The more I go into this process, the more I realized how many Christians never really read the Bible. They pass over this verses without to even stoping to analyze what they just read. I found the Bible more fascinating now, because you can really see the evolution of the beliefs through the years, and is easier to understand all the theological contradictions in the book that got assembled with all those scriptures.
Yeah when I was a devout SDA, I thought my church was at least half decent about reading the Bible. Maybe a few stories here and here and quoting some really obscure prophecies. But the more I spoke the members about anything specific, I realized that barely anyone actually read the stories or prophecies outside of the ones who were cultish. I could tell that most of them barely read their Bibles. Now, I see that this is an issue with not only Christianity, but most of the Abrahamic faiths and I imagine thats the case with other religions as well. Regardless of the availability of their sacred texts. Our pastors would say that the church isn't a social club. They were wrong. Not only is it a social club, but its also a comedy club within a thin veneer of a book club.
Not reading and not reading critically are two different things. However, the issue is more what preconceived notions readers bring to the text than whether they’re reading the text. We all bring and force presuppositions on the biblical text. Good, critical reading requires that we take stock of those presuppositions and do our best to let the text stand on its own no matter how uncomfortable that makes us.
Many translations of these verses have been rendered in such a way that it downplays this history, so even someone trying to honestly engage with the text wouldn't notice.
A big problem with mainstream evangelicalism in America at least is folks who place such emphasis on the text of the Bible, haven't actually read it. They generally just get parts of it read at them on Sundays. So they can say "LOL Not in the BIBLE!!" peak of confidentially incorrect.
This isn't even "just" accepted by majority scholarship, it's accepted within the most conservative scholarship, too, like in the SBC. Commenter knows nothing.
Can you give a pointer to someone in SBC who is acknowledging this? Not disagreeing, just looking for ammo for future conversations with my SB parents.
@@PrometheanRising Google "southern baptist convention divine council". The first result for me was an article on the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary website.
It makes me really sad to think that if my parents (or anyone in my life during my childhood) had been half as smart or half as informed as you, Dr Dan, I wouldn’t have grown up in terror or still be living with the scars all these decades later. smh
I learned this years ago and still remember how shocked I was … so I understand the commenter’s incredulity. Problem is 99% of churches are run by layman who just follow study plans that conveniently skip over all this stuff and the pastors who learn this in seminary are immediately taught the apologetics for it so they never bring it up unless trying to defend the Bible from an informed reader
I'm always fascinated by the inability to express disagreement in a respectful manner. Hubris requires that the [potential] disagreement be framed as an insult instead of asking a clarifying question. "The Divine Council...Can you tell me where you see that in the Bible?" It's not just the lack of understanding the Bible that is problematic. It is the giving permission to be "un-Christlike" towards those who hold different viewpoints that Evangelical "Christians" will be held accountable.
It's interesting to realise how much polytheism/henotheism is in the bible, but even more interesting to see how confidently the faithful will deny this, without having done any actual research into the subject.
Two observations. firstly, i love seeing biblical literalists and fundamentalist Christians getting schooled o what is in their own holy book. Secondly, how can Christians claim that their god is the same as Yhwh of the Hebrew bible? That god was both corporeal and limited to a place and a people. The early Christians played a neat trick in reinventing their god in line with Greek thought, even as they blamed the Jews for killing their Christ while convenriently ignoring the part where it was suposedly God's plan.
EXCELLENT job bringing these connections together around the importance of the number 70. Many people address these texts without ever brininging in the cool significance of 70.
@@WayWalker3Rather similarly to how Dan mentions it. Ok, this is OLD -- but we had these copies of 'handouts' with the lists of books in the seminary collections which specifically address each topic, should the students want to know more. These were like those old blueish 'mimeographs'. But the treatment was like : here's the grammar unique to this section, here's the description of the structure (parts of speech, verb conjugation/tense, justifications), cross references (when there were such) with parallels in other parts of the bible (or contemporary writings). The bible study wasn't so much 'god said X and it means Y' but rather this is how the writing was done here, and why, and when and how we know the why and when.
I notice in the screenshots at the end of the that Mcclellan does show Michael Heiser's paper on the divine council. I would encourage the evangelicals watching to read Heiser's books that deal with this subject and yes he interpreted the scripture as revealing the existence if the council, great evangelical scholar who died last year and Mcclellan probably knew him well
Years ago a brother in mentioned Michael Heiser, the Divine Counsel and the Unseen Realm. (Much earlier I had read “The Invisible War” by Donald Gray Barnhouse, but saw nothing about a “Divine Counsel” in it). I had never heard of the Divine Counsel, so I began reading with a Berean mindset. Once I saw the Biblical evidence and the Scriptural pattern, I’ve never read my Bible the same way since, nor have I seen and understood the world the same way since. I do not think this perspective is “necessary for salvation,” but it opens your eyes to the activities in the “ Unseen Realm” reveals the facets of the Divine and human rebellions, the perspective on “Mythology” and the origins of the “gods” of the ancient world and the role they still play in our world today.
The story of 1 Kings 22 is one of two stories in the Bible that guarantee that I can never go back to being a Christian. It is the ultimate rebuttal to "God is not the author of confusion." That scene right there shows that even if God himself does not lie, he is the father of lies. It shows that any and every case of "demon posession" is his fault because there's literally no reason to give spirits the ability to posess people and cause problems unless he intended to have them use it in a way he sees fit. I'm so glad that none of that is real.
Dan alludes to an interesting point in the middle of this video that I hope he elaborates on later...How the religious beliefs of the time only allowed a people to worship their god/s on the physical territory that they had authority over, shown how the Babylonian exiles are lamenting about how can they worship YHWH so far from home. It's fascinating that we can trace the evolution of their beliefs, as Dan briefly outlines, showing how, when faced with this problem, they could either abandon their god and take up foreign gods...or simply *change the rules*, which they did. I think we see this best in Ezekiel, with his vision of God's throne suddenly sprouting wheels so that he can literally zoom out of his Temple, Batmobile-style, to come across the land to be with his people! All of which culminates in Psalm 82, where they simply elevate their God over the entire world, so it's just not even an issue anymore...which was probably a surprise to the Israelites left behind when the reunification occurred decades later, and their divergent beliefs had to be reconciled!
That story of the prophet seeing the divine council is hilarious, btw: Full context is, a king wants to go to war, but wants to consults the prophets to see if God approves and will back him. All the court prophets tell him God is on his side, but he doesn't want to consult with the most famous one, because "he hates me, and never gives me good news", but summons him anyway. Despite being warned to give the king good news, he tells him that God does NOT support him, at which the other prophets point out that God has told them otherwise. At this point, we get the story of the vision, where the prophet tells how his superior vision got to see God at council...outright announcing how much he hates the king, wants to lure him into disaster and will anyone volunteer to LIE to the king's prophets to do so? A spirit (Satan?) steps forth, volunteering to do so. It doesn't go well for the prophet, who is jailed for his temerity, but it goes worse for the king, who rides off to battle and doesn't come back, as predicted. The story doesn't bother to tell us WHY, if God meant for the king to be deceived, did he allow this prophet to see, let alone TELL, the truth about his deception...But maybe the greater issue is that *the king did nothing wrong*! He's doing exactly what he's supposed to do, consult God before making a major move, and God willingly LIES to him! Remember this story next time someone claims that God is always truthful and that prophecy is always accurate...the very existence of this story should PROVE that, even if prophecy does have a divine origin, it cannot always be trusted!
@@blacktemplar2323 1 Kings 22 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micaiah#:~:text=A%20messenger%20is%20sent%20to,1%20Kings%2022%3A14). (This article, under "modern scholarly interpretation", says this is probably the earliest example of God having a Heavenly Throne Room"!)
Dan, I would love to see a series where you discuss other ancient or even modern religions, and comparing and contrasting primary sources of each of these religions. No need to make judgements, just comparisons, looking for similarities, etc.. Perhaps could be a good podcast episode. The one religion I'm specifically thinking of is zoroastrianism
*The Enuma Elish would later be the inspiration for the Hebrew scribes who created the text now known as the biblical Book of Genesis.* Prior to the 19th century CE, the Bible was considered the oldest book in the world and its narratives were thought to be completely original. In the mid-19th century CE, however, European museums, as well as academic and religious institutions, sponsored excavations in Mesopotamia to find physical evidence for historical corroboration of the stories in the Bible. ***These excavations found quite the opposite, however, in that, once cuneiform was translated, it was understood that a number of biblical narratives were Mesopotamian in origin.*** *Famous stories such as the Fall of Man and the Great Flood were originally conceived and written down in Sumer,* translated and modified later in Babylon, and reworked by the Assyrians ***before they were used by the Hebrew scribes for the versions which appear in the Bible.*** ***In revising the Mesopotamian creation story for their own ends, the Hebrew scribes tightened the narrative and the focus but retained the concept of the all-powerful deity who brings order from chaos.*** Marduk, in the Enuma Elish, establishes the recognizable order of the world - *just as God does in the Genesis tale* - and human beings are expected to recognize this great gift and honor the deity through service. *"Enuma Elish - The Babylonian Epic of Creation - Full Text - World History Encyclopedia"* *"Sumerian Is the World's Oldest Written Language | ProLingo"* *"Sumerian Civilization: Inventing the Future - World History Encyclopedia"* *"The Myth of Adapa - World History Encyclopedia"* Also discussed by Professor Christine Hayes at Yale University in her 1st lecture of the series on the Hebrew Bible from 8:50 to 14:30 minutes, lecture 3 from 28:30 to 41:35 minutes, lecture 4 from 0:00 up to 21:30 minutes and 24:00 up to 35:30 minutes and lecture 7 from 24:20 to 25:10 minutes. From a Biblical scholar: "Many stories in the ancient world have their origins in other stories and were borrowed and modified from other or earlier peoples. *For instance, many of the stories now preserved in the Bible are* ***modified*** *versions of stories that existed in the cultures and traditions of Israel’s* ***older*** *contemporaries.* Stories about the creation of the universe, a cataclysmic universal flood, digging wells as land markers, the naming of important cultic sites, gods giving laws to their people, and even stories about gods decreeing the possession of land to their people were all part of the cultural and literary matrix of the ancient Near East. *Biblical scribes freely* ***adopted and modified*** *these stories as a means to express their own identity, origins, and customs."* *"Stories from the Bible"* by Dr Steven DiMattei, from his website *"Biblical Contradictions"* ------------------------------------------------------------------ In addition, look up the below articles. *"Yahweh was just an ancient Canaanite god. We have been deceived! - Escaping Christian Fundamentalism"* *"Debunking the Devil - Michael A. Sherlock (Author)"* *"The Greatest Trick Religion Ever Pulled: Convincing Us That Satan Exists | Atheomedy"* *"Zoroastrianism And Persian Mythology: The Foundation Of Belief"* (Scroll to the last section: Zoroastrianism is the Foundation of Western Belief) *"10 Ways The Bible Was Influenced By Other Religions - Listverse"* *"January | 2014 | Atheomedy"* - Where the Hell Did the Idea of Hell Come From? *"The Search for Noah’s Flood - Biblical Archaeology Society"* *"Eridu Genesis - World History Encyclopedia"* *"The Atrahasis Epic: The Great Flood & the Meaning of Suffering - World History Encyclopedia"* *"Gilgamesh vs. Noah - Wordpress"* *"Old Testament Tales Were Stolen From Other Cultures - Griffin"* *"Parallelism between “The Hymn to Aten” and Psalm 104 - Project Augustine"*
Great video Dan. Out of curiosity, I've always understood the Jewish people as considering the God of Israel as the god of the Jewish people, with a special relationship/covenant between the two. By universalizing their deity in Psalm 82, and condemning other gods to mortality, are they indirectly implying that Gentiles now have no gods or implying that the only god now available to worship for Gentiles is the God of Israel? Or was this constrained only to the gods in the divine council (i.e., the gods of the "Canaanite pantheon")? I can imagine the real concern here was primary tribal-centric, meaning this was done so they can worship their god everywhere, but I wonder if they considered the broader implications elsewhere.
