Meaning of Holy in the Old Testament

B ib ^ o t h e c a S a c r a ٦ 70 (October-December 2013) : 400-17

T h e M e a n in g o f “H o ly” IN THE O lH T e s t a m e n t

Peter j . Gentry

T־ ONE IS HOLY LIEE Y ־0 a h w e h ” was H annah’s bold praise أ ر when God granted her request for a child (1 Sam. 2:2).1

praise is based not only on her own experi- ence, bu t also on the revelation given a t the Exodus. Moses’ Song a t the Sea rang out, ‘W ho is like you among the gods, Yahweh? Who is like y o u -m ajestic in holiness!” (Exod. 1 5 : 1 -The revela .(لtion of God as holy and the creation of a covenant people who are holy are connected specifically with the events of the Exodus. “Saint” is, in fact, an Exodus word, and indeed Paul’s use of it has in view the work of Jesus Christ as bringing about a new Exodus.2

U ^ortunate ly , the church of Jesus Christ, a t least in the west- ern world, has not understood very well the m eaning of the word “holy,” nor what it m eans to worship a holy God. Systematic theologians from the Reformation to the present tim e are surveyed by Richard Muller, who describes the Reformed orthodox doctrine of the divine holiness as follows: “Holiness, has, moreover, two impli- cations, both of which are typically stated in relation or in contrast to creatures. First, it can indicate the absolute ‘moral purity’ of God and stand, therefore, in relation to his justice or righteousness. . . . Second, ‘the word is also employed to denote God’s infinite excel- lence above all th a t is low and created.’ ”3 Thus holiness is seen as

Feter j . Gentry is Frofessor ه £ Old Testament Interpretation, The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, Kentucky.

أ Translations of Scripture in this article are the writer’s, unless noted otherwise.

2 Connections between the term “holy” and the events of the Exodus are explored below in sections about the calling of Moses in Exodus 3 and the calling of Israel in Exodus 19.

3 Richard A. Muller, Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics: The Rise and Deuel- opment af Reformed Orthodoxy, ca. 1520 ٤٠ ca. 1725. Volume 3: The Divine Essence and Attributes (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003), 499.

The Meaning آه “H©ly” in the Old Testament 401

roughly equivalent to “purity” and “transcendence.”U nderstanding of the root קדט, moreover, is commonly based

on the work of w. w. Baudissin, “Der Begriff der Heiligkeit im AT,” published in 1878.4 Baudissin surm ised th a t the original root was a b iliteral קד meaning “to cut.” He influenced more th an a century of ecclesiastical thought, for recent theologians continue to rely on the etymology adduced by him.

Not only is th is etymology entirely uncertain , bu ج t also scholars, w hether biblical exegetes or systematic theologians, have been warned for over half a century about the dangers of etymological approaches to semantics. As an example, ،‘nice” in English comes from the Latin word nescius, m eaning “ignorant.” Thus the history or origin of a word may be interesting bu t entirely irrelevant for determ ining its meaning.

The best approach to semantic analysis is an exhaustive study of all available usage, both in the litera tu re in question and in con- tem porary documents in the cultures surrounding the original texts of the Bible. For קדט th is kind of study was performed already in 1 8 6 و by a French evangelical, Claude B ernard Costecalde.6 Cos- tecalde analyzed the pertinent term s in Akkadian, Ugaritic, and Northwest Semitic inscriptions in addition to the usage of קדש in the Hebrew Bible. His exhaustive research was so well recognized by scholars th a t he was invited to contribute the article on holiness in the famous Catholic Dictionary known as Suppléments aux Die- tionnaire de la Bible? Although published a quarter of a century ago, this research has not penetrated the church in North America, possibly because Costecalde’s work is in French. My own exegesis over the last twenty-five years has been greatly stim ulated by the work of Costecalde. Thus 1 am presenting his work as well as my own, which finds th a t neither “moral purity” nor “transcendence” is

W. w . Baudissin, “Der Begriff der Heiiigkeit im AT,” in Studien zur semitischen Religionsgeschichte, vol. 2 (Leipzig: Fr. Wilh. Grunow, 1878).

5 T. E. MeGomiskey States, “The suggestion that the root qdsh is derived from an orignal biliteral qd (“cut”) is attractive but tenuous. . . . Tire meaning “to separate” is favored by many scholars, but the fact that qdsh rarely, if ever, occurs in a secu- lar sense makes any positive conclusion in this regard difficult because of the lim- ited evidence on which to base philological comparison” (“ קדש [و،محأءمحأ ],” in Theologi- cal Wordbook ةألم،/ه Old Testament, ed. R. L. Harris, G. L. Archer, and B. K. Waltke [Ghicago: Moody, 1908], 2:780-87).

6 Claude Bernard Costecalde, Aux origines du sacré biblique (Paris: Letouzey ه Ané, 1986).

٢ Claude Bernard Costecalde, “Sacré ” in Dictionnaire de la Bible, Supplément Tome, vol. 10 (Paris: Letouzey & Ané, 1985), columns 1346—1415.

402 B ib l io t h e c a S a c r a / October-December 2013

fundam ental to the m eaning of “holy” in Greek or Hebrew.The meaning of the word “holy” can be expounded by focusing

largely on three texts: Exodus 3, Exodus 19, and Isaiah 6.

E xo d u s 3— H oly G round

In Exodus 3 Moses encounters Yahweh in the burning bush and is asked to remove his sandals because he is standing on “holy ground.” This is the first occurrence in the Old Testam ent of the root קדש in either an adjectival or noun form. Indeed, only one in- stance of the related verb is found prior to this text (Gen. 2:3); so Exodus 3 is foundational to thinking about the word. As Costecalde observes, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob was not called by them a “Holy God,” nor was He worshiped by them at a holy place. God waited until He called Moses and revealed Himself to him to announce to th is shepherd th a t “the m ountain of God” was a holy place: אךמת־קךש, normally transla ted “holy ground.”

