# Is God humble?



## steadfast7 (Sep 18, 2011)

We sang a song at church today called Humble King. What do you brethren think? is God humble? Does Jesus continue to be a servant of humanity?


----------



## Scott1 (Sep 18, 2011)

"Humble" in whose estimation?

"Humble" to what?


----------



## JennyG (Sep 18, 2011)

The song must have been referencing how it says in Philippians that Jesus made himself of no reputation, humbled himself and became obedient unto death. 
Surely in Himself God could not be either humble or the reverse, since he perfectly knows all things, including his own power and glory.


----------



## steadfast7 (Sep 18, 2011)

JennyG said:


> The song must have been referencing how it says in Philippians that Jesus made himself of no reputation, humbled himself and became obedient unto death.
> Surely in Himself God could not be either humble or the reverse, since he perfectly knows all things, including his own power and glory.


 so my question is whether Jesus continues to have that quality about him? Do we continue to worship him for his humility?


Scott1 said:


> "Humble" in whose estimation?


 humility is considered a great virtue. Does God have it?


----------



## Scott1 (Sep 18, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> Quote Originally Posted by Scott1 View Post
> "Humble" in whose estimation?
> humility is considered a great virtue. Does God have it?



How do you define humility?

A great virtue in whose eyes?

Who assesses whether God "has" it?


----------



## steadfast7 (Sep 18, 2011)

Scott1 said:


> steadfast7 said:
> 
> 
> > Quote Originally Posted by Scott1 View Post
> ...


 in the words of the song: 
You are the God of the broken
The friend of the weak
You wash the feet of the weary
Embrace the ones in need
And I want to be like you Jesus
To have this heart in me
You are the God of the humble
You are the humble King
...

so, that God would be concerned with the downcast, the oppressed, the orphan, widow, alien, etc seems to suggest that God is this type of God who is "humble". The simplest definition would be the lowering of oneself before another. We know that Jesus was humble, that much is explicit in scripture, but my question this attribute was only touching his humanity, or was it intrinsic to the Godhead? 

It's not as if any of us is able to assess any of God's attributes if it were not told to us, or suggested, in Scripture. Many people seem to read humility in God.


----------



## MW (Sep 18, 2011)

Psalm 113:5, 6. "Who is like unto the Lord our God, who dwelleth on high, who humbleth himself to behold the things that are in heaven, and in the earth."

Praise God for His dignified humility! And thanks be to God for an infallible Psalter which enables the worshipper to proclaim His wonders and virtues with the full assurance of faith.


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Sep 18, 2011)

Dennis:

You are asking, I believe, a very important question, one that should not simply be dismissed or brushed aside.

I appreciate, and agree, with Matthew's (customarily insightful) comment.

Let me add: Some reformed teachers have taught the "selfishness of God," arguing that, unlike us, it is fitting that God should not abase Himself and should, in contrast, take unto Himself all glory, honor, and praise. Now this takes truth--that God magnifies His own name and that we are to glorify God (and that everything ultimately does)--and, I fear, unintentionally blackens God's name, or has the potential to do so at least. I have heard such theologians go on at length that it is right for God to glorify Himself and to require us to do the same--to be, as they put it, "selfish." I do not think that this is quite the right way to conceive it and is fraught with likely misunderstanding.

Rather than make God sound self-obssessed in some mono-maniacal way, we ought to think of God as a communion of persons who delights in loving and honoring the other and whose love, as it were, overflows so that God does not, if I may put it this way, wish to keep such to Himself but delights to pour out His love, and pour out Himself, in creating. The Blessed Holy Undivided Trinity answers to the charge of any self-obssession (God being a communion of love in which each one delights in the other and is mutually involved in the work of the other--perichoresis). 

And this God--jealous as He is for His glory--loves a people even after Adam's sin and is so loving and self-giving (in the covenant of redemption and the covenant of grace) that He is willing to sacrifice Himself in the most unspeakable of ways to save a people who deserve eternal punishment. 

So though humility for God does not mean, in some senses, what it means for us--abasement as a creature and further abasement as a sinful creature; it does mean self-giving and love of the other to the fullest. I find the song that you quoted to be orthodox and proper in its expression(s).

Peace,
Alan


----------



## steadfast7 (Sep 18, 2011)

Thanks for the post Alan. 
Now, could this not be considered a chink in our Reformed armour and something that Arminians can now use in defense of their position? See, they argue that it is the glory of God to be _essentially_ giving in his nature. In other words, "God is most glorified when he is most interested in others." The recent resurgence of Edwards championed by Piper of God's essential self-centeredness is Reformed theology's way of making the lines very sharp and clear and safeguarding against God as an idolater (putting man above all things). It does a good job of ensuring that God's love is ultimately self-reflexive; that everything he does he does for his own personal pleasure and glory.


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Sep 19, 2011)

Dennis:

God is essentially giving in His nature, because He is essentially loving (and loving is giving).

Note, however, that I said that that such love is _essentially_ expressed in the Blessed Holy Undivided Trinity. Each of the persons loves and delights in the other. This loving and glorying is fulfilled in the _opera ad intra_ and it is not required of God that He is in his Trinitatarian being express this in the _opera ad extra_. It is fitting that He do so, but not necessary that He do so. There is no external necessity for God, in other words, to create the world, but it is evidently fitting--in keeping with His divine nature--to do so. 