I cannot speak to how they thought of it specifically, beyond saying there were/are conversions, as well as what were called 'god-fearer' before Christ. The 'God-fearers' were Gentiles who worshipped the Jewish God but did not fully convert. There is, and was what are called Noahides, Gentiles who obey the 7 laws of Noah as opposed to the full Jewish laws. I can imagine that approval of these people varied. There are today rabbis (and a common commenter on Dan's videos) who advocate for Gentiles to be Noahides instead of Christian.
Your language here about inheriting the nations is so reminiscent of the language in the gospels. Is that deliberate? Is there a thematic parallel of Adonai inheriting from El with Jesus inheriting from the Father? (My apologies that I’m not as up on chapter and verse as some of your commenters.) I learn something every time I watch you, thank you!
Dr. Michael Heiser said (my paraphrase), "Once a person reads and understands Psalm 82:1 and the Divine Council, that person will never read the Bible again in the same way." That has certainly happened to me. Now that I have studied and have an understanding of the Divine Council, the Bible and the entire world makes more sense and I definitely do not read the Bible the same way.
That was fascinating. I was wondering how you would reconcile the common phrase melekh ha'olam, king of the universe, but you answered that in the last minute. Wow! As a kid, my only clue to this was in noticing that elohim was a plural noun. No one could ever explain that to my satisfaction.
For who hath known the mind of the Lord? Or who hath been his counsellor? Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? For of him, and through him, and to him, ARE ALL THINGS: TO WHOM BE GLORY FOR EVER. Amen.
There are also rebuttals to Heiser. --------------------------------------------‐------------ "I should add here that it is very clear from the grammar that the noun nachalah in v. 9 should be translated “inheritance.” *Yahweh receives Israel as his “inheritance” (nachalah), just as the other sons of El received their nations as their inheritance (nachal, v. 8).* With this verb, especially in the Hiphil, the object is always what is being given as an inheritance. Thus, Israel is given to Yahweh as his inheritance. ((Here I’m indebted to Dan McClellan.)) It would make no sense for Elyon to give himself an inheritance. Moreover, as I’ve argued elsewhere, it is not just the Gentile nations that are divided up according to the number of the sons of El. It is all of humankind, i.e., “the sons of Adam.” This clearly includes Israel. And the sons of Adam are not divided up according to the number of the sons of El, plus one (i.e., plus Elyon). They are divided up, according to the text, solely according to the number of the sons of El. *Thus, that Yahweh receives Israel as his inheritance makes Yahweh one of the sons of El mentioned in v. 8. Any other construal of the text would constitute its rewriting.* A Sumerian hymn speaks to the goddess: “Nanshe, your divine powers are not matched by any other divine powers.” *Does this mean that Nanshe was the high goddess, that there were no gods above her? No, it does not.* Nanshe was the daughter of Enki, the high god. *In Sumerian mythology, as with Ugaritic, Israelite, Babylonian, and others, in the ancient past, the high god (Enki, in this case) divided up the world and assigned his children certain domains.* Nanshe was given a limited domain (the modern Persian Gulf) and was tasked with maintaining social justice there. *This is exactly what we see in Deuteronomy 32 with Yahweh. Yahweh is given a limited domain (Israel) and is given authority over his people, to punish them, as well as to protect and defend them against foreign enemies.* That Yahweh, like Nanshe, is said to have incomparable divine power *does not* mean that he is not subordinate to the high god who gave him his domain. *It is also of note that Nanshe, like Baal, Yahweh, and so many other deities, evolved over time. Her domain increased, and she was promoted in the pantheon (although she never became the high goddess)."* *"The Most Heiser: Yahweh and Elyon in Psalm 82 and Deuteronomy 32 - Religion at the Margins"* based on the *majority scholarly consensus.* (Written by Thom Stark who is a Christian) *"Michael Heiser: A Unique Species? - Religion at the Margins"* (A second response to Michael Heiser) *"The Syncretization of Yahweh and El : reddit/AcademicBiblical"*
@Vitamin.Z Not to my knowledge. He does acknowledge this is the consensus view in the article by Thom Stark. It's a bit more nuanced than what Heiser makes it out to be. According to Stark he doesn't take the ANE context into account. --------------------------------------------------------- Nevertheless, the historical reconstruction that El was the chief god of the Israelites is not indebted only to the testimony of the (rather late) biblical witness of P. *Numerous biblical texts attest to the fact that the titles, functions, and the imagery associated with the Canaanite god El, as revealed by the Ugaritic texts and the Canaanite myth of Elkunirša, were assimilated into the profile of the deity YHWH.* According to the Ugaritic texts, El was known for his *wisdom* (e.g., KTU2 1.4.V.65[6]) and *great age* (’ab šnm, *“Father of Years,”* and drd, *“Ageless One,”* in KTU2 1.4.IV.24 and 1.10.III.6, respectively),[7] his *compassionate nature* (lţpn il dp’id, *“Kind El, the Compassionate One,”* e.g., KTU2 1.16.IV.9), his role as *father of the gods and humanity* (’ab ’adm, *“father of humanity,”* KTU2 1.14..III.47, and bny bnwt, *“creator of creatures,”* KTU2 1.17.I.24) and *creator of the cosmos.* [8] El was the *divine King* (e.g., KTU2 1.2.III.5-6) and the *head of the pantheon or divine council* (referred to variously as the dr ’il, *“circle of El/Family of El,”* KTU2 1.15.III.19; mpħrt bn ’il, *“the assembly of the sons of El,”* KTU2 1.65.3; bn ’il, *“the sons of El,”* KTU2 1.40.33, 41; pħr kbbm, *“assembly of the stars,”* KTU2 1.10.I.3-4; ‘dt ’ilm, *“assembly of the gods,”* KTU2 1.15.II.7; cf. KTU2 1.2.I; 1.3V; 1.4 IV-V) which met at the sacred mountain. *His consort was the goddess Athirat who bore him seventy sons* (šb‘m bn ’atrt, *“the seventy sons of Athirat,”* KTU2 1.4.VI.46). El was also known for his *divine patronage and blessing of progeny to humans* (as in the Epic of Kirta; see, for example, KTU2 1.14.III.46-51), for his *appearances to humans in dreams* (e.g., KTU2 1.14.I.35-37), as *being a healer* (KTU2 1.16.V-VI), and for his *dwelling at the sacred mountain* (e.g., KTU2 1.2.III.5-6) at the *sources of the mythical rivers* (KTU2 1.2.III.4; 1.3.V.6; 1.4.IV.20-22; 1.17.V.47-48) in a *tent* (KTU2 1.2.III.5; 1.3.V.8; 1.4.IV.24; 1.17.V.49; c.f. the Canaanite myth Elkunirša which *describes El’s abode as a tent[9]).[10]* *To underscore the fact that terminology and imagery originally used for the god El was adopted by the Israelites in their descriptions of YHWH,* the following brief summary might be placed in comparison to the discussion of El above: YHWH is an *aged, patriarchal deity* (Ps. 102:28; Job 36:26; Is. 40:28; Dan. 7.9-14, 22), *a father* (Deut. 32:6; Is. 63:16; 64:7; Jer. 3:4, 19; 31:9, etc.), *merciful and gracious* (Ex. 34:6; Jon. 4:2; Joel 2:13; Ps. 8615; 103:8; 145:8, etc.), *a divine patron who bestows the blessing of progeny upon Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,* often manifesting himself in *dreams or visions, a healer* (Gen. 20:17; Num. 12:13; 2 Kgs. 20:5, 8; Ps. 107:20, etc.), who *dwells in a tent* (Ps. 15:1; 27:6; 91:10; 132:3) *amidst the heavenly waters* (Ps. 47:5; 87; Is. 33: 20-22; Ez. 47:1-12, etc.), the *creator of the cosmos,* who is enthroned as *heavenly King* in the *divine council* (1 Kgs. 22:19; Is. 6:1-8; cf. Ps. 29:1-2; 82; 89: 5-8, etc.) on the *sacred mount of assembly* (e.g., Is. 14:13). Additionally, in much Israelite religious practice throughout the monarchic period, *YHWH had a divine consort, the goddess Asherah, the Hebrew equivalent of Ugaritic Athirat.[11]* (Originally the wife of El) *"When Jehovah Was Not the God of the Old Testament. Part II - theyellowdart"* Watch Professor Christine Hayes who lectures on the Hebrew Bible at Yale University. Watch lecture 2 from 40:40 to 41:50 minutes, lecture 7 from 30:00 minutes onwards, lecture 8 from 12:00 to 17:30 minutes and lecture 12 from 27:40 minutes onwards. Watch *"Pagan Origins of Judaism"* by Sigalius Myricantur and read the description in the video to see the scholarship the video is based on. Watch *"How Monotheism Evolved"* by Sigalius Myricantur and watch up to at least 21:40. ------------------------------------------------------------------ In addition, look up the below articles. *"Jews and Arabs Descended from Canaanites - Biblical Archaeology Society."* ("The study in Cell not only establishes that the ancient Israelites were ***descended from the Canaanites,*** but also establishes that the Canaanite people across the separate city-states of the southern Levant, and over a period of 1,500 years, were a genetically cohesive people.") *"The Canaanites weren't annihilated, they just 'moved' to Lebanon - The Times of Israel."