Saints Are Gods: A Biblical View

[David Bokovoy]

In D&C 115:5, the Lord specified that members of his restored Church should receive the title â??Latter-day Saintsâ?:

â??For thus shall my church be called in the last days, even The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saintsâ? (D&C 115:5)

From a biblical perspective, the word â??saintâ? carries an interesting connotation:

â??â??Saintsâ?? or â??holy onesâ?? translates the Hebrew qedoshim: the masculine plural of the adjective qadosh â??holy.â??â?¦ qedoshim [saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that is widely attested throughout the ancient Near East under other names (Sons of the gods, council, etc.)â? S.B. Parker, â??Saints,â? Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible; Karel van der Toorn, et al. (Leiden: Brill, 1999): 718.

In the Old Testament, â??saintsâ? is a title given to the deities of the divine council: â??Who among the gods is like the Lord,â? declares the Psalmist, â??a God feared in the council [s

[Nevo]

In D&C 115:5, the Lord specified that members of his restored Church should receive the title â??Latter-day Saintsâ?:

â??For thus shall my church be called in the last days, even The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saintsâ? (D&C 115:5)

From a biblical perspective, the word â??saintâ? carries an interesting connotation:

â??â??Saintsâ?? or â??holy onesâ?? translates the Hebrew qedoshim: the masculine plural of the adjective qadosh â??holy.â??â?¦ qedoshim [saints or holy ones] refers to the gods as a collectivity that is widely attested throughout the ancient Near East under other names (Sons of the gods, council, etc.)â? S.B. Parker, â??Saints,â? Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible; Karel van der Toorn, et al. (Leiden: Brill, 1999): 718.

In the Old Testament, â??saintsâ? is a title given to the deities of the divine council: â??Who among the gods is like the Lord,â? declares the Psalmist, â??a God feared in the council [s

[David Bokovoy]

Of course, the New Testament designation "saints"--the antecedent for "Latter-day Saints"--refers not to "the gods as a collectivity" but to members of "the church of God . . . who are sanctified in Christ Jesus" (1 Cor. 1:2).

But I agree that "the purpose of God's church is to assist natural men and women in becoming gods" (cf. Rev. 1:5-6; 3:21), so I suppose the OT connotation isn't inappropriate.

I too believe that a connection exists between the Old and New Testament use of â??saint.â?

The Dead Sea Scrolls contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenly beings. â??There is, then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy ones and the earthly community, at least in some of the Scrollsâ? J.J. Collins, â??Saints of the Most High,â? Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible; Karel van der Toorn, et al. (Leiden: Brill, 1999): 720.

The Saints then from a second temple perspective could not only mingle with the heavenly host but were alsoâ??at least to some extent, synonymous with the divine assembly.

[Nevo]

The Dead Sea Scrolls contain several references to the use of qedoshim for heavenly beings. â??There is, then a fluid boundary between the heavenly holy ones and the earthly community, at least in some of the Scrollsâ? J.J. Collins, â??Saints of the Most High,â? Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible; Karel van der Toorn, et al. (Leiden: Brill, 1999): 720.

The Saints then from a second temple perspective could not only mingle with the heavenly host but were alsoâ??at least to some extent, synonymous with the divine assembly.

Thanks for that, David. I'd completely overlooked the DSS, which does indeed provide a link between OT and NT concepts of "holy ones".

As one scholar notes, "one of the highest goals of the Qumran community seems to have been to participate in the heavenly angelic liturgy and to see the great throne-chariot of God enter the heavenly Temple" (James M. Scott, "Throne-Chariot Mysticism in Qumran and in Paul," Eschatology, Messianism, and the Dead Sea Scrolls, ed. C. A. Evans and P. W. Flint [Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1997], 103).

This they apparently did by reciting songs which gave the worshipper "the sense of being in the heavenly sanctuary and in the presence of the angelic priests" (Scott, 104).

DSS scholar James Davila goes even further--keeping with your suggestion that earthly "saints" in the Second Temple period were "at least to some extent synonymous with the divine assembly":

Regarding Fletcher-Louis's theory, I think it is plausible that many of the angels in the [Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice] are indeed human beings (and here I depart somewhat from my commentary), but I think they are probably just as fully angels as well. From the perspective of the human participants they were experiencing divinization or angelification by engaging in a cultic drama that put them into the heavenly realm. But their taking on the roles of angels to the point of more or less (temporary) complete identification with them did not lessen the theological reality for the participants that actual angels served in the macrocosmic Temple.

(see http://qumranica.blogspot.com/2005_03_13_q...a_archive.html)

[David Bokovoy]

Thanks Nevo for adding some interesting quotes!

