me to preach glad tidings to the poor,
to heal the broken in heart,
to proclaim liberty to the captives."
Thrilling Septuagint textual differences do not end there. In the King James Psalm 40:6 reads as follows based on the Masoretic Hebrew text:
"Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire;
mine ears hast thou opened;
burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required."
In this Messianic phrase the Psalmist records a peculiar statement on the Messiah's ears being opened. This statement almost seems out of place with the subject of sin offerings which were animal sacrifices meant to point the way to the Messiah's great sacrifice. The same passage in the Septuagint (Greek) reads as follows:
"Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire;
but a body thou hast prepared me;
burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required."
In this Messianic Psalm the Savior tells The Father "thou hast prepared me a body". This bold declaration makes enormous sense, namely, that in a discussion of bodily sacrifices, usually understood as animal sacrifices, the Messiah would state that The Father had prepared or made Him a body. And it was for the purpose of doing the will of The Father that Jesus received His body from The Father; it was in His half divine mortal body that Jesus suffered for the sins of the world, died, then rose on the third day triumphantly over death. The words of Abinadi, a prophet from The Book of Mormon, summarize these points beautifully: (The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ, Mosiah 15:1-3):
"I would that ye should understand that
God himself shall come down among the children of men,
and shall redeem his people.
And because he dwelleth in the flesh
he shall be called the Son of God,
and having subjected the flesh to the will of the Father,
being Father and Son--
The Father, because he was conceived by the power of God;
and the Son, because of the flesh;
thus becoming the Father and the Son--"
This week we LDS join our fellow Christians as well as our Muslim, Jewish and Hindu brethren in looking forward for that Divine Being, whom we call the Christ or the Messiah, to come. With our fellow Christian and our Muslim brethren we join in that faith that Jesus came the first time, the Messiah, and He was born of a virgin. With our fellow Christians we share the faith that Jesus is The Son of God.
The Hebrew scriptures testify that Heavenly Father, addressed either as "Elohim" (lit. 'Gods') or Jehovah ('Eternal One', 'Lord'), both of which are His two sacred name-titles, "God" and "Jehovah/Lord", has a body of flesh and bones. Because The Father has a body we truly were created in His image, and Jesus grew to become more like (dare I say just like) His Father by receiving a body. In this tabernacle of flesh Jesus did the will of His Father, which was to be the Savior of the World.
Inasmuch as The Father and The Son are One, united in purpose and love, before His birth The Son of God bore the same title as His Father, "Elohim" ('God'). But as regards The Son of God's personal name before mortal birth, He was "Jehovah". "Jehovah" is His Father's name-title, but it was Jesus' antemortal personal name. I would like to clarify that point, that "Jehovah" is a title of Heavenly Father just as is Elohim, (Elohim=God/s, Jehovah=Eternal One), but for The Son "Jehovah" was His personal name, and Elohim His title. For that matter, Heavenly Father calls all of us all "Elohim" ('Gods') as well, collectively, since we are no less His spirit children.
(Psalm 82:6)
"I have said ye are gods [in Hebrew "Elohim"],
children of the Most High."
As is well known, the name of our Lord upon mortal birth became "Jesus", and this name was revealed through the prophetic line of the House of Israel.
(Psalm 82:6)
"I have said ye are gods [in Hebrew "Elohim"],
children of the Most High."
As is well known, the name of our Lord upon mortal birth became "Jesus", and this name was revealed through the prophetic line of the House of Israel.
The New Testament Rests upon the Foundation of the Greek Septuagint
In our New Testament, when Jesus stood up and quoted Isaiah 61:1-2, our text of Luke uses, not a translation of an ancient Hebrew text (certainly not the Masoretic Text which had yet to be fashioned), but in actuality the Greek Septuagint: (Luke 4:18-19)
because he hath anointed me;
he hath sent me to preach glad tidings to the poor,
to heal the broken in heart,
to proclaim liberty to the captives,
and recovery of sight to the blind,
To preach the acceptable year of the Lord..."
Why was the Greek Septuagint quoted here (and exclusively throughout the New Testament)? Does The New Testament's reliance on the Greek Septuagint mean that Jesus stood up and opened the Greek manuscript of Isaiah (BTW the Greek the name of Isaiah is "Esaias")? Does this citation in Luke (and many others) imply that Jesus read from a Hebrew text that was compatible with the Septuagint, a Hebrew text that had not the subsequent Pharisaical alterations? Or does this mean that Jesus read from a Hebrew scroll but that the writer or translator(s) of Luke (no one is completely certain whether Luke was penned in Greek or translated to Greek from Aramaic) simply quoted the passage out of the Septuagint since the rest of Luke was being rendered in Greek? One thing is certain, though, that the Septuagint from circa 200 B.C. is The Old Testament foundation of The New Testament.