* *"Ancient Canaanite religion explained* - everything.explained.today" *"Archeology of the Hebrew Bible - NOVA - PBS"* ("Many scholars now think that *most of the early Israelites were originally Canaanites, displaced Canaanites,* displaced from the lowlands, from the river valleys, displaced geographically and then displaced ideologically.") *"Origins of Judaism explained* - everything.explained.today" ("According to the current academic historical view, the origins of Judaism lie in the Bronze Age amidst polytheistic ancient Semitic religions, ***specifically evolving out of Ancient Canaanite polytheism,*** then co-existing with Babylonian religion, and syncretizing elements of Babylonian belief into the worship of Yahweh as reflected in the early prophetic books of the Hebrew Bible. (The Torah)". *Refer to the bibliography at the bottom of the page)* *"Canaanite languages - Britannica"* ("Group of Northern Central or Northwestern Semitic languages including ***Hebrew,*** Moabite, Phoenician, and Punic.") *"El - New World Encyclopedia"* (Refer to the section "El Outside the Bible" and the fact that *most of the early Israelites were originally indigenous or displaced Canaanites)* *"El (deity) explained* - everything.explained.today" (Refer to section "Ugarit and the Levant" and the fact that *most of the ancient Israelites were originally indigenous or displaced Canaanites* and see how Yahweh, later conflated with El (Yahweh-El(ohim)) is fictional) *"The Gods and Goddesses of Canaan - Essay - The Metropolitan Museum of Art - Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History"* *"Canaanite Phoenician Origin of the God of the Israelites."* *"The Phoenician (Canaanite) God Resheph in the Bible - Is That in the Bible?"* *"How the Jews Invented God and Made Him Great- Archaeology - Haaretz."* *"When the Jews believed in other gods - Archaeology - Haaretz"* *"The Invention of God - Maclean's"* *"How Did the Bible’s Editors Conceal Evidence of Israelite Polytheism - Evolution of God by Robert Wright."* *"A Theologically Revised Text: Deuteronomy 32:8-9 - Ancient Hebrew Poetry."* *"Biblical Contradiction #3: Which God is the Creator of the Heavens and Earth: Yahweh or El?"* - Dr Steven DiMattei *"Biblical Contradiction #27. Are Yahweh and El the Same God or Not?"* - Dr Steven DiMattei *"Biblical Contradiction **#294**, **#295**, **#296**. Which god liberated Israel from Egypt: Yahweh or El?"* - Dr Steven DiMattei *"Quartz Hill School of Theology - B425 Ugarit and the Bible."* *"The Origins of Yahweh and the Revived Kenite Hypothesis - Is That in the Bible?"* *"Yahweh, god of metallurgy - Fewer Lacunae."* *"Polytheistic Roots of Israelite Religion - Fewer Lacunae."* *"Yahweh was just an ancient Canaanite god. We have been deceived! - Escaping Christian Fundamentalism"* *"Religious Studies: El, Yahweh and the Development of Monotheism in Ancient Israel."* *"Yhwh, God of Edom - Daniel O. McClellan."*
@@epicofgilgamesh9964 thanks for that. I’m shocked that Stark would say Heiser doesn’t take the ANE context into account as Heiser constantly harps on reading the Bible in its correct context which is that of the Ancient Near East.
@Vitamin.Z Yes, but according to Stark he's not considering the ANE context properly, which he explains in both articles. Comment from Stark below from his second article in bold. *That is why scholars like Stark and others (I say this in humor; really we should be citing Cross, Smith, Rollston, etc.) argue that there is no clear evidence for anything like "species uniqueness" until Jeremiah 10 and Isaiah 44 (seventh and sixth centuries respectively). In these texts, other national deities are ridiculed as being merely the products of human woodworkers, and not real deities at all. This may or may not be an intentionally hyperbolic polemic, but regardless, not until these texts do we get any indication that Yahweh is in a category all to himself. This kind of language does not appear in any of the earlier texts.* ***Pointing to the standard ancient Near Eastern "incomparability" rhetoric as evidence for early species uniqueness in Israel is nothing more than special pleading.*** *But this is exactly the kind of special pleading Heiser warns against in "Heiser's Laws for Bible Study" (linked above). And I quote:* The Bible must be interpreted in context, and that context isn’t your own or that of your theological tradition; it is the context that produced it (ancient Near East / Mediterranean). Put another way, if you’re letting your theological tradition filter the Bible to you, you aren’t doing Bible study or exegesis. *Agreed.*
@@thedude9941 Hundreds of different readings words meanings change. No trinity 1 John 5:7-8 or Mark 16:9-20. No Virgin in Isaiah 7:14 in future tense. Isaiah 53 very different reading .
It's easy to see why they don't get this stuff because some of the most common versions of the Bible used by evangelicals translate Psalm 82:1 in a way that really obscures the verse. The KJV, NKJV, and NIV don't say divine council. Quite a few other translations don't as well. They use assembly or congregation of the mighty. Or even assume El and YHWH are the same and translate both as if they're the Christian God. Many Christians barely know or grasp that the Bible was written in different languages. Understanding the importance of accurate translations and historical context is far beyond them.
In general, everyone should read the bible and it's context. We can come across many of these videos from all different perspectives and hear different opinions. Psalm 82:1 is a Psalm of Asaph, who wrote songs in the time of David's rule. It is a song written for David, not an actual court scene. Jeremiah 23:18 asks who has stood in the "counsel" of the Lord, not "council". All I'm saying is read the bible yourself and its context to verify without relying on what's spoken alone.
I seem to recall a bible passage that tells which lands were assigned to which gods, l mentioning YHWH for Israel, Chemosh for Moab, etc. like an expanded Psalm 82, but I cannot find it on the interwebs. Anyone have any insight?
Divine council 100% in the bible, it doesnt take away from the bible. Infact it makes complete sense. I think Michael Hieser does a great job teaching this.
The data does not support Deuteronomy 32:8-9 readings of “angels of God/Sons of God” from the LXX and Dead Sea Scrolls as original. The argument for originality is based on the fact that the reading exist amongst the DSS, and matches closely to that of the Septuagint. However, the Masoretic reading “children of Israel” also exists amongst the DSS and is actually dated older. Manuscript 4Q45 (Dated 100-25BC)
This dude with the comment got rolled so hard he won't be standing up for days. Its even more amazing that he used laughing emojis, and than was promptly annihilated. I got my laughs for today.
2:06 "preserves a distinction" while this may be a popular scholarly opinion, it is conjecture. Distinguishing between El Elyon and Adonai is not a necessary way of interpreting the Hebrew text. We should take into consideration how it was intended to be read & understood by its hearers in the context of the immediate speech and larger narrative.
The idea that YHWH is sovereign over the gods in later Psalms is evidence that the Hebrews did consider YHWH to be the most high, so again, the "distinction" is not necessarily there in Deut 32. The best reading IMO is that Elyon=YHWH, at least in the understanding of the Deuteronomist.
It's wild that stuff like this is still (to some degree) in the Bible, yet Christianity is thought of as monotheistic, when clearly that's not how it was originally.
What Dan is attempting to show us, I think, is that the Bible is not inerrant. That is, it is not a science tract. It is a quasi-historical collection of texts with ambiguity built in because of metaphor and redaction, etc. To think that the Bible proves the existence of a Divine Council goes contrary to Dan's beliefs, or at least his scholarly method. What we can say is that there is something like a divine council suggested in Scripture and that scholars have long debated its nature and significance.
@@monteirolobato6830 I mean, that's sorta Dan's whole channel in a nutshell, isn't it? I never made any comment about the Bible proving anything, either...
The major issue with Christianity is that the bible is excruciatingly dull. Most Christians haven't read it in its entirety, (and I don't blame them) but have a handful of passages memorized, or own an annotated version of it, and so they have the idea that it's a collection of feel good stories about Jesus, and some stuff about The Law. They don't know that a huge chunk of it is made up of largely irrelevant stories about royalty and politics, and that it has to be read in context or Greek for it to make any sense. Well, the parts that do make sense anyway. Quite a lot of was written by or about lunatics. That's why they say things like "That's not in the the bible' with such confidence. They've only read about 10% of it.
@MrMortal_Ra That's a good point. Thom Stark mentions this in the below articles. *"The Most Heiser: Yahweh and Elyon in Psalm 82 and Deuteronomy 32 - Religion at the Margins"* based on the *majority scholarly consensus.* (Written by Thom Stark who is a Christian) *"Michael Heiser: A Unique Species? - Religion at the Margins"* (A second response to Michael Heiser)
Why do you refer to God as "they/them" when the bible uses a masculine pronoun? I thought you simply spoke about what is in the text without inserting any of your own ideas (religious or modern ideas of non-gendered persons) Is there data to show the genderlessness of God?
@@FishfaceTheDestroyer Pretty sure Dan is non-trinitarian, which means this can only be misgendering God to make an ideological point about sexism or something?
First, LOL! Is there a meaningful distinction between the Divine Council's Gods and the angels? When exactly did the Bene Elohim go from being one to the other? When God visits Abraham he's already traveling in the company of angels, so that category of divine being seems to already exist...Did belief in angels exist at the same time as the Canaanite Gods?
Ok, let me see if I understand. YHWH is not supposed to be pronounced out of some sort of deference, right? So is does Yahweh also work that way? Do you just say Adonai?
@AtollSurfer This is all I could find: Of the sons of El, we only know the names of five of them specifically: Baal, Yam, Mot, Shalim and Shahar. It's reasonable to assume that the gods whose parents aren't directly named are also sons of El (because El was everybody's daddy). So you can add Moloch, Kothar, Athtar, Melqart, Resheph, Chemosh, Marqod and Yarikh to the list (and possibly Eshmun if you want to assume his father Sydyk = Jupiter = El).
