Who Are You Worshipping?
Discovering the True God Through Scripture
Imagine you’re married to someone who loves steak. You know this about them—it’s part of who they are. But one day, you decide to ignore that and start serving them vegetarian meals exclusively, pretending they’re someone they’re not. How long do you think that relationship would last? Not very long, right? Because love and respect in any relationship depend on knowing and honoring the true identity of the other person.
The same principle applies to our relationship with God. If we misunderstand or misrepresent who He is, our connection with Him suffers. And when we disagree with others about God’s core identity, it can strain our relationships with them as well. Today, I want to explore two critical questions: What is the relevance of core identity in relationships? And how do we maintain relationships with those who hold fundamentally different understandings of that core identity? These questions strike at the heart of human connection—both with each other and with God—and they’re especially pertinent when we consider the tension between Reformed Theology and non-Reformed perspectives.
As a man shaped by Jewish tradition and ignited by faith in Yeshua (Jesus), I see the Hebrew Scriptures as a rich tapestry pointing to their fulfillment in Him. My goal is to weave together sound logic, trusted hermeneutical principles, and a profound understanding of these ancient texts to illuminate how they find their culmination in Yeshua—bridging the old and the new with clarity and grace.
The Centrality of Core Identity
Core identity is the unchanging essence of who someone is—their character, values, beliefs, and nature. It’s the bedrock upon which every relationship is built. In human terms, think of a close friend or spouse: knowing their deepest desires and honoring their true self fosters trust and intimacy. Misrepresenting or ignoring that identity fractures the bond because love requires authenticity.
Scripture reveals this principle in our relationship with God. The Hebrew texts describe Him as loving, just, wise, and sovereign. “He who does not love does not know God, for God is love” (1 John 4:8)1. “Righteousness and justice are the foundation of Your throne” (Psalm 89:14). “For the Lord gives wisdom” (Proverbs 2:6). “The Lord has established His throne in heaven, and His kingdom rules over all” (Psalm 103:19). These attributes aren’t abstract; they define how we approach Him as the awe-inspiring Creator and Sustainer of all.
Yet, how we understand God’s core identity shapes everything—our worship, our prayers, and our relationships with others. Enter the theological divide: Reformed Theology, rooted in the doctrines of grace (TULIP: Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, Perseverance of the Saints), emphasizes God’s absolute sovereignty. Non-Reformed perspectives often highlight His love and human responsibility, seeing salvation as a cooperative act. These aren’t mere differences of opinion; they reflect fundamentally different portraits of God’s character. If core identity drives relational transactions, then such a divergence inevitably impacts how we connect with Him and with each other.
The Tension of Theological Differences
This tension isn’t theoretical—it’s personal. I’ve often sensed a subtle condescension from some Reformed adherents, an undertone that those outside their framework haven’t grasped the “true” God. It can feel demeaning, fostering an elitism that clashes with the humility Scripture demands: “Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love” (Ephesians 4:2). Reformed Theology’s logical rigor—while admirable—sometimes confines God to a system, risking the loss of wonder. “For My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways,” declares the Lord (Isaiah 55:8-9). Shouldn’t our encounter with the divine leave room for awe?
Consider Total Depravity, which asserts that humanity is wholly corrupt apart from God’s grace. Yes, “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23), but does this mean every person is irredeemably wicked? When I observe human nature—love between parents and children, kindness among strangers—I see complexity. Even those outside the faith reflect God’s image (Genesis 1:27), displaying qualities that challenge a stark view of depravity. This suggests a God who engages His creation with both justice and mercy, not a rigid determinism.
Historically, rigid systems—whether Marxism or tyrannical regimes—divide the “elect” from the “condemned.” TULIP’s focus on election and limited atonement can, when misapplied, echo this hierarchy. Yet, Scripture shows God pursuing all people: “The Lord is… not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance” (2 Peter 3:9). His identity isn’t split; He is one—unchanging in love and sovereignty (Malachi 3:6).
Theological Lenses and Scriptural Divergence
Let’s be clear: every denomination—Reformed Theology included—hinges on a view of God that, to some degree, varies from the fullness of Scripture. These frameworks, while rooted in a desire to understand God, often emphasize certain attributes over others, crafting a portrait that aligns more with human logic than divine mystery. As a student of the Hebrew Scriptures and a follower of Yeshua, I see this as a subtle but profound drift—one we must confront if we’re to know God as He truly is.
