FEAR AND TREMBLING IN THE BIBLE

 Some of you who are far more knowledgeable in philosophical matters than myself may recognize this expression as the title of a book by Soren Kierkegaard published in 1843. This philosophical treatise deals with the situation of Abraham when he was commanded to kill his only son. But you may not be aware that the expression comes from the Bible, where it appears no less than four times.

Louw states, “Throughout the Bible, references to fear occur in nonreligious as well as in religious contexts, with two distinct meanings. The first involves emotional distress and alarm with intense concern for impending danger or evil...The other area of meaning relates to allegiance to and regard for deity...The phrase 'fear and trembling' expresses the same two areas of meaning denoted by fear. In Psalm 55.5 and Mark 5.33, the phrase expresses great emotional distress, while in Psalm 2.11 and Philippians 2.12 the phrase signifies religious devotion.”

Hear are some comments from scholars on the exact meaning of this recurring phrase as it appears in those four contexts:

Psalm 2:11-12

Jacobson translates these verses as “Serve the LORD in fear! In trembling kiss his feet! Lest he be angry and you perish in the way, for his anger burns quickly.” He comments: “This entire [last] colon is problematic. Literally, the phrase might read: 'Rejoice in trembling! Kiss the son.” Not only is 'rejoice with trembling' incoherent, but the phrase nassequ bar is odd. If bar means 'son,' then why does the Aramaic word appear here when the normal Hebrew word for son, ben, has already occurred?...Many commentators emend the text to read bir'ada nassequ beraglayu, 'in trembling kiss his feet.” The solution is not pleasing, since it requires significant revisions to MT [the Hebrew text] without support from the versions.”

Hulst similarly discusses the translation problems with this text, noting “The word bar has various meanings.” In Aramaic it can mean 'son', which would lead to the rendering 'Kiss the son.' But in Hebrew it connotes 'ground,' with the corresponding meaning of 'Kiss the ground' – “a sign of complete subjection and homage. “This translation deserves careful consideration,” in Hulst's opinion. Lastly, bar in Hebrew may also mean 'pure.' Apparently this was how the Latin Vulgate read these verses.

Jacobson translates 2:11-12 as “Serve the LORD in fear! In trembling kiss his feet! Lest he be angry and you perish in the way, for his anger burns quickly.” He further states: “Many commentators have, in fact, puzzled over the strange occurrence of the verb kiss (nassequ), especially because the Hebrew text is problematic at this point...But when understood in terms of the poetic motif of speech, the verb fits well in this context. In the ancient world, to kiss the feet of a king (or the ground in front of the king's feet) was a symbol of humility and political obedience (see Ps. 72:9; Isa. 49:23; Mic. 7:17).”

Psalm 55:5

“The next section turns from the acts of the enemies to the way the one praying is feeling. His torment is not only emotional; it is physical. My heart twists in my chest in v. 4 begins a physical description to which anyone suffering emotional hurt can relate: the feeling in the chest, the terror and trembling that feel overwhelming.” (Tanner)

Anderson defines 'fear' in this verse as “a fright or state of anxiety, and not an 'awareness of the holy God'. 'Fear and trembling' probably means 'great fear'...the physical effects of fear, such as shuddering, have taken control of me; lit. 'shuddering covers me (completely)' (cf. Job 21:6; Ezek. 7:18).”

“The nom. pallasut, shuddering, shaking, trembling occurs 4x [in the OT]. In each instance it depicts the internal response to a terrible external reality. This strong emotional reaction, resulting in physical shaking, is described as something that falls upon (Isa 21:4), overwhelms (Ps 55:5; Ezek 7:18) and even seizes (Job 21:6) a person.” (Van Pelt and Kaiser)

Mark 5:33

This verse appears toward the end of the story of the woman with incurable bleeding secretly touching Jesus' clothing and becoming instantly well. The beginning question here revolves around which of the two basic types of fear is being displayed by the woman when Jesus asks, “Who touched me?” Is she in awe of the divine nature of the man who has just healed her, or is she just afraid that she will get into trouble by having broken the Jewish purity laws forbidding menstruating women from making physical contact with others? Below are some comments from scholars regarding this issue.

