Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The idea that Ps.82 somehow supports 'judges' and specifically in relation to John 10:34 is puzzling. How does the statement in John carry any weight if it just refers to judges? Jesus said he and his father are one and that he was the Son of God - that is he was God in the flesh. The Jews took that as blaspheme.
What power are Jesus’ words in John 10:34-36 if they are mere humans? ‘Hey guys I said I am the Son of God and that I and my father are one and you accuse me of blasphemy but God said humans could be gods so you to can call yourself gods as well ’ Really! If Jesus is arguing from the lesser to the greater the sting is taken out of his statement that he and the father are one - as pertaining to his divinity. It would just be saying that God ordained me as a unique human son of God not necessarily equal with God - God in the flesh. But John’s theme is that Christ is God in the Flesh (1:14) not just a unique human son of God.
If the argument is that humans were called gods in Ps.82 (the lesser) then certainly another son of God (the greater/in purpose and mission) should be able to be called a son of god. But how does this equate with being God? This is particualrly the case since the terminology in Ps.82 is in reference to sons of God not humans or judges.
The Jews improperly thought He was making Himself God. That is why Jesus quoted Psalm 82 to correct them that humans can be called sons of God.
Quote:
The point Jesus is making is that if there were heavenly beings that were called gods in Ps.82 (the lesser) how much more so The Son of God (the greater). This is particularly so since the Son of God was manifest in the flesh to be the Messiah and take away the sins of the world according to John. Jesus is not using Ps.82 to downplay his remarks so as not to be construed as Divine statements he is highlighting the fact that God had sons and as such how much more of a son is The Son of God - hence I and my father are one unlike the other sons.
Excellent thoughts.
Psalm 82 says they would "die like common humanity" so they can't be spirit beings because:
Luk 20:36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and [believers] are the sons of God, being the children of the resurrection.
I added the bracketed word above.
Angels and spirit beings can't die. They are not mortal.
Jesus and the Father were one in spirit and mission.
Just as they were one, Jesus prayed that the disciples would be one too even as They were one; not "one in being, of the same substance, God of God etc which is balogna."
John 17:22 And I have given them the glory which Thou has given Me, that they may be one, according as We are One,
Yet another GREAT post, Whoppers. I came across the Ugarit material a few years back and was amazed. The discovery in the early 1900s just never got the press that the Dead Sea Scrolls received/receives but it is well known in academic circles. Yes, the civilization there (in modern day western Syria) pre-dated the Israelite culture was, at the same time, similar even in language. By the time we read about a band of tribes establishing themselves to become "Israel," Ugarit was on the waning days of its glory years.
Thanks, Insane!
You're exactly correct about the disparity between the general press that the Ras Shamra/Ras Ibn Hanni discoveries were given when compared to the enormous press that the Qumran discoveries garnered. Heck, the Nag Hammadi discoveries were even overshadowed by Qumran due to their incredibly bad timing ha ha! In the environment I was raised (religious) I never once heard of Ugarit, but heard about the Dead Sea Scrolls. I attended private school and no doubt it's Fundamentalist outlook contributed greatly to the lack of information available to us students concerning Ugarit and the great arch-enemy Baal spoken so vituperatively of in the "Old Testament". Oh well - I shouldn't be too surprised - after all, these were the same teachers that couldn't explain why a certain dogmatic teaching was being espoused by the school. Their answer usually was "that's just how it is" and this used to annoy the living crap out of me, as I always wanted to read more about it, or study it a little deeper - not to mention just being bewildered at some of the more strange things I was being taught.
Only later would I become exposed to Ugarit and learn that the treasures it yielded had been informing academic biblical studies for decades upon decades.
Apparantly Ugarit had been occupied off and on since about 6500-6000 BCE last time I checked - and that's a pretty long period of time, all things considered. Those darn sea-peoples! (Or is it earth-quakes now?) Some of the more eerie letters to read from around it's end are the ones in which they are desparately asking their Hittite overlords (they were vassals at this point, but with some special privileges) for help against various assualts. The Hittites had their own problems, unfortunately, and there would be a general wave of destruction around this time caused by the Sea-Peoples. Trivia for Bible Students: one group of Sea-Peoples, at this time, would become the Phillistines - Israel's great pain in the rear!
Eusebius, I think you are letting your beliefs cloud your ability to see the bigger picture (wider religious history). I once had the same problem. You start in the future and then read backwards into history instead of going from the past into the future. You start with the premise that the bible is the divinely inspired word of god, working with the idea that the writers were under the hypnotic spell of a holy spirit to write ONLY truth and ANYTHING outside of that small scope contained in 66 books must be viewed with suspicion, scoffed at, concluded as satanic and so on. For this reason, your view on this subject will be severely limited in my humble opinion.
Insane and Daniel,
Just because people, long before the Bible was written, believed in a pantheon of gods does not mean they were correct. The one true God revealed Himself to Adam and *some* of his progeny. Cain got ticked off and started his own religion. He didn't want to worship God the way God wanted.