Thank you , I have come across those names, I was hoping Dan would cover this. It seems that Baal was one of Yawhe’s brothers and of course Asherah is mentioned too. The bible hints at others that have been erased. I hope that from here Dan goes over the 7 times Cannabis is mentioned in the bible, Asherah, Yahweh’s wife/ consort loved cannabis and the women would go the forest, to places of nature to place cannabis in the little shrines to Asherah. Here in Kiribati, we have little alters, mostly piles ofr coral rubble but highly venerated and respected. Out of respect I visit them with a little offering of Tobacco. There are reasonable comparisons to ancient time, for here our ancient time was the early 1800’s before Christianity so easy to see the past before. That brings us to the discovery in the district of Judah a few years ago. A temple with stones for Yahweh and his Asherah and before them was an alter and on the was resin of Cannabis. God and and lady Asherah just like us today love Cannabis. Thank you@@KasperKatje
I think it's out of respect for certain religious groups who think it's wrong to invoke the divine name, at least outside of certain restrictive contexts
This question might not have an answer, but in the story of Onan, everyone is obsessed with why god killed Onan But why did god kill his brother? Genesis 38:7 But Er, Judah’s firstborn, was wicked in the Lord’s sight; so the Lord put him to death. Are there any other texts with him or is this the writer basically handwaving to put Onan in his predicament?
@@hrvatskinoahid1048 I think it's more the fact that Onan disrespected the levitical law to give children to his brother's wife, and so to his brother's name. I don't know about Er, there don't seem to be any more details.
Not a critique here, just a wondering. You prefer to call the deity Adonai to show respect to other scholars in your field. But the history you tell is at odds with the colon religious narrative, so they would surely see that as disrespectful wouldn’t they? (Even though it’s not because it’s just statements of known history). So why not just go the extra step and use the deity’s name?
So what's up with the (changing?) relationship between El and YHWH, and who exactly is Asherah the consort of? Would love a video devoted to this issue.
The short version is that, essentially, YHWH and El were two different deities and over time they were conflated to one deity. Asherah was the consort of El, but due to the conflation, became the consort of YHWH for a time too.
Initially, Yahweh appears to have been incorporated as a subordinate deity (one of the 70 sons) and somewhat shortly after he was conceptually merged with El in the early monarchy. Mark Smith's "The Origin of Biblical Monotheism" is a great read for the history of Yahwism.
I notice that you use the term “Adonai”. What do you have to say about the term “Jehovah”? I am a little unsure about that term. I have a Reina-Valera 1960 Bible and it uses the term “Jehová” where the KJV uses “LORD” in the Psalms.
It wasn’t too long ago when I had purchased a couple of Michael Heiser books. I then tried explaining to my wife. Yahweh has a divine council. She then looked him up and said he was a sheep in wolves clothing. I left the faith because of that and bil said if I didn’t perform church service that the enemy will creep up and will be a death trap for you. I still study this stuff, just to be vigilant with all the nuttiness out there. I’m still undecided in a historical or mythological Jesus.
I urge you to re-approach the question of historical vs mythological Jesus. And when I say re-approach, I really mean completely ignore the question. Don't ask whether he (or anything else) is historically accurate. because truth and accurate are not the same thing. Ask any statistician, you can use accurate numbers to lie like a dog. Instead, ask what principle is being taught, and ask yourself if living the principle will effect you and those around you in a positive way or a negative way. The power of truth isn't in its accuracy, it is in its efficacy. If the effects that flow from an idea are good, then hold to that idea and revere it as truth. If something like the historicity of Jesus has no effect on what you do with your day to day life, then don't focus on that question.
At this point I've come to the conclusion that unless some kind of clear, unambiguous data is found, such as a letter recovered from the library in Pompeii that has someone mention they were in Jerusalem for something and witnessed some preacher from the boonies called Joshua (or something) get crucified for causing a disturbance in the Temple that the debate of myth versus historical is almost pointless. The character of Jesus, as portrayed in religious writing made decades and centuries later, is so mythologized that it's essentially impossible to really, honestly, say anything with objective confidence about him. If there was a guy, he's so lost and overwritten that it doesn't matter because he might as well have been purely myth.
It gets a bit more complicated than that I think, because I think the answer is both. For example, the Mandeans (followers of John the Baptist, the Nazorenes) believe that a man named Jesus of Nazereth existed. The Mandeans have texts with scholarly consensus that are dated from 100-200 AD. The Mandeans of course believe many of their texts are much older, which could be true since a lot of their sacred books are kept within their community and not shared with outsiders. (You can still read a lot of them online however) They don’t really have any incentive to believe in Jesus Christ, but they still recognize him as having existed and growing up in their community (Nazareth). He is not viewed as divine being, but someone who turned away from the Mandean faith it as he got older. My understanding is they have mixed feelings about him. Some Mandeans online claim that he become a false prophet, while other Mandeans view him the same way they would view someone like Buddha. It is interesting to read youtube comments by Mandeans commenting about their religion, one of the oldest in the world that still has followers. Mythological Jesus seems to come from the Christian era, especially after a few hundred years. He is very much real in the same way Hercules also goes from Man to God.
@@DataBeingCollected That’s so interesting to find out they were Gnostics. I’ll have to bring this up with Dr. Justin Sledge. He’s my favorite. Thanks for your interesting reply.
I know it's a Psalm but when I heard the content at 2:52, I immediately thought of Sublime's cover of By the Rivers of Babylon: ua-cam.com/video/dULC24US1w8/v-deo.htmlsi=phC4Uz3VCMDUBtl2
I gotta find the video where you explain your faith. From an outsider perspective you sound just as much an atheist as the rest of the secular Bible stuff I watch, or at least atheistic to Yahweh. I have a semi belief in reincarnation due my own childhood experiences and anecdotal stories that may or may not be true, but I don’t get how you call yourself a Christian if you agree the Bible is a man made construct, manipulated to exact a result by churches, leaders, and states. Side note, being LDS and obviously into great stories by the job and fits, are you into The Cosmere.
This guy in the video is a Mormon, that speaks for itself Israel are the "gods" in Psalm 82, the "gods" are human NOT nonhuman meaning angels/spirit beings. Israel was unique from the pagan nations that surrounded them, Israel had the law of God, 10 commandment, prophets and a Levitical priesthood. Since Israel had the law of God, it put Israel in the position of being "gods," becuase God chose them, Israel was God's chosen people. They were chosen because of Christ. Psalm 82:6 I said, “You are gods, sons of the Most High, all of you; John 10: 34-35 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, “You are gods” ’? 35 If He called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken)," 1. >>>>"I said, “You are gods” >>>>>ONCE by the God (Father) in Psalm 82. Aspaph is the Author and Psalmist of Psalm 82. Prophets of the Old Testament like Asaph the "word of the Lord" would come to Prophets like Asaph. Prophets were the "Voice" of God. God (Father) would communicate His words through the prophets, God does that here in Psalm 82:6 I said, “You are gods, sons of the Most High, all of you;">>>>>>>>Israel, Psalm 82 uses the word "all". This clearly is not about a bunch of watchers/super angels of a divine council. The Psalms were written to and for Israel. 2. SECOND time Jesus in John 10: 34 Repeats >>>> ‘I said, “You are gods”
The more I go into this process, the more I realized how many Christians never really read the Bible. They pass over this verses without to even stoping to analyze what they just read. I found the Bible more fascinating now, because you can really see the evolution of the beliefs through the years, and is easier to understand all the theological contradictions in the book that got assembled with all those scriptures.
Yeah when I was a devout SDA, I thought my church was at least half decent about reading the Bible. Maybe a few stories here and here and quoting some really obscure prophecies.
But the more I spoke the members about anything specific, I realized that barely anyone actually read the stories or prophecies outside of the ones who were cultish. I could tell that most of them barely read their Bibles.
Now, I see that this is an issue with not only Christianity, but most of the Abrahamic faiths and I imagine thats the case with other religions as well. Regardless of the availability of their sacred texts.
Our pastors would say that the church isn't a social club.
They were wrong. Not only is it a social club, but its also a comedy club within a thin veneer of a book club.
Not reading and not reading critically are two different things. However, the issue is more what preconceived notions readers bring to the text than whether they’re reading the text. We all bring and force presuppositions on the biblical text. Good, critical reading requires that we take stock of those presuppositions and do our best to let the text stand on its own no matter how uncomfortable that makes us.
Many translations of these verses have been rendered in such a way that it downplays this history, so even someone trying to honestly engage with the text wouldn't notice.
We shouldn't see the bible as one book but as collection of books with different age and different views.
Yep. Today they "come to Jesus", tomorrow they start preaching and evangelising. And when you ask them questions, they don't have an answer.
A big problem with mainstream evangelicalism in America at least is folks who place such emphasis on the text of the Bible, haven't actually read it. They generally just get parts of it read at them on Sundays. So they can say "LOL Not in the BIBLE!!" peak of confidentially incorrect.
And pass off what they are told by others
They also read it with preconceived notions. They don't read it impartially and critically.
Yes you nailed it. Nobody reads their Bible today. Not in a serious way.
This is such an interesting subject! The way Religions develop over time is fascinating.
This isn't even "just" accepted by majority scholarship, it's accepted within the most conservative scholarship, too, like in the SBC. Commenter knows nothing.
which commenter are you referring to?
The guy to whom Dan is responding
@@howlrichard1028 thank you.
Can you give a pointer to someone in SBC who is acknowledging this? Not disagreeing, just looking for ammo for future conversations with my SB parents.
@@PrometheanRising Google "southern baptist convention divine council". The first result for me was an article on the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary website.
It makes me really sad to think that if my parents (or anyone in my life during my childhood) had been half as smart or half as informed as you, Dr Dan, I wouldn’t have grown up in terror or still be living with the scars all these decades later. smh
I learned this years ago and still remember how shocked I was … so I understand the commenter’s incredulity. Problem is 99% of churches are run by layman who just follow study plans that conveniently skip over all this stuff and the pastors who learn this in seminary are immediately taught the apologetics for it so they never bring it up unless trying to defend the Bible from an informed reader
Yeah it sounds so weird up against all the dogma we learnt. Good of you to have compassion for the commenter despite the snarkiness.
Shout out to the late Dr. Heiser for teaching me this several years ago. May he rest in peace.
@@MrMortal_Ra yeah I didn’t agree with everything but enjoyed the book.
Reversing Hermon ?@@Joy_Joy_Joy
I'm always fascinated by the inability to express disagreement in a respectful manner. Hubris requires that the [potential] disagreement be framed as an insult instead of asking a clarifying question. "The Divine Council...Can you tell me where you see that in the Bible?" It's not just the lack of understanding the Bible that is problematic. It is the giving permission to be "un-Christlike" towards those who hold different viewpoints that Evangelical "Christians" will be held accountable.
It's interesting to realise how much polytheism/henotheism is in the bible, but even more interesting to see how confidently the faithful will deny this, without having done any actual research into the subject.
@@brianj5495 that was an extremely weird reply. It sounds like you read the bible as superficially as you have read my comment above.
