The Divine Council

[johnny]

urroner,

Okay, in your mind, nobody has, but you have yet to demonstrate that your last statement is true, other than you simply declaring that it is so.

I have demonstrated it many times in this post, I have used the following verses:

• Mal.2 ([10] Have we not all one father? hath not one God created us? why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother, by profaning the covenant of our fathers?)
  
• -
  
• Isa.44 ([6] Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. [8] Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any. [24] Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself; )
  

[johnny]

kryoung1983,

And you stil don't understand the hebrew conotations of creation, which is to organize chaotic matter. The world is 'without form' its about unorganized matter. Once again what do you mean by 'create'.

And you still do not understand that God alone is the Creator, the Catholic Church teaches the following about the verb "create".

• 290 - "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth": [Gen 1:1] three things are affirmed in these first words of Scripture: the eternal God gave a beginning to all that exists outside of himself; he alone is Creator (the verb "create" - Hebrew bara - always has God for its subject). The totality of what exists (expressed by the formula "the heavens and the earth") depends on the One who gives it being
  

[Sargon]

Johnny,

Sargon

QUOTE

Gen 1: 26 Let us make man in our image, after our likeness

Since you agree that there was a divine council, and that multiple divine beings co-existed in the heavens at the time the Earth was formed, who was God speaking to? What instructions was he giving them?

The "us" is "the Word", the apostle John reveals,

John 1 ([1] In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. )

I think Rob Beron has nicely refuted you.

Besides that, since you already agreed that a divine council of beings exists, why not just accept the simple reading of the text, that God was speaking to this council? That is the formula for all ANE religious cultures. The head god consults with his council. Why is this one any different? Why do you insist that the "us" be only 2 individuals?

And secondly, John is correct in pointing out that Jesus was in the beginning with God, but that in no way precludes the fact that there were other. John does NOT say,

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was [the only divine being] with God, and the Word was God." The statement as we have it today does not preclude the existence of others as being with God in the beginning.

Isa.44 ([6] Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. [8] Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any. [24] Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself; )

As Michael Heiser has pointed out, this type of rhetoric that Isaiah uses here is idiomatically declaring nothing more than the supremacy of God as a creator, not his uniqueness as a divine creator. Heiser points out that Isa 47:8,10 & Zeph 2:15 have Babylon and Ninevah saying the same sorts of things. These cities (personified) declare that there is "none else beside me." Obviously, there are other cities in existence. It is a way of declaring their supremacy.

An example of this is Psalm 86:8-10, which reads:

8 Among the gods there is none like you, O Lord;

no deeds can compare with yours.

9 All the nations you have made

will come and worship before you, O Lord;

they will bring glory to your name.

10 For you are great and do marvelous deeds;

you alone are God.

Within 3 verses the author first acknowledged the existence of other gods, glorifies YHWH as the supreme God, then declares that YHWH is in fact alone as a god. What do we make of this? The declaration that YHWH "alone is God" in verse 10 when read literally directly contradicts verse 8. If verse 8 is read symbolically it severly reduces (and even calls into question) the sincerity of the praise. Thus, we are left to interpret verse 10 as symbolic, or as idiomatic.

LDS Music,

QUOTE(Sargon @ Aug 22 2008, 03:15 PM)

Gen 1: 26 Let us make man in our image, after our likeness

Since you agree that there was a divine council, and that multiple divine beings co-existed in the heavens at the time the Earth was formed, who was God speaking to? What instructions was he giving them?

you meant "don't agree" right?

No, I meant "agree." Johnny agrees that the divine council is a reality in the OT. That much he cannot avoid, the balance of the evidence is too strong. What he now is forced to nit-pick at are the other details, like who created man.

[Sargon]

kryoung1983,

And you still do not understand that God alone is the Creator, the Catholic Church teaches the following about the verb "create".

• 290 - "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth": [Gen 1:1] three things are affirmed in these first words of Scripture: the eternal God gave a beginning to all that exists outside of himself; he alone is Creator (the verb "create" - Hebrew bara - always has God for its subject). The totality of what exists (expressed by the formula "the heavens and the earth") depends on the One who gives it being
  

And here is what the "catholic" church used to teach about creation:

The Earliest Christians and Creation

The earliest Christians, as Hatch intimates, believed the Jewish doctrine81 of creation from chaos. For instance, Justin Martyr wrote, "And we have been taught that He in the beginning did of His goodness, for man's sake, create all things out of unformed matter . . . ."82 Peter himself echoed the picture presented in Genesis 1:1-2 of a watery chaos from which the world was created. The New English Bible translates these passages in the following way: "In the beginning of creation . . . the earth was without form and void, with darkness over the face of the abyss, and a mighty wind that swept over the surface of the waters." (Genesis 1:1-2 NEB) "There were heavens and earth long ago, created by God's word out of water and with water . . . ." (2 Peter 3:5 NEB)

Young also lists Athenagoras, Hermogenes, and Clement of Alexandria among the early Christian writers who explicitly taught creation from chaos. For example, in his Hymn to the Paedagogus, Clement rhapsodized: "Out of a confused heap who didst create This ordered sphere, and from the shapeless mass Of matter didst the universe adorn . . . ."83

http://www.fairlds.org/Restoring_the_Ancie...03.html#enloc80

[johnny]

Sargon

I think Rob Beron has nicely refuted you.