Reformed Theology: Sovereignty Over All Else
Reformed Theology, with its TULIP framework, elevates God’s sovereignty as the defining lens. Total Depravity paints humanity as utterly incapable, devoid of any good apart from divine intervention. “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked” (Jeremiah 17:9) is a cornerstone text, yet it’s paired with an interpretation that often overlooks Genesis 1:27—humanity made in God’s image, a reflection of His goodness even after the Fall. Unconditional Election and Limited Atonement further assert that God unilaterally chooses some for salvation, while others are passed over. Romans 9:15—“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy”—is cited, but what of 1 Timothy 2:4, where God “desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth”? Irresistible Grace and Perseverance of the Saints complete the system, suggesting a God whose will overrides human response, rooted in Ephesians 1:11—“the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will.”
This view isn’t without merit—God’s sovereignty is undeniable (Psalm 115:3). But it risks flattening His character. Scripture reveals a God who mourns over sin (Genesis 6:6), pleads with His people (Ezekiel 33:11—“I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live”), and offers salvation universally (John 3:16). Reformed Theology’s emphasis on election can obscure this relational heart, reducing God to a cosmic chessmaster rather than a Father who seeks His children. The Hebrew concept of chesed—covenant love—permeates the Torah, yet TULIP’s determinism struggles to reconcile this with a God who limits His atonement.
Arminianism: Human Freedom Over Divine Initiative
On the other side, Arminianism—common among non-Reformed denominations—prioritizes human responsibility and God’s love. It counters Total Depravity with prevenient grace, suggesting all receive enough grace to respond (Titus 2:11—“the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men”). It rejects election as unconditional, pointing to 2 Peter 3:9 and God’s desire for all to repent. Atonement is unlimited (1 John 2:2—“He is the propitiation… for the whole world”), and grace can be resisted (Hebrews 10:29—“trampled the Son of God underfoot”). Perseverance isn’t guaranteed—believers can fall away (Hebrews 6:4-6).
This aligns with God’s relational nature—He calls Israel to choose (Deuteronomy 30:19—“I have set before you life and death… therefore choose life”) and Yeshua to invite (Matthew 11:28—“Come to Me”). But it risks overemphasizing human agency, potentially diminishing God’s sovereignty. If “salvation belongs to the Lord” (Psalm 3:8), can we truly initiate it? Arminianism’s focus on free will can paint a God who waits rather than pursues, clashing with texts like Psalm 139:16—“Your eyes saw my substance… all my days were written.”
Catholicism: Tradition Over Textual Primacy
Roman Catholicism adds another layer, blending Scripture with tradition. God’s identity is mediated through the Church—His sovereignty exercised via papal authority (Matthew 16:18—“on this rock I will build My church”), His love through sacraments. Human cooperation with grace is central (James 2:24—“a man is justified by works and not by faith alone”), and atonement is universal yet accessed through prescribed means. This reflects Jewish tradition’s emphasis on community and ritual (e.g., Leviticus’ sacrificial system), but it diverges when tradition supersedes Scripture. Sola Scriptura is sidelined—where does “purgatory” appear in the Tanakh or New Testament? God’s direct accessibility (Hebrews 4:16—“approach the throne of grace with confidence”) is filtered through human constructs.
Pentecostalism: Experience Over Consistency
Pentecostalism exalts God’s immediacy—His Spirit moves now (Acts 2:17—“I will pour out My Spirit on all flesh”). Love and power dominate, often through miracles and tongues (1 Corinthians 12:10). This echoes the Hebrew prophets’ encounters (e.g., Elijah’s fire, 1 Kings 18:38), but it can prioritize experience over Scripture’s broader narrative. If God is unchanging (Malachi 3:6), why do some Pentecostal teachings—like prosperity gospel—suggest He bends to human demands? The focus on present action can obscure His eternal justice and holiness (Isaiah 6:3—“Holy, holy, holy”).
The Common Thread: Human Filters
Each framework—Reformed, Arminian, Catholic, Pentecostal—claims scriptural grounding, yet each hinges on a selective lens. Reformed Theology exalts sovereignty, sidelining relational love. Arminianism lifts freedom, softening divine initiative. Catholicism adds tradition, veiling direct revelation. Pentecostalism chases experience, risking inconsistency. All reflect truths—God is sovereign, loving, accessible, powerful—but all fall short of His fullness. “The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us” (Deuteronomy 29:29). We grasp what’s revealed, but our systems impose what’s secret, bending God to fit human molds.
Scripture resists this. God’s identity is singular: “I am the Lord, I do not change” (Malachi 3:6). He’s “merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love” (Exodus 34:6), yet “a consuming fire” (Deuteronomy 4:24). He elects (Isaiah 42:1—“My Elect One”) and invites (Isaiah 55:1—“Come, everyone who thirsts”). Yeshua embodies this unity—fully sovereign (Colossians 1:17—“in Him all things consist”), fully relational (John 15:15—“I have called you friends”). Denominations diverge not because Scripture is unclear, but because we are finite, shaping God to our comfort.