I learned something again. Thanks Dan.
I didn't know about Isaiah passing the divine council bar exam, for example.
This is a masterful explanation: concise, strong, intellectually honest.
Two observations.
firstly, i love seeing biblical literalists and fundamentalist Christians getting schooled o what is in their own holy book.
Secondly, how can Christians claim that their god is the same as Yhwh of the Hebrew bible? That god was both corporeal and limited to a place and a people. The early Christians played a neat trick in reinventing their god in line with Greek thought, even as they blamed the Jews for killing their Christ while convenriently ignoring the part where it was suposedly God's plan.
EXCELLENT job bringing these connections together around the importance of the number 70. Many people address these texts without ever brininging in the cool significance of 70.
I love it when commenters are so confidently incorrect
Quashing misinformation, Thanks Dan!
I’d love to see a bigger discussion on how the conflation of YHWH and El came about in Semitic cultural history.
I’ve heard Dan talk about this before, but I don’t recall if it was a Tik Tok or on his podcast.
No conflation, just revisionism. The conflation is in the thought that the words refer to different entities
Ever since I began my deconstruction, this topic has fascinated me. Thanks for the insight Dan.
This was covered in several seminaries I'd worked with.
How was it explained, or was it not explained?
@@WayWalker3Rather similarly to how Dan mentions it. Ok, this is OLD -- but we had these copies of 'handouts' with the lists of books in the seminary collections which specifically address each topic, should the students want to know more. These were like those old blueish 'mimeographs'.
But the treatment was like : here's the grammar unique to this section, here's the description of the structure (parts of speech, verb conjugation/tense, justifications), cross references (when there were such) with parallels in other parts of the bible (or contemporary writings).
The bible study wasn't so much 'god said X and it means Y' but rather this is how the writing was done here, and why, and when and how we know the why and when.
This is fascinating stuff. I was brought up Jehovah's Witness, and they have an _interesting_ way of reading the Bible.
I notice in the screenshots at the end of the that Mcclellan does show Michael Heiser's paper on the divine council. I would encourage the evangelicals watching to read Heiser's books that deal with this subject and yes he interpreted the scripture as revealing the existence if the council, great evangelical scholar who died last year and Mcclellan probably knew him well
I wish someone had taught me about the divine council back when I was in Hebrew school. I would have been amazed.
Owned
Years ago a brother in mentioned Michael Heiser, the Divine Counsel and the Unseen Realm. (Much earlier I had read “The Invisible War” by Donald Gray Barnhouse, but saw nothing about a “Divine Counsel” in it).
I had never heard of the Divine Counsel, so I began reading with a Berean mindset.
Once I saw the Biblical evidence and the Scriptural pattern, I’ve never read my Bible the same way since, nor have I seen and understood the world the same way since.
I do not think this perspective is “necessary for salvation,” but it opens your eyes to the activities in the “ Unseen Realm” reveals the facets of the Divine and human rebellions, the perspective on “Mythology” and the origins of the “gods” of the ancient world and the role they still play in our world today.
The story of 1 Kings 22 is one of two stories in the Bible that guarantee that I can never go back to being a Christian.
It is the ultimate rebuttal to "God is not the author of confusion."
That scene right there shows that even if God himself does not lie, he is the father of lies.
It shows that any and every case of "demon posession" is his fault because there's literally no reason to give spirits the ability to posess people and cause problems unless he intended to have them use it in a way he sees fit.
I'm so glad that none of that is real.
Dan alludes to an interesting point in the middle of this video that I hope he elaborates on later...How the religious beliefs of the time only allowed a people to worship their god/s on the physical territory that they had authority over, shown how the Babylonian exiles are lamenting about how can they worship YHWH so far from home. It's fascinating that we can trace the evolution of their beliefs, as Dan briefly outlines, showing how, when faced with this problem, they could either abandon their god and take up foreign gods...or simply *change the rules*, which they did. I think we see this best in Ezekiel, with his vision of God's throne suddenly sprouting wheels so that he can literally zoom out of his Temple, Batmobile-style, to come across the land to be with his people! All of which culminates in Psalm 82, where they simply elevate their God over the entire world, so it's just not even an issue anymore...which was probably a surprise to the Israelites left behind when the reunification occurred decades later, and their divergent beliefs had to be reconciled!
I use to believe as the commentor until I got into the scholarship. Hope this will open their mind to the literary reality.
That story of the prophet seeing the divine council is hilarious, btw: Full context is, a king wants to go to war, but wants to consults the prophets to see if God approves and will back him. All the court prophets tell him God is on his side, but he doesn't want to consult with the most famous one, because "he hates me, and never gives me good news", but summons him anyway. Despite being warned to give the king good news, he tells him that God does NOT support him, at which the other prophets point out that God has told them otherwise. At this point, we get the story of the vision, where the prophet tells how his superior vision got to see God at council...outright announcing how much he hates the king, wants to lure him into disaster and will anyone volunteer to LIE to the king's prophets to do so? A spirit (Satan?) steps forth, volunteering to do so.
It doesn't go well for the prophet, who is jailed for his temerity, but it goes worse for the king, who rides off to battle and doesn't come back, as predicted. The story doesn't bother to tell us WHY, if God meant for the king to be deceived, did he allow this prophet to see, let alone TELL, the truth about his deception...But maybe the greater issue is that *the king did nothing wrong*! He's doing exactly what he's supposed to do, consult God before making a major move, and God willingly LIES to him! Remember this story next time someone claims that God is always truthful and that prophecy is always accurate...the very existence of this story should PROVE that, even if prophecy does have a divine origin, it cannot always be trusted!
Where in the bible can i find that story?
@@blacktemplar2323 1 Kings 22
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micaiah#:~:text=A%20messenger%20is%20sent%20to,1%20Kings%2022%3A14).
(This article, under "modern scholarly interpretation", says this is probably the earliest example of God having a Heavenly Throne Room"!)
@@blacktemplar2323 1 Kings 22
@@blacktemplar2323 in 1 kings 22 you can read it yourself
@@JopJio done. That's a wild read
YHWH the OG Kratos wiping out a pantheon and taking control over their stuff
No because KRATOS would kill YHWH
Dan, I would love to see a series where you discuss other ancient or even modern religions, and comparing and contrasting primary sources of each of these religions. No need to make judgements, just comparisons, looking for similarities, etc.. Perhaps could be a good podcast episode. The one religion I'm specifically thinking of is zoroastrianism
*The Enuma Elish would later be the inspiration for the Hebrew scribes who created the text now known as the biblical Book of Genesis.* Prior to the 19th century CE, the Bible was considered the oldest book in the world and its narratives were thought to be completely original. In the mid-19th century CE, however, European museums, as well as academic and religious institutions, sponsored excavations in Mesopotamia to find physical evidence for historical corroboration of the stories in the Bible. ***These excavations found quite the opposite, however, in that, once cuneiform was translated, it was understood that a number of biblical narratives were Mesopotamian in origin.***
*Famous stories such as the Fall of Man and the Great Flood were originally conceived and written down in Sumer,* translated and modified later in Babylon, and reworked by the Assyrians ***before they were used by the Hebrew scribes for the versions which appear in the Bible.***
***In revising the Mesopotamian creation story for their own ends, the Hebrew scribes tightened the narrative and the focus but retained the concept of the all-powerful deity who brings order from chaos.*** Marduk, in the Enuma Elish, establishes the recognizable order of the world - *just as God does in the Genesis tale* - and human beings are expected to recognize this great gift and honor the deity through service.
*"Enuma Elish - The Babylonian Epic of Creation - Full Text - World History Encyclopedia"*
*"Sumerian Is the World's Oldest Written Language | ProLingo"*
*"Sumerian Civilization: Inventing the Future - World History Encyclopedia"*
*"The Myth of Adapa - World History Encyclopedia"*
Also discussed by Professor Christine Hayes at Yale University in her 1st lecture of the series on the Hebrew Bible from 8:50 to 14:30 minutes, lecture 3 from 28:30 to 41:35 minutes, lecture 4 from 0:00 up to 21:30 minutes and 24:00 up to 35:30 minutes and lecture 7 from 24:20 to 25:10 minutes.
From a Biblical scholar:
"Many stories in the ancient world have their origins in other stories and were borrowed and modified from other or earlier peoples. *For instance, many of the stories now preserved in the Bible are* ***modified*** *versions of stories that existed in the cultures and traditions of Israel’s* ***older*** *contemporaries.* Stories about the creation of the universe, a cataclysmic universal flood, digging wells as land markers, the naming of important cultic sites, gods giving laws to their people, and even stories about gods decreeing the possession of land to their people were all part of the cultural and literary matrix of the ancient Near East. *Biblical scribes freely* ***adopted and modified*** *these stories as a means to express their own identity, origins, and customs."*
*"Stories from the Bible"* by Dr Steven DiMattei, from his website *"Biblical Contradictions"*
------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, look up the below articles.
*"Yahweh was just an ancient Canaanite god. We have been deceived! - Escaping Christian Fundamentalism"*
*"Debunking the Devil - Michael A. Sherlock (Author)"*
*"The Greatest Trick Religion Ever Pulled: Convincing Us That Satan Exists | Atheomedy"*
*"Zoroastrianism And Persian Mythology: The Foundation Of Belief"*
(Scroll to the last section: Zoroastrianism is the Foundation of Western Belief)
*"10 Ways The Bible Was Influenced By Other Religions - Listverse"*
*"January | 2014 | Atheomedy"* - Where the Hell Did the Idea of Hell Come From?
*"The Search for Noah’s Flood - Biblical Archaeology Society"*
*"Eridu Genesis - World History Encyclopedia"*
*"The Atrahasis Epic: The Great Flood & the Meaning of Suffering - World History Encyclopedia"*
*"Gilgamesh vs. Noah - Wordpress"*
*"Old Testament Tales Were Stolen From Other Cultures - Griffin"*
*"Parallelism between “The Hymn to Aten” and Psalm 104 - Project Augustine"*
@@epicofgilgamesh9964 this is almost too much info, but I love this! Thank you!
@@austinandersen5765 You're welcome.
Great video Dan. Out of curiosity, I've always understood the Jewish people as considering the God of Israel as the god of the Jewish people, with a special relationship/covenant between the two. By universalizing their deity in Psalm 82, and condemning other gods to mortality, are they indirectly implying that Gentiles now have no gods or implying that the only god now available to worship for Gentiles is the God of Israel? Or was this constrained only to the gods in the divine council (i.e., the gods of the "Canaanite pantheon")? I can imagine the real concern here was primary tribal-centric, meaning this was done so they can worship their god everywhere, but I wonder if they considered the broader implications elsewhere.
