Jump to content

Is The Spirit In 1 Kings 22:19-23 Embodied Or Incorporeal?


Recommended Posts

Rob Bowman,

On the one hand, we can be sure that these passages do not mean that God is literally or actually dishonest, untruthful, or deceptive. Our confidence that the passages do not teach such a view of God need not be forced onto the texts from the outside; it is well supported from the history itself. Earlier in the history, Samuel tells Saul, “And also the Glory of Israel will not lie or have regret, for he is not a man, that he should have regret” (1 Sam. 15:29). (“Have regret” here is often translated “repent” or “change his mind.”) In context Samuel is warning Saul that God’s solemn decision to reject Saul as king, which Samuel had just communicated to Saul, was not going to change (see vv. 22-28). Furthermore, if God was literally intent on deceiving Ahab he went about it in a very strange way, since the whole point of Micaiah’s revelation was that the spirit to which Ahab was listening was deceiving him!

Not if one reads in the context that Ahab was being presented with a choice, to beleive his prophets and scribes with the written word of God or beleive Micaiah, a living breathing spirit filled prophet of God. Thats why the king locks him up so that If he does return unharmed from the battle, He could put him to death for prophecying falsely.

This isn't the first time that God has used deceptive means to bring about his purposes either.

He's going to used the same type of delusions and deception when the AntiChrist comes.

2 Thess 2

11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

He's going to send a lieing spirit into the world to deceive the sinner into falling just Like Ahab.

Edited by Zakuska
Link to comment

Hi Rob,

I have been mulling over your "host of heaven" argument, and I must admit that it doesn't entirely make sense to me. Correct me if I am wrong, but this seems to be the jist of your argument:

1) The designation "host of heaven" refers to literal astronomical entities (stars, planets, constellations, moon, etc.)

2) When used in relation to spirits, the designation "host of heaven" should be consider as figurative (spirits are figuratively, and not literally, consider as stars or planets or constellations or moons).

3) If things, like spirits, are designated in a figurative way, then the context in which they are so designated should also be considered as figurative.

4) Hence, since in 1 Kings 22:21 the spirits seen standing and speaking before the throne of God, are referred to figuratively as the "host of heaven," then what was seen (their standing and speaking) should be considered as figurative as well.

Correct?

If so, then even if one accepts your 1st and 2nd premise (we don't), I am not sure that your premise #3 necessarily follows.

For example, were the Savior, during his mortal ministry, to have sat himself down on a rock on the side of the mountain, and were his disciples to have been gathered together and stood in front of him, on his right hand and on his left, and they listened to his message and cried out praises; and were one of the disciples to have poetically recorded the event by saying, "the Shepherd sitteth upon a rock, and his sheep were gather together, and stood around him and listened and praised his name; does this necessarily mean that since the disciples were referred to figuratively as "sheep," one should consider the gathering and standing and speak by the disciples was not literal, but figurative?

I don't think so. I believe one may reasonably view the event as literal.

In short, since we reasonably believe the designation "host of heaven" may literally refer to the host of spirits/angels in heaven as well as stars and moons and planets, and since we may reasonably believe that a figurative designation of a thing doesn't necessarily render, as figurative, the context of the thing, then we can reasonably view 1 Kings 22:21 literally.

You, of course, may reasonably view it as figurative. To each their own.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited by wenglund
Link to comment

Hi Rob,

I have been mulling over your "host of heaven" argument, and I must admit that it doesn't entirely make sense to me. Correct me if I am wrong, but this seems to be the jist of your argument:

1) The designation "host of heaven" refers to literal astronomical entities (stars, planets, constellations, moon, etc.)

2) When used in relation to spirits, the designation "host of heaven" should be consider as figurative (spirits are figuratively, and not literally, consider as stars or planets or constellations or moons).

3) If things, like spirits, are designated in a figurative way, then the context in which they are so designated should also be considered as figurative.

4) Hence, since in 1 Kings 22:21 the spirits seen standing and speaking before the throne of God, are referred to figuratively as the "host of heaven," then what was seen (their standing and speaking) should be considered as figurative as well.

Correct?

If so, then even if one accepts your 1st and 2nd premise (we don't), I am not sure that your premise #3 necessarily follows.

For example, were the Savior, during his mortal ministry, to have sat himself down on a rock on the side of the mountain, and were his disciples to have been gathered together and stood in front of him, on his right hand and on his left, and they listened to his message and cried out praises; and were one of the disciples to have poetically recorded the event by saying, "the Shepherd sitteth upon a rock, and his sheep were gather together, and stood around him and listened and praised his name; does this necessarily mean that since the disciples were referred to figuratively as "sheep," one should consider the gathering and standing and speak by the disciples was not literal, but figurative?

I don't think so. I believe one may reasonably view the event as literal.

