tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post7865299229836305310..comments2024-03-16T02:22:18.475-07:00Comments on Articuli Fidei: The Apostasy That Wasn't - an interesting, multi-dimensional book by Rod BennettDavid Waltzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comBlogger113125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-36373926380530050612019-09-12T10:25:46.884-07:002019-09-12T10:25:46.884-07:00Hey David,
Thanks,
but that still gives no weigh...Hey David,<br />Thanks, <br /><br />but that still gives no weight to the plurality of gods of Mormonism, that males evolve into gods and get a planet and pro-create through plural marriage and populate planets.<br /><br />You still bend over backwards to try to give credibility to this outrageous hideous false religion - that God once had a body; against creation ex nihilo, that Jesus and Lucifer were "spirit-brothers"; the planet Kolob, etc. and the problems with Joseph Smith's and Brigham Young's actions and statements; and the implication of decades of "living prophets" statements that seem to clearly imply (and seemed to assert) that God the Father had sex with Mary and procreated Jesus.<br /><br />The mythology type of theology that characterizes historic Mormonism (males evolving into gods, plural marriage, secret temple ceremonies, special anointed clothing, etc.), almost like Greek Mythology paganism, the millions of gods, etc. = paganism - that stuff is so incredible that it hard to want to go deeper - your method is to constantly encourage someone to read lots of stuff; and avoid the obvious ridiculous beliefs of historic Mormonism.<br /><br />Why would anyone want to read Ostler when there are too many clear outrageous things that you seem to downplay and avoid?<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-75132631472388807812019-09-09T10:48:03.004-07:002019-09-09T10:48:03.004-07:00Good morning Ken,
Back from the cruise, and tryin...Good morning Ken,<br /><br />Back from the cruise, and trying to adjust back to ‘normal life’. On 09-01-19, you posted:<br /><br />==David,<br />No comments?<br /><br />All Heisner seems to be saying is that God created angels and (some of them later became) demons - but he calls them "divine beings" - ? It gives no weight at all to the LDS theology of plurality of gods.==<br /><br />Though Dr. Heiser repeatedly refers to the angels as ‘gods’ and ‘divine beings’, he also clearly does not place them on the same level as the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The same holds true for the LDS Quad. <br /><br />Now, with that said, I think it is important to point out that the only extant systematic treatment on theology proper by an LDS author—Blake Ostler—recognizes and affirms the distinction between the three members of the Godhead (Father, Son and Holy Ghost), and the other beings termed ‘gods’ in the LDS Quad. Only the Father, Son and Holy Ghost possess divinity in its fullness—those three being termed “the one God” a number of times in the LDS Quad.<br /><br />Ostler’s book length treatment on this subject is his <i>Exploring Mormon Thought – The Attributes of God</i> - see this <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Exploring-Mormon-Thought-Attributes-God/dp/1589580036/ref=sr_1_2/104-3403806-7882331?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1186785599&sr=1-2" rel="nofollow">LINK</a>.<br /><br />Ostler also has a published essay which is an excellent summation of this thoughts on this issue - <a href="http://www.smpt.org/docs/ostler_element1-1.html" rel="nofollow">LINK</a>.<br /><br /><br />Grace and peace,<br /><br />David<br />David Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-53217663363493514962019-09-05T04:28:29.405-07:002019-09-05T04:28:29.405-07:00Hi Ken,
I am in the middle of a 10 day cruise. Wi...Hi Ken,<br /><br />I am in the middle of a 10 day cruise. Will not be able to respond at length until my return. Check back in Monday evening.<br /><br />Grace and peace,<br /><br />David<br />David Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04577758667034909467noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-22183464010787756262019-09-01T10:11:15.514-07:002019-09-01T10:11:15.514-07:00David,
No comments?
All Heisner seems to be sayin...David,<br />No comments?<br /><br />All Heisner seems to be saying is that God created angels and (some of them later became) demons - but he calls them "divine beings" - ? It gives no weight at all to the LDS theology of plurality of gods.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-14841080112622768132019-08-05T14:38:15.970-07:002019-08-05T14:38:15.970-07:00So if the "divine beings" are angels and...So if the "divine beings" are angels and demons - that does not give any weight or help to the LDS concepts of "gods" at all.<br /><br />God does not take counsel from them at all. (see above Scripture)<br /><br />Yes, I know about Job chapter 1 and the "sons of God" and Satan coming with them to appear before God and talk to Him.<br /><br />You have seemed to try and give credence to the LDS view, but Heiser and Tate and probably others give no help for a plurality of gods.<br /><br />There is only one God - those NT verses and Psalm 96:5, etc. are too clear.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-11415471522038514172019-08-05T13:47:01.730-07:002019-08-05T13:47:01.730-07:00I am not employed by SBC.
