Directory | Site Map | Apples of Gold A. B. Davidson

Andrew Bruce Davidson (1831-1892) was an evangelical Scotsman and eventually professor of Hebrew and Old Testament Exegesis at New College (United Free Church Seminary) in Edinburgh, Scotland. He was one of the primary men responsible for introducing the discipline of "Old Testament theology" to English and American theologians. Though he was hesitant about accepting every conclusion of contemporary OT scholarship regarding the history of Israel and the composition of the Bible, he was convinced of the need to study Scripture from an historical viewpoint. And he was not afraid of letting the Text speak for itself, at times in contradistinction to established theological tradition. The following quotes are from: The Theology of the Old Testament (edited by S. D. F. Salmond; Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1904). This edition was assembled after Davidson’s death from his notes; consequently it contains spelling inconsistencies involving the Name of God. On Monotheism The history of the people of God enables us to observe how these great thoughts of what God was rose like stars, one in succession to another, upon their horizon; thoughts which we, who have inherited * the mental riches of these great men, now are able to unite together into one great constellation and call it God. The religion of Israel was practical, not speculative; and while a practical Monotheism prevailed, and gave rise to all that profound religious life which we see in such men as Moses and Samuel and David and the prophets, it perhaps needed that internal conflict which arose through the slowness of the popular mind, and the degradation of the popular morals arising from absorbing the native Canaanite, to bring into speculative clearness the doctrines of Monotheism and Spirituality. The whole history of Israel is filled with this internal conflict between the strict worshippers of Jahweh and those who showed a leaning to other gods. (62-63) On the word Elohim The word Elohim is a plural, and probably a plural of that sort called the plural of majesty or eminence, more * accurately the plural of fulness or greatness. It is common in the East to use the plural to express the idea of the singular in an intensified form.... The singular of Elohim means probably strength, power, or might, and the plural merely intensifies this idea—the might par excellence, or the plentitude of might, is God. The name is common to Israel with most of the Shemitic peoples. (40-41) All Shemitic languages use the plural as a means of heightening the idea of the singular; the precise kind of heightening has to be inferred from the word. Thus water—mayim—is plural, from the fluidity and multiplicity of its part; the heavens—shamayim—from their extension.... And of this kind probably is the plural Elohim—a plural not numerical, but simply enhancive of the idea of might. (99) In contrast to man, angels belong to the class of Elohim. . . . It might be an interesting question how the same name Elohim came to designate God and this class of beings. Perhaps we should be satisfied with the general explanation, that the name, meaning 'powers,' is applied from the standpoint of men to all that is above man, to the region lying above him. Though the same name is given, the two are never confounded in Scripture. (293, 294) These Elohim, or sons of Elohim, form the council of Jehovah. They surround Him, and minister to Him. He and they are Elohim. And it is from this point of view that some explain the the use of the plural in such passages as "Let us make man" (Gen. i.26); "Let us go down and there confound their languages" (Gen xi.7). (295) [Top] The Trinity or the Council? We hear it said sometimes in regard to such passages as that in Gen. 1.26: "Let us make man"; or Isa. vi.8: "Who will go for us?"—that there is there a vague or obscure intimation of the doctrine of the Trinity. Now this is unfortunate language.... There is no vagueness or obscurity in either of the passages referred to. If God, who speaks in these passages, uses the word us of Himself, there is a perfectly clear statement to the effect that the Godhead is a plurality—whether that plurality be a duality, or a trinity, or some other number is spoken of. But so far the sense has no vagueness or obscurity. The point, however, is whether the Divine speaker uses the word us of Himself, i.e. of the Godhead alone, or whether He does not rather include others, e.g., His heavenly council along with Him. The opinion of most expositors is to the latter effect. (129) [See the related The Heavenly Council in the Hebrew Bible and New Testament.] [Top] On the Spirit of God The question whether the Old Testament teaches the personality of the Spirit of God is not one that should be raised apart from the other—What is its conception of the Spirit of God?.... The sphere of the Old Testament is the practical religious sphere, out which it never wanders into the sphere of ontology. The whole question is the question of the relation of a living, active, moral, personal God to the world and men. It askes as little what the essence of God is as it asks what the essence of man is. (115) It becomes an interesting question how Jehovah exercises His rule in Israel, and His guidance of it in all the spheres of its life. There are two ways in which the Old Testament conceives this to be done. First, by external manifestation of Himself to men, and the giving of commands. This external manifestation of Himself is called the Angel of the Lord (malakh YHVH). This Angel is not a created Angel—He is Jehovah Himself in the form of manifestation. Hence He is identical with Jehovah, although also in a certain sense different.... Second, by God’s Spirit. As Jehovah’s operations in ruling His people were chiefly through men, they are regarded as the operations of His Spirit. The “Spirit of Jehovah” is Jehovah Himself within men, as the “Angel of Jehovah” is Jehovah Himself without men. (116) Further, the idea of the Spirit of God, like other ideas of God, is probably formed upon the idea of the spirit of man. The spirit of man is not something distinct from man, but is man. The thinking, willing life, within man, manifesting itself in influences on what is without, is his spirit. So the fulness of God, active, effectual on that which is without, is His Spirit.... It is His nature, not conceived, however, as substance or cause, but as moral, personal life. (116, 117) Is the Spirit of God numerically another, distinct from God in the Old Testament? This question is exceedingly difficult to answer. Of course, the language used, whether of the Spirit of God...might be used, and no doubt is used now, to express the conception of the Spirit as a distinct person. But it is doubtful if any Old Testament passage can be found which requires this sense; and it is doubtful if any passage...has this sense, if by the sense of the Old Testament we mean the sense intended by the writers of the Old Testament. (127) [See the related From holy spirit to Holy Ghost.] [Top] On life and the future 'Life' is what we so call; it is the existence of the complete personality, in its unity, body and soul.... But in the Old Testament there is always an additional element. What might be called the centre of gravity of life not physical, but moral or religious. Man was created a living person, in a particular relation to God; and this relation to God would have maintained him in the condition of a living person.... [Life], as the Old Testament uses the term, is what we name life, with the addition of the fellowship of God. (503) To die was to become separate from God; to be dead was to continue in this state of separation. This is the meaning of death in the Old Testament.... Death was separation from God, but the very idea of a covenant is union with God, and union with God is 'life.' (520) In the perfect state of God's people, when the covenant should be fully realised, when Jehovah should be truly their God and they His people, the saints would not be translated into heaven to be with God, but He would come down to earth and abide among them.... In other words, what we call, and what is to us, heaven, the Israelite called earth, when the Lord had come to dwell in His fulness among men; there was no translation into another sphere. There were not two worlds, but one. (507) Men cannot live unless they have some knowledge of what the end of life shall be. They cannot strive unless a goal be set before them, nor run for the prize unless there be a mark. Prophecy was an absolute necessity in a redemptive history. (104) [Top]

Directory | Site Map | Explanation Author-Editor | Book Reviews | Apples of Gold (Quotes) hebrew-streams.org