Great overview on a complex subject matter. I very much enjoyed your analysis. I have subscribed to your podcast and UA-cam. I look forward to learning more from you. Thank you.
Hello again Bro. Peter and Blessing's abide your way. Want to chime - in with a thumbs up concerning this video presentation. I enjoyed your content and the way your research reflects reality to it's topic. My reply here will reflect a more open time in the "Church" world as pertaining to biblical concepts, and the acceptance of such. As I mentioned in a previous video I'm 71 years of age. I re-stated this point as I think it will bring qualification to my reply here, or at least I hope so. The topic you are covering here in our current present, at one time in our present-past, was not as questionable to discuss as it it today. Evolution to my way of thinking has no substantiation in creation, but it for sure has allot to do with modern "Biblical" concept's. So much acceptance today of what was once deemed unreliable, has for many become topic's for the day and of permanent status. So with this said I believe fault for this embarrassment is incumbent upon my generation of "Men of God," and I do not exclude myself. "We" seem to have given into compromise and have accepted the "look good, feel good, fake it to make it Theology." Having a long time to evaluate this current status, I've come to this conclusion. "GOD" does not dwell in a box and neither should "HIS" earthly "Body." The validness to this statement is revealed by "Israel's" blindness to the identity of their "Messiah." They, meaning "Israel's" religious leaders, had compromised away their reality. It had become so bad "Jesus in "His" dealings with them, called them "blind leader's." Thank you for being at your post. More men need to make their stand unashamedly and proclaim, " what is future what is past, what is present that shall last." Recently in a conversation with "The Lord" I heard these words in reply. "He said; "Can you hit the ball if you are not at the plate." Needless to say I could only answer one way. And to that the conversation ended. Again thank you for the privilege to share this.
On the variant reading of Deuteronomy, see Rydelnik's works. The texts come out of different manuscript traditions. The readings in Daniel make great sense of the Deut text.
The problem with Greek is that 3 words are used to describe the whole invisible realm, theos, Kyrios and angellos. Elohim is any being in the invisible realm. Even the spirit's of man without receiving their new resurrections bodies as Hebrews description of Mount Zion. We have been intentionally kept ignorant by authorities trying to hide this. There is no doctrine of that realm in the church that lets people know about it directly. You cannot really understand the conflict in kingdoms unless you know what the other kingdom is about and why we need salvation from it
12:54 I don't know of canonical sources, but the book of jubelees states explicitly that angels were there with Moses on mount Sinai. The idea would have been familiar to knowledgeable 1sr century Jews.
Thanks for mentioning that! Acts 7:53 and Gal 3:19 are both biblical texts that also talk about angels being involved in the giving of the law. Fascinating to think about.
Yes! Ephesians 6:12 (ESV): For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places. It does seem the NT attributes more spiritual warfare and involvement with the angelic realm than we often realize.
the traditional churches and priest and so on do not want to teach on the supernatural or spiritual but we , the christians in the trenches share materials and live it daily @@thebiblesojourner
You didn't really touch on Jesus's comments about Psalm 82, where he does compare the Pharisees, who would had been "like gods" to the people of Israel as far as their authority granted to them by God. What's your take on how Jesus applied this passage in John 10:34?
Hey Fred, yes--I figured I would (for time's sake) just give the OT survey this go around. I am planning on doing an episode on the John 10:34 issue sometime. But in the meantime, I do have this old blog where I summarize Heiser's viewpoint: petergoeman.com/jesus-quoting-psalm-82-in-john-10/ I think that is a better understanding in line with the context of Ps 82. Thanks for listening.
@@thebiblesojourner I read the article, but am not entirely convinced that Jesus has in mind only angelic beings in John 10. Returning to Psalm 82, if those "judges" are exclusively divine beings, or ontologically angelic, why are they being accused of injustice? How exactly do holy angels show partiality to the wicked or don't help the weak? Additionally, how exactly are they inherting the nations? What does that mean? I am wondering if God has in mind human rulers are number among the idea of divine judges.