A Biblical Case: Pharaoh’s Heart
Let’s examine Pharaoh’s story in Exodus 7-14, often cited to support divine determinism. Reformed thinkers point to “I will harden Pharaoh’s heart” (Exodus 7:3) as proof of God’s unilateral control. But the text tells a fuller story. Pharaoh hardens his own heart first (Exodus 8:15, 8:32) before God confirms it (Exodus 9:12). As a Jewish scholar, I see this through the lens of midrash—God, knowing Pharaoh’s pride, sends plagues that expose his stubbornness, working through his choices. This isn’t coercion; it’s a dance of sovereignty and responsibility.
Yeshua fulfills this pattern. The Hebrew Scriptures promise a Messiah who embodies God’s character: “He will not judge by what He sees with His eyes… but with righteousness He will judge” (Isaiah 11:3-4). In Him, we see sovereignty and love united—choosing to die for all (John 3:16), yet calling each to respond (John 6:44). Pharaoh’s story foreshadows this: God’s actions reveal His justice, but human response matters.
John 8:19—A Convicting Call to Know the True God
Now, let’s turn to a moment that cuts to the core—John 8:19. Yeshua stands before the Pharisees and delivers a piercing rebuke: “You know neither Me nor My Father. If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also.” These words aren’t gentle; they’re a thunderclap, a convicting indictment of those who claim to know God yet miss Him entirely. The Pharisees mastered the Torah, yet Yeshua exposes their blindness: they’ve crafted a God of their own making, a shadow of the true One standing before them.
This isn’t just historical—it’s a warning. Do we truly know God, or have we settled for a caricature shaped by our denominations? The Pharisees’ error was clinging to a system over the living Word. “The Word became flesh” (John 1:14)—Yeshua, the Torah incarnate, the exact image of the Father (Hebrews 1:3). To know Him is to know God; to miss Him is to miss everything. If our Reformed, Arminian, or other lenses obscure Yeshua, we stand condemned by our own frameworks. “If you had known Me…”—those words should haunt us. Are we defending doctrines or bowing before the Messiah?
Maintaining Relationships Across the Divide: A Loving Yet Firm Warning
So, how do we relate to those who see God differently? If I view Him as loving and relational, while another sees Him as sovereign and electing, are we truly worshiping the same God? It’s a question we can’t dodge. When our perceptions of His core identity diverge—like imagining a spouse as someone they’re not—intimacy erodes, and we risk drifting into dangerous territory. Yes, “we see through a glass, darkly” (1 Corinthians 13:12), and none of us grasp God fully. But this humility must never become an excuse to tolerate distortions of His truth. Scripture calls us to stand firm: “Contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 1:3). We must love deeply, yet we cannot compromise the core of what the Bible reveals about who God is.
Paul’s warning rings clear: “Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you?… I follow Christ” (1 Corinthians 1:12-13). When we elevate human doctrines—Reformed or otherwise—above Scripture, we fracture the body and obscure the God we claim to worship. Love compels us to reach across divides, but firmness demands we reject what contradicts His Word. Consider these examples:
Denying Yeshua’s Deity: Some claim He’s merely a prophet or teacher, not God incarnate. Yet John 1:1 declares, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” To strip Him of divinity guts the gospel—salvation hinges on His deity (Colossians 2:9).
Universalism’s False Comfort: Others insist all are saved, regardless of faith, citing God’s love (1 John 4:8). But Jesus warns, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me” (John 14:6). Overlooking this exclusivity denies the cross’s necessity (Acts 4:12).
Prosperity’s Distorted God: Some preach a God who guarantees wealth and health, twisting verses like John 10:10 (“I have come that they may have life… abundantly”). Yet Scripture exalts suffering for righteousness (2 Timothy 3:12) and treasures in heaven (Matthew 6:20), not earthly gain.
These aren’t minor quibbles—they strike at God’s identity. A God without justice isn’t the Holy One of Isaiah 6:3. A Savior without exclusivity isn’t the Messiah of Isaiah 53. We must love those who differ, “speaking the truth in love” (Ephesians 4:15), but we cannot pretend all views align with Scripture. John 8:19 sharpens the stakes: “You know neither Me nor My Father.” Unity isn’t agreeing on every system—it’s knowing the same Yeshua, the true God revealed in His Word.
So how do we walk this out practically, with both love and firmness?
Anchor in Truth: Share non-negotiables—the Messiah’s deity, salvation by grace (Ephesians 2:8-9)—and let Scripture, not sentiment, define them.
Warn with Grace: Call out error humbly, as Paul did, “lest anyone should deceive you with persuasive words” (Colossians 2:4), always aiming to restore.
Listen to Correct: Hear others out, but test everything against God’s Word (1 Thessalonians 5:21), correcting gently yet firmly (2 Timothy 2:25).