I would disagree, it appears he is not clear in his understanding of "wisdom", the prophet Jeremiah says,

• Jer.10:10-16 (the LORD is the true God, he is the living God ... He hath made the earth by his power, he hath established the world by his wisdom, and hath stretched out the heavens by his discretion. When he uttereth his voice, there is a multitude of waters in the heavens ... The LORD of hosts is his name.)
  

Besides that, since you already agreed that a divine council of beings exists, why not just accept the simple reading of the text, that God was speaking to this council? That is the formula for all ANE religious cultures. The head god consults with his council. Why is this one any different? Why do you insist that the "us" be only 2 individuals?

"the Word" is not an individual like those in divine council, those in the divine council were created by "the Word".

And secondly, John is correct in pointing out that Jesus was in the beginning with God, but that in no way precludes the fact that there were other. John does NOT say,

The prophet Isaiah says God was alone and by himself.

As Michael Heiser has pointed out, this type of rhetoric that Isaiah uses here is idiomatically declaring nothing more than the supremacy of God as a creator, not his uniqueness as a divine creator. Heiser points out that Isa 47:8,10 & Zeph 2:15 have Babylon and Ninevah saying the same sorts of things. These cities (personified) declare that there is "none else beside me." Obviously, there are other cities in existence. It is a way of declaring their supremacy.

I am not talking about the words "none else beside me." I am talking about the words "alone" and "by myself". "alone" is not referring to the supremacy of God, it is saying he was alone, he was by himself.

[Sargon]

Sargon

I would disagree, it appears he is not clear in his understanding of "wisdom", the prophet Jeremiah says,

• Jer.10:10-16 (the LORD is the true God, he is the living God ... He hath made the earth by his power, he hath established the world by his wisdom, and hath stretched out the heavens by his discretion. When he uttereth his voice, there is a multitude of waters in the heavens ... The LORD of hosts is his name.)
  

"the Word" is not an individual like those in divine council, those in the divine council were created by "the Word".

The prophet Isaiah says God was alone and by himself.

I am not talking about the words "none else beside me." I am talking about the words "alone" and "by myself". "alone" is not referring to the supremacy of God, it is saying he was alone, he was by himself.

Sigh. I'm not interested in debating someone who doesn't go much beyond mere assertions with very little (and often absolutely no) support for them.

Johnny: I'm right.

Sargon: No you aren't.

Johnny: Yes I am.

[Rommelator]

johnny:

Might I suggest that you read Mark Smith's discussion of Isaiah 40-50 in his book The Origins of Biblical Monotheism before you engage in such faulty prooftexts. Basically Smith demonstrates that those passages are being applied to foreign idols and deities and not polytheism per se. His book is really good and I strongly encourage that you read it.

[Sargon]

I am not talking about the words "none else beside me." I am talking about the words "alone" and "by myself". "alone" is not referring to the supremacy of God, it is saying he was alone, he was by himself.

I clearly said "this type of rhetoric". Furthermore, I provided an example in psalms 89 of the word "alone" being used in this way.

[johnny]

Sargon,

And here is what the "catholic" church used to teach about creation:

And here is what the early apostolic Christian church taught about creation:

• Irenaeus "It was not angels, therefore, who made us nor who formed us, neither had angels power to make an image of God, nor anyone else. . . . For God did not stand in need of these in order to accomplish what he had himself determined with himself beforehand should be done, as if he did not possess his own hands. For with him [the Father] were always present the Word and Wisdom, the Son and the Spirit, by whom and in whom, freely and spontaneously, he made all things, to whom also he speaks, saying, â??Let us make man in our image and likenessâ?? [Gen. 1:26]" (Against Heresies 4:20:1 [A.D. 189].
  
• -
  
• Irenaeus "For the Church, although dispersed throughout the whole world even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and from their disciples the faith in one God, Father Almighty, the Creator of heaven and earth and sea and all that is in them; and in one Jesus Christ, the Son of God" (Against Heresies 1:10:1 [A.D. 189]). "Nor is he moved by anyone; rather, freely and by his Word he made all things. For he alone is God, he alone is Lord, he alone is Creator, he alone is Father, he alone contains all and commands all to exist" (ibid., 2:1:1). "Of his own accord and by his own power he made all things and arranged and perfected them; and his will is the substance of all things. He alone, then, is found to be God; he alone is omnipotent, who made all things; he alone is Father, who founded and formed all things, visible and invisible, sensible and insensate, heavenly and earthly, by the Word of his power. And he has fitted and arranged all things by his wisdom; and while he comprehends all, he can be comprehended by none. He is himself the designer, himself the builder, himself the inventor, himself the maker, himself the Lord of all" (ibid., 2:30:9).
  