In short, since we reasonably believe the designation "host of heaven" may literally refer to the host of spirits/angels in heaven as well as stars and moons and planets, and since we may reasonably believe that a figurative designation of a thing doesn't necessarily render, as figurative, the context of the thing, then we can reasonably view 1 Kings 22:21 literally.

You, of course, may reasonably view it as figurative. To each their own.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

The word “hosts” is used in various ways in the Bible. It is used to refer to the entire congregation of the house of Israel which came out of Egypt:

Exodus 12
:

41 And it came to pass at the end of the four hundred and thirty years, even the selfsame day it came to pass, that all the hosts of the Lord went out from the land of Egypt.

It is used to refer to all the members of one of the tribes of Israel:

Numbers 10
:

14 In the first place went the standard of the camp of the children of Judah according to their armies: and over his host was Nahshon the son of Amminadab.

15 And over the host of the tribe of the children of Issachar was Nethaneel the son of Zuar.

16 And over the host of the tribe of the children of Zebulun was Eliab the son of Helon.

19 And over the host of the tribe of the children of Simeon was Shelumiel the son of Zurishaddai.

20 And over the host of the tribe of the children of Gad was Eliasaph the son of Deuel.

23 And over the host of the tribe of the children of Manasseh was Gamaliel the son of Pedahzur.

24 And over the host of the tribe of the children of Benjamin was Abidan the son of Gideoni.

26 And over the host of the tribe of the children of Asher was Pagiel the son of Ocran.

27 And over the host of the tribe of the children of Naphtali was Ahira the son of Enan.

Its commonest use however is to refer to the armies of Israel or of other nations. Rob’s argument that “hosts of heaven” refers only or predominantly to celestial spheres is not tenable.

Link to comment

Not if one reads in the context that Ahab was being presented with a choice, to beleive his prophets and scribes with the written word of God or beleive Micaiah, a living breathing spirit filled prophet of God. Thats why the king locks him up so that If he does return unharmed from the battle, He could put him to death for prophecying falsely.

This isn't the first time that God has used deceptive means to bring about his purposes either.

He's going to used the same type of delusions and deception when the AntiChrist comes.

2 Thess 2

11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

He's going to send a lieing spirit into the world to deceive the sinner into falling just Like Ahab.

That is the verse that came to my mind when I read the discussion.

Link to comment

The word “hosts” is used in various ways in the Bible. It is used to refer to the entire congregation of the house of Israel which came out of Egypt:

Exodus 12
:

41 And it came to pass at the end of the four hundred and thirty years, even the selfsame day it came to pass, that all the hosts of the Lord went out from the land of Egypt.

It is used to refer to all the members of one of the tribes of Israel:

Numbers 10
:

<snip>

Its commonest use however is to refer to the armies of Israel or of other nations. Rob’s argument that “hosts of heaven” refers only or predominantly to celestial spheres is not tenable.

Further more...

1 Chronicles 12:22

22 For at that time day by day there came to David to help him, until it was a great host, like the host of God.

Why would these human "hosts" of Israel be compared to a Heavenly host of sphereoids?

When the context cleary is comparing the numbers of these earthly armies to the "endless concourses of Angels/gods" standing and singing praises around the throne of God?

And another...

Jude 1

4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

5 I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not.

6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

8 Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.

9 Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.

I guess pluto and neptune were at it again!

Edited by Zakuska
Link to comment

Ex. 14:4 And I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, that he shall follow after them; and I will be honoured upon Pharaoh, and upon all his host; that the Egyptians may know that I am the Lord. And they did so.

• • •

17 And I, behold, I will harden the hearts of the Egyptians, and they shall follow them: and I will get me honour upon Pharaoh, and upon all his host, upon his chariots, and upon his horsemen.

• • •

24 And it came to pass, that in the morning watch the Lord looked unto the host of the Egyptians through the pillar of fire and of the cloud, and troubled the host of the Egyptians,

• • •

28 And the waters returned, and covered the chariots, and the horsemen, and all the host of Pharaoh that came into the sea after them; there remained not so much as one of them.

I guess the Egyptians had their own stars, moons and suns.

Edited by Vance
Link to comment

Josh. 5: 13 ¶ And it came to pass, when Joshua was by Jericho, that he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, behold, there stood a man over against him with his sword drawn in his hand: and Joshua went unto him, and said unto him, Art thou for us, or for our adversaries?

14 And he said, Nay; but as captain of the host of the Lord am I now come. And Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and did worship, and said unto him, What saith my lord unto his servant?

15 And the captain of the Lord’s host said unto Joshua, Loose thy shoe from off thy foot; for the place whereon thou standest is holy. And Joshua did so.

I guess stars, moons and suns can have a captain that looks like a man and talks.

Who knew?

