Bokovoy - Heiser

[J Green]

A few first impressions of this wonderful exchange in the new FARMS Review:

1. Kudos to Bokovy. He has the gift of being technically specific and articulate while being accessible at the same time. In my opinion, that's rare.

2. I was surprised at the groud given up by Heiser. The first eight points he lists (affirmations he makes with which he believes LDS would agree) mark an important departure from the usual EV apologetic interpretation of Psam 82 that I've seen here and elsewhere (he acknowledges this himself). Even a few of the eight points on which he believes the LDS would disagree are, as Bokovy points out, not necessarily points on which we would disagree. I'd be interested in what some of the EV denizens of MADB think of his 16 points.

3. My favorite part by far is Bokovy's discussion of Adam as part of the divine council (Review, 290-95), and Heiser seemed impressed as well (Reveiw, 321). I'd love to see some of these thoughts looked at in terms of the BOM. For example:

A. Lehi as Adam in 2 Nephi 1. Lehi's sermon places the land of promise in a garden-like setting as pristine, consecrated of God, given to them to control, but they will be evicted if they disobey. In the process, Lehi uses phrases pregnant with Genesis--'Arise from a deep sleep'; 'arise from the dust,' etc. At the heart is the process of being redeemed of God and encircled in his arms.

B. Tree of Life. Bokovy discusses both the Tree of Life and the concept of the qedoshim (holy beings) being possibly part of the DC, and the BOM brings these together. Enos tells us that the words his father, Jacob, taught him concerning eternal life and â??joy of the saintsâ?? caused his hunger to be forgiven. Jacob does indeed talk about this using the words 'joy' and 'happiness' of the saints (2 Ne:9:18, 43). Where does this joy and happiness come from? Lehi tells his children that the fruit of the tree was â??desirable to make one happyâ? (1 Ne 8:10) and filled his soul with â??exceedingly great joyâ? (1 Ne 8:12). Nephi makes the connection complete by referring to those in Lehiâ??s dream that partook of the fruit as 'saints' (1 Ne 15:28), which would be the qedoshim. This brings Enosâ?? thirst after the â??joy of the saintsâ?? into the realm of the Tree of Life vision: He is in the wilderness, desires conversion and the joy and happiness the fruit brings, then desires for the conversion of his loved ones, just as Lehi and Nephi both did in the Tree of Life vision. It's also likely that Jacob experienced the same vision or something similar--consider that Nephi and Lehi both tell us that Jacob saw the Savior (2 Ne 2:4; 2 Ne 11:3) and Lehi tells us that Jacob has beheld "that in the fullness of time he [the Redeemer] cometh to bring salvation unto men" (2 Ne 2:3). This sounds like the extended Tree of Life vision that explains the Savior's mortal ministry. All of this makes it seem that the holy ones not only water the Tree of Life (as they do in Alma 32), but that they water it by partaking of it. The qedoshim (saints) who partake of it in some sense become part of the DC.

Just a few impressions from a well-written exchange.

[J Green]

One of my favorite quotes from Heiser:

. . . after spending nearly a decade absorbed in study of the divine council, I feel more strongly than ever that there is not a single doctrine that is untouched by the subject. (Review, 222)

[e=mc2]

I also liked the fact the Heiser is calling for further study, interaction, analysis, etc., from all parties, Evangelicals and LDS. It seems to me that some maturing is going on with the Christian scholars, and it is rather nice to see........expecially when it comes to "Mormon" subjects. I say that in quotes, that is, "Mormon," because we were the very first since Joseph Smith to actually claim ownership of it, so to speak. We are proud of it, and say it loud, and now biblical scholarship, along the lins of Heiser are now saying, well yeah, duh, NOTHING is not influenced by this astonishing thing we call God's Council. Nothing indeed! It's simply one of the most HUGE things about the Plan of Salvation!

[LifeOnaPlate]

It's simply one of the most HUGE things about the Plan of Salvation!

Down to the brass tacks, it ultimately is the plan.

A. Lehi as Adam in 2 Nephi 1. Lehi's sermon places the land of promise in a garden-like setting as pristine, consecrated of God, given to them to control, but they will be evicted if they disobey. In the process, Lehi uses phrases pregnant with Genesis--'Arise from a deep sleep'; 'arise from the dust,' etc. At the heart is the process of being redeemed of God and encircled in his arms.