Why did God designate the m ountain as a קו־ש place? One reason generally given goes as follows. The “holiness” of the place was a barrier th a t prevented Moses, and la ter the people, from approaching. The m ountain was “taboo” or “a forbidden place.” The presence of God as “the totally other” upon the m ountain made the place inaccessible and provoked fear in Moses because of the “holy” character of the mountain. M uilenburg, for example, expresses this view. He states:

The consciousness of the radical cleavage between the human and the divine is rooted in taboo, and is illustrated in the law of the hérem ,in which man is forbidden to appropriate what belongs to God ,(חרם)and in the frequent prohibitions against profanation. The holy is un- approachable; man must not “come near” (קרב) to it. Thus Moses must not come near¿ for the place on which he stands is קדש (Exod. 3:5 j; cf. Josh. 5:15).8

This explanation, however, does not account for all the facts given in the text. God does not forbid Moses from approaching the holy ground bu t only from coming near the b u s h - th e place from which He speaks. The ground designated as holy includes the precise place where Moses stands, not ju st the bush where Yahweh speaks. In the narrative of Exodus 3:1-6 Moses is given two distinct and separate commands: (1) “Don’t come near here!” and (2) “Remove

j . Muileuburg, “Holiness,” in The Interpreter’s Dictionary ٠/ the Bible (Nashville: Abingdon, 1962), 2:618.

403 Holy” in the Old Testament“ آه The Meaning

your sandals because the place where you are standing is holy ground.”9 The holy ground, then, is much larger than the bush where Yahweh speaks. It follows th a t the command th a t forbids

Moses to approach does not apply to the ground declared “holy,” but only to the precise spot where ¥ahw eh speaks. The causal clause informing Moses th a t he is standing on holy ground gives the reason for removing his sandals and is not connected to thecommand to stay away from the bush.

The “holy ground” (v. 5) encompasses a larger space than just the bush from which God speaks and is, in fact, equivalent to the area designated as “the m ountain of God” (v. 1). Moses is standing

place; there is nothing inaccessible or restricted about ap- קדש on a proaching there. The m ountain of God is not “taboo” or a “forbidden place.” Moreover, it does not inspire fear any more than the bush, which ra th e r provokes curiosity. The fear th a t seizes Moses in the narrative does not spring from the “sacrosanct” character of the m ountain; it is provoked by the shock of the vision of God. This u n- expected meeting with God seizes Moses with fright. Verse 6 shows clearly the difference between “fear” and “holy,” because the fear is inspired by the vision of God, not by the holy mountain. It is therefore improper to speak of “holy fear” if language is to be genuinelytrue to Scripture.

As already noted, “holy ground” appears as a synonym of the “m ountain of God.” From the culture of th a t tim e there is nothing

astonishing about th is because a t Ugarit, in the fourteenth century before Jesus Christ, Baal dwells on a m ountain and “the m ountain

,3:1 of Baal” is also called a place qds.10 The m ountain in Exodus because of the presence of the God of Abra- קדש however, is called

ham, Isaac, and Jacob upon it and not because of a holy character inherent in or proper to the place where Moses stands. In the course of Moses’ vision, it is not so much the place as such th a t is valued, but the presence of God on it. This is when it becomes re-

because it is the m ountain of God. קדש markable: the m ountain is Exodus 3, then, provides a m eaning for a derivative of the root current in the fourteenth century before Jesus Christ, where קדש

ground is not the place of distance or radical separation, קדש the but of m eeting and of presence, the meeting of God and man. In

The sentences are asyndetic rather than connected by waw.

10 G. del Olm© Lete and j . Sanmartín, A Dictionary of the Ugaritic Language in the ,695 (,2003 ,Alphabetic Tradition, Handbook of Oriental Studies 67 (Leiden: Brill

Baal,” in KTU 0؛ where qds is attributed to the citadel of Baal = “the mountain.1.16.11:46 ,1.16.1:7


standing on the ground th a t beiongs to God, Moses is not caiied but to he allowed to walk there he m ,קדוש ust submit to the practice of a rite or ritual: remove his sandals. Is th is an innovation? Um doubtedly not. The act of removing one’s sandals, as does the nearest relative in Deuteronomy 25:9 and in R uth 4:7, is a ceremony of de-possession well-known in the culture of th a t time. The göel, th a t is, the nearest relative, removes his sandal to show th a t he is relinquishing his rights of purchase. Thus Moses m ust acknowledge th a t this ground belongs to God and enter into an at- titude of consecration. R ather than being m arking as set apart, “holy” ground is ground consecrated, devoted, or prepared for the m eeting of God and man.

In speaking from the middle of the bush, God m anifests His desire to be present in the midst of men. But He presents Himself progressively. F irst He addresses Moses, who does not dare to look at Him and who is surprised a t the tim e and seized with fear. It is God who takes the initiative in meeting men; He is the one who declares the m ountain to be ground קדט . It is not Moses who de- cides to meet the God of the patriarchs; it is not he who consecrates to th is invisible God a particular place. The narra to r insists on the divine initiative. It seems th a t the most suitable translation of קדש in Exodus 3 m ust be something like “consecrated” or “devoted ground.” God has chosen the place of the meeting; He waits for Mo- ses, and after having “prepared the ground,” He presents Himself to the shepherd and makes him p art of His project of salvation .

