Did Jesus Christ exist before his birth on Earth?

This topic has 25,929 replies, 116 voices, and was last updated 1 hour, 43 minutes ago by carmel.

Viewing 20 posts - 22,401 through 22,420 (of 25,930 total)

←1 2 3…1,1201,1211,122…1,295 1,296 1,297 →

Author
Posts
June 2, 2021 at 2:26 am#871194
GeneBalthrop
Participant
Adam…..I believe wisdom is one of the seven spirits of God, through which he uses in his creating process. It always existed in the beginning just as the rest of the Seven Spirits of God also did, wisdom is just one of the attributes of God, probably the most important, and is easily seem in all of God’s whole creation. Wisdom being a Spirit attribute, can therefore be possessed and used by us as well as God and angels. Just as all the rest of the SEVEN SPIRITS OF GOD CAN BE ALSO. The Spirit of WISDOM, GIVES IT’S OWN ” Specific Cognition ” to our minds, just like the Spirit of truth, and the rest of Gods seven other Spirits do.
I Don’t see it as a being itself, but a type or kind of Spirit, that works in all creation the LORD OUR God have made. Wisdom indeed is a very important, Spiritual “cognition”, we all need to use in what ever we are doing. IMO
Peace and love to you Adam and yours………..gene

June 2, 2021 at 1:23 pm#871200
gadam123
Participant
Hi Carmel,
Hi Gadam,
YOU: It may be about the virtue of wisdom only, or
it may be about the virtue of wisdom and Jesus. But the context will not allow this text to be about Jesus alone.
Yes, Gadam,
Ezekiel 28:12 And say to him: Thus saith the Lord God:
Thou wast the seal of resemblance, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty.
The above scripture is directed to Lucifer, the light bearer! FULL OF WISDOM, IN
“THE WORD” JESUS, THE SON OF MAN TO BE, HIDDEN IN LUCIFER.
When God created Lucifer, THE BEGINNING, the first-ever creature of light, He engrafted
“THE WORD” Jesus, the Son of Man to be, THE BEGINNING OF ALL BEGINNINGS, in his heart, eternal life!
John1:1 IN THE BEGINNING WAS “THE WORD” ……
To be more precise A CREATURE WITH ONE HEART SHARED BETWEEN GOD IN “THE WORD” JESUS, AND LUCIFER, TWO ENTITIES IN ONE EMBODIMENT OF LIGHT. MALE AND FEMALE, in the same way, WE HUMANS ARE A SOUL AND A FLESH!
Lucifer visible and Jesus invisible, one the physical light and one the spiritual light, respectively, both WISDOM, both THE MORNING STAR.
THE PRIMORDIAL LIGHT. Manifested by Jesus on Mount Tabor.
The fact that both Jesus and Lucifer are, angels, morning stars, brothers, and sons of God. Lucifer created by God through Jesus who was emanated from God on God’s first-ever words LET THERE BE LIGHT.
Prov 8:22-31 is about the Lady Wisdom and it is purely a anthropomorphism of an attribute of God. Yes it’s not about Jesus as it was imagined by the Christianity.
Lucifer is another mistranslation of the word;
In most of the English versions of the Bible the name “Lucifer” appears only one time, in Isaiah 14:12. This verse reads:
How are you fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning… (Isaiah 14:12).
Isaiah was talking about king of Babylon and not any Christian invented Satan the Devil.
Now the word “Lucifer” is not an English word, but a Latin word. And so the question is: Who gave the world this Latin name “lucifer”? And why did they give us this Latin name?
In Isa 14:12, The KJV translators did not actually translate the Hebrew word ‏הילל as ‘Lucifer.’ This word occurs only here in the Hebrew Old Testament. Most likely, the KJV translators were not sure what to make of it, and simply duplicated the word used in the Latin Vulgate that translated ‏הילל. In the Vulgate, Isa 14:12 reads as follows:
quomodo cecidisti de caelo lucifer qui mane oriebaris corruisti in terram qui vulnerabas gentes.
Notice the fifth word of the text—lucifer. It is not a proper name but the Latin word for ‘morning star.’ The word lucifer occurs four times in the Vulgate: Isa 14:12, Job 11:17, Job 38:32, and 2 Peter 1:19. In Job 11:17, the KJV renders the Hebrew word ‏בקר as ‘morning’
Ezekiel 28:11-19 is Lament over the King of Tyre and not any Satan or Lucifer as Christianity imagined.
I am not for these old myths of Christianity.
June 2, 2021 at 2:18 pm#871201
gadam123
Participant
Hello brother Gene,
Adam…..I believe wisdom is one of the seven spirits of God, through which he uses in his creating process. It always existed in the beginning just as the rest of the Seven Spirits of God also did, wisdom is just one of the attributes of God, probably the most important, and is easily seem in all of God’s whole creation. Wisdom being a Spirit attribute, can therefore be possessed and used by us as well as God and angels. Just as all the rest of the SEVEN SPIRITS OF GOD CAN BE ALSO. The Spirit of WISDOM, GIVES IT’S OWN ” Specific Cognition ” to our minds, just like the Spirit of truth, and the rest of Gods seven other Spirits do.
I Don’t see it as a being itself, but a type or kind of Spirit, that works in all creation the LORD OUR God have made. Wisdom indeed is a very important, Spiritual “cognition”, we all need to use in what ever we are doing. IMO
Yes you are right Wisdom is one of the attributes of God and not sure about your Seven Spirits.
As it is written: “The Spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the Spirit of wisdom and understanding, the Spirit of counsel and might, the Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD, and He will delight in the fear of the Lord.” Isaiah 11:2–3 (NASB). Including the Spirit of the Lord, and the Spirits of wisdom, of understanding, of counsel, of might, of knowledge and of fear of the LORD, here are represented the seven Spirits, which are before the throne of God. The reference to the lamb in Revelation 5:6 relates it to the Seven Spirits which first appear in Revelation 1:4 and are associated with Jesus who holds them along with seven stars.
But Prov 8 & 9 is about the Lady Wisdom in a poetical description of its activity in the God’s creation. Wisdom is not a separate being as imagined by many Christians here as Jesus in his preexistence.
Thanks and peace to you…..Adam
June 2, 2021 at 7:17 pm#871203
Berean
Participant
@Mike
Hi Mike

