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.
Genesis 1:1 assumes one God. There are not multiple gods. There is one God. The rest are false deities created in the minds of people.
Yes, "God" created the earth. Or, to be more precise, God the Father directed the creation which was executed by His Son, Jesus Christ. There is only one of Him and there will never be another.
None of the other beings mentioned in the scriptures are referred to as "God" but as "gods." They are, in fact, lesser beings, beings that evidently have certain divine qualities, but none of whom have any power over us. They did not create us, they cannot intervene in our lives, they cannot answer our prayers, they can not raise us from the dead, and we will never stand before them to be judged. They are only "false" gods if we attribute to them abilities they do not have. They are not "false" because they do not exist, because they do exist. The Bible tells us that our Father in Heaven, the Almighty God is "God of gods." If you are going to insist that ever reference to "gods" in the Bible is a reference to "false gods," then you are going to have to concede that "God is the God of false gods." I don't think you're going to want to do that.
Genesis 1:1 assumes one God. There are not multiple gods. There is one God. The rest are false deities created in the minds of people.
You are getting hung up on the English word 'God.' The meaning you impute to the word God, is not the meaning of the Hebrew word elohim.
Correctly translated into English in the ESV, Psalm 82 reads;
God (Elohim) has taken his place in the divine council, in the midst of the gods (elohim) he holds judgment.
These gods (elohim) of Yahweh's divine council are not human rulers. They are spirit beings who in Psalm 89:5-7 are said to be in the skies. In Daniel 4:24 Daniel tells Nebuchadnezzar of the decree of the Most High. But in Daniel 4:17, speaking of the same decree, the decree is said to be that of the watchers. 'Watcher' is a term used in the Bible only in Daniel and refers to angelic spirit beings. In 1 Enoch however, the word 'watcher' is frequently used of these spirit beings.
So in Daniel it is seen that while ultimately, the decree regarding Nebuchadnezzar's discipline is the Most Highs, the watchers also shared in the decision making. The decree was both of Yahweh, and of the watchers of the divine council which is another term for the heavenly host.
So yes. There are other gods. There are other elohim. They are created spirit beings who do not compare with the uncreated Yahweh and are subject to Him.
You are getting hung up on the English word 'God.' The meaning you impute to the word God, is not the meaning of the Hebrew word elohim.
Correctly translated into English in the ESV, Psalm 82 reads;
God (Elohim) has taken his place in the divine council, in the midst of the gods (elohim) he holds judgment.
These gods (elohim) of Yahweh's divine council are not human rulers. They are spirit beings who in Psalm 89:5-7 are said to be in the skies. In Daniel 4:24 Daniel tells Nebuchadnezzar of the decree of the Most High. But in Daniel 4:17, speaking of the same decree, the decree is said to be that of the watchers. 'Watcher' is a term used in the Bible only in Daniel and refers to angelic spirit beings. In 1 Enoch however, the word 'watcher' is frequently used of these spirit beings.
So in Daniel it is seen that while ultimately, the decree regarding Nebuchadnezzar's discipline is the Most Highs, the watchers also shared in the decision making. The decree was both of Yahweh, and of the watchers of the divine council which is another term for the heavenly host.
So yes. There are other gods. There are other elohim. They are created spirit beings who do not compare with the uncreated Yahweh and are subject to Him.
Yes. THEY believed in false deities that were powerless.
Then how come he doesn't say "thou shalt have no false gods before me" (or even just "thou shalt place nothing else before me") and how come he says "I am the lord YOUR god, which have brought thee (you) out of the land of Egypt," hence specifying himself as THEIR god (god of the Hebrews) and explaining that he's the one who brought them out of Egypt, just in case I guess they got him mixed up with another god or something? Why would it have been necessary to specify that, if there was only one?
When I look at the sky I don't say, "There is the sky, the earth's sky, the one that appears to be above Planet Earth" just to make sure they don't think I'm talking about the earth around Venus or something, or about some duplicate earth sky that somehow exists somewhere. There's just one. So it need not be stated. Plain and simple.
You are getting hung up on the English word 'God.' The meaning you impute to the word God, is not the meaning of the Hebrew word elohim.
But the Bible God isn't hung up on the word? Saying "I'm the one, I'm the one, don't worship others, I'm the one, I am THY God," etc. throughout the OT?
It's obviously a pretty important word. No, not in English, obviously. But if it just means "a" god then Bible God wouldn't be so insistent on explaining he's "it" and nobody better worship any other. Right?