Accordingly and not surprisingly, the Apostle Paul also relied on the Greek Septuagint. When Paul quoted Psalm 40:6 to teach that we are sanctified by the shedding of the blood of Christ, he used, not the Hebrew text (by the way, I am not anti-Hebrew text, but I am for the Truth of our Lord however that Truth has been preserved) but rather the Septuagint:
(Hebrews 10:5)
"Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith,
Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not,
but a body hast thou prepared me..."
Such examples in The New Testament abound, but I see these beautiful citations, our Lord's quotation as well as the ancient uber-missionary Paul quoting the Septuagint, as validation of the way that honorable translation reads, at least in those passages. Now, to be sure, the Septuagint is a translation, and even it has been altered (it appears that the Septuagint used to read YHWH for Jehovah, but now it reads "Lord" for both Jehovah and Adonai), and there are always nuances lost in translation, but occasionally there are nuances gained.
The Father, The Son, and The Holy Ghost Are in Harmony, "One"
The Apostle John delivered some of the most beautiful teachings on The Godhead, or Trinity if you will. He started his Gospel by declaring that Jesus is a God alongside The Father who is The God. Here I will convey the nuances of the Greek text that often get lost in the translation:
(John 1:1-3)
"In the beginning was the Word,
and the Word was with the God,
and the Word was a God.
This One was in the beginning with the God.
All things through Him came into being
and without Him not one thing came into being
that has come into being."
This is John's poignant declaration is of The God, The Father, and His Word, who is a God.
John went on to describe how we should worship The Father. Here I will again cite a careful translation from the Greek source text:
(John 4:23-24)
"But an hour is coming and now is,
when the true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth;
for also the Father seeketh such who worship him.
Spirit the God,
and they that worship him in spirit and truth must worship."
and they that worship him in spirit and truth must worship."
That phrase is very curious, "Spirit the God". It is always translated as "God is a spirit", although there is no word "is" used, which is Greek is "estin", and there would have been no problem using "estin" here. If we take this statement, "Spirit the God" to mean "God is a Spirit", then we have to understand that in context of Jesus' spoken words to 10 of His Apostles and to Mary Magdelene:
(Luke 24:37-39)
"But they were terrified and affrighted,
and supposed that they had seen a spirit.
and supposed that they had seen a spirit.
and he said unto them,
Why are ye troubled?
and why do thoughts arise in your hearts?
Why are ye troubled?
and why do thoughts arise in your hearts?
Behold my hands and my feet,
that it is I myself :
handle me, and see;
for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have."
that it is I myself :
handle me, and see;
for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have."
(John 20:16-17)
"Jesus saith unto her, Mary.
She turned herself, and saith unto him,
Rabboni; which is to say, Master.
She turned herself, and saith unto him,
Rabboni; which is to say, Master.
Jesus saith unto her,
Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father:
but go to my brethren, and say unto them,
I ascend unto my Father, and your Father;
and to my God, and your God."
Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father:
but go to my brethren, and say unto them,
I ascend unto my Father, and your Father;
and to my God, and your God."
The Resurrected Christ told 10 of His Apostles to handle Him because they thought he was a spirit and by handling Him they would know that He had a body of flesh and bones. He reminded them that a spirit does not have flesh and bones as He clearly did. Yet earlier, when Mary Magdalene was on the point of hugging Him or in the least touching or handling Him, He asked her not to because He had not yet ascended to His Father. The presumption is that His Father would be the first Person to hug the Resurrected Christ. Again, a "spirit hath not flesh and bones", so here the Savior appears to be speaking from the perspective that God The Father has a body of flesh and bones because physical touch does not occur between one body and another spirit, but from one body to another body, as The Savior pointed out.
It is worth noting that one of the oldest copies of our four Gospels, some argue the oldest copy, though not without controversy, is the Sinaitic Palimpsest. This important document was rediscovered in 1892 and published in English translation the same year. The Sinaitic Palimpsest has the four canonical Gospels in Syriac (Aramaic), and though most scholars agree this is a translation, some would maintain that the Sinaitic Palimpsest contains a Syriac source text.