[Rommelator]

Furthermore, johnny, how can the Word be a plural entity in the Divine Council if he is indeed God as you try to show by your verse from John? Surely you are not going to suggest that somehow the Word is God and somehow a seperate entity from God, thus making this a form of modalism, are you?

[johnny]

Sargon

Sigh. I'm not interested in debating someone who doesn't go much beyond mere assertions with very little (and often absolutely no) support for them.

The assertions are supported by scripture, below are the supporting scriptures,

"the Word" is not an individual like those in divine council, those in the divine council were created by "the Word". (Col 1:16-17; Neh 9:6)

The prophet Isaiah says God was alone and by himself. (Isa 44:24)

I am not talking about the words "none else beside me." I am talking about the words "alone" and "by myself". (Isa 44:24) "alone" is not referring to the supremacy of God, it is saying he was alone, he was by himself.

[Rommelator]

The prophet Isaiah says God was alone and by himself. (Isa 44:24)I am not talking about the words "none else beside me." I am talking about the words "alone" and "by myself". (Isa 44:24) "alone" is not referring to the supremacy of God, it is saying he was alone, he was by himself.

Johnny, the Isaiah proof texts do not help your cause. See my above post. If you keep using them than this does not help your credibility or argument at all.

"alone" is not referring to the supremacy of God,

Actually, that is EXACTLY what alone means in the Isaiah verses. Context is everything, my dear Johnny.

[johnny]

Rommelator,

Might I suggest that you read Mark Smith's discussion of Isaiah 40-50 in his book The Origins of Biblical Monotheism before you engage in such faulty prooftexts. Basically Smith demonstrates that those passages are being applied to foreign idols and deities and not polytheism per se. His book is really good and I strongly encourage that you read it.

Please show how my prooftext is faulty, it is clear you do not even understand what passages I am referring too.

What does he say about the words "alone" and "by myself" in Isa 44:24

• Isa.44 ([24] Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself; )
  

[kryoung1983]

kryoung1983,

And you still do not understand that God alone is the Creator, the Catholic Church teaches the following about the verb "create".

• 290 - "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth": [Gen 1:1] three things are affirmed in these first words of Scripture: the eternal God gave a beginning to all that exists outside of himself; he alone is Creator (the verb "create" - Hebrew bara - always has God for its subject). The totality of what exists (expressed by the formula "the heavens and the earth") depends on the One who gives it being
  

You are reducing God to the sole independant cause of everything which is contrary to the earliest Hebrew thought. Its based on the premises of Greek metaphysics. If chaotic matter is self existant, and creation is within the bounds of organization of that which is premordial as has been shown by the Harvard Professor, and is hinted at in some of the writings of Rashi then the concept that you are implying doesn't make sense. You are forcing a paradigm onto the word 'create' which doesn't match up with Hebrew thought.

[Sargon]

Rommelator,

Please show how my prooftext is faulty, it is clear you do not even understand what passages I am referring too.

What does he say about the words "alone" and "by myself" in Isa 44:24

• Isa.44 ([24] Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself; )
  

How many recognized OT scholars have you read who comment on this passage?

[johnny]

Rommelator,

Johnny, the Isaiah proof texts do not help your cause. See my above post. If you keep using them than this does not help your credibility or argument at all.

Please provide some details to support your argument ...

Actually, that is EXACTLY what alone means in the Isaiah verses. Context is everything, my dear Johnny.

We know from other passages exactly what Isaiah means by "alone" and "by myself", the prophet Malachi says "one God created us",

• Mal.2 ([10] Have we not all one father? hath not one God created us? why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother, by profaning the covenant of our fathers?)
  

[johnny]

Sargon

I clearly said "this type of rhetoric". Furthermore, I provided an example in psalms 89 of the word "alone" being used in this way.

Psalm 89 does not have the emphasize of the words "by myself" that Isaiah has, you are comparing two different things.

[johnny]

Rommelator,

Furthermore, johnny, how can the Word be a plural entity in the Divine Council if he is indeed God as you try to show by your verse from John? Surely you are not going to suggest that somehow the Word is God and somehow a seperate entity from God, thus making this a form of modalism, are you?

The Word and the Father are distinct, but they are not different Gods. The apostle John says "the Word was with God, and the Word was God".

[Rommelator]

Please provide some details to support your argument ...

Mark Smith says it better than I do, but I will try.