You says That JESUS Never created anything…..!?
Colossians 1:12-18
Give thanks to the Father (God)
who brought us together to share in the legacy of the saints in the light:
[13] Who delivered us from the power of darkness and carried us into the kingdom of his beloved Son: (Jesus)
[14] In whom (Jesus) we have redemption through his blood, even forgiveness of sins:
[15] Who (Jesus,)
is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creatures:
[16] For by him (Jesus) were created all things that are in the heavens and on the earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones, or rulers, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him(JESUS), and for him:
[17] And he (Jesus) is before all things, and through him (Jesus) all things consist.
[18] And he (Jesus) is the head of the body, the church: who (Jesus) is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he (JESUS) could have the preeminence.

God bless

June 3, 2021 at 9:59 am#871213
Lightenup
Participant
Mike,
You asked:
At what point was Jesus ever lesser than the other Davidic kings so that he had to have God place him higher than them? Besides, since there nothing in the scripture that clearly supports your idea, we’re left with a scripture saying that somebody’s own God placed that somebody higher than other persons – which means he wasn’t higher than them before the placement. Now, can that be said in any circumstance about God Himself?
Philippians 2:
5Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus:
6Who, existing in the form of God,
did not consider equality with God
something to be grasped,
7but emptied Himself,
taking the form of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8And being found in appearance as a man,
He humbled Himself
and became obedient to death—
even death on a cross.
9Therefore God exalted Him to the highest place
and gave Him the name above all names,
10that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.
Now, can that be said in any circumstance about God Himself?
It isn’t said about God the Father but it is said about the Son whom the Father identifies as YHVH who laid the foundation of the earth and the heavens are the work of the Son YHVH’s hands. That Son who is YHVH, although He had the form of God, He emptied Himself to come in the form of a bondservant. That is such a marvelous wonder.
LU
June 3, 2021 at 10:05 am#871214
Lightenup
Participant
Mike,
You said:
The Son is indeed, by very definition, an angel of his and our God, Jehovah. Btw, verse 4 says he BECAME better than the [other] angels to the extent that the name his and our God gave him was better than theirs.
YHVH the Son, was made lower than the angels when He emptied Himself and became a bondservant. After His resurrection, His Father exalted Him over all things in heaven and on earth, including the angels. See my last post.
June 3, 2021 at 10:13 am#871215
Lightenup
Participant
Mike,
You said:
If you can tell me how God is “above” both me in Arizona and Tater in NZ at the same time, then I might read your article.
I told you here:
…Another example, If I stick pins straight into a globe in every nation, and put the globe under a tabletop, the tabletop is above the globe and all its pins at the same time, the floor is not above the globe and all its pins or even any of its pins. The table is above the whole globe.
The pins (Inhabitants) in Arizona and NZ are both on the globe and the table top in my example is over the whole globe. The table top is above all the pins “inhabitants” in the globe, even if the pins are standing on their heads or doing cartwheels.
LU
June 3, 2021 at 10:20 am#871216
Lightenup
Participant
Mike,
You said:
Now if only there was such a thing as a “genitive of subordination” in the Greek language. But there’s not. It’s simply the genitive form of “every” and the genitive form of “creature”, ie: of every creature.