The Sinaitic Palimpsest is important for another reason: it dates to the late fourth century AD. This date is critical because the Roman Catholic Church was fashioned by Emperor Constantine by compelling the major western branches of Christianity to unite into a single church (in reality a Roman and Greek confederacy of sorts) starting in AD 325. Within 50 years they had established their key doctrines and assembled The New Testament. However, the Catholic Church began to feel uncomfortable with the absence of the central doctrine, The Trinity and the nature of God (substance-less matter), in The New Testament. Thus a process was begun of inserting a word or phrase here and there to allow for the interpretation of the key Catholic doctrines on God. Here is John 4:23-24 as it reads in the late fourth century Sinaitic Palimpsest:
The Sinaitic Palimpsest is important for another reason: it dates to the late fourth century AD. This date is critical because the Roman Catholic Church was fashioned by Emperor Constantine by compelling the major western branches of Christianity to unite into a single church (in reality a Roman and Greek confederacy of sorts) starting in AD 325. Within 50 years they had established their key doctrines and assembled The New Testament. However, the Catholic Church began to feel uncomfortable with the absence of the central doctrine, The Trinity and the nature of God (substance-less matter), in The New Testament. Thus a process was begun of inserting a word or phrase here and there to allow for the interpretation of the key Catholic doctrines on God. Here is John 4:23-24 as it reads in the late fourth century Sinaitic Palimpsest:
"But behold, the hour cometh, and now is,
when the true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and in truth:
for the Father even seeketh these worshippers,
those who worship him in spirit and truth."
What is astonishing here is the absence of the words "Spirit the God", usually translated as "God is a spirit." This is not all. In the Sinaitic Palimpsest wording of God being a Spirit appears somewhere else, in John 3:6:
"That which is born of the flesh is flesh;
and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit,
and God is a living Spirit."
This additional text, "and God is a living Spirit", does seem to present the reader with a fourth century snap shot of scribes trying to resolve the issue of sacred writ that bears no witness of their key doctrines, doctrines that their newly unified faith had just recently codified. The Sinaitic Palimpsest seems to indicate that at one point a phrase about God being a Spirit was inserted into John 3:6, but later John 4:24 was chosen as the point of insertion. In both instances, however, the statement "God is a Spirit" seems out of context with the discussion mainly because the words appear as a bold declaration with no lead and no further comment.
The process of inserting missing doctrines into sacred write did not stop there. As the Protestant Reformation spread the Catholic Church (BTW: I am not anti-Catholic; I do believe there is much to benefit from knowing history) became more concerned that their highest doctrine of all, the Trinity in the sense of Three Divine Manifestations of a Single Being, was totally unmentioned in The New Testament. So in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries a phrase that seems to speak to this view was inserted into two Greek manuscripts : of places in order to allow for the interpretation of a Trinitarian view if not an overt statement of it. The primary (though not only) such insertion is 1 John 5:7-8:
"For there are three that bear record in heaven,
the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost:
and these three are one.
And there are three that bear witness in earth,
the Spirit, and the water, and the blood:
and these three agree in one."
Here the text in red was entered into two Greek manuscripts in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, just a few decades before the translation of The King James Version of The Bible!
Scribal liberties notwithstanding, what we have is what we have. We are all spirits now, spirits housed in a body of flesh and bones, and Jesus who is the express image of His Father is also a spirit housed in a body of flesh and bones. As is The Son, so is The Father. As is The Son, we may become.
"For there are three that bear record in heaven,
the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost:
and these three are one.
And there are three that bear witness in earth,
the Spirit, and the water, and the blood:
and these three agree in one."
Here the text in red was entered into two Greek manuscripts in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, just a few decades before the translation of The King James Version of The Bible!
Scribal liberties notwithstanding, what we have is what we have. We are all spirits now, spirits housed in a body of flesh and bones, and Jesus who is the express image of His Father is also a spirit housed in a body of flesh and bones. As is The Son, so is The Father. As is The Son, we may become.
Conclusion
Scriptural insights are a beautiful gift this Christmas, The Bible, The Septuagint, as well as that Isaiah Scroll from the Dead Sea, and that tome that has come to us via God's direct divine intervention, The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ, in short, all the revealed word of God is our great gift, because they reveal that our Father, whether we use the title Elohim (God) or Jehovah (LORD), He has a body of flesh and bone, and that the erstwhile "Spirit Jehovah" was born to receive a body from His and our Father, and to do the will of The Father in that body, which was to take upon Himself our sins and weaknesses, die and rise triumphantly from the grave. Jesus is truly The Son of God. And as challenging as it is, my duty and ours collectively is to learn to do the Father's will in our bodies now.
Merry Christmas and God bless!