I cannot speak to how they thought of it specifically, beyond saying there were/are conversions, as well as what were called 'god-fearer' before Christ. The 'God-fearers' were Gentiles who worshipped the Jewish God but did not fully convert.
There is, and was what are called Noahides, Gentiles who obey the 7 laws of Noah as opposed to the full Jewish laws.
I can imagine that approval of these people varied. There are today rabbis (and a common commenter on Dan's videos) who advocate for Gentiles to be Noahides instead of Christian.
Really fascinating stuff! Thanks for sharing!
intensely brilliant well done - or is it just fish in a barrel?
Thanks Dan. I learn so much about the truth of the Bible from your videos. Respect🙏🙏.
Very insightful video
Thank you Dan!
So concise and perfect! Thank u
Your language here about inheriting the nations is so reminiscent of the language in the gospels. Is that deliberate? Is there a thematic parallel of Adonai inheriting from El with Jesus inheriting from the Father? (My apologies that I’m not as up on chapter and verse as some of your commenters.) I learn something every time I watch you, thank you!
Dr. Michael Heiser said (my paraphrase), "Once a person reads and understands Psalm 82:1 and the Divine Council, that person will never read the Bible again in the same way." That has certainly happened to me. Now that I have studied and have an understanding of the Divine Council, the Bible and the entire world makes more sense and I definitely do not read the Bible the same way.
That was fascinating. I was wondering how you would reconcile the common phrase melekh ha'olam, king of the universe, but you answered that in the last minute. Wow! As a kid, my only clue to this was in noticing that elohim was a plural noun. No one could ever explain that to my satisfaction.
Well answered.
love it. fantastic work as always. keep it up, brother
"... as the gods for most people are squished down into this angelic category" 4:06
That's right! Squished! Non-technical, but telegraphic. Perfect!
Thank you.
Dan McClellan at his best.
For who hath known the mind of the Lord?
Or who hath been his counsellor?
Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again?
For of him, and through him, and to him, ARE ALL THINGS:
TO WHOM BE GLORY FOR EVER.
Amen.
Dr Heiser’s (rest in peace) “Unseen Realm” deals with this very well.
There are also rebuttals to Heiser.
--------------------------------------------‐------------
"I should add here that it is very clear from the grammar that the noun nachalah in v. 9 should be translated “inheritance.” *Yahweh receives Israel as his “inheritance” (nachalah), just as the other sons of El received their nations as their inheritance (nachal, v. 8).* With this verb, especially in the Hiphil, the object is always what is being given as an inheritance. Thus, Israel is given to Yahweh as his inheritance. ((Here I’m indebted to Dan McClellan.)) It would make no sense for Elyon to give himself an inheritance. Moreover, as I’ve argued elsewhere, it is not just the Gentile nations that are divided up according to the number of the sons of El. It is all of humankind, i.e., “the sons of Adam.” This clearly includes Israel. And the sons of Adam are not divided up according to the number of the sons of El, plus one (i.e., plus Elyon). They are divided up, according to the text, solely according to the number of the sons of El. *Thus, that Yahweh receives Israel as his inheritance makes Yahweh one of the sons of El mentioned in v. 8. Any other construal of the text would constitute its rewriting.*
A Sumerian hymn speaks to the goddess: “Nanshe, your divine powers are not matched by any other divine powers.” *Does this mean that Nanshe was the high goddess, that there were no gods above her? No, it does not.* Nanshe was the daughter of Enki, the high god. *In Sumerian mythology, as with Ugaritic, Israelite, Babylonian, and others, in the ancient past, the high god (Enki, in this case) divided up the world and assigned his children certain domains.* Nanshe was given a limited domain (the modern Persian Gulf) and was tasked with maintaining social justice there. *This is exactly what we see in Deuteronomy 32 with Yahweh. Yahweh is given a limited domain (Israel) and is given authority over his people, to punish them, as well as to protect and defend them against foreign enemies.* That Yahweh, like Nanshe, is said to have incomparable divine power *does not* mean that he is not subordinate to the high god who gave him his domain. *It is also of note that Nanshe, like Baal, Yahweh, and so many other deities, evolved over time. Her domain increased, and she was promoted in the pantheon (although she never became the high goddess)."*
*"The Most Heiser: Yahweh and Elyon in Psalm 82 and Deuteronomy 32 - Religion at the Margins"* based on the *majority scholarly consensus.*
(Written by Thom Stark who is a Christian)
*"Michael Heiser: A Unique Species? - Religion at the Margins"*
(A second response to Michael Heiser)
*"The Syncretization of Yahweh and El : reddit/AcademicBiblical"*
@@epicofgilgamesh9964does Heiser then interact with the work you mention here?
@Vitamin.Z Not to my knowledge. He does acknowledge this is the consensus view in the article by Thom Stark. It's a bit more nuanced than what Heiser makes it out to be. According to Stark he doesn't take the ANE context into account.
---------------------------------------------------------
Nevertheless, the historical reconstruction that El was the chief god of the Israelites is not indebted only to the testimony of the (rather late) biblical witness of P. *Numerous biblical texts attest to the fact that the titles, functions, and the imagery associated with the Canaanite god El, as revealed by the Ugaritic texts and the Canaanite myth of Elkunirša, were assimilated into the profile of the deity YHWH.* According to the Ugaritic texts, El was known for his *wisdom* (e.g., KTU2 1.4.V.65[6]) and *great age* (’ab šnm, *“Father of Years,”* and drd, *“Ageless One,”* in KTU2 1.4.IV.24 and 1.10.III.6, respectively),[7] his *compassionate nature* (lţpn il dp’id, *“Kind El, the Compassionate One,”* e.g., KTU2 1.16.IV.9), his role as *father of the gods and humanity* (’ab ’adm, *“father of humanity,”* KTU2 1.14..III.47, and bny bnwt, *“creator of creatures,”* KTU2 1.17.I.24) and *creator of the cosmos.* [8] El was the *divine King* (e.g., KTU2 1.2.III.5-6) and the *head of the pantheon or divine council* (referred to variously as the dr ’il, *“circle of El/Family of El,”* KTU2 1.15.III.19; mpħrt bn ’il, *“the assembly of the sons of El,”* KTU2 1.65.3; bn ’il, *“the sons of El,”* KTU2 1.40.33, 41; pħr kbbm, *“assembly of the stars,”* KTU2 1.10.I.3-4; ‘dt ’ilm, *“assembly of the gods,”* KTU2 1.15.II.7; cf. KTU2 1.2.I; 1.3V; 1.4 IV-V) which met at the sacred mountain. *His consort was the goddess Athirat who bore him seventy sons* (šb‘m bn ’atrt, *“the seventy sons of Athirat,”* KTU2 1.4.VI.46). El was also known for his *divine patronage and blessing of progeny to humans* (as in the Epic of Kirta; see, for example, KTU2 1.14.III.46-51), for his *appearances to humans in dreams* (e.g., KTU2 1.14.I.35-37), as *being a healer* (KTU2 1.16.V-VI), and for his *dwelling at the sacred mountain* (e.g., KTU2 1.2.III.5-6) at the *sources of the mythical rivers* (KTU2 1.2.III.4; 1.3.V.6; 1.4.IV.20-22; 1.17.V.47-48) in a *tent* (KTU2 1.2.III.5; 1.3.V.8; 1.4.IV.24; 1.17.V.49; c.f. the Canaanite myth Elkunirša which *describes El’s abode as a tent[9]).[10]*
*To underscore the fact that terminology and imagery originally used for the god El was adopted by the Israelites in their descriptions of YHWH,* the following brief summary might be placed in comparison to the discussion of El above: YHWH is an *aged, patriarchal deity* (Ps. 102:28; Job 36:26; Is. 40:28; Dan. 7.9-14, 22), *a father* (Deut. 32:6; Is. 63:16; 64:7; Jer. 3:4, 19; 31:9, etc.), *merciful and gracious* (Ex. 34:6; Jon. 4:2; Joel 2:13; Ps. 8615; 103:8; 145:8, etc.), *a divine patron who bestows the blessing of progeny upon Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,* often manifesting himself in *dreams or visions, a healer* (Gen. 20:17; Num. 12:13; 2 Kgs. 20:5, 8; Ps. 107:20, etc.), who *dwells in a tent* (Ps. 15:1; 27:6; 91:10; 132:3) *amidst the heavenly waters* (Ps. 47:5; 87; Is. 33: 20-22; Ez. 47:1-12, etc.), the *creator of the cosmos,* who is enthroned as *heavenly King* in the *divine council* (1 Kgs. 22:19; Is. 6:1-8; cf. Ps. 29:1-2; 82; 89: 5-8, etc.) on the *sacred mount of assembly* (e.g., Is. 14:13). Additionally, in much Israelite religious practice throughout the monarchic period, *YHWH had a divine consort, the goddess Asherah, the Hebrew equivalent of Ugaritic Athirat.[11]* (Originally the wife of El)
*"When Jehovah Was Not the God of the Old Testament. Part II - theyellowdart"*
Watch Professor Christine Hayes who lectures on the Hebrew Bible at Yale University. Watch lecture 2 from 40:40 to 41:50 minutes, lecture 7 from 30:00 minutes onwards, lecture 8 from 12:00 to 17:30 minutes and lecture 12 from 27:40 minutes onwards.
Watch *"Pagan Origins of Judaism"* by Sigalius Myricantur and read the description in the video to see the scholarship the video is based on.
Watch *"How Monotheism Evolved"* by Sigalius Myricantur and watch up to at least 21:40.
------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, look up the below articles.
*"Jews and Arabs Descended from Canaanites - Biblical Archaeology Society."*
("The study in Cell not only establishes that the ancient Israelites were ***descended from the Canaanites,*** but also establishes that the Canaanite people across the separate city-states of the southern Levant, and over a period of 1,500 years, were a genetically cohesive people.")
*"The Canaanites weren't annihilated, they just 'moved' to Lebanon - The Times of Israel."*
*"Ancient Canaanite religion explained* - everything.explained.today"
*"Archeology of the Hebrew Bible - NOVA - PBS"*
("Many scholars now think that *most of the early Israelites were originally Canaanites, displaced Canaanites,* displaced from the lowlands, from the river valleys, displaced geographically and then displaced ideologically.")