Edited by Vance
Link to comment

Josh. 5: 13 ¶ And it came to pass, when Joshua was by Jericho, that he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, behold, there stood a man over against him with his sword drawn in his hand: and Joshua went unto him, and said unto him, Art thou for us, or for our adversaries?

14 And he said, Nay; but as captain of the host of the Lord am I now come. And Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and did worship, and said unto him, What saith my lord unto his servant?

15 And the captain of the Lord’s host said unto Joshua, Loose thy shoe from off thy foot; for the place whereon thou standest is holy. And Joshua did so.

I guess stars, moons and suns can have a captain that looks like a man and talks.

Who knew?

Correction... a Sword toating captian.

Johnny+Depp+Jack+Sparrow+3.jpg

He appeared again here...

1 Chronicles 21:16

16 And David lifted up his eyes, and saw the angel of the Lord stand between the earth and the heaven, having a drawn sword in his hand stretched out over Jerusalem. Then David and the elders of Israel, who were clothed in sackcloth, fell upon their faces.

Edited by Zakuska
Link to comment
It is often said that the scene Micaiah describes is God in his heavenly court or divine council. Although this interpretation is widely held, there are some reasons to think it may not be quite accurate. Micaiah’s use of the term “host of heaven” describes the spiritual beings in God’s presence as an army. That is what the term “host” (seba’) means.

I am confused.

You initially argued that "the usual meaning and reference of the biblical expression 'the host of heaven' is to the stars, planets, and similar observed objects in the sky (see especially Deut. 4:19; 17:3; 2 Kings 23:5; Isa. 34:4; Jer. 8:2; 33:22; Dan. 8:10; cf. also Ps. 33:6; Neh. 9:6a; Isa. 40:26; 45:12)..".

Now, you are saying it means army of heaven.

Which is it?

Also, if the word seba’ (or tze·va)means Army, then why was it translated as "host" (which can mean "army," but can also mean "a large number of people or things")? Are you saying that the Bible, in this case, wasn't translated correctly? ;)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Link to comment

I am confused.

You initially argued that "the usual meaning and reference of the biblical expression 'the host of heaven' is to the stars, planets, and similar observed objects in the sky (see especially Deut. 4:19; 17:3; 2 Kings 23:5; Isa. 34:4; Jer. 8:2; 33:22; Dan. 8:10; cf. also Ps. 33:6; Neh. 9:6a; Isa. 40:26; 45:12)..".

Now, you are saying it means army of heaven.

Which is it?

Also, if the word seba’ (or tze·va)means Army, then why was it translated as "host" (which can mean "army," but can also mean "a large number of people or things")? Are you saying that the Bible, in this case, wasn't translated correctly? ;)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

If you put on anti-Mormon blinders shades the inconsistency just disappears from view.

Link to comment

If you put on anti-Mormon blinders shades the inconsistency just disappears from view.

Lets give him the benefit of a doubt. I think he was just showing how Hosts can be used in both instances to refer to two different things.

Luke 2

13 And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying,

14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.

Those heavenly Planets can sure sing Christmas Carols good!

Link to comment
Lets give him the benefit of a doubt.

That is the charitable thing to do.

However, as best I can tell, whichever way he answers the doubts, it may undermine at least one of his arguments. We'll see.

Either way, even if he is able to salvage the reasoning behind his own interpretation, our differing reasonable interpretation is not negated.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Link to comment

Lets give him the benefit of a doubt. I think he was just showing how Hosts can be used in both instances to refer to two different things.

Luke 2

13 And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying,

14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.

Those heavenly Planets can sure sing Christmas Carols good!

Another problem is, he is reading something into the text that isn't there.

Deut. 4:19 And lest thou lift up thine eyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven, shouldest be driven to worship them, and serve them, which the Lord thy God hath divided unto all nations under the whole heaven.

Deut. 17:3 And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded;

2 Kgs. 23:5 And he put down the idolatrous priests, whom the kings of Judah had ordained to burn incense in the high places in the cities of Judah, and in the places round about Jerusalem; them also that burned incense unto Baal, to the sun, and to the moon, and to the planets, and to all the host of heaven.

Isa. 34:4 And all the host of heaven shall be dissolved, and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll: and all their host shall fall down, as the leaf falleth off from the vine, and as a falling fig from the fig tree.

Jer. 8:2 And they shall spread them before the sun, and the moon, and all the host of heaven, whom they have loved, and whom they have served, and after whom they have walked, and whom they have sought, and whom they have worshipped: they shall not be gathered, nor be buried; they shall be for dung upon the face of the earth.

Jer. 33:22 As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured: so will I multiply the seed of David my servant, and the Levites that minister unto me.

Dan. 8:10 And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them.

Absolutely, NOTHING in those verses requires "the host of heaven" to include astronomical bodies.