E xodus 19— H oly N ation

In the next stage in God’s progressive revelation and also in the extension of holiness, Israel has come out of Egypt and is now camped before the m ountain in the desert of Sinai (Exod. 19). In the narrative of th is episode, the Lord speaks to Moses and commands him to “consecrate” the people (v. 10). Moses obeys. He comes down the mountain, where he has m et God and received this communication from Him, and “consecrates” the people (v. 14). In fact, five forms of the root קדש are found in Exodus 19 (vv. 6, 10, 14, 22, 23), making this an im portant development from Exodus 3.

Several different translations of the verb קדש have been pro- posed: “sanctify” (The Original Bible), “cause to sanctify oneself’ (New Jerusalem Bible 1973), “consecrate” (Dhorme11), “cause to be

E. Dhorme, L ’Évolution Religieuse d ’Israël. Yol. 1: La Religion des Hébreux Ho- mades (Brussels: Nouvelle Société (!’Editions, 193?), 309.

The Meaning آه “Holy” in Old Testament 405

holy” (Gilbert^), and “declare holy” (Leenhardt13). We can agree here with the position of Gilbert against th a t of Leenhardt. The form is in the Piel stem, and the m eaning is essentially Intensive- Factitive . This has to do with the causation or bringing about of a ئstate: Moses brings the people into a consecrated or holy status.

At th is point the notion of “sanctification” is overcharged with a moral sense in m any expositions. Such a m eaning cannot be jus- tified here by reason of the context. In other respects, the transía- tion “sanctify” the people, the priests, or the mountain, does not adequately convey the sense of the command given by God to Mo- ses. The notion of e x e c r a t io n —more neutral in the first p la c e - is more suitable.

W hat does God desire? He w ants to get ready or prepare a meeting w ith the people of Israel under certain conditions. He pre- sented Himself first to Moses in a spectacular m anner. Before re- ceiving the divine call, Moses m ust accomplish a rite. Now in Exo- dus 19, Moses plays the role of interm ediary between God and the people. Likewise, in 19:23, Moses receives the order to consecrate (Piel קדט) the mountain, which has been “delimited” or “m arked

Gilbert believes th a t “the notion of the holy” in 19:22-23 “is closer to the idea of taboo than th a t which appears in Ex 19:2- 13.”15 The verb קדש, however, in relation to the m ountain is in the same stem as in verses 10-14, where it is used in relation to the people. It is difficult to discover a semantic difference between two identical uses of the verb. Furtherm ore, according to the context, the “ban / interdiction / prohibition” (or the taboo) is not equivalent to consecration: “a consecrated m ountain” is not “a forbidden m ountain.” The interdiction is a consequence or result of the consecration, it does not define consecration itself. Consecrating the m ountain is preparing this place for the coming of God. To do this,

ئ Maurice Gilbert, “Le Sacré dans l’Ancien Testament,” in L ’Expression du Sacré dans les Grandes Religions, ed. Julien Ries, Herbert Sauren, et al. (Louvain-la- Neuve, 1983), 1:210-211.

إ3 Franz-J. Leenhardt, La Notion de Sainteté dans l ’Ancien Testament {Faris: Librairie Fischbacher, 1929), 44.

ئ See E. Jenni, Das hebräische Pi'el: Syntaktisch-semasiologische Untersuchung einer Verbalform im Alten Testament (Zürich: EVZ-Verlag, 1968), and idem, “Ak- tionsarten und s^mml'ormen im Althebräischen: Das Fi'el in verbesserter Sicht,” Zeitschrift für Althebraistik 13/1 (2000): 67-90, and Bruce K. Waltke and M. O’Connor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, IN: Ei- senbrauns, 1990).

15 Gilbert, “Le Sacré dans l’Ancien Testament,” 1:263.

406 ^□OTHECA Sacra / October-December 2013

Moses m ust place boundaries there and order the people not to ap-proach i t.

Unlike Exodus 3, where God orders the fulfillment of a ritua l on a consecrated place, here in Exodus 19 it is Moses who “consecrates” the people (19:10). Thus there is in th is text a progression in comparison with the passage in Exodus 3. Moses is no longer a witness of consecration; he actively participates in th is consecration. He does not ju st touch consecrated ground; he consecrates the people in the one case and the delimited m ountain in the o ther.

The m eaning of th is consecration is defined by the context. In Exodus 3 the “consecrated m ountain” appears as a place prepared, having become for a tim e a divine possession. In chapter 19 a con-

meet God, as verse 11 sta tes, ٠، secrated people are a people ready “th a t they may be ready for the th ird day.” The onsecra tion of the

people is a preparation. For M oses-w ho is clearly the subject of in verse 10-consecra ting the people is “to put them in קדש the verb

a sta te to approach God.”16 This preparation is effected by the prac- -10 .tice of a ritual: washing the cloaks, which takes two days (w

11 and 14—15). According to the sequence of volitives, the washing follows the consecration and appears as a result. An elem ent of purification is certainly present in this text, bu t one cannot equate

pu-“) טהר consecration and purification in strict term s, and the rootrify”) is not used.

Are the people consecrated in the same m anner as the consecrated m ountain? A consecrated people—are they a people who belong to God? It seems th a t the context confirms this, likewise th a t the elem ent of preparation predom inates. Moses m ust declare to the people: “Be ready in three days. Don’t come near your wives” (v.