@@fredbutler5358That is an intriguing possibility (human rulers among divine judges). I'll have to give that one more thought. Whether one takes Ps 82 as angelic/divine beings or humans, there are descriptions which match the other viewpoint. If human judges, they are called sons of God (which seems fairly concrete in other passages of Scripture), and they are apart of God's counsel, and they are labeled as "gods" but are condemned to die as "men" which makes no sense if they are already men that seems an odd judgment. But alternatively, like you said, there are some descriptions which seem to coincide better with human judges. I think the description of showing partiality and injustice involves the angelic role of oversight over pagan nations. The angels operate in the spiritual world but influence our world from positions of governance (Thus the Dan 10 scenario). So, angels could be ignoring justice and just be concerned with elevating those whom they wish to see achieve power. There may be other ways to think through that too, that's just one possibility. I personally don't think v. 8 is the "gods"/angels inheriting the nations. I think that is the concluding cry to THE God to arise and inherit the nations and execute true justice. Here is another article I wrote on Psalm 82, and how people often argue for the judges view, in particular: petergoeman.com/the-gods-of-psalm-82-human-divine/
@@thebiblesojourner Another issue that is problematic with the judges being angelic beings is what kind of angelic being are these that God is addressing? Are they evil or elect? This raises the question that if God assigns angels over territory, why would holy angel fail in doing justice or favor the wicked. (I mentioned that previously a bit). Additionally, in Daniel 10, the prince that withstood Gabriel getting to Daniel for 20 days, wat that a holy angel or an evil angel? IF an evil angel, why is God giving it authority over a city or nation?
@@fredbutler5358 I personally think God does allow fallen angels authority over non-Israelite nations in the Old Testament. Seems to be that's what Daniel 10 is referring to. I don't see a problem with that. God allows fallen humans to rule over parts of creation as well.
The LSB actually translates it as gods in distinction from NASB. There are ways Jesus’s statement makes sense with this understanding of John. I wrote a blog on it if interested, otherwise a future podcast hopefully!
Well, I don’t disagree with the main point you are making, but technically the phrase council or assembly is what is used in Scripture, not divine council (emphasis on divine). And in OT studies the idea of divine council was a phrase well before Heiser in liberal circles. Heiser just adapted it and made it more palatable for Christians.
This was really helpful. Can you please make a small video with pack of verses of other Elohim being mentioned, that will be very informative.
Thanks for watching and the great recommendation. I’ll try to remember to do a video on that.
Thank you so much for doing this. I am really excited to listen.
Let me know what you think!
Great overview on a complex subject matter. I very much enjoyed your analysis. I have subscribed to your podcast and UA-cam. I look forward to learning more from you. Thank you.
Thanks for sharing that! I praise God for that. Looking forward to hearing feedback from you in the future.
Promo SM
Hello again Bro. Peter and Blessing's abide your way. Want to chime - in with a thumbs up concerning this video presentation. I enjoyed your content and the way your research reflects reality to it's topic. My reply here will reflect a more open time in the "Church" world as pertaining to biblical concepts, and the acceptance of such. As I mentioned in a previous video I'm 71 years of age. I re-stated this point as I think it will bring qualification to my reply here, or at least I hope so. The topic you are covering here in our current present, at one time in our present-past, was not as questionable to discuss as it it today. Evolution to my way of thinking has no substantiation in creation, but it for sure has allot to do with modern "Biblical" concept's. So much acceptance today of what was once deemed unreliable, has for many become topic's for the day and of permanent status. So with this said I believe fault for this embarrassment is incumbent upon my generation of "Men of God," and I do not exclude myself. "We" seem to have given into compromise and have accepted the "look good, feel good, fake it to make it Theology." Having a long time to evaluate this current status, I've come to this conclusion. "GOD" does not dwell in a box and neither should "HIS" earthly "Body." The validness to this statement is revealed by "Israel's" blindness to the identity of their "Messiah." They, meaning "Israel's" religious leaders, had compromised away their reality. It had become so bad "Jesus in "His" dealings with them, called them "blind leader's." Thank you for being at your post. More men need to make their stand unashamedly and proclaim, " what is future what is past, what is present that shall last." Recently in a conversation with "The Lord" I heard these words in reply. "He said; "Can you hit the ball if you are not at the plate." Needless to say I could only answer one way. And to that the conversation ended. Again thank you for the privilege to share this.
I always appreciate your interactions with the videos. Always great to hear from a 71 year young who is eager to learn and grow!
On the variant reading of Deuteronomy, see Rydelnik's works. The texts come out of different manuscript traditions. The readings in Daniel make great sense of the Deut text.
I can’t remember, which reading does Rydelnik take in Deut 32:8?