Edited to add, for good measure.

Neh. 9:6 Thou, even thou, art Lord alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth, and all things that are therein, the seas, and all that is therein, and thou preservest them all; and the host of heaven worshippeth thee.

Ps. 33:6 By the word of the Lord were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.

Isa. 40:26 Lift up your eyes on high, and behold who hath created these things, that bringeth out their host by number: he calleth them all by names by the greatness of his might, for that he is strong in power; not one faileth.

Isa 45:12 I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded.

Edited by Vance
Link to comment

Another problem is, he is reading something into the text that isn't there.

<snip>

Absolutely, NOTHING in those verses requires "the host of heaven" to include astronomical bodies.

Neh. 9:6 Thou, even thou, art Lord alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth, and all things that are therein, the seas, and all that is therein, and thou preservest them all; and the host of heaven worshippeth thee.

I agree vance. I was unaware that "Planets" can worship God and sing him praises.

Edited by Zakuska
Link to comment

I agree vance. I was unaware that "Planets" can worship God and sing him praises.

The bottom line is that his statement,

The usual meaning and reference of the biblical expression “the host of heaven” is to the stars, planets, and similar observed objects in the sky (see especially Deut. 4:19; 17:3; 2 Kings 23:5; Isa. 34:4; Jer. 8:2; 33:22; Dan. 8:10; cf. also Ps. 33:6; Neh. 9:6a; Isa. 40:26; 45:12).

is UNTRUE!!

Link to comment
maklelan,

I wondered if this topic would get your interest. Say, have you seen my thread on the Mormon use of the Alphabet of Rabbi Akiva? You might want to take a look at it, since I specifically critique a statement you made about it.

I am roughly two-thirds done with my response. I am saving the best sources for last.

Link to comment

Mr. Bukowski,

You wrote:

He is here to collect counter-arguments so he can scuttle away to his little website and create more straw men to knock down by misquoting what he has collected here.

I have been forbidden to link to my organization's website, but apparently you think you are free to trash it with impunity (and you're not the only one). But now you have made a claim that is possible to test objectively. CFR that I have ever on IRR's website misquoted something posted here. You can give the title of the article without linking to it so as not to violate forum rules.

Edited by Rob Bowman
Link to comment

volgadon,

You wrote:

I am roughly two-thirds done with my response. I am saving the best sources for last.

Knock yourself out, but I hope you actually address the point of my blog article, which was that the Alphabet of Rabbi Akiva is not good evidence that Joseph Smith restored a doctrine that was lost in a second-century apostasy of the Christian church.

Link to comment

volgadon,

You wrote:

Knock yourself out, but I hope you actually address the point of my blog article, which was that the Alphabet of Rabbi Akiva is not good evidence that Joseph Smith restored a doctrine that was lost in a second-century apostasy of the Christian church.

I have ammassed a good ammount of evidence which will defang your criticism of the passage in question. Most of it was rather easy to find.

Link to comment

Mr. Bukowski,

You wrote:

I have been forbidden to link to my organization's website, but apparently you think you are free to trash it with impunity (and you're not the only one). But now you have made a claim that is possible to test objectively. CFR that I have ever on IRR's website misquoted something posted here. You can give the title of the article without linking to it so as not to violate forum rules.

To be more accurate your website cannot be linked because it contains Temple content which is clearly not allowed from anyone (pro, neutral or anti - Mormon) according to board rules. You have been allowed to present and promote any LDS related topic or point of view without obstruction on this site.

Link to comment

Mr. Bukowski,

You wrote:

I have been forbidden to link to my organization's website, but apparently you think you are free to trash it with impunity (and you're not the only one). But now you have made a claim that is possible to test objectively. CFR that I have ever on IRR's website misquoted something posted here. You can give the title of the article without linking to it so as not to violate forum rules.

You are right. The correct words would be "misrepresent and distort". Is that better?

And as far as trashing your website- that's not necessary. It is what it is.

Edited by mfbukowski
Link to comment

Mr. Bukowski,

You wrote:

You are right. The correct words would be "misrepresent and distort". Is that better?

CFR that I have ever on IRR's website misrepresented or distorted something that I was told here. Again, you can give the title of the article without linking to it, thus staying within board rules.

Link to comment

Ares,

You wrote:

To be more accurate your website cannot be linked because it contains Temple content which is clearly not allowed from anyone (pro, neutral or anti - Mormon) according to board rules. You have been allowed to present and promote any LDS related topic or point of view without obstruction on this site.

I understand that. But are forum members permitted to harangue me repeatedly with criticisms of my organization's website when I don't even bring it up? Are they permitted to harass me with endless personal attacks on my intentions, motivations, honesty, and so forth, and to complain over and over about my being on this forum? So far, it seems the answer is yes.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...