15.) This order is certainly given for a precise reason. In “not coming near” their wives, the Israelites are ready “to come near” God. God w ants to prepare the people for a very special meeting. Cer- tainly Moses is not establishing a taboo; the text does not say th a t to have sexual relations is to move away from God. But God de- sires, for a special occasion, a special consecration. This abstinence

.21:5 is also found in 1 Sam uel One discovers the idea of belonging and devotion connected to

the notion of consecration a t the beginning of Exodus 19, where verses 5-6 affirm clearly the purpose of God, less evident perhaps in verses 10-15 and 22-24. ‘ o u will be my personal treasure

16 Georges Auzou, De la Servitude au Service: Étude du Livre de l ’Exode (Paris: Editions de !’Orante, 1961), 254. Auzou’s words in the original are as follows: “« Sanctifier » ou « consa؛؛rer », V. 10, c’est mettre en état d’approcher Dieu.”

The Meaning of “Holy” in fhe Old Testament 407

[sglh, an Amorite term] among 1ة ؛ل the peoptes—since all the earth belongs to me—and you will he for me a royal priesthood and a holy nation” (vv. 5-6). Priests are persons devoted solely to the service of the deity.17 Israel as a nation קדוט is a nation given access to the presence of Yahweh and devoted solely to the service and worship of the Lord. Moreover the statem ents in verses 5 and 6 are double. F irst, the call to he a holy nation is parallel to the call to be a royal priesthood, and second, the two designations “royal priesthood” and “holy nation” together constitute an explanation of what it means to he Yahweh’s personal treasure. The idea of belonging and th a t of consecration are closely related in these verses; they are also in the verses th a t follow.

Study of Exodus 19 does not support speaking of “separation,” as some like Leenhardt1 and M ichaeli^ do, or of an impassable gulf, as Lefevre does, for whom “holiness is the impassable gulf which makes God ^accessib le to the c r e a t u r e . S u c h meanings are not appropriate to the use of forms of קדט in th is text.

The ban on going up on the m ountain does not imply a radical separation or barrier between the people and the mountain. On the contrary, the people are invited to participate in the theophany, not simply as spectators, but as consecrated. The place and the people are ready to receive God because they belong to Him. If Moses m ust fix impassable lim its—as God Himself m ust do for Moses at the time of the burning b u s h - th is is not to establish a radical separation between the people and God, but to indicate the distance th a t further rem ains between the people and God and to protect, in a certain m anner, the Israelites. There is a gradation: the people are consecrated; they may approach and see, but only Moses and several privileged ones may be enveloped by the cloud. So then, the greater the consecration, the greater is the distance noticeably di- minished. Consecration appears correctly in Exodus 19 as the opposite of separation.

In the H SCB notes to Exodus 19:9-25 Coover-Cox observes

17 A full treatment ©f the details and exegetieal issues ean he found in Peter j . Gentry and Steven Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant (Wheaton: Cr©ssway, 2012 ) .

Leenhardt, La Notion de Sainteté dans l و1 ’Ancien Testament, 19-23-

و1 Franh Michaeli, Le Livre de l’Exode (Neuchâtel: Delachaux et Niestlé, 1974), 166.

٠ A. Lefèvre, “Saint est le Seigneur,” in Grands Thèmes Bibliques, ed. M. E. B©ismard et al. (Paris: Editi©ns de Feu Nouveau, 1958), 52. Lefèvre’s own words are as follows: “La sainteté est l’abime i^ n c h is s a b le qui rend Dieu inaccessible à la créature.”


th a t the covenant-making at Sinai is compared to a u zera in -vassa l treaty in the ancient Near East. She states:

The Reparations for a meeting between the Lord and the Israeiites continue the extended metaphor that compares the Lord to a great king issuing a covenant to his vassal· The Lord had chosen to come to Mount Sinai in a way designed to reveal His presence and to com- municate with the Israelites, making it “private property,” where no one should expect to wander in and out oblivious to the wishes of the owner. For as long as the Lord visited that place, it was holy ground, an extension of His royal court. Coming teere required a royal sum- mons. It was not a casual meeting of equals.21

Isaiah 6 - Y ahw eh as H oly

If “holy” means essentially “consecrated” or “devoted,” w hat then does it m ean to apply this adjective to God? How is He consecrated ٨٣ devoted? Isaiah 6 helps answer these questions.

Outline of Isaiah 6:1-13

I. Vision of Yahweh (6:1—4)II. R e s ^ n s o f l s a i a h (6:5—7)

זז ז Commission of the Prophet (6:8-13)

GOD IS AWESOME

Certain aspects of th is text depict God as awesome and transcend- ent. Isaiah begins by saying th a t he saw tee Lord (י -sitting up ,(אדנon a throne high and lifted up. God is exalted; He is tee High King; tee edges of His robe filled tee tem ple (6:1). This not only expresses the awesome greatness of God but also clearly indicates th a t Isaiah was prostrate on tee ground; th is is why he could see only the edges or hem of God’s robe. This vision of God is sim ilar to the tee- ophany granted to the nobles of Israel when tee covenant with Is- rael was ratified on M ount Sinai in Exodus 24. The nobles saw the God of Israel, but all th a t they reported seeing is bright blue lapis lazuli bricks under His feet (v. 10). They, too, were flat on tee ground and were so awestruck th a t their eyes were raised no high- er than the paving stones under God’s feet.

Isaiah 6:3 says further th a t the glory of tee Lord filled the earth . W hen the tabernacle was completed in Exodus 40, a bright cloud designated as tee glory of tee Lord filled tee tabernacle (vv. 34—35). Likewise, when Solomon built and dedicated tee temple,

21 Dorian G. Coover-Cox, “Exodus,” in HCSB Study Bible, ed. Edwin A. Blum and Jeremy Royal Howard (Nashville: Holman, 2010), 131.