So while God was revealing Himself to the people of the Seed, the rest were off doing their own thing, making their own idols and and make-believe gods.
Just because Israel slipped into idolatry from time to time does not mean the idols or "gods" they worshipped during those times were real gods.
Elijah in his contest made fun of the heathen's gods in the contest on the mountain. But the one true God answered Elijah. During that time Israelites slipped into Baal worship. So Elijah showed that god was no real god.
Just because people, long before the Bible was written, believed in a pantheon of gods does not mean they were correct. The one true God revealed Himself to Adam and *some* of his progeny. Cain got ticked off and started his own religion. He didn't want to worship God the way God wanted.
So while God was revealing Himself to the people of the Seed, the rest were off doing their own thing, making their own idols and and make-believe gods.
Just because Israel slipped into idolatry from time to time does not mean the idols or "gods" they worshipped during those times were real gods.
Elijah in his contest made fun of the heathen's gods in the contest on the mountain. But the one true God answered Elijah.
The importance is that it provides context to understand what is meant in the bible. If the people who wrote some portions of the Bible believed Yahweh was one of several gods, that fact should be kept in mind in understanding what they meant by what they wrote.
For example:
"Thou shalt have no other gods before me" has a slightly different meaning if the writer believed other gods really existed.
Eusebius, I don't think you ever fully addressed this:
When the Most High [Elyon] gave to the nations their inheritance,
when he separated the sons of men,
he fixed the bounds of the peoples
according to the number of the sons of God.
For the LORD's [YHWH] portion is his people,
Jacob his allotted heritage. - Deuteronomy 32:8-9
Are there some distinctions made here? We have 3 entities here:
1. The Most High [Elyon]
2. The sons of God [elohim]
3. the LORD [YHWH]
How are these verses CORRECTLY interpreted?
The same way this one is:
Psa 110:1 A Davidic Psalm
The averring of Yahweh to my Lord:
Sit at My right Until I should set Your enemies as a stool for Your feet.
In the above verse there are three:
Yahweh
The Lord, Jesus
David
The importance is that it provides context to understand what is meant in the bible. If the people who wrote some portions of the Bible believed Yahweh was one of several gods, that fact should be kept in mind in understanding what they meant by what they wrote.
For example:
"Thou shalt have no other gods before me" has a slightly different meaning if the writer believed other gods really existed.
Moses did not go to the Ugarit religion to discover what Yahweh was like.
"gods" can also be idols or "gods called "Sun" "Moon" "Fire" etc. They weren't real gods but they were gods people worshipped such as Baal and Asherah or Greek leaders worshipped as God.
Did Paul go to the Greeks to lean that God was a multi-breasted deity?
Just because people, long before the Bible was written, believed in a pantheon of gods does not mean they were correct. The one true God revealed Himself to Adam and *some* of his progeny. Cain got ticked off and started his own religion. He didn't want to worship God the way God wanted.
So while God was revealing Himself to the people of the Seed, the rest were off doing their own thing, making their own idols and and make-believe gods.
Just because Israel slipped into idolatry from time to time does not mean the idols or "gods" they worshipped during those times were real gods.
Elijah in his contest made fun of the heathen's gods in the contest on the mountain. But the one true God answered Elijah. During that time Israelites slipped into Baal worship. So Elijah showed that god was no real god.
I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm not arguing that they're ontologically real. All I'm arguing is that the authors of the Hebrew Bible believed they were real, and of that there is no doubt.
Moses did not go to the Ugarit religion to discover what Yahweh was like.
This could not be more irrelevant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
"gods" can also be idols or "gods called "Sun" "Moon" "Fire" etc.
The astral bodies were actually considered sentient deities. What do you think the "Host of Heaven" is? Why do you think Yhwh is conceptualized repeatedly as the sun?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
They weren't real gods but they were gods people worshipped such as Baal and Asherah or Greek leaders worshipped as God.
The authors of the Bible certainly believed they were real. The author of 2 Kgs 3:27 obviously thought Chemosh was real. After all, he presents the Moabite patron deity as running off the Israelite army after the king sacrificed his son.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
Did Paul go to the Greeks to lean that God was a multi-breasted deity?
Why on earth do you keep bringing up this idea about learning about deity? No one has ever claimed anyone went to another culture to learn about deity. The claim is that they used common stock divine characteristics literary motifs to write about God and the gods.
Moses did not go to the Ugarit religion to discover what Yahweh was like.
"gods" can also be idols or "gods called "Sun" "Moon" "Fire" etc. They weren't real gods but they were gods people worshipped such as Baal and Asherah or Greek leaders worshipped as God.
Did Paul go to the Greeks to lean that God was a multi-breasted deity?
A natural, objective interpretation would be that the author of the verse assumed there was more than one god, just as nearly everyone else in that region believed at that point in time, and so he naturally made references to them.
It's not that any of them were real, it's just that everyone at that point believed they were real, and that assumption made it into the bible.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