But I am a member of a ...I am not employed by SBC.<br /><br />But I am a member of a SBC church that is Calvinistic. <br /><br />I may comment on other things later.<br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-36400629875643040182019-08-05T09:15:16.831-07:002019-08-05T09:15:16.831-07:00Hi Ken,
Thanks for the responses. You wrote:
==W...Hi Ken,<br /><br />Thanks for the responses. You wrote:<br /><br />==What does he mean by "divine beings"?<br /><br />angels?<br /><br />demons?<br /><br />angels and demons?<br /><br />Those are created beings, angels and fallen angels, and if he means those (angels and demons), then they are not "divine" - especially since only demons are disobedient to God.==<br /><br />"divine beings" = angels. Satan and the angels that follow him are angels. <br /><br />=If they are demons, why not just say "demons" rather than "divine beings"?=<br /><br />I suspect because demons are angels. Keep in mind that in the OT period ALL angels (elect and fallen) are part of the heavenly host/realm. Note the following from Job:<br /><br />"Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them." (Job 1:6)<br /><br />"Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD." (Job 2:1)<br /><br />The "sons of God" are the angels; and when they assemble before Yahweh, this assembly includes both the elect and fallen angels. We know from the book of Revelation, that at some time (scholars disagree over the when) the fallen angels are banished from the heavenly assembly. I know of no scholar who argues that this banishment happened before the writing of the Psalms; as such, the "divine beings" (אלהים) spoken of in the Psalms include the elect and fallen angels.<br /><br />Moving on, one the scholarly works cited by Dr. Tate in his commentary is: <i>The Divine Council as a Type-Scene in the Hebrew Bible</i> by D. M. Fleming. This work is Fleming's Ph.D. diss. Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1989. I have tried to hunt down a digital copy of this dissertation, but have not been able to locate one online. Since you are a member of the SBC, and if I remember correctly, employed by the SBC, I am wondering if you can obtain a digital copy ?<br /><br /><br />Grace and peace,<br /><br />David<br />David Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-68429929209342225982019-08-04T14:03:07.882-07:002019-08-04T14:03:07.882-07:00The demons are God's "counselors" ??...The demons are God's "counselors" ??<br /><br />I don't think so.<br /><br />33 Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways! 34 <b>For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who became His counselor? </b> (see further: Isaiah 40:13-14; Job chapters 38-42:6) 35 Or who has first given to Him that it might be paid back to him again? (see Job 41:11) 36 For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever. Amen.<br /><br />Romans 11:33-36Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-33034593520850034152019-08-04T13:55:10.918-07:002019-08-04T13:55:10.918-07:0019 What do I mean then? That a thing sacrificed to...19 What do I mean then? That a thing sacrificed to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? 20 No, but I say that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons and not to God; and I do not want you to become sharers in demons.<br /><br />I Corinthians 10:19-20<br /><br />So, there is no substanstantiation for the Mormon view of other gods. The gods of the nations are idols and behind idols are demons.<br /><br />If that is what Heiser and Marvin Tate mean, then they should call them demons clearly, rather than "divine beings" - "divine" sounds too good for them.<br /><br />But as I wrote earlier, there is good Scriptural evidence that demonic forces / spirits are being dictators and evil and proud political leaders (Isaiah 14; Ezekiel 28; Daniel 10; Ephesians 6:10-18; Luke 4:6)<br /><br />"And the devil said to Him, “I will give You all this domain and its glory; for it has been handed over to me, and I give it to whomever I wish."<br /><br />Luke 4:6<br /><br />Seems there an indication that political kingdoms have Satan behind them, as in Ezekiel 28, the fallen cherub that was in the garden of God was behind the king of Tyre. <br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-69041223481251123912019-08-04T13:42:47.662-07:002019-08-04T13:42:47.662-07:00Good angels always obey God, so if it is about goo...Good angels always obey God, so if it is about good angels, how can they be rebuked for the injustice, oppression, and injustice in Psalm 82:2-6 ?<br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-43671626041947383942019-08-04T13:41:08.004-07:002019-08-04T13:41:08.004-07:00Thanks for the links.