The Meaning of “Holy” in the Old Testament 409

Kings 8:10-11). Here in ل) the glory of the Lord filled the temple Isaiah’s vision, the glory of the Lord fills the earth. This indicates th a t the entire earth is His sanctuary, or temple, and th a t He rules the whole world. The seraphim describe Him, and whatever they are, their name m eans “burning ones.” They are beings of fire. In addition, the foundations of the door-posts shake and the place is filled with smoke. Earthquake, fire, and smoke clearly speak of the God of Sinai. In Abram’s vision in Genesis 15:17 God reveals Him- self by m eans of a smoking firepot and blazing torch. In Exodus

3:2, which is a foretaste and precursor to Sinai, He reveals Himself to Moses in the burning bush. According to Exodus 19:16-19 God came on Mount Sinai accompanied by earthquake, fire, and smoke. He appeared similarly to Ezekiel in chapter 1 in clouds and fire. In Daniel 7:9—10, “his throne was flaming with fire and its wheels were all ablaze. A river of fire was flowing, coming out from before him ” (NIV). There is no question th a t the lord whom Isaiah saw is the God who made the covenant with Israel at Sinai.

GOD IS HOLY

The concept th a t God is holy is not new. This idea is found before ;6:20 .Isaiah’s time (Lev. 11:44-45; 20:3, 7, 26; Josh. 24:19; 1 Sam

Ps. 22:4). Nonetheless, Isaiah’s favorite term for God is the Holy One of Israel/Jacob. He uses th is term some 26 times; outside of the Book of Isaiah it is found only six times. The vision of God given to Isaiah a t the beginning of his life and m inistry as a prophet profoundly affected his life and radically shaped his message and m inistry. Though recognition of Yahweh as a Holy God is not new, w hat is new is the particular message th a t God gives to Isaiah in

.8-13 versesIn Isaiah 6 it is when God appears to the prophet th a t Isaiah

hears the voice of the seraphim proclaiming the holiness of the Lord. This declaration accompanies the coming of God among men in the temple and a ttests His presence in the place of consecration. God appears in the place th a t belongs to Him, the sanctuary, but He does not stay in the holy of holies, the place th a t is most consecrated. Instead He lets Himself be seen by men in the front room of the temple, the great hall. This is evident from two or th ree facts

In 1 Kings 6-8, the היכל. in the text. The Hebrew word used here is or م passage describing the construction of the temple, the word و

“house” is used for the tem ple as a whole, which is divided into two and elsewhere היכל rooms: the front room or great hall is called the

and later the holy of דביר the holy place; the back room is called the


holies.22 In Isaiah 6 the Lord is not in the זיביר, or holy of holies, He is in the היכל, the front room, the great hall of His palace. Note th a t the standard term for the tem ple as a whole, בית, is used in verse 4 and clearly contrasts with היכל in verse 1.

Secondly, Isaiah says th a t the bases of the doorposts shook. This makes it absolutely clear th a t the Lord is in the front room, because Isaiah is a t the doorway and would not have been able to see into the back room from the doorway. So while God is awesome in His majesty. His holiness does not mean th a t He is the “Totally O ther,” nor does it speak of His separation. Ju s t the opposite in f a c t-h e re God is coming to meet m an (as in Exodus 3), which fits the central them e of th is new section of Isaiah: Imm anuel, th a t is, “God with us.”

ROLE OF THE SERAPHIM

In addition, Isaiah sees the seraphim in his vision. It is as im- portant to note w hat he does not see as to note w hat he does see. He sees seraphim and not cherubim. Normally images of the cherubim y a rd e d access to the presence of God in the garden and the temple. Their wings protected the mercy seat of the ark, and they were on the curtains guarding the holy of holies. W hat is intended by the fact th a t Isaiah sees seraphim instead of cherubim? The English word “seraphim ” is, in fact, not of English origin, but rather a loanword from Hebrew based on a rough transliteration of the p lural form of the word ט'ךף.

The word “saraph” is rare in the Hebrew Bible. It occurs in Numbers 21:6 and 8 and refers to fiery snakes, or serpents, th a t struck the Israelites. It also refers to a fiery snake in Deuteronomy 8:15, Isaiah 14:29, and 30:6. In the occurrences in Isaiah 14 and 30 the seraphim are specifically designated as winged serpents, which clearly connects them to the instances in Isaiah 6.23 Finally we have the two occurrences in Isaiah 6 for a total of seven instances in the entire Hebrew Bible. Probably the word was transliterated instead of transla ted because the transla to rs did not see how the

22 For היכל see 1 Kings 6:5, 17; 7:50; and הבית היכל in 1 Kings 6:3. For הביו see ل Kings 6:5, 16, 19-23, 31; 7:49, 8:6, 8. The term for the whole, בית, occurs approxi- mately 46 times in 1 Kings 6-8. The הביו is also designated as the “holy of holies” in 1 Kings 6:16, 8:6. The היכל is designated as the “holy place” in 1 Kings 8:8, 10.

23 Annals from King Esarhaddon of Assyria describe his journey across the desert, and in the same spot where Israel encountered the fiery snakes, he mentions strange creatures with batting wings (James B. Pritchard, ed., Ancient Near East-ern Texts: Relating to the Old Testament [Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1955], 292b).


seraphim here could be connected to the other occurrences where the word refers to snakes.