*"Origins of Judaism explained* - everything.explained.today"
("According to the current academic historical view, the origins of Judaism lie in the Bronze Age amidst polytheistic ancient Semitic religions, ***specifically evolving out of Ancient Canaanite polytheism,*** then co-existing with Babylonian religion, and syncretizing elements of Babylonian belief into the worship of Yahweh as reflected in the early prophetic books of the Hebrew Bible. (The Torah)".
*Refer to the bibliography at the bottom of the page)*
*"Canaanite languages - Britannica"*
("Group of Northern Central or Northwestern Semitic languages including ***Hebrew,*** Moabite, Phoenician, and Punic.")
*"El - New World Encyclopedia"*
(Refer to the section "El Outside the Bible" and the fact that *most of the early Israelites were originally indigenous or displaced Canaanites)*
*"El (deity) explained* - everything.explained.today"
(Refer to section "Ugarit and the Levant" and the fact that *most of the ancient Israelites were originally indigenous or displaced Canaanites* and see how Yahweh, later conflated with El (Yahweh-El(ohim)) is fictional)
*"The Gods and Goddesses of Canaan - Essay - The Metropolitan Museum of Art - Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History"*
*"Canaanite Phoenician Origin of the God of the Israelites."*
*"The Phoenician (Canaanite) God Resheph in the Bible - Is That in the Bible?"*
*"How the Jews Invented God and Made Him Great- Archaeology - Haaretz."*
*"When the Jews believed in other gods - Archaeology - Haaretz"*
*"The Invention of God - Maclean's"*
*"How Did the Bible’s Editors Conceal Evidence of Israelite Polytheism - Evolution of God by Robert Wright."*
*"A Theologically Revised Text: Deuteronomy 32:8-9 - Ancient Hebrew Poetry."*
*"Biblical Contradiction #3: Which God is the Creator of the Heavens and Earth: Yahweh or El?"* - Dr Steven DiMattei
*"Biblical Contradiction #27. Are Yahweh and El the Same God or Not?"* - Dr Steven DiMattei
*"Biblical Contradiction **#294**, **#295**, **#296**. Which god liberated Israel from Egypt: Yahweh or El?"* - Dr Steven DiMattei
*"Quartz Hill School of Theology - B425 Ugarit and the Bible."*
*"The Origins of Yahweh and the Revived Kenite Hypothesis - Is That in the Bible?"*
*"Yahweh, god of metallurgy - Fewer Lacunae."*
*"Polytheistic Roots of Israelite Religion - Fewer Lacunae."*
*"Yahweh was just an ancient Canaanite god. We have been deceived! - Escaping Christian Fundamentalism"*
*"Religious Studies: El, Yahweh and the Development of Monotheism in Ancient Israel."*
*"Yhwh, God of Edom - Daniel O. McClellan."*
@@epicofgilgamesh9964 thanks for that. I’m shocked that Stark would say Heiser doesn’t take the ANE context into account as Heiser constantly harps on reading the Bible in its correct context which is that of the Ancient Near East.
@Vitamin.Z Yes, but according to Stark he's not considering the ANE context properly, which he explains in both articles.
Comment from Stark below from his second article in bold.
*That is why scholars like Stark and others (I say this in humor; really we should be citing Cross, Smith, Rollston, etc.) argue that there is no clear evidence for anything like "species uniqueness" until Jeremiah 10 and Isaiah 44 (seventh and sixth centuries respectively). In these texts, other national deities are ridiculed as being merely the products of human woodworkers, and not real deities at all. This may or may not be an intentionally hyperbolic polemic, but regardless, not until these texts do we get any indication that Yahweh is in a category all to himself. This kind of language does not appear in any of the earlier texts.* ***Pointing to the standard ancient Near Eastern "incomparability" rhetoric as evidence for early species uniqueness in Israel is nothing more than special pleading.*** *But this is exactly the kind of special pleading Heiser warns against in "Heiser's Laws for Bible Study" (linked above). And I quote:*
The Bible must be interpreted in context, and that context isn’t your own or that of your theological tradition; it is the context that produced it (ancient Near East / Mediterranean). Put another way, if you’re letting your theological tradition filter the Bible to you, you aren’t doing Bible study or exegesis.
*Agreed.*
As a baby biblical scholar, this is taught in the first year. The commenter really needs to take a seat and maybe listen and learn.
Christians refuse to teach their kids to read Hebrew and Greek to read original scripture..
Telling why .
Excellent channel 👍
What do you think would change if they did?
@@thedude9941 Hundreds of different readings words meanings change.
No trinity 1 John 5:7-8 or Mark 16:9-20.
No Virgin in Isaiah 7:14 in future tense.
Isaiah 53 very different reading .
It's easy to see why they don't get this stuff because some of the most common versions of the Bible used by evangelicals translate Psalm 82:1 in a way that really obscures the verse. The KJV, NKJV, and NIV don't say divine council. Quite a few other translations don't as well. They use assembly or congregation of the mighty. Or even assume El and YHWH are the same and translate both as if they're the Christian God. Many Christians barely know or grasp that the Bible was written in different languages. Understanding the importance of accurate translations and historical context is far beyond them.
Amazing how much church pastors lie about.
In general, everyone should read the bible and it's context. We can come across many of these videos from all different perspectives and hear different opinions. Psalm 82:1 is a Psalm of Asaph, who wrote songs in the time of David's rule. It is a song written for David, not an actual court scene. Jeremiah 23:18 asks who has stood in the "counsel" of the Lord, not "council".
All I'm saying is read the bible yourself and its context to verify without relying on what's spoken alone.
I seem to recall a bible passage that tells which lands were assigned to which gods, l mentioning YHWH for Israel, Chemosh for Moab, etc. like an expanded Psalm 82, but I cannot find it on the interwebs.
Anyone have any insight?
As much as I agree, most people will stop paying attention when you repeat the phrase “overwhelming academic consensus” over and over.
Most people are morons.
Divine council 100% in the bible, it doesnt take away from the bible. Infact it makes complete sense. I think Michael Hieser does a great job teaching this.
The data does not support Deuteronomy 32:8-9 readings of “angels of God/Sons of God” from the LXX and Dead Sea Scrolls as original.
The argument for originality is based on the fact that the reading exist amongst the DSS, and matches closely to that of the Septuagint.
However, the Masoretic reading “children of Israel” also exists amongst the DSS and is actually dated older.
Manuscript 4Q45 (Dated 100-25BC)
This dude with the comment got rolled so hard he won't be standing up for days. Its even more amazing that he used laughing emojis, and than was promptly annihilated. I got my laughs for today.
Terima kasih.
Yaweh is also known as the Manowar
2:06 "preserves a distinction" while this may be a popular scholarly opinion, it is conjecture. Distinguishing between El Elyon and Adonai is not a necessary way of interpreting the Hebrew text. We should take into consideration how it was intended to be read & understood by its hearers in the context of the immediate speech and larger narrative.
The idea that YHWH is sovereign over the gods in later Psalms is evidence that the Hebrews did consider YHWH to be the most high, so again, the "distinction" is not necessarily there in Deut 32. The best reading IMO is that Elyon=YHWH, at least in the understanding of the Deuteronomist.
Spawn is one of my favorite comic book characters
It's wild that stuff like this is still (to some degree) in the Bible, yet Christianity is thought of as monotheistic, when clearly that's not how it was originally.
What Dan is attempting to show us, I think, is that the Bible is not inerrant. That is, it is not a science tract. It is a quasi-historical collection of texts with ambiguity built in because of metaphor and redaction, etc. To think that the Bible proves the existence of a Divine Council goes contrary to Dan's beliefs, or at least his scholarly method. What we can say is that there is something like a divine council suggested in Scripture and that scholars have long debated its nature and significance.
@@monteirolobato6830 I mean, that's sorta Dan's whole channel in a nutshell, isn't it? I never made any comment about the Bible proving anything, either...
Well, I'm not sure I accept that Christianity was ever polytheistic, but maybe that's not what you meant.@@Quirken
❤All who donate to this video will receive. 1/3: gravity reduction makes u lite on yr feet
Gideon is experiencing serious cognitive dissonance
That is so cool...
Was there a historic event associated with Psalm 82? A war of some sort I would assume.
It’s interesting and somewhat miraculous how the truth of the Bible can be a mirror and can take the masks off of people…
You are with Heiser on this. Interesting.
The major issue with Christianity is that the bible is excruciatingly dull. Most Christians haven't read it in its entirety, (and I don't blame them) but have a handful of passages memorized, or own an annotated version of it, and so they have the idea that it's a collection of feel good stories about Jesus, and some stuff about The Law. They don't know that a huge chunk of it is made up of largely irrelevant stories about royalty and politics, and that it has to be read in context or Greek for it to make any sense. Well, the parts that do make sense anyway. Quite a lot of was written by or about lunatics. That's why they say things like "That's not in the the bible' with such confidence. They've only read about 10% of it.
I wouldn't be surprised if a lot have read the whole thing, they just breezed past thinking about the parts they didn't understand
nobody has read Numbers, not even the guy that wrote it.@@benroberts2222
Love your insights and lessons. Can you please tell me why you say Adonai when reading YHWH. I always thought that was pronounced Yahweh.
He did a video explaining. My best recollection is that he is being sensitive to others who find pronouncing YHWH aloud is distasteful.
It’s because those of the Jewish faith don’t use the sacred name of God. Dan is being sensitive to this and using the title Adonai meaning Lord.
@@Vitamin.Z Many religious Jews don't say Adonai outside of prayer either. They usually say "HaShem", meaning "The Name".
@@aaronpolichar7936 geshunteit
@@aaronpolichar7936 exactly
hey whats your opinion on dr michael heisers work?
@MrMortal_Ra That's a good point. Thom Stark mentions this in the below articles.
*"The Most Heiser: Yahweh and Elyon in Psalm 82 and Deuteronomy 32 - Religion at the Margins"* based on the *majority scholarly consensus.*
(Written by Thom Stark who is a Christian)
*"Michael Heiser: A Unique Species? - Religion at the Margins"*
(A second response to Michael Heiser)
What is the hos of hosts thing that Richard carrier often refers to in the context of Adonai? Should not El be the host of hosts?
Drop the mic...... Dan, Dan, The Fireman.
Why do you refer to God as "they/them" when the bible uses a masculine pronoun? I thought you simply spoke about what is in the text without inserting any of your own ideas (religious or modern ideas of non-gendered persons)
Is there data to show the genderlessness of God?
Why would an all powerful being need a penis?
This is a position held by Jews primarily: that God is genderless and is given "He" out of reverence for his role.
@@FishfaceTheDestroyer Pretty sure Dan is non-trinitarian, which means this can only be misgendering God to make an ideological point about sexism or something?