You just gave me a hundred more ideas. Thanks for the short summary. I read the exchange yesterday, but this adds even more possibilities.

I have a question for David: You rely somewhat on what seem to be non-Christian, and non-Jewish sources in several places, which parallelism reminded me a little of Nibley. I wonder how open critics are to bringing in "pagans" as sources to substatiate, deepen, or explain a claim.

[Zakuska]

I wonder how open critics are to bringing in "pagans" as sources to substatiate, deepen, or explain a claim.

Should it cause a problem? Paul did several times.

Acts 17, 1 Cor 15

[LifeOnaPlate]

Should it cause a problem? Paul did several times.

Acts 17, 1 Cor 15

Right, but I am looking for a general mood about arguments including information like that, and I believe David might have pre-empted a rebuttal by explaining briefly why the inclusion of "pagan" sources is acceptable, or substantial. It's a little nitpick, not a big deal. I just wonder what he'd say of it. As it stands, he's likely cleaning crayon off some old Jewish book right now, thus too busy to answer.

[e=mc2]

Well, my take on it is that it's not just pagan views and sources, though they are certainly included, without question. With a re-looking into the Hebrew Bible, the Council ofthe Gods is found rather large and looming, but it took over 70 years of scholarship and cross comparison connections from outside books other than the Bible for scholars to see this. Joseph Smith simply ticked it off via revelation from the Book of Abraham. I think that is rather remarkable.

[Chris Smith]

When one realizes how much of the Old Testament is fundamentally "pagan" when compared with our Christian monotheism, one must either see it as inferior and unauthoritative for the present or one must find it within himself to embrace the pagan perspective. I think Bokovoy and Heiser are both very aware of the continuity between paganism and the Old Testament and both would rather invest it with authority than abandon it to obsolescence.

I'm more of a Marcionite myself.

[LifeOnaPlate]

When one realizes how much of the Old Testament is fundamentally "pagan" when compared with our Christian monotheism, one must either see it as inferior and unauthoritative for the present or one must find it within himself to embrace the pagan perspective. I think Bokovoy and Heiser are both very aware of the continuity between paganism and the Old Testament and both would rather invest it with authority than abandon it to obsolescence.

I'm more of a Marcionite myself.

Thanks for the perspective, CK. It doesn't bother me, either.

[e=mc2]

Israel was always resorting to paganism, whatever that pejorative term really means, I suspect it just means "them" as opposed to "us." But on the other hand, one of the problems with comparative studies is that what is labeled paganism in ancient Israel, may not actually be such, such as the Nehushtan (the serpent on the pole) which Moses himself made and was in the temple, and only later destroyed and condemned as pagan as was the asherah, even though they were a legitimate aspect oftemple worship. Crimany even the cherubim (male and female statues of God and his wife, via Raphael Patai) were not pagan idols. So it gets tricky.

[LifeOnaPlate]

Israel was always resorting to paganism, whatever that pejorative term really means, I suspect it just means "them" as opposed to "us." But on the other hand, one of the problems with comparative studies is that what is labeled paganism in ancient Israel, may not actually be such, such as the Nehushtan (the serpent on the pole) which Moses himself made and was in the temple, and only later destroyed and condemned as pagan as was the asherah, even though they were a legitimate aspect oftemple worship. Crimany even the cherubim (male and female statues of God and his wife, via Raphael Patai) were not pagan idols. So it gets tricky.

Not only tricky, but fascinating, brother.

[Bill Hamblin]

When one realizes how much of the Old Testament is fundamentally "pagan" when compared with our Christian monotheism, one must either see it as inferior and unauthoritative for the present or one must find it within himself to embrace the pagan perspective. I think Bokovoy and Heiser are both very aware of the continuity between paganism and the Old Testament and both would rather invest it with authority than abandon it to obsolescence.

I'm more of a Marcionite myself.

Or a Gnostic.

That's a rather odd position to take considering Jesus and his disciples all viewed the OT as the scripture. Without the OT, there would be no Christianity. It is not clear how the OT can be "unauthoritative" yet the NT can remain somehow authoritative.