Ju s t because they have feet, hands, and faces, however, does not mean th a t they cannot be s n a k e s . ? i c t u r e s of winged snakes from both Egypt and Syria show them with feet, hands, and faces. According to Isaiah 14:2 و , a winged seraph is a symbol of a future Hebrew king. In fact, Hebrew seals, some of them royal, have winged snakes on them .25

If th is interpretation is regarded as far-fetched, recall 2 Kings 18:4, a passage th a t describes King Hezekiah’s efforts to rid the tem ple worship of idols and idolatrous objects. One item m entioned is the bronze snake, the “saraph” made by Moses, which by this tim e had become an object of idolatrous worship to which the Isra- elites burned incense. Since Hezekiah became king in 715, this bronze snake was in the temple a t the time of King Uzziah’s death in 740, when Isaiah was given th is vision.

The seraphim constitute a direct allusion to Numbers 21:6, 8. Their purpose and role in the vision is to rem ind Isaiah and read- ers of when the Israelites complained in the desert about God’s great provisions in food and water. By complaining about His pro- vision for them , the people were in reality saying th a t God was not completely devoted, and so they impugned His holiness. The people of Isaiah’s tim e were promoting a society full of social injustice and saying th a t God should hurry up and bring the day of judgm ent th a t He promised (Isa. 5:18-19). In th is way they were saying He

24 Out of respect the seraphim cover their faces with one of their three pairs of wings and their feet with another pair. It is possible that the context may r e t ir e the meaning “pudenda” for feet here (HALOT, s.v. ךגל׳( so that covering the feet means “covering their genitals.” According to Exodus 20:26; 28:42, Israelite priests contrasted with priests in the ancient Near East in that they were not to expose " in worship of Yahweh. The action of the seraphim may he simiiar to this.

25 For interpretation of the seraphim as snakes, see K. R. Joines, “Winged Ser- pents in Isaiah’s Inaugural Yision,” Journal ofBiblical Literature 86 (1967): 410-15; j , M. Roberts, “Solomon’s Jerusalem and Zion Tradition,” in Jerusalem in Bible and Archaeology, ed. A. G. Vaughn and A. E. Killebrew (Atlanta: SBL, 2008), 165- 66, especially H. Cazelles, “La Vocation d’Isaie (Ch. 6) et le Rites Royaux,” in Homenaje a Juan Prado, ed. L. Alvarez Verdes and E. j . Alonso Hernandez (Ma- drid: C.S.I.C., 1975), 89-108, and Othmar Keel, Jahwe-Visionen und Siegelkunst: Eine neue Deutung der Majestätsschilderungen in Jes 6, Ez ل und 10 und Sach 4 (Stuttgarter Bibelstudien 84/85; Stuttgart: Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1977).

See for example images 11 and 127 in Nahman Avigad, Corpus ٠/ West Semitic Stamp Seals, rev. Benjamin Sass (Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Hu- manities, 1997). Image 11 definitely belonged to a royal personage in Israel. See also Benjamin Sass and Christoph Uehlinger, eds.. Studies in the Iconography of Northwest Semitic Inscribed Seals, Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 125 (Fri- bourg/Göttingen: University Press Fribourg/Vandenhoek ه Ruprecht, 1998).

412 B ib l io t h e c a S a c r a / October-December 2 1 3 ه

was not devoted to His justice and so impugned His hoiiness. Thus there is a clear parallel between the people of Isaiah’s time and the people who journeyed through the desert.

Such a m eaning for “holy” is entirely consonant with uses of the word connected to Israel’s journey through the desert. Numbers 20:10-13 is an example: “So Moses took the staff from the Lord’s presence, just as he commanded him. He and Aaron gathered the assembly together in front of the rock and Moses said to them, ‘Lis- ten, you rebels, m ust we bring you w ater out of th is rock?’ Then Moses raised his arm and struck the rock twice with his staff. Wa- ter gushed out, and the community and their livestock drank. But the Lord said to Moses and Aaron, ‘Because you did not tru s t in ٥ ١ enough to honor me as holy in the sight of the Israelites, you will not bring th is community into the land I give them .’ These were the w aters of Meribah, where the Israelites quarreled with the Lord and where he was proved holy among them ” (NHO.

Moses’ and Aaron’s act of disobedience did not trea t Yahweh as h o ly -a s completely devoted to the job of bringing the people out of Egypt and into the Promised Land. Even so, the actions of Yahweh did dem onstrate precisely the fact th a t He was fully consecrated and devoted to His promise and task.

Another example sim ilar to th is is Isaiah 63:10, which recalls th a t during the journey through the wilderness the people of Israel grieved God’s holy spirit. The term “spirit” speaks of someone as he or she is em powered,^ and in the context, it is the messenger of His presence who m ediated God’s care for the people in providing protection from cold and heat through the cloud and also food and water. Yet the people constantly questioned th a t God was devoted to His promise to bring them through and complained about His care and provisions for them.

In the vision of Isaiah, the seraphim cover them selves as a sign of respect and submission, and Isaiah is conscious of his impu- rity. He is not ready to meet God: he is a m an of unclean lips, and he dwells in the m idst of a people of unclean lips; he ought not to see the King, the Lord of Armies. The fear th a t inspires Isaiah is not a fear of holiness. He does not say, “My eyes have seen the Holy One,” but rather, “My eyes have seen the King, Yahweh of Armies.” As in Exodus 3, it is not the holiness of God th a t inspires fear, but the vision of God Himself. In seeing God, the prophet dreads to be

؛؛؛زأ Hans Walter Wolff, Anthropology of the Old Testament (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974), 32-39; James M. Hamilton Jr., God’s Indwelling Presence (Nashville: ^ H Academic, 2006), 39-40; and idem, “God with Men in the Torah,” Westminster Theo- logical Journal 65 (2003): 113-33.

The Meaning of “Holy” in the ©Id Testament 413

crushed by the m ajesty of the Soveretgn King, and ence purified, he does not hesitate to meet God in verse 8.