I just showed you that there is a genitive of subordination. Wallace is a Greek scholar. https://www.amazon.com/Basics-Testament-Syntax-Daniel-Wallace/dp/0310232295
Check out all the books he wrote about Greek grammar.
https://youtu.be/K8cPgxa1p9U
June 3, 2021 at 10:27 am#871217
Lightenup
Participant
Mike,
You said:
The word is a verb, meaning an action. The meaning of the Hebrew you quoted is that God took action A before He took those other actions of ancient times (ie: the ones we all already know about, like creating the heavens and the earth, etc.) So whether “possessed” or “created”, God took action to do that thing before He did the other things. That’s all the word “before” is saying.
Please note that it doesn’t say that YHVH took possession of me, it merely says that YHVH possessed me. There is a difference.
LU
June 3, 2021 at 10:30 am#871218
Lightenup
Participant
@Proclaimer
You repeat this over and over:
“For us, there is one God the Father…”.
For everyone else, there is a long list of gods from Babylon to choose from.
For you, YHVH is not Lord, just God. If you read Heb 1:10-12 you would see that God the Father identifies His Son as YHVH. YHVH is both God and Lord, Father AND Son.
June 3, 2021 at 10:36 am#871219
Lightenup
Participant
Thanks gadam123!
Can you tell me who is God of gods and Lord of lords?
June 3, 2021 at 2:16 pm#871221
gadam123
Participant
Hi Sis Kathi,
Thanks gadam123!
Can you tell me who is God of gods and Lord of lords?
My outlook as a believer:
We know there is only one Lord (Yahweh) God, but sometimes the Bible references other gods and lords. For example, in Deuteronomy 10:17 we find, “The LORD your God is God of gods and Lord of lords, the great God, mighty and awesome.” Whoever these other “gods” and “lords” are, they cannot compete with the “great God, mighty and awesome.”
The emphasis in this verse is God’s supremacy. The focus is on God’s greatness and might. When He is called “God of gods,” we understand it as a reference to the God who is more powerful and greater than any other so-called god. The verse does infer the existence of other gods. But later in Isaiah God says, “I am the LORD, and there is no other; apart from me there is no God” (Isaiah 45:5). See also Isaiah 43:11. Being the “God of gods,” the One True God towers over anything else that might be worshiped. He alone is worthy of worship (Deuteronomy 10:21).
Idols have no power: “All the gods of the nations are worthless” (1 Chronicles 16:26, NET; cf. Psalm 96:5). Psalm 97:7 adds, “All who worship images are put to shame, those who boast in idols.” These and many other passages note that there is only one God. To worship any other God is useless.
What about the title “Lord of lords”? A “lord” (lower case l) often referred to a leader. To call the Lord the “Lord of lords” emphasizes God’s greatness above all other leaders or anyone who holds power. As a result, the psalmist writes, “Give thanks to the Lord of lords, for his steadfast love endures forever” (Psalm 136:3, ESV).
In the New Testament, we find the phrase “Lord of lords” used on three occasions in reference to Jesus. Paul teaches that Jesus is “he who is the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords” (1 Timothy 6:15, ESV) (still I feel it is about God). Revelation 17:14 speaks of Jesus’ return, saying, “He is Lord of lords and King of kings.” Revelation 19:16 adds, “On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written: king of kings and lord of lords.”
While God the Father is the One called “Lord of lords” in Deuteronomy 10:17 and in Psalms, the New Testament writers use the same title to refer to Jesus Christ. This is the change I am questioning.
As a critic I see it differently. My next post will make it clear on this question.