[Olavarria]

When one realizes how much of the Old Testament is fundamentally "pagan" when compared with our Christian monotheism, one must either see it as inferior and unauthoritative for the present or one must find it within himself to embrace the pagan perspective. I think Bokovoy and Heiser are both very aware of the continuity between paganism and the Old Testament and both would rather invest it with authority than abandon it to obsolescence.

I'm more of a Marcionite myself.

whatever youdo, dont castrate yourself. ...or was that Origen?

[Chris Smith]

Or a Gnostic.

That's a rather odd position to take considering Jesus and his disciples all viewed the OT as the scripture.

I'd accept the term "gnostic" insofar as it applies to me. Jesus claimed he was fulfilling rather than abolishing the Law, but I don't think the distinction's really all that clear. It seems to me that he made himself a pretty ardent opponent of most of the formalisms of Old Testament religion, including such things as priesthood, temple, sacrifice, purity laws and the like. There's no question that Jesus and his disciples studied the Old Testament and believed it presaged the work of the messiah. Yet for Peter and Paul (probably not for James) the work of Jesus utterly eclipsed all that had come before. Very few early Christians (Clement seems to be one) read the Old Testament both sympathetically and straightforwardly. They either spiritualized it (Justin, Barnabas, Irenaeus, Origen, etc.) or rejected it (Ignatius, Epistle to Diognetus, Marcion, various gnostics). I happen to stand in the latter tradition.

-CK

[Chris Smith]

whatever youdo, dont castrate yourself. ...or was that Origen?

That was Origen. Don't worry; I won't.

[Bill Hamblin]

It seems to me that he made himself a pretty ardent opponent of most of the formalisms of Old Testament religion, including such things as priesthood, temple, sacrifice, purity laws and the like.

Your position is not without its detractors. See, among many others:

B. Chilton, The Temple of Jesus (1992)

D. Alexander and S. Gathercole, Heaven on Earth: The Temple in Biblical Theology (2004)

G Barrois, Jesus Christ and the Temple (1980)

M Barker, The Hidden Tradition of the Kingdom of God (2007) (which summarizes her views developed over the past two decades)

W Hamblin and D Seely, Solomon's Temple: Myth and History (2007)

[Chris Smith]

Your position is not without its detractors.

No doubt.

[urroner]

Your position is not without its detractors. See, among many others:

B. Chilton, The Temple of Jesus (1992)

D. Alexander and S. Gathercole, Heaven on Earth: The Temple in Biblical Theology (2004)

G Barrois, Jesus Christ and the Temple (1980)

M Barker, The Hidden Tradition of the Kingdom of God (2007) (which summarizes her views developed over the past two decades)

W Hamblin and D Seely, Solomon's Temple: Myth and History (2007)

Ahhh, did you notice the advertisement on the shy by Hamblin? No shame in that man probably.

[e=mc2]

Now Urroner, it is time for you to show a little proper respect for the cogniscenti (sp?)............

[urroner]

Now Urroner, it is time for you to show a little proper respect for the cogniscenti (sp?)............

Aye, and for the elderly also.

BTW, it's "cognoscenti" and I'm in awe of him and many others.

[Bill Hamblin]

Ahhh, did you notice the advertisement on the shy by Hamblin? No shame in that man probably.

I only post on MAD to promote my book. Is there any other reason to be here?

[Daniel Peterson]

I only post on MAD to promote my book. Is there any other reason to be here?

Shameful!

Daniel C. Peterson,

author of the recent biography Muhammad: Prophet of God

(available on Amazon.com)

[stn9]

Truly shameful!

-stn9,

Author of no book, and one who would not even promote a new (revised and expanded) edition of a book as wonderful as Ehat's award-winning The Words of Joseph Smith due out his fall.

[e=mc2]

Shameful indeed!

Lord "I can write as fast as either Hamblin or Peterson" Kerry

Author of and producer of the Backyard Professor Blog and Podcasts, as well as innumerable scholarly articles on myriads of subjects here: http://backyardprofessor.typepad.com/the_backyard_professor/

[Doctor Steuss]

You guys really make me sick.

-"Doctor Steuss" (Contributor to about 30 or so pages of Outsmarting Depression: Surviving the Crossfire of the Mental Health Wars by Debbie Thurman).