So I had a sudden realization followed by some thoughts which are probably running too much on a very wooden, literal reading of a passage.
Divine aseity, God is perfect in His own existence, doesn’t need anything. That is what YHWH means, “He is”.
But Phil 2:9-10 says “Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow” – the highest name is not YHWH, but Yeshua: “YHWH saves”.
This not only implies there is a subject for YHWH to verb upon. If it were “YHWH loves” it would not be an issue since the members of the Trinity can eternally love among one another (a capability Allah or other Unitarian views lack).
But “YHWH saves” implies an imperfect subject to be saved. Since YHWH is perfect, the imperfect subject must be something else created. This would then imply that contra aseity, it is objectively higher that YHWH does create.
(There ARE some views that do go so far to say that YHWH must necessarily create, such as Essential Kenosis, the views of Jurgen Moltmann, or the logical conclusion of Divine Simplicity.)
Thoughts?
Leave a Reply