June 3, 2021 at 3:15 pm#871222
gadam123
Participant
Heiser, Michael, “Are Yahweh and El Distinct Deities in Deut. 32:8-9 and Psalm 82?”
Introduction
The polytheistic nature of pre-exilic Israelite religion and Israel’s gradual evolution toward monotheism are taken as axiomatic in current biblical scholarship. This evolution, according to the consensus view, was achieved through the zealous commitment of Israelite scribes who edited and reworked the Hebrew Bible to reflect emerging monotheism and to compel the laity to embrace the idea. One specific feature of Israelite religion offered as proof of this development is the divine council. Before the exile, Israelite religion affirmed a council of gods which may or may not have been headed by Yahweh. During and after the exile, the gods of the council became angels, mere messengers of Yahweh, who by the end of the exilic
period was conceived of as the lone council head over the gods of all nations. Deuteronomy 32:8-9 and Psalm 82 are put forth as rhetorical evidence of this redactional strategy and assumed religious evolution. The argument is put forth that these texts suggest Yahweh was at one time a junior member of the pantheon under El the Most High, but that he has now taken control as king of the gods. Mark S. Smith’s comments are representative:
The author of Psalm 82 deposes the older theology, as Israel’s deity is called to assume a new role as judge of all the world. Yet at the same time, Psalm 82, like Deut 32:8-9, preserves the outlines of the older theology it is rejecting. From the perspective of this older theology, Yahweh did not belong to the top tier of the pantheon. Instead, in early Israel the god of Israel apparently belonged to the second tier of the pantheon; he was not the presider god, but one of his sons.
1 Mark S. Smith, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel’s Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 49.
2 Michael S. Heiser, “The Divine Council in Late Canonical and Non-Canonical Second temple Jewish
The focus of this paper concerns the position expressed by Smith and held by many others: whether Yahweh and El are cast as separate deities in Psalm 82 and Deuteronomy 32. This paper argues that this consensus view lacks coherence on several points. This position is in part based on the idea that these passages presume Yahweh and El are separate, in concert with an “older” polytheistic or henotheistic Israelite religion, and that this older theology collapsed in the wake of a monotheistic innovation. The reasoning is that, since it is presumed that such a religious evolution took place, these texts evince some sort of transition to monotheism. The alleged transition is then used in defense of the exegesis. As such, the security of the evolutionary presupposition is where this analysis begins.
Backdrop to the problem
In the spirit of going where angels—or perhaps gods in this case—fear to tread, in my dissertation I asked whether this argumentation and the consensus view of Israelite religion it produces were coherent. I came to the position that Israelite religion included a council of gods (אלהים (and servant angels (מלאכים (under Yahweh-El from its earliest conceptions well into the Common Era. This conception included the idea that Yahweh was “species unique” in the Israelite mind, and so terms such as henotheism, polytheism, and even monolatry are not sufficiently adequate to label the nature of Israelite religion. Those who use such terms also assume that אלהים is an ontological term in Israelite religion, denoting some quality or qualities that points to polytheism if there are more than one אלהים. This fails to note the use of the term within and without the Hebrew Bible for the departed human dead and lower messenger beings(מלאכים). Rather, אלהים in Israelite religion denotes the “plane of reality” or domain to which a being properly belongs (for example, the “spirit world” versus the “corporeal world”). For these reasons and others it is more fruitful to describe Israelite religion than seek to define it with a single term.