What does he mean by "...Thanks for the links.<br /><br />What does he mean by "divine beings"?<br /><br />angels?<br /><br />demons?<br /><br />angels and demons?<br /><br />Those are created beings, angels and fallen angels, and if he means those (angels and demons), then they are not "divine" - especially since only demons are disobedient to God.<br /><br />Good angels always obey God.<br /><br />If they are demons, why not just say "demons" rather than "divine beings"?<br /><br />There is only one God.<br /><br />"all the gods of the nations are idols" - Psalm 96:5 - that is more clear than implying some kind of polytheism or giving credence to Mormon theology.<br /><br />"Therefore concerning the eating of things sacrificed to idols, we know that there is no such thing as an idol [another god] in the world, and that there is no God but one. 5 For even if there are <b>so-called gods whether in heaven or on earth,</b> as indeed there are many gods and many lords, <br />[that the unbelieving pagans and nations have created in their own minds and make idols of them - per Psalm 96:5; even modern man making other things like food, sex, lust, ambition for power, worldly success into "gods". see Colossians 3:5 . . . covetousness, greed, which amounts to idolatry."]<br /> 6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him."<br /><br />I Corinthians 8:4-6 (with my comments)<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-31700174962404892972019-08-04T09:44:27.575-07:002019-08-04T09:44:27.575-07:00Good morning Ken,
One of the most detailed exeges...Good morning Ken,<br /><br />One of the most detailed exegesis' of Psalm 8:1-8 I have read to-date is in volume 20 of <i>The Word Biblical Commentary - Psalms 51-100</i>, by Dr. Marvin E. Tate—who was Professor of Old Testament Interpretation at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, KY when the book was first published in 1990. His exegesis and commentary of Psalms 8:1-8 is found on pages 328-342 of the 1990 edition of which I own. <br /><br />The <i>Google Books</i> preview of the 2018 edition (<a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=e1ErDwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false" rel="nofollow">link</a>) does not have those pages. However, a word search brought up <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=e1ErDwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q=counselors&f=false" rel="nofollow">this snippet</a> (page 335 of the 1990 edition).<br /><br />Dr. Tate fully concurs with Dr. Heiser's view that the אלהים spoken of in Psalms 8:1-8 are "divine beings" and not human judges.<br /><br /><br />Grace and peace,<br /><br />DavidDavid Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-9916692117948437502019-08-03T14:49:34.863-07:002019-08-03T14:49:34.863-07:00Joseph Smith receives revelation from the same sou...<i>Joseph Smith receives revelation from the same source that inspired John 5:19. Thus, when Joseph Smith used John 5:19 to make a point it was a supporting source not the ONLY source. </i><br /><br />Except he did not. He was a bad character; a charlatan. Not credible.<br /><br />Joseph Smith did not receive revelation from God.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-10844626522446496552019-08-03T12:43:13.939-07:002019-08-03T12:43:13.939-07:00This is a good review of Heiser's book, "...<br />This is a good review of Heiser's book, "The Unseen Realm"<br /><br />https://knowingscripture.com/articles/book-review-the-unseen-realm-heiserAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-2531484585624010512019-08-03T12:34:45.506-07:002019-08-03T12:34:45.506-07:00I have looked at his material before. he does not...I have looked at his material before. he does not make sense, IMO. (from what I remember - "divine beings" means angels, demons, and disembodied dead humans) I confess I will need to go back and read it again, even though I don’t want to waste my time on him or his material. <br /><br />I went back and read the paper you linked to. I had read it before. It gives the impression of depth and scholarly qualities, but because it does not deal at all with the context of Psalm 82 or the content of verses 2-8, it is a very shallow and inadequate study, IMO.<br /><br />His other attitudes about his work, that I have seen him in interaction with others on line, made me think he is not very credible. After I looked into his views, it was overall a waste of time for me. <br /><br />What does Heisner mean by “divine beings”? Is he a Monotheist?