As they do in both Akkadian and Ugaritic, the biblical gods appear with the title qedoshim meaning â??holy ones,â? or â??saints.â?

These gods of the heavenly council, however, clearly serve as Yahwehâ??s subordinates:

â??For who in the skies can equal the LORD, can compare with the LORD among the gods, a God greatly dreaded in the council of holy beings [saints], held in awe by all around Him?â? (Psalm 89:7-8 ).

â??The members of this sod [council] around Yahweh,â? explains Heinz Josef Fabry, â??are kept clearly on the terminological periphery, and finally their designation as qedoshim â??holy beingsâ?? even opens up the possibility that human beings belong to this sod (c.f. Job 15:8; Ps. 89:8[7], though this involves primarily the prophets (1 K. 22:19-22; Isa. 6; 40:1-8; Jer. 23:18, 22; Am. 3:7)â? H. J. Fabry, â??sod,â? The Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament; G. Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren, and Heinz-Josef Fabry eds. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2004): 174.

According to modern revelation, the Saints of God have an opportunity to become participatory members of the heavenly assembly. The connection is made clear through the discussion in D&C 76 concerning those who select a terrestrial glory:

â??Last of all, these all are they who will not be gathered with the saints, to be caught up unto the church of the Firstborn, and received into the cloudâ? (v. 102).

[The Traveler]

I believe that most modern religious individuals have defined G-d in such a matter that many of the references in Biblical canon cannot be reconciled. For example, the text â??King of Kingsâ?, â??L-rd of L-rds and even â??G-d of G-dsâ? requires a significant departure in understanding literal text that they will use to understand other literal ancient text.

I believe the real problem is that modern religions do not understand the context of the meaning of G-d before the fall as compared to the meaning of G-d after the fall. In essence their context of G-d is that man remained attached to the same G-d before and after the fall which in essence denies that there really was a fall rendering man subject instead to a â??Mediatorâ?.

The Traveler

[marvmax]

Thanks for that, David. I'd completely overlooked the DSS, which does indeed provide a link between OT and NT concepts of "holy ones".

Why in the world would you need the DSS to provide a link between the OT and the NT?

[Jerubaal]

Why in the world would you need the DSS to provide a link between the OT and the NT?

Try asking a Jew sometime.

No, really. Until the DSS were discovered, many felt that the NT was a major departure from the ideas within the OT.

[stn9]

Not to go too far off-topic, but I was thinking about the practical application of this, of teaching or sharing (perhaps the better word) this to a congregation of saints today and I thought of the "mixed" congregation of saints and so-called saints, and several passages came to mind:

â?¢ "Ye are clean, but not all." For he knew who should betray him; therefore said he, "Ye are not all clean." (John 13:10-11)

â?¢ "Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind: which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away." (Matt. 13:47-48)

â?¢ Parable of the wheat and tares (also Matt. 13)

Of course, not all saints are truly saints. John 10:28-29 came to mind as well: "I give unto them [my sheep] eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand." This idea of having been given to Christ by the Father, while possibly misconstrued as Calvanistic, is nonetheless true: certain people were called gods, even before they came to earth as mortals; they are clearly identified as such from a reverse reading of Abraham 4:1 though 3:22, tracing the antecedent to "they" who are identified as "Gods" in 4:1. Couple that with Joseph Smith's teachings on pre-mortal ordination and you get a very intriguing topic to ponder. What power is in knowing who "they" are?

[marvmax]

Try asking a Jew sometime.

No, really. Until the DSS were discovered, many felt that the NT was a major departure from the ideas within the OT.

That's an interesting answer. From the little I've talked to Jews, or read what Jews have to say about it, they point out that Jesus was a Jew and so he arose out of the OT/Jewish tradition. In other words Jesus was first a Jew and his followers were Jews, and most of the first converts were Jews, like Paul. It seems hard to deny that the OT and NT are connected in some way even without the DSS.

[Jerubaal]

That's an interesting answer. From the little I've talked to Jews, or read what Jews have to say about it, they point out that Jesus was a Jew and so he arose out of the OT/Jewish tradition. In other words Jesus was first a Jew and his followers were Jews, and most of the first converts were Jews, like Paul. It seems hard to deny that the OT and NT are connected in some way even without the DSS.

Yes, I think anyone can agree with that. It is rather the radically differing interpretations from Pharisaic (Talmudic, etc.) interpretations that seemed to have no precedent in Judaism prior to the discovery of the DSS. If you compare the DSS view of the Messiah with Orthodox Judaism, they will radically differ, with the DSS being much closer to the Christian view.