Basically, "Second Isaiah" in the context of post exillic Israelite theology was blasting foriegn gods and idols that were being used against Israel by Israel's enemies. So, in order to combat these trends, the author of "Second Isaiah" tried to prop up the power of YHWH by the use of strong monotheistic hyperbole and rhetoric. However, as Smith points out, this does not negate the role of the Divine Council or Israelite polytheism.

Like I said, Mark Smith as well as Margaret Barker both have treated this issue extensively. You should read their works to get an understanding of the progress of Monotheism in Israel.

The Word and the Father are distinct, but they are not different Gods.

How are they distinct but not different Gods? You contradict yourself.

We know from other passages exactly what Isaiah means by "alone" and "by myself",

To try and use Malachai to support "Second Isaiah" is like trying to use Joseph Smith to support John Paul II. "Second Isaiah" and Malachai were writing under different historical contexts and for different reasons with different theological contexts in mind.

[johnny]

Rommelator,

Basically, "Second Isaiah" in the context of post exillic Israelite theology was blasting foriegn gods and idols that were being used against Israel by Israel's enemies. So, in order to combat these trends, the author of "Second Isaiah" tried to prop up the power of YHWH by the use of strong monotheistic hyperbole and rhetoric. However, as Smith points out, this does not negate the role of the Divine Council or Israelite polytheism.

The Bible needs to read as a whole, there are other scriptures that reveal that one God created us. The Bible does not reveal a divine council of Gods created us like Mormon scripture.

How are they distinct but not different Gods? You contradict yourself.

They are distinct, in that the Father is not the Son.

To try and use Malachai to support "Second Isaiah" is like trying to use Joseph Smith to support John Paul II. "Second Isaiah" and Malachai were writing under different historical contexts and for different reasons with different theological contexts in mind.

Isaiah and Malachi are consistent with the revelation of the New Testament. The historical context does not take away from the fact that one God created us. On the other hand Joseph Smith revealed many Gods created us.

[Rommelator]

The Bible needs to read as a whole

In other words, it needs to be read the way johnny wants it to be read.

You seem to think, johnny, that the Bible is some monolithic entity that is in complete agreement in every single way on theology. This is false. The different books of the Bible were written by different men, for different reasons, at different time and under different contexts.

Furthermore, are you going to engage in the scholarship I have provided? You can't pull the "well, they are Jewish so they don't count" card with Smith and Barker since they are both Christians. If you disagree with their assessment that there is a Divine Council readily attested in the Bible (Isaiah 6, Pslams 89, etc.) then I want to see you engage them not with petty proof texts but with actual biblical scholarship. Maybe going to the original Hebrew and Greek (Like Smith and Barker do) would be a good place to start.

[Bill Hamblin]

Rommelator,

Please show how my prooftext is faulty, it is clear you do not even understand what passages I am referring too.

What does he say about the words "alone" and "by myself" in Isa 44:24

• Isa.44 ([24] Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself; )
  

Well, as the rabbis would say, there goes the doctrine of the Trinity.

[johnny]

Rommelator,

In other words, it needs to be read the way johnny wants it to be read.

My reading is consistent with scripture, with the writings of the early apostolic Christians, and with the teachings of the Catholic Church.

You seem to think, johnny, that the Bible is some monolithic entity that is in complete agreement in every single way on theology. This is false. The different books of the Bible were written by different men, for different reasons, at different time and under different contexts.

The inspired Word is consistent because it is the word of God.

Furthermore, are you going to engage in the scholarship I have provided? You can't pull the "well, they are Jewish so they don't count" card with Smith and Barker since they are both Christians.

Please provide some quotes from Smith and Barker that they believe the Mormon teaching that a divine council of angels created man.

If you disagree with their assessment that there is a Divine Council readily attested in the Bible (Isaiah 6, Pslams 89, etc.) then I want to see you engage them not with petty proof texts but with actual biblical scholarship. Maybe going to the original Hebrew and Greek (Like Smith and Barker do) would be a good place to start.

I have no problem with there being a Divine Council, I have a problem with Mormon scripture which reveals that a council of Gods created man because this is contrary to what the OT and the NT reveal.Bill Hamblin

Well, as the rabbis would say, there goes the doctrine of the Trinity.

It is evident that you do not understand the doctrine of the Trinity.

[Rommelator]

For those interested:

Psalms 82:1...

NIV:

1 God presides in the great assembly;

he gives judgment among the "gods":

NASB:

God takes His stand in His own congregation;

He judges in the midst of the rulers.

ESV:

God has taken his place in the divine council;

in the midst of the gods he holds judgment:

NKJV:

God stands in the congregation of the mighty;

He judges among the gods.

ASV:

God standeth in the congregation of God; He judgeth among the gods.

Cool, huh?

[johnny]

Bill Hamblin,

Well, as the rabbis would say, there goes the doctrine of the Trinity.

It is evident that you do not understand the doctrine of the Trinity.