<br /><br />Even if all Heisner means is "angels and demons"; that is not the LDS view that we are talking about, and gives them no real substance to substantiate their heretical views and polytheism and males being about to evolve into gods and get planets and have multiple celestial wives and populate another planet. What a crazy religion!!<br /><br />“Divine beings” = ? ; angels ?, angels and demons ? if so, they are created beings and not literally “gods”.<br /><br />Why does he put forth and emphasize "divine beings" rather than the more clear terms of "angels and demons" ?<br /><br />He seems to want to just get people to read his whole argument. <b>He goes into a deep word study of the Hebrew word of Elohim and it's uses of plurality, etc. and canaanite parallels, YET he avoided any contextual study of verses 2-8 !!!</b><br /><br />In John 10:35, he seems to ignore or downplay the phrase "to/ toward whom the word of God came". <br /><br /> εἰ ἐκείνους εἶπεν θεοὺς <b>πρὸς οὓς ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ ἐγένετο</b> καὶ οὐ δύναται λυθῆναι ἡ γραφή<br />“If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken),<br /><br />Revelation came to the Jews -not just the law /Torah / 5 books of Moses (Jesus is calling Psalm 82 "law" (τῷ νόμῳ) there in John 10:34, so He means all of the OT written revelation - 10:34 - "written in your law" - Scriptures, the writings) but also the Psalms and the prophets - Jesus is alluding that the Pharisees should understand that they are the problem - their pride, arrogance, hypocrisy and lack of good leadership - injustice, oppression, etc. <br /><br />John 10:34 ἀπεκρίθη αὐτοῖς ὁ Ἰησοῦς οὐκ ἔστιν γεγραμμένον ἐν τῷ νόμῳ ὑμῶν ὅτι ἐγὼ εἶπα θεοί ἐστε<br />Jesus answered them, “Has it not been written in your Law, ‘I SAID, YOU ARE GODS’?<br /><br />Heiser also does not say anything about <b> "I said"</b> you are gods. The text does not say they are indeed gods in reality, it says that God says / calls (mocks) them as "gods" because of their arrogance and injustice. <br /><br />Heiser's view does not make sense, as the whole Psalm is a rebuke to injustice and oppression. verses 3-4 are commands to do justice. Why would God be making those kinds of ethical commands to angels and demons? Angels always obey and demons always disobey. <br /><br /> And Angels and demons will not die like men. (verse 7) <br /><br />However, it does seem that demons are behind a lot of political powers in the world in Scripture. (Isaiah 14 (the spirit behind the arrogance of the king of Babylon), Ezekiel 28 (the spirit behind the king of Tyre - the cherub in the garden of Eden (Satan), Daniel 10, Ephesians 6:10-20)<br /><br />Even that though, just makes Psalm 82 inclusive of both evil men / evil, oppressive human leaders, dictators, and demons; and it does not give any help to Mormon interpretation or theology.<br /><br />It seems to be about humans who are arrogant - judges, leaders, political leaders, dictators, etc. <br /><br />I am wondering David, why you are always so quick to defend Mormonism? <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-2288434447425655662019-08-03T09:48:02.561-07:002019-08-03T09:48:02.561-07:00Hello again Ken,
Thanks for your responses. I hav...Hello again Ken,<br /><br />Thanks for your responses. I have a very busy day planned, with little time for the internet; but before I head out of town, wanted to bring to your attention the thoughts of one of the leading Evangelical Hebrew scholars of our day—Dr. Michael S. Heiser—concerning the interpretation of Psalm 82. See the following 15 page treatment:<br /><br />Should the Plural אלהים [<i>elohim</i>]of Psalm 82 Be Understood as Men or Divine Beings? [<a href="http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/Heiser%20Elohim%20of%20Ps82%20Gods%20or%20Men%20ETS2010.pdf" rel="nofollow">LINK</a>]<br /><br />See also Dr. Heiser numerous contributions concerning the "divine council" in the Bible: <a href="http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/" rel="nofollow">LINK</a><br /><br /><br />Grace and peace,<br /><br />David<br />David Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-44944265569499587752019-08-02T14:54:06.468-07:002019-08-02T14:54:06.468-07:00Hello Ken!