The fact th a t the word “hoiy” is repeated three tim es is not re- iated to the New Testam ent doctrine of the Trinity; it is simply a form of extreme emphasis in the Hebrew language (cf. Jer. 7:4, “tem ple”; Jer. 22:29, “land”; Ezek. 21:27 [Heb. 32], “ruin”; and Isa. 6:3, 4, “holy”).

W hat does it m ean for Yahweh to he called holy? Hermeneutics requires, surely, above all, a ttention to the context. And the context th a t is determ inative for Isaiah 6 is found in chapter 5, where lit- erary analysis dem onstrates the centrality of verse 16:27

[15] So hum anity is hum bled and m ankind is brought low, and

the eyes of the haughty will be brought low,

[16] but the Lord of Hosts is exalted in justice, and the Holy

God shows him self holy in righteousness.2®

Now in Isaiah 6:3, the repetition of the word three times means th a t God is absolutely holy. “Holy” m eans th a t He is completely devoted and in this a r t i c u la r context, devoted to His justice and righteousness, which characterizes His instruction of the people of Israel in the covenant, showing them not only w hat it m eans to be devoted to Him but also w hat it means to trea t each other in a genuinely hum an way, in short, social justice. The holiness of God is clearly seen in Isaiah 5:16.

Isaiah’s response confirms the understanding th a t the basic m eaning of holiness is being devoted. Holiness is not identical with moral purity, although there is a connection. Holiness should not be defined as moral purity, bu t ra ther purity is the result of being completely devoted to God as defined by the covenant. When he sees the vision of the Lord and hears the chorus of the seraphim, Isaiah cries out, “Woe is me, I am a m an of unclean lips and I dwell in the m idst of a people of unclean lips.” Isaiah does not say th a t he is impure or th a t the people are impure. He says th a t his lips and the lips of the people are impure. This refers to all his words and to all the words of the people. These words stand in contrast to the words of the seraphim. Isaiah and the people cannot participate in

27 See Peter j . Gentry, “Isaiah and Secial Justice,” Journal of Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary 12 (Spring 2013): 1-15.

Transiation that of H. G. M. Williamson, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 1-27 (New York: T & T Clark, 2000), 1:356-57.

414 B ib l io th ec a Sacra / October-December 2013

the worship led by the seraphim. The confession of unclean lips is the reason for the cry, “Woe is me, for I am ruined / 1 am undone.” The verb translated “undone” can also be translated , “Woe is me, for I am silenced .” ج Because his lips and the lips of the covenant وpeople are filled with words challenging God’s justice and impugn- ing His holiness, they are unclean and not able to join in the chorus of worship with the seraphim. They have been silenced and may not join the true worship of God. One can and ought to apply th is to the church and consider w hether the church’s failure to implement God’s righteous standards may silence worship.

An action from one of the seraphim brings about cleansing of his speech and atonem ent. One of the seraphim takes a burning coal from the a lta r using tongs and brings it to Isaiah and causes it to touch his lips. W hat is used to purify Isaiah is exactly what is promised to the people of Judah as a whole in 1:31, 5:5, and 6:13— fire. Thus, the purification of Isaiah is a forecast or harbinger of the coming judgm ent th a t will purify the people as a whole. The atonem ent is also an act of divine grace. The fire comes from the altar. This indicates th a t atonem ent is made by sacrifice and not by achievements on the part of Isaiah.

GOD IS KING

It is im portant to rem ember th a t behind the hum an king in Israel stands the real king, Yahweh Himself. Near the end of Sam uel’s life the people desired a king like the nations surrounding them (1 Sam. 8:5—7). This is a hum an wielding absolute power for the pur- poses of self-aggrandizement. The Lord told Samuel, “It is not you they have rejected, bu t they have rejected me as their king.” When God made the covenant with David in 2 Samuel 7, the purpose of this covenant was for the king to fulfill the earlier plan prescribed by Moses in Deuteronomy 17:14-20. The Israelite king m ust repre- sent the divine King. And th a t is precisely the point in both Isaiah 6:1 and 6:5. Isaiah was given th is vision in the year th a t King Uz- ziah died (v. 1). At such a tim e there would be a change of regime. It m ight be an opportunity for those falsely imprisoned to be re- tried and released under the dawning of a new era of social justice. The title given in verse 5 to Yahweh is not simply a statem ent th a t Yahweh is king. In fact the Lord is referred to in the usual ا م س ب in اwhich the hum an kings in Israel are referred to in 1 and 2 Kings. It

ا؛ة L. K©ehl؛؛r and w. Baumgartner, Hebräisches und Aramäisches Lexikon zum Alten Testament, 3rd ed., edited by ١٧. Baumgartner, j . j . Stamm, and B. Hartmann (Leiden: E. J_ Brill, 1 5 و67-19و )> s . v. 1 .דם□ and III דמם


is like saying, “in the year th a t President Obama finished his se- cend term of office I saw the real president, the Lord of Armies.”

COMMISSION

fsaiah heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?” (Isa. 6:8). Why did the Lord use the plural? Why did He say, “Who will go for us?” W hat does this mean? This does not m ean th a t the faith of Israel was in m any gods, nor is it a rem nant of an old polytheism. It is not even an indication of the Trinity, which is not clearly revealed until the coming of Jesus Christ. I t is an expression th a t would have been understood in the ancient Near East to refer to the fact th a t the heavenly King was speaking in the divine court or council and Isaiah the prophet was given access to th a t council. It indicates th a t Isaiah was an authorized agent who really did know the mind and will of God and was commissioned to bring it to the people.