If there are no other Elohim then why do we have the first commandment
That is a fair point. By the way, I read your book and enjoyed it 👍
The problem with Greek is that 3 words are used to describe the whole invisible realm, theos, Kyrios and angellos. Elohim is any being in the invisible realm. Even the spirit's of man without receiving their new resurrections bodies as Hebrews description of Mount Zion. We have been intentionally kept ignorant by authorities trying to hide this. There is no doctrine of that realm in the church that lets people know about it directly. You cannot really understand the conflict in kingdoms unless you know what the other kingdom is about and why we need salvation from it
12:54 I don't know of canonical sources, but the book of jubelees states explicitly that angels were there with Moses on mount Sinai. The idea would have been familiar to knowledgeable 1sr century Jews.
Thanks for mentioning that! Acts 7:53 and Gal 3:19 are both biblical texts that also talk about angels being involved in the giving of the law. Fascinating to think about.
Ephesians 6:12??
Yes! Ephesians 6:12 (ESV): For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.
It does seem the NT attributes more spiritual warfare and involvement with the angelic realm than we often realize.
the traditional churches and priest and so on do not want to teach on the supernatural or spiritual but we , the christians in the trenches share materials and live it daily @@thebiblesojourner
You didn't really touch on Jesus's comments about Psalm 82, where he does compare the Pharisees, who would had been "like gods" to the people of Israel as far as their authority granted to them by God. What's your take on how Jesus applied this passage in John 10:34?
Hey Fred, yes--I figured I would (for time's sake) just give the OT survey this go around. I am planning on doing an episode on the John 10:34 issue sometime. But in the meantime, I do have this old blog where I summarize Heiser's viewpoint: petergoeman.com/jesus-quoting-psalm-82-in-john-10/
I think that is a better understanding in line with the context of Ps 82. Thanks for listening.
@@thebiblesojourner I read the article, but am not entirely convinced that Jesus has in mind only angelic beings in John 10. Returning to Psalm 82, if those "judges" are exclusively divine beings, or ontologically angelic, why are they being accused of injustice? How exactly do holy angels show partiality to the wicked or don't help the weak? Additionally, how exactly are they inherting the nations? What does that mean?
I am wondering if God has in mind human rulers are number among the idea of divine judges.
@@fredbutler5358That is an intriguing possibility (human rulers among divine judges). I'll have to give that one more thought. Whether one takes Ps 82 as angelic/divine beings or humans, there are descriptions which match the other viewpoint. If human judges, they are called sons of God (which seems fairly concrete in other passages of Scripture), and they are apart of God's counsel, and they are labeled as "gods" but are condemned to die as "men" which makes no sense if they are already men that seems an odd judgment. But alternatively, like you said, there are some descriptions which seem to coincide better with human judges. I think the description of showing partiality and injustice involves the angelic role of oversight over pagan nations. The angels operate in the spiritual world but influence our world from positions of governance (Thus the Dan 10 scenario). So, angels could be ignoring justice and just be concerned with elevating those whom they wish to see achieve power. There may be other ways to think through that too, that's just one possibility.
I personally don't think v. 8 is the "gods"/angels inheriting the nations. I think that is the concluding cry to THE God to arise and inherit the nations and execute true justice. Here is another article I wrote on Psalm 82, and how people often argue for the judges view, in particular: petergoeman.com/the-gods-of-psalm-82-human-divine/
@@thebiblesojourner Another issue that is problematic with the judges being angelic beings is what kind of angelic being are these that God is addressing? Are they evil or elect? This raises the question that if God assigns angels over territory, why would holy angel fail in doing justice or favor the wicked. (I mentioned that previously a bit). Additionally, in Daniel 10, the prince that withstood Gabriel getting to Daniel for 20 days, wat that a holy angel or an evil angel? IF an evil angel, why is God giving it authority over a city or nation?
@@fredbutler5358 I personally think God does allow fallen angels authority over non-Israelite nations in the Old Testament. Seems to be that's what Daniel 10 is referring to. I don't see a problem with that. God allows fallen humans to rule over parts of creation as well.
Ps.82 as litetal "gods" or angels makes no sense when appied by Jesus in John 10:34. It is applied as Judges or rulers as the LSB has it.
The LSB actually translates it as gods in distinction from NASB. There are ways Jesus’s statement makes sense with this understanding of John. I wrote a blog on it if interested, otherwise a future podcast hopefully!
It does when you realize Jesus is God and is the judge in psalm 82. See also psalm 89 job 38, 1kings 22
Its not that hesier calls it divine council...the bible calls it divine council or assembly
Well, I don’t disagree with the main point you are making, but technically the phrase council or assembly is what is used in Scripture, not divine council (emphasis on divine). And in OT studies the idea of divine council was a phrase well before Heiser in liberal circles. Heiser just adapted it and made it more palatable for Christians.