Color me crazy! Or maybe you are? How...Hello Ken!<br />Color me crazy! Or maybe you are? How could you possibly know.<br /><br />John 5:19 says that Christ only does what He saw His Father do. I would consider that a WEAK reason to postulate that God the Father once had a body, but that is not what is at stake here. Joseph Smith receives revelation from the same source that inspired John 5:19. Thus, when Joseph Smith used John 5:19 to make a point it was a supporting source not the ONLY source. You deny extra-Biblical revelation so what you think is crazy may or may not be, but you flitting through the Bible with your personal prejudices never to be grounded by any solid knowledge.<br /><br /><br />The John 17 discussion (again not John 19 sorry) is different than the above. If the Bible is the sole source of revelation from God, my understanding of John 5:19 could be correct as could yours. But for John 17, concerning monotheism, you have inconsistently abandoned the idea that the Bible is the sole source of revelation and instead embraced philosophical speculations offered by ordained clergy from ancient days. John 17 has two passages that say that the Father and the Son are ONE in a way that the disciples can become ONE. Nobody in this discussion disputes that the Father and the Son are one. I merely assert that the “philosophical speculations” are NOT a product of the Bible and are inconsistent with the Bible (or at least not aligned without much extra-Biblical “reconciliation” with the Bible).<br />Charity, TOmTOmhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12511360918671604918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-3818010056945131162019-08-02T12:01:20.799-07:002019-08-02T12:01:20.799-07:00Jesus is saying He depends on the Father and looks...Jesus is saying He depends on the Father and looks to the Father who is in heaven, for His (Jesus') actions on earth (while Jesus is on the earth in the incarnation and life, death, resurrection, etc.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-61557167090471592982019-08-02T11:49:05.102-07:002019-08-02T11:49:05.102-07:00That is a crazy interpretation of John 5:19
(that...That is a crazy interpretation of John 5:19<br /><br />(that the Father had a body, was a man before, then evolved into a god, etc.)<br /><br />Jesus is saying He depends on the Father and looks to the Father for His actions on earth. - He does what the Father does on earth - that is while Jesus is on the earth - His actions and character are harmonious with the perfect character of God the Father in heaven. Jesus looks to the Father and depends on the Father. <br /><br /> <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-40563037163578708182019-08-02T11:39:05.588-07:002019-08-02T11:39:05.588-07:00As a LDS I welcome plural and singular expressions...As a LDS I welcome plural and singular expressions concerning God / Gods. <br />I am as polytheistic as is/was the one who inspired Genesis. I am as monotheistic as the one who inspired Isaiah.<br />You are arguing with the Bible which uses a PLURAL noun.<br />Charity, TOmTOmhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12511360918671604918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-27715947941119707092019-08-02T11:37:19.664-07:002019-08-02T11:37:19.664-07:00Psalm 82:6 and John 10:34 is not affirming that ot...Psalm 82:6 and John 10:34 is not affirming that other gods exist, rather it is a rebuke to the judges and leaders of the world who are unjust - unjust rulers / dictators - leaders whose pride makes them think they are gods.<br /><br />God takes His stand in His own congregation;<br />He judges in the midst of the rulers.<br /><br /><b>2 How long will you judge unjustly<br />And show partiality to the wicked? Selah.<br />3 Vindicate the weak and fatherless;<br />Do justice to the afflicted and destitute.<br />4 Rescue the weak and needy;<br />Deliver them out of the hand of the wicked.</b><br /><br />Obviously God is rebuking these rulers in the world, including and especially rulers in Israel, who are so proud and look down on others and do not do justice nor help the weak or orphans or the needy or the poor.<br />Obviously God is rebuking political leaders / judges.<br /><br />5 They do not know nor do they understand;<br />They walk about in darkness;<br />All the foundations of the earth are shaken.<br />6 I said, “You are gods,<br />And all of you are sons of the Most High.<br /><br />"I said" shows God is mocking them by calling them that, even though they are not really gods.<br /><br /><b>7 “Nevertheless you will die like men<br />And fall like any one of the princes.”</b><br /><br />This proves that God is mocking and rebuking humans - they will die - because they are men / human, like any other prince (political leader, son of a king, warrior in a war, etc.)<br /><br /><br />8 Arise, O God, judge the earth!<br />For it is You who possesses all the nations.<br /><br />Shows God is talking about not only Israel, but the whole earth and all the nations - rebuking political leaders of all the nations.<br /><br />John 10:34<br />Jesus quotes Psalm 82:6 to show that He is the true Son of God, but shows that God sometimes mocks unjust leaders by calling them "gods" - Jesus is rebuking the Pharisees and leaders of Israel.<br /><br />30 I and the Father are one.”