The commission Isaiah was given seems strange. The people will really hear but not gain insight. They will really see but not know a t all. Their heart, the center of the place where they feel, think, and make decisions will not be granted insight or understanding. It seems crazy to send a person on a mission th a t will fail. It seems cold and hard-hearted to prevent repentance and res- toration. Yahweh is, however, describing for Isaiah not the content of his message but (by way of metonymy) the effect and results of his preaching. It will harden hearts (vv. 9-10), and it will lead to the devastation of the land and the people (vv. 11-12). The reason for th is is clear. The people have already rejected the divine message. The first five chapters of Isaiah detail their arrogance and indifference. The result of Isaiah’s preaching will be to confirm the response they have already made and to bring about the judgm ent th a t has already been predicted. These verses, then, show th a t judgm ent is certain and inevitable and there will be no situation like Jonah’s preaching to Nineveh, where the people repented and God reversed the judgment. These verses are also a rem inder th a t the results of preaching and witness are in God’s hands, and not the m essenger’s.

It is now possible to explain why the encounter opens with a vision of God’s transcendence. Why is it th a t a t the beginning Isai- ah sees Yahweh as exalted and awesome? He sees Yahweh as high and exalted because He is beyond m anipulation. He sees Yahweh sitting on His throne for judgment, and there will be no possibility for influencing th is to anyone’s advantage. It is clear from the out- set th a t no one is in a palsy-walsy situation with th is judge, and no one has the m eans to reach Him and influence His mind on the

416 Bib^ theca $AcaA / October-December 2013

verdict. Ail m ust await His sentence. He is tru iy abeve and beyend everyone. Sentence has been passed on the nation in heaven; Isai- ah’s preaching wiii pu t it into effect on earth.

And yet there is a hope, even though it is extremely slender. This is expressed in verse 13. At first the picture of judgm ent is bleak. After the devastation and death only a ten th will remain. And even th is surviving ten th will be subjected to further judgment. There are a num ber of problems in th is verse and scholars differ greatly on the details . و The general picture, however, is وroughly the same. It may refer to two great trees ju st outside one of the gates of Jerusalem which were burned. All th a t was left was the blackened trunk and branches stripped bare. It seemed th a t the tree was dead and could only be cut down and the stum p taken out. And yet there was life and new growth came. In the Old Tes- tam ent, kings or kingdoms are pictured as majestic, tall, stately trees (for example, Ezek. 31; Dan. 9). The Davidic dynasty seems to be a tree th a t is dead. And yet, somehow, out of th is trunk will spring new life and the promises of God will be fulfilled. We see here the messianic hope of Isaiah. It may be th a t true Israel will be reduced to one faithful person before the rebuilding process begins-

C o n c l u s i o n

This is only the beginning of a fresh study of the word “holy” in the Old Testam ent. Interestingly, if one begins to analyze the counter- part in Greek, the word αγιο؟ , the basic m eaning given is also “devoted.”31 This needs close attention.

Wayne Grudem in his Systematic Theology s ta tes th a t “God’s holiness m eans th a t he is separated from sin and devoted to seek- ing his own honor.”32 F urther reading yields a discussion th a t is traditional, so th a t the use of the word “devoted” in his opening sentence is confused with the notion of separation. Indeed, systematic theologians of the last five hundred years have not been help- ful in explaining w hat Scripture teaches on this topic due to reli- ance on doubtful etymologies and connection of the term with mor-

30 For a thorough treatment of the problems in the text, see Dominique Barthéle- my. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament, 2, Isaïe, Jérémie, Lamentations, Orbis Bihlicus et Orientalis 50/2 (Göttingen: v^denhoeek & Rupreeht, 1986), 41-44.

31 H. G. Liddell, R. Scott, and H. s. Jones, A Greek-English Lexicon, 9th ed. with revised supplement (Oxford: Oxford University Fress, 1996), s.v. άγιο؟ .

32 Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), 203.

The Meaning of “Hoiy” in fhe اه Testament 417

al purity and divine toanscendence. Purity is a result of being holy in the biblical sense, bu t is not the m eaning of the word. Nor is the word connected with divine transcendence, however much this idea is otherwise made plain in Scripture . و و

The basic meaning of the word is “consecrated” or “devoted.” In Scripture it operates within the context of covenant relationships and expresses commitment. The notion of divine transcendence in Isaiah 6 is there to dem onstrate th a t the holiness of Y ahw eh-H is dedication to social justice in th is particular s i^ a tio n —cannot be m anipulated, and judgm ent is certain. That explains the coinci- dence of hohness and divine transcendence in th is text.

One day in the barnyard, the hen and the pig were discussing the difference in m eaning between the words “involvement” and “commitment.” The pig told the hen, “When the farm er comes for breakfast tomorrow, you’re only involved, but I’m committed.” The cross is a revelation of the divine holiness.

33 Although holiness and transeendence are both in the context of Isaiah 6, it is false to assume that they are e،}uivalent. They are connected or related in that the one who is devoted to social justice is the supreme judge and cannot be bribed, bought off, or overpowered.

آلمآورلم؛

Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as otherw ise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the copyright holder(s)’ express written permission. Any use, decompiling, reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be aviolation of copyright law.

This journal is made av^lable to you through the ATLAS collection with permission from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a jouirai typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However, for certain articles, the author ofthe article may maintain the copyright in the article. Please contact the copyright holder($) to request permission to use an article or specific

covered by the fair use provisions ofthe copyright laws or covered آس work for any use by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright infonnation in the journal, if available,

or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder.)$(

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS®) collection contains electronic versions of previously published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association

(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form ofthis electronic document is the property ofthe American.Theological Library Association

Documents

Meaning of Holy in the Old Testament