@@musicofforester ...Jews are also non-trinitarian.
@@musicofforester Jews aren't trinitarian either though.
First, LOL! Is there a meaningful distinction between the Divine Council's Gods and the angels? When exactly did the Bene Elohim go from being one to the other? When God visits Abraham he's already traveling in the company of angels, so that category of divine being seems to already exist...Did belief in angels exist at the same time as the Canaanite Gods?
There is a meaningful distinction between God (E'lohim as a singular proper name) and angels (elohim as a plural commonplace noun).
"A song of Asaph. God stands in the congregation of God; in the midst of the judges He will judge."
Ok, let me see if I understand. YHWH is not supposed to be pronounced out of some sort of deference, right? So is does Yahweh also work that way? Do you just say Adonai?
enjoy this thread , who were Gods brothers and sisters, who was his father and mother ?
Look up El and Asherah. If I remember correctly, they had about 80 "children".
@@KasperKatje 70 children as per the table of nations. Dan mentions it in this video.
@@epicofgilgamesh9964 oh thanks, I thought it was the same clip as posted a couple of days ago. More to watch 😉
@AtollSurfer This is all I could find:
Of the sons of El, we only know the names of five of them specifically: Baal, Yam, Mot, Shalim and Shahar.
It's reasonable to assume that the gods whose parents aren't directly named are also sons of El (because El was everybody's daddy).
So you can add Moloch, Kothar, Athtar, Melqart, Resheph, Chemosh, Marqod and Yarikh to the list (and possibly Eshmun if you want to assume his father Sydyk = Jupiter = El).
Thank you ,
I have come across those names, I was hoping Dan would cover this.
It seems that Baal was one of Yawhe’s brothers and of course Asherah is mentioned too. The bible hints at others that have been erased.
I hope that from here Dan goes over the 7 times Cannabis is mentioned in the bible, Asherah, Yahweh’s wife/ consort loved cannabis and the women would go the forest, to places of nature to place cannabis in the little shrines to Asherah. Here in Kiribati, we have little alters, mostly piles ofr coral rubble but highly venerated and respected. Out of respect I visit them with a little offering of Tobacco. There are reasonable comparisons to ancient time, for here our ancient time was the early 1800’s before Christianity so easy to see the past before.
That brings us to the discovery in the district of Judah a few years ago. A temple with stones for Yahweh and his Asherah and before them was an alter and on the was resin of Cannabis. God and and lady Asherah just like us today love Cannabis. Thank you@@KasperKatje
Ohh ❤Jesus power
I’m curious why you say Adonai for the Tetragrammaton YHWH?
I think it's out of respect for certain religious groups who think it's wrong to invoke the divine name, at least outside of certain restrictive contexts
What's interesting is that many religious Jews don't say Adonai either outside of prayer. They would say HaShem ("The Name").
What book do you recommend i start this investigation with?
you need a fake mic to drop when you deliver the goods like this!
This question might not have an answer, but in the story of Onan, everyone is obsessed with why god killed Onan But why did god kill his brother? Genesis 38:7 But Er, Judah’s firstborn, was wicked in the Lord’s sight; so the Lord put him to death.
Are there any other texts with him or is this the writer basically handwaving to put Onan in his predicament?
Er and Onan were punished by God for spilling semen wastefully.
Might have eaten shellfish or worn blended fabrics, hard to tell.
@@hrvatskinoahid1048 I think it's more the fact that Onan disrespected the levitical law to give children to his brother's wife, and so to his brother's name. I don't know about Er, there don't seem to be any more details.
Not a critique here, just a wondering. You prefer to call the deity Adonai to show respect to other scholars in your field. But the history you tell is at odds with the colon religious narrative, so they would surely see that as disrespectful wouldn’t they? (Even though it’s not because it’s just statements of known history). So why not just go the extra step and use the deity’s name?
All the evidence points towards man creates gods.
In this early concept is God the creator of these other divine beings or is the God of Israel just one of the bunch?
So what's up with the (changing?) relationship between El and YHWH, and who exactly is Asherah the consort of? Would love a video devoted to this issue.
There's already a few. Just make a quick search on his channel.
The short version is that, essentially, YHWH and El were two different deities and over time they were conflated to one deity. Asherah was the consort of El, but due to the conflation, became the consort of YHWH for a time too.
Yaweh is one of the son of El
@@ChristianCarrizales This is the answer.
Ashera is a tree planted by a Gentile for the purpose of being worshiped. Less sensational, but true.
Drops the mic, never sounded so right for a comment
Was Adonai subordinate to El in the divine council?
Initially, Yahweh appears to have been incorporated as a subordinate deity (one of the 70 sons) and somewhat shortly after he was conceptually merged with El in the early monarchy. Mark Smith's "The Origin of Biblical Monotheism" is a great read for the history of Yahwism.
Job 1? Or are those different sons of God? Or is the story such an obvious fiction that it doesn't count?
I notice that you use the term “Adonai”. What do you have to say about the term “Jehovah”? I am a little unsure about that term. I have a Reina-Valera 1960 Bible and it uses the term “Jehová” where the KJV uses “LORD” in the Psalms.
It’s Hebrew? For master. He’s using it as a stand in for the divine make so as to not invoke the divine name in a casual video.
It wasn’t too long ago when I had purchased a couple of Michael Heiser books. I then tried explaining to my wife. Yahweh has a divine council. She then looked him up and said he was a sheep in wolves clothing. I left the faith because of that and bil said if I didn’t perform church service that the enemy will creep up and will be a death trap for you. I still study this stuff, just to be vigilant with all the nuttiness out there. I’m still undecided in a historical or mythological Jesus.
I urge you to re-approach the question of historical vs mythological Jesus. And when I say re-approach, I really mean completely ignore the question. Don't ask whether he (or anything else) is historically accurate. because truth and accurate are not the same thing. Ask any statistician, you can use accurate numbers to lie like a dog. Instead, ask what principle is being taught, and ask yourself if living the principle will effect you and those around you in a positive way or a negative way. The power of truth isn't in its accuracy, it is in its efficacy. If the effects that flow from an idea are good, then hold to that idea and revere it as truth. If something like the historicity of Jesus has no effect on what you do with your day to day life, then don't focus on that question.
That settles it then. Mythological Jesus it is. Thanks for the reply.
At this point I've come to the conclusion that unless some kind of clear, unambiguous data is found, such as a letter recovered from the library in Pompeii that has someone mention they were in Jerusalem for something and witnessed some preacher from the boonies called Joshua (or something) get crucified for causing a disturbance in the Temple that the debate of myth versus historical is almost pointless. The character of Jesus, as portrayed in religious writing made decades and centuries later, is so mythologized that it's essentially impossible to really, honestly, say anything with objective confidence about him. If there was a guy, he's so lost and overwritten that it doesn't matter because he might as well have been purely myth.
It gets a bit more complicated than that I think, because I think the answer is both.
For example, the Mandeans (followers of John the Baptist, the Nazorenes) believe that a man named Jesus of Nazereth existed. The Mandeans have texts with scholarly consensus that are dated from 100-200 AD. The Mandeans of course believe many of their texts are much older, which could be true since a lot of their sacred books are kept within their community and not shared with outsiders. (You can still read a lot of them online however)
They don’t really have any incentive to believe in Jesus Christ, but they still recognize him as having existed and growing up in their community (Nazareth). He is not viewed as divine being, but someone who turned away from the Mandean faith it as he got older. My understanding is they have mixed feelings about him. Some Mandeans online claim that he become a false prophet, while other Mandeans view him the same way they would view someone like Buddha. It is interesting to read youtube comments by Mandeans commenting about their religion, one of the oldest in the world that still has followers.
Mythological Jesus seems to come from the Christian era, especially after a few hundred years. He is very much real in the same way Hercules also goes from Man to God.
@@DataBeingCollected That’s so interesting to find out they were Gnostics. I’ll have to bring this up with Dr. Justin Sledge. He’s my favorite. Thanks for your interesting reply.
Who comprised this council of God?
Names ??
Every deity named in the Bible is part of this council. Baal-Zaphon (Beelzebub) the Lotan-slayer, Chemosh, Moloch, and so forth.
I know it's a Psalm but when I heard the content at 2:52, I immediately thought of Sublime's cover of By the Rivers of Babylon: ua-cam.com/video/dULC24US1w8/v-deo.htmlsi=phC4Uz3VCMDUBtl2
1:10 Why the gender-neutral "their" for the Ugaritic patriarch El? (Genuinely curious)
Dan says that for basically every deity
@@superiorbeing8805 Yeah-I wonder why.
Mic drop
Someone didn't read the Bible for accuracy before commenting.
In fairness, that's most of the internet lol.
@@AurorXZ totally
How dare you use the Bibles original language against me. 😂
I gotta find the video where you explain your faith. From an outsider perspective you sound just as much an atheist as the rest of the secular Bible stuff I watch, or at least atheistic to Yahweh. I have a semi belief in reincarnation due my own childhood experiences and anecdotal stories that may or may not be true, but I don’t get how you call yourself a Christian if you agree the Bible is a man made construct, manipulated to exact a result by churches, leaders, and states.
Side note, being LDS and obviously into great stories by the job and fits, are you into The Cosmere.
This guy in the video is a Mormon, that speaks for itself
Israel are the "gods" in Psalm 82, the "gods" are human NOT nonhuman meaning angels/spirit beings.
Israel was unique from the pagan nations that surrounded them, Israel had the law of God, 10 commandment, prophets and a Levitical priesthood. Since Israel had the law of God, it put Israel in the position of being "gods," becuase God chose them, Israel was God's chosen people. They were chosen because of Christ.
Psalm 82:6 I said, “You are gods, sons of the Most High, all of you;
John 10: 34-35 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, “You are gods” ’? 35 If He called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken),"
1. >>>>"I said, “You are gods” >>>>>ONCE by the God (Father) in Psalm 82. Aspaph is the Author and Psalmist of Psalm 82. Prophets of the Old Testament like Asaph the "word of the Lord" would come to Prophets like Asaph. Prophets were the "Voice" of God. God (Father) would communicate His words through the prophets, God does that here in Psalm 82:6 I said, “You are gods, sons of the Most High, all of you;">>>>>>>>Israel, Psalm 82 uses the word "all". This clearly is not about a bunch of watchers/super angels of a divine council. The Psalms were written to and for Israel.
2. SECOND time Jesus in John 10: 34 Repeats >>>> ‘I said, “You are gods”
So is the council the Anunnaki?