Stand Together on Scripture: Study the Bible directly, not systems, heeding “Let God be true, and every man a liar” (Romans 3:4).
We love people by pointing them to truth, not by overlooking lies. “If we endure, we shall also reign with Him; if we deny Him, He also will deny us” (2 Timothy 2:12). The cost of compromise is too high—both for us and those we care about.
Yeshua: The Fulfillment of God’s Identity
The Hebrew Scriptures point to Yeshua as God’s fullness. “The Lord said to my Lord, ‘Sit at My right hand’” (Psalm 110:1)—a prophecy Yeshua claims (Matthew 22:44). Isaiah’s Suffering Servant (Isaiah 53:5) echoes in His cross (1 Peter 2:24). He is “the exact representation of [God’s] being” (Hebrews 1:3), uniting sovereignty and love beyond human systems.
A Call to Seek Him
Core identity matters—it shapes how we live. John 8:19 leaves no room for complacency: to miss Yeshua is to miss God. Read the Bible yourself. Test every framework against Scripture and the world—love, kindness, even among the “unsaved.” Seek Him with awe, leaving room for mystery. Reflect: How does your view of God shape your relationships? What might change if you met Yeshua afresh? Take up the Tanakh and New Testament—discover the Messiah who bridges every divide.
The Gospel Unfolded: Yeshua’s Love Completes the Story
The Full Story: How Yeshua Fulfills God’s Promise to Abraham and Calls Us to Walk in His Steps
If you found this article insightful or helpful in your walk with Yeshua, please share it with others seeking biblical truth. Together, let’s grow in covenant faithfulness. Shalom!
It seems a failure that has existed since Adam and Eve had to leave the Garden. Human filters placed on God that can never match up.
I run, as you know, to 1 John, which you have put here. And the funny thing is that I don't really think we are defined by defining God correctly, but acting as he does and he does the defining. Here sits the catch missed in Religion. What I speak of is what God says about us rather than the other way around. After all, we do get it wrong so often, don't we? 45,000 Denominations stand as a testament to this.
But it is the TRAITS of God and the TRAITS of the enemy that seem to narrow things down a bit. Pride, lies, twisting the truth are the friends of religion - perhaps a harsh take but quite accurate and you give perfect examples. The human lens is just that set of mirrored boxes everyone wears on their head except for their chosen leader, right? They see the reflection they want to in their chosen teacher, then congratulate him on his reflection. And he can smile and say he saw his approval shining throughout the entire congregation. No wonder he thinks he is right.
What a mess. (I think I say that a lot LOL)
But I do, I go back and forth searching for the balance. And if pride or false humility is a constant companion of those in conversation (you said subtle condemnation - I say it isn't so subtle) one must evaluate 2 Timothy 3:1-9 and ask the Lord when to throw it up to His capable hands to handle it.
David has measured out 10 years as an estimate to see striking changes in this world. I have to agree because the body that calls itself the church has not just lost it moorings, its hold to morality is even slipping. Religion is defined now rather than God because God is self. There will be a time that the Lord says, "be a witness of that sin" as he says in his word and leave it at that. They are full of so much knowledge stating their sin is an obvious challenge to repentance. Guess I need to study more of that.
I sure am grateful I have a few to speak truth with. Sergio, I can't say it enough, thanks! David too, I know you read my comments, and I love you so very much. You are a dear brother!
More than all of that I am so grateful that my Lord is ever patient to attend to all my humanity - after all, he is the greatest promise keeper.
Extremely well done, although you come up short by not saying that the problem in all cases is doctrine. Doctrine is Man's distillation of scripture—it is always less, from the very beginning, than Scripture itself. Doctrine is used to define denominations. I tend to think less of denominations than I do of doctrine. We need to ask the Holy Spirit to teach us and guide us while we study the Bible in many versions. We don't need or want commentaries. I do not care what Man has to say. I want to know what the Lord has to say.
I believe the solution is two-fold. 1: The Biblical requirement of being reborn of God. 2: The requirement that we know the Lord. That is know, ginosko, an intimate relationship as we see in the plan for marriage. In fact, the Greek word is slang for sex. I believe the Hebrew word for know is also.
We are betrothed to Yeshua Messiah. We are in the courtship stage where both parties strive to know each other intimately. This requires conversation.
I have a newsletter on my site called "Hearing Jesus now": https://biblicalreality.substack.com/s/hearing-jesus-is-necessary It has seven articles so far about practical steps to take to build a verifiable conversation with the Lord in your mind.
Yeshua will guide you to where He wants you to fellowship. He knows where you can be useful to Him.
I don't know what it means that the fellowship He has led me to is Substack.
But the days of doctrines and denominations are almost over. Soon, the shofar will blow. Jesus will call us, and we will know the Truth completely. But the key until then is to determine where the Lord wants you to be.