Mike, it's a hole in the plot. All writers encounter this; when bringing together many writers (as in the books of the Bible), it's even more problematic. But such inconsistencies only highlight that the book was very definitively written by humans, not spoken from God to the ear of humans. It's very human, it sees God as having human pettiness (like jealousy and anger), it's one way people have seen "their god(s)" historically but it's not THE be-all or end-all or there really could be no such foibles like this one. Surely a God would know better than this.
But the Bible God isn't hung up on the word? Saying "I'm the one, I'm the one, don't worship others, I'm the one, I am THY God," etc. throughout the OT?
It's obviously a pretty important word. No, not in English, obviously. But if it just means "a" god then Bible God wouldn't be so insistent on explaining he's "it" and nobody better worship any other. Right?
Mike, it's a hole in the plot. All writers encounter this; when bringing together many writers (as in the books of the Bible), it's even more problematic. But such inconsistencies only highlight that the book was very definitively written by humans, not spoken from God to the ear of humans. It's very human, it sees God as having human pettiness (like jealousy and anger), it's one way people have seen "their god(s)" historically but it's not THE be-all or end-all or there really could be no such foibles like this one. Surely a God would know better than this.
I already explained in post #41 why God insisted that Israel worship only Him. There is no ''hole in the plot.'' I obviously do not agree with you that the Bible is a work of fiction. And yes, the Biblical writers used anthropopathisms and anthropomorphisms - language of accommodation in describing God in order to make Him easier to relate to. To make Him and His policies somewhat more understandable. And while I believe the Bible is the word of God I also fully understand that it is also a very human book.
Then how come he doesn't say "thou shalt have no false gods before me" (or even just "thou shalt place nothing else before me") and how come he says "I am the lord YOUR god, which have brought thee (you) out of the land of Egypt," hence specifying himself as THEIR god (god of the Hebrews) and explaining that he's the one who brought them out of Egypt, just in case I guess they got him mixed up with another god or something? Why would it have been necessary to specify that, if there was only one?
When I look at the sky I don't say, "There is the sky, the earth's sky, the one that appears to be above Planet Earth" just to make sure they don't think I'm talking about the earth around Venus or something, or about some duplicate earth sky that somehow exists somewhere. There's just one. So it need not be stated. Plain and simple.
Because to them, they were gods. The god's ineffectiveness didn't prevent them from worshiping them.
Because to them, they were gods. The god's ineffectiveness didn't prevent them from worshiping them.
And it's so rare for Bible God to correct people, right? So he thought he'd just let that one slide by? That one time, he just said "oh hell, I'll let them believe what they want and I'll act like they're right, because then they'll understand Me better"?
The same God who ordered infants ripped from wombs did a nice-nice here and talked down to people like they were toddlers...instead of SIMPLY saying, "I am the ONLY God, I am the Lord of EVERYONE (not the one who took you out of Egypt), you shall worship NOTHING before me, since I'm the only God, only I can be worshiped"?
Row, row, row your boat...backward...
Look, it's a nice story but it's a story. Like any other. There must be elements of truth to the ideas/thoughts/morals behind it as with any other religion. But it's not superior to any other religion and almost certainly is no closer to one "real truth" than any of the others.
If one's religion brings one closer to a wider understanding, then that's good. But by that token, then, just as you wish people would not be so insulting of your god, don't be so insulting of others' gods, as to say they literally don't exist. Those gods are as real to those people as yours is to you and in the end, these ALL are just anthropomorphism to try to explain concepts that are hard to grasp in a logical, concrete way.
Notice how upset you get when anyone says your God isn't real?
Imagine being ANY non-Abrahamic god adherent...and having Christians say such things flippantly to you everywhere you go. Now you know...and now you know you're not on any higher level that, just as you throw away Vishnu and Thor as if they're literally imagination, others can throw away your god as if he's imagination, too. And you have no more leg to stand on than they have in saying "I know I'm right." You don't know. Neither do they.
And it's so rare for Bible God to correct people, right? So he thought he'd just let that one slide by? That one time, he just said "oh hell, I'll let them believe what they want and I'll act like they're right, because then they'll understand Me better"?
He did correct them. Over and over and over and over and over again.
His prophets killed false prophets (Elijah and the prophets of Baal).
There is one God. Only one God.
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.
Why would it have been necessary to specify that, if there was only one?