Swift: “Her malady was one which made her ceremonially unclean and would convey the uncleanness to all who came in touch with her (Lv. 15:25). For this reason, probably, she approached Jesus from behind, in order not to be seen.”

Short says, “The embarrassment she felt on account of the nature of her malady, made her anxious to secure the healing which she believed Jesus could impart to her without the publicity which was normally inevitable in the event of such healings...Though fearful of Jesus' anger, and dreading now being exposed, the woman presented herself before His face...whereupon Jesus commended her for her faith, and assured her of the completeness of her cure.”

Marcus: “As Lohmeyer points out, this reaction is natural in the situation, but fear is also the standard biblical response to a theophany (an appearance of God) from Genesis onward (e.g. Gen 15:12; 28:17; Judg 6:22-23). The combination 'fear and trembling' occurs in a theophanic context in 4 Macc 4:10 and in Phil 2:12, which implies the presence of God in the Christian community. The phrase is linked with salvation, as in our passage.”

“With fear and trembling the woman acknowledged all that had happened. Her action in making herself known indicates both courage and gratitude, and it is here that the accent should fall rather than upon her fear.” (Lane)

Mann says, “Coming secretly, because of ritual impurity, the woman's action indicates her belief that mere contact will effect a cure...Luke attributes the woman's fear to the fact of her being discovered, an interpretation disavowed by the subsequent clause in Mark. It is possible that the woman's fear may have been increased by her knowledge that she had rendered Jesus ritually unclean.”

“Moved by awe (in fear and trembling) in regard to Jesus' authoritative power, the woman openly and honestly ascribes everything to him and claims nothing for herself.” (Anderson)

In conclusion, there doesn't appear to be any need to choose between fear of Jesus' anger, embarrassment, or godly awe as the reason for her fear and trembling. They probably all played a part.

Philippians 2:12

This is by far the most theologically loaded appearance of “fear and trembling” of the four. In its context, Paul tells that church, “Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.” (RSV)

This, at first, appears to be a blatant contradiction in that we are first told to work out our own salvation, but then informed that God is working it out for us. But is it really a contradiction, or perhaps a tension which must be maintained? It almost sounds like a combination of salvation by works and salvation by faith. Below is how various scholars attempt to deal with this passage.

Knox simply states that we should work it out “humbly, and with constant dependence on God's help” while the translation in the Roman Catholic translation, The Jerusalem Bible, reads that we are to work for our salvation, in place of most Protestant Bibles, which infer instead that it is the consequences of the salvation we already possess that we are to work out.

For example, William Hendriksen wisely explains, “Yes, they must work it out, that is, carry it to its conclusion, thoroughly digest it, and apply it to day-by-day living. They must strive to produce in their lives all the fruits of the Spirit...They must aim at nothing less than spiritual and moral perfection ...Believers are not saved at one stroke. Their salvation is a process (Luke 13:23; Acts 2:47; II Cor. 2:15). It is a process in which they themselves, far from remaining passive or dormant, take a very active part. It is a pursuit, a following after, a pressing on, a contest, fight, race (see Phil. 3:12; also Rom. 14:19; I Cor. 9:24-27; I Tim. 6:12). Putting forth such a constant and sustained effort is not easy. It is a battle...It will mean making full use of every God-appointed means to defeat the evil and bring out the good with them ('within them' because God placed it there!).”

I know that for the sake of completeness and fairness I should quote differing opinions from those who believe quite strongly in “once saved, always saved” and totally deny the concept of apostasy. However, I honestly think that Hendriksen, who is, by the way, a Calvinist, does a more than adequate job of expressing that theological outlook while at the same time incorporating ideas which the Arminians would also applaud. As I have said in a previous post, sometimes we need to realize that the only way to do complete justice to all the teachings in the Bible, we need to maintain a healthy tension and not feel that we need to totally let go of one biblical teaching in order to embrace another one.