He alone remains necessary being and all else is contingent upon His decrees and His good pleasure. Reformed theologians who have developed this in terms of self-centeredness or "godly selfishness" have in my read of them done so in an insufficiently Trinitarian way. This in no way disturbs the Romans 9 reality that He permits evil into this world both to show His mercy and grace in a way that it would not be seen demonstrated otherwise, and to manifest His wrath and justice, with respect to sin, in a way otherwise not seen. And even this does not make evil necessary but the occasion for the fuller demonstration of his attributes, showing Him to be such a great and good God that not only does evil not defeat Him but He uses evil to bring about the greatest good. 

I very specifically did not put it in terms of God being the most glorified when the most interested in others. Rather, inter-Trinitarian love needs nothing outside of itself, but nonetheless, in the economy of things, God delights to bring a people into that love. I think that this is a better way of conceiving matters theologically than by speaking of God in provocative ways that, while well-meaning, and seeking to preserve God's glory, actually might sell short His matchless love and, as your song has it, humility of a sort.

Peace,
Alan


----------



## steadfast7 (Sep 19, 2011)

Excellent insights Alan! Definitely something to meditate more on and refine my reading of Piper et al. Thanks!


----------



## bookslover (Sep 19, 2011)

Here's Matthew Henry on God being humble, from his commentary on Psalm 113.5-6:

_God is said to exalt Himself and to humble Himself. Both are His own act and deed. As He is self-existent, so He is both the fountain of His own honor and the spring of His own grace...Considering the infinite perfection, sufficiency, and felicity of the divine nature, it must be acknowledged as an act of wonderful condescension that God is pleased to take into the thoughts of His eternal counsel and into the hand of His universal providence both the armies of heaven and the inhabitants of the earth (Daniel 4.35). Even in this dominion, He humbles Himself. It is condescension in Him to behold the things of heaven, to support the beings, direct the motions, and accept the praises and services of the angels themselves, for He needs them not nor is benefited by them. Much more is it condescension in Him to behold the things that are in the earth, to visit the sons of men, and regard them, to order and overrule their affairs, and to take notice of what they say and do, that He may fill the earth with His goodness, and so set us an example of stooping to do good, of taking notice of, and concerning ourselves about our inferiors. If it be such condescension for God to behold things in heaven and earth, what an amazing condescension was it for the Son of God to come from heaven to earth and take our nature upon Him, that He might seek and save those that were lost! Herein, indeed, He humbled Himself._


----------



## Pergamum (Sep 19, 2011)

God certainly cannot ever be arrogant for if He demands that we all glorify Him and praise Him alone as the highest Being, then he is not asking us to do anything less than is due him. 

Excellent question Dennis. Thanks Alan for your answers.


----------



## Scott1 (Sep 19, 2011)

One of the difficulties is the creature measuring the Creator according to the creature's notions of "humility."

Christ had two natures, subsumed in His Divine nature. His human nature condescended to human sufferings and limitations voluntarily. But your original question was is God humble, not was Christ, (in His human nature) humble?

Yet, when we try to speak of the Holy Trinity as being "humble" in our own (creature) estimation, we are bringing a Holy, infinite God down to our own appraisal. And how does the creature judge it's Creator? 

It's like asking, "Is God fair?"

Does the Creature decide if His Creator is "fair?"

Does the Creature judge His Creator to be "unfair"?

The question betrays presuppositions. And without defining its subjective terms, almost has no meaning.


----------



## steadfast7 (Sep 19, 2011)

Scott1 said:


> One of the difficulties is the creature measuring the Creator according to the creature's notions of "humility."


 Agreed, defining humility in the case of God is not easy because humility is a relational term that begs the question, "humble, but in relation to what?" In God's case we cannot compare him with us because the distance is simply too far, but we can say that there is humility in the Triune Godhead. The members are mutually exalting one another, and we are able to see this even in Scripture. So we can say that there is something essential to the character of God where he delights in turning his eyes onto another. Whether this means he _necessarily_ does this in our case? As Alan mentioned, it is fitting, but not necessary. 

When we see him close to the contrite, lowly, and oppressed, is this flowing from his "humility", or because he knows these groups are already humble more likely to pay him the proper honour?


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Sep 19, 2011)

Scott:

The question that you raise with respect to our theological language about God is pervasive, not limited to the question of "Is God humble?"

It's no different than speaking about the goodness of God, the justice of God, or the love of God, for that matter. This is because our knowledge of God is not univocal but analogical. This means that in every case there will be like and unlike between God and us in the definition of communicable attributes. So we always have to ask about meaning and definition.

If this question is suspect in some way then so are all theological questions. It seems to me one of the better questions that I've seen here, because so much that we think about humility--and that properly pertains to us with respect to humility--would not pertain to humility with respect to God: yet there is properly some sense in which God is said to be marked by humility. 

We've here on the PB in this discussion been able to explore in what sense God is humble. And that seems to me to be a good thing. Not something meaningless.

We certainly can carry on these discussions, and do our theology, as if we are putting God under the microscope. The science of theology can be carried on, in other words, as if God is an object to be studied. This must be avoided and we must approach all our discussion of God with reverence, with fear and trembling. He does not stand before us to be judged by us but we before Him to be judged of Him. 

We can do theology, however: humbly, carefully, patiently, thoughtfully, and, above all, biblically. I have had the kind of concern, Scott, that I think you have here, with other questions that I have seen raised on PB. I personally did not have concerns with this one. 

Peace,
Alan


----------



## Scott1 (Sep 19, 2011)

Well said, Reverend Strange. 

In addition to the creature/Creator distinction, "humility" needs to be defined for a discussion like this to have meaning, as well as whether we are talking about the human or divine natures of our Lord, whether of the Trinity, or the Father alone.

Important topics, but need to be approached carefully, and as you say, "with reverence, with fear and trembling."


----------