<br /><br />31 The Jews picked up stones again to stone Him. 32 Jesus answered them, “I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?” <br /><br /><b>33 The Jews answered Him, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God.” </b><br /><br />34 Jesus answered them, “Has it not been written in your Law, ‘I said, you are gods’? <br /><br />35 If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), 36 do you say of Him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’? 37 If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me; 38 but if I do them, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, so that you may know and understand that the Father is in Me, and I in the Father.” 39 Therefore they were seeking again to seize Him, and He eluded their grasp.<br /><br />John 10:30-39<br /><br />35 If he called them gods, <br /><br />[ He called them "gods", but they really are not gods.]<br /><br />to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken),<br /><br />[The Scriptures came to Israelites, A Psalm of Asaph, etc. - revelation came to them - Jesus is rebuking the Pharisees and Jewish leaders - in the context - from John 10:24 - So the Jews gathered around Him . . . ]<br /><br /> 36 do you say of Him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?<br /><br />God called them "gods", but the true Son of God, that the Father truly sanctified / set apart and sent into the world - shows He is saying He is the Messiah, the Son of God. John 10:24 - "if you are the Messiah, tell us plainly"<br /><br />Jesus is saying it is not blasphemy to call Himself the Son of God, since He truly is (as the rest of the gospel of John demonstrates) since the Scriptures called others, other humans (unjust leaders / judges) as "gods"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-9324996809256423232019-08-02T11:37:03.979-07:002019-08-02T11:37:03.979-07:00"For the LORD your God is God of gods, and Lo..."For the LORD your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible, which regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward:" (Deut. 10:17)<br /><br />same for Psalm 136:2<br /><br />Obviously, according to reason, logic, and the rest of Scripture, according to proper exegesis and hermeneutics, he does not mean that those "gods" are real gods that exist, but the false gods / idols / idols of the mind / creations of man in false religions (animism, Greek mythology, paganism, Hinduism, Buddhism, etc.) - God is the one true Creator God over the false gods / idols of humans.<br /><br />Psalm 96:5 (and I Chronicles 16:26)<br /><br />"For all the gods of the peoples are idols,<br />But the LORD made the heavens."<br /><br />a note on that verse in my NASB even says that idols means: "non-existent things"<br /><br />ESV says "worthless idols"<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-75015147988005780182019-08-02T11:33:46.163-07:002019-08-02T11:33:46.163-07:00Sorry. I ment John 17.
In two places, the onene...Sorry. I ment John 17. <br /><br />In two places, the oneness of the Father and the Son are referenced. This is a oneness that the disciples COULD achieve. <br /><br />Theologians who care to use the Bible to understand truths about God have no other scripture that gives us info (more info perhaps) on HOW God is one.<br /><br />Protestant and Catholic theologians insisted on a Trinitarian oneness that ignores this scripture. I think this is wrong in principle and perverting of the truth.<br />Charity, TOmTOmhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12511360918671604918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-54578815846187737632019-08-02T10:26:41.388-07:002019-08-02T10:26:41.388-07:00Hi Ken,
You mentioned a phrase from the BOA: &qu...Hi Ken,<br /><br />You mentioned a phrase from the BOA: "the head, Father of the Gods".<br /><br />You seem to suggest that this type of phrase is not to be found in the Bible. However, it sure seems to me that near equivalents permeate the Bible. Note the following:<br /><br />"For the LORD your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible, which regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward:" (Deut. 10:17)<br /><br />"O give thanks unto the God of gods: for his mercy <i>endureth</i> for ever." (Psalm 136:2)<br /><br />"I have said, Ye <i>are</i> gods; and all of you are children of the most High." (Psalm 82:6 - see also John 10:34)<br /><br />"Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God..." (Acts 17:29)<br /><br /><br />Grace and peace,<br /><br />David<br />David Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-76461373957478838992019-08-02T10:11:33.453-07:002019-08-02T10:11:33.453-07:00Hi Tom,
So good to hear that you have returned h...Hi Tom, <br /><br />So good to hear that you have returned home safely—welcome back !!!<br /><br />I suspect that you are going to be quite busy over the next few days. But, with that said, after you have had a chance to respond to Ken, I would like to suggest that you take a look at my last post here at <i>AF</i>:<br /><br /><a href="http://articulifidei.blogspot.com/2019/07/seer-stone-v-urim-and-thummim-book-of.html" rel="nofollow">Seer Stone v. Urim and Thummim</a><br /><br />And a related thread I recently started over at MDDB:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/72073-the-paradigm-shift-concerning-the-translation-of-the-book-of-mormon/" rel="nofollow">The paradigm shift concerning the translation of the Book of Mormon</a><br /><br /><br />Grace and peace,<br /><br />David<br />David Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.com