Questioning the consensus on such matters requires some explanation, and so the path toward consensus skepticism is briefly traced below via several examples where the consensus view suffers in coherence. These examples demonstrate that the consensus view has been elevated to the status of a presupposition brought to the biblical text that produces circular reasoning in interpretation.
First, Deutero-Isaiah is hailed as the champion of intolerant monotheism, giving us the first allegedly clear denials of the existence of other gods. And yet it is an easily demonstrated fact that every phrase in Deutero-Isaiah that is taken to deny the existence of other gods has an exact or near exact linguistic parallel in Deuteronomy 4 and 32—two passages which every scholar of Israelite religion, at least to my knowledge, rightly sees as affirming the existence of other gods. Deutero-Isaiah actually puts some of the same denial phrasing into the mouth of personified Babylon in Isaiah 47:8, 10. Should readers conclude that the author has Babylon denying the existence of other cities? Why is it that the same phrases before
Deutero-Isaiah speak of the incomparability of Yahweh, but afterward communicate a denial that other gods exist?
Second, the rationale for the shift toward intolerant monotheism is supported by appeal to the idea that since Yahweh was once a junior member of the pantheon, the belief in his rulership over the other gods of the nations in a pantheon setting is a late development.
The consensus thinking argues that Yahweh assumes a new role as judge over all the world and its gods as Israel emerges from the exile. This assertion is in conflict with several enthronement psalms that date to well before the exilic period. Psalm 29 is an instructive example. Some scholars date the poetry of this
psalm between the 12th and 10th centuries B.C.E. The very first verse contains plural imperatives directed at the ליםִ֑א ֵניֵ֣בּ , ְpointing to a divine council context. Verse 10 ; flood the over enthroned sits LORD Theְ֭ (“יהָוה ַלַמּ֣בּוּל ָיָ֑שׁב ַוֵ֥יּ ֶשׁב ְ֝יהָ֗וה ֶ֣מֶל ְלעוָֹ ֽלם׃ : declares the LORD sits enthroned as king forever”).
In Israelite cosmology, the flood upon which Yahweh sat was situated over the solid dome that covered the round, flat earth. Since it cannot coherently be asserted that the author would assert that Gentile nations were not under the dome and flood, this verse clearly reflects the idea of world kingship. And in Israelite cosmic geography, reflected in Deuteronomy 32:8-9 and 4:19-20, the nations and their gods were inseparable. The Song of Moses, among the oldest poetry in the Hebrew Bible, echoes the thought. In Exodus 15:18 the text reads: עדֶ ֽו ָלםָֹ֥לע ֖ ְמ ְי ִוהָ֥יה”) ְ The LORD will reign forever and ever”). As F. M. Cross noted over thirty years ago, “The kingship of the gods is a common theme in early Mesopotamian and Canaanite epics. The common scholarly position that the concept of Yahweh as reigning or king is a relatively late development in Israelite thought seems untenable.”
Lastly, my own work on the divine council in Second Temple period Jewish literature has noted over 170 instances of plural אלהים or אלים in the Qumran material alone. Many of these instances are in the context of a heavenly council. If a divine council of gods had ceased to exist in Israelite religion by the end of the exile, how does one account for these references? The Qumran material and the way it is handled is telling with respect to how hermeneutically entrenched the consensus view has become. As all the scholarly studies on the divine council point out, in terms of council personnel, the אלהים and מלאכים were distinguished, but scholars who do draw attention to the Qumran material say that this deity vocabulary now refers to angels. For example, Mark S. Smith asserts that later Israelite monotheism, as represented by Second Isaiah, “reduced and modified the sense of divinity attached to angels” so that words like אלים in the Dead Sea Scrolls must refer to mere angels or heavenly powers “rather than full-fledged deities.”
Handy also confidently states that “by the time of the Dead Sea Scrolls . . . the word אלהים was used even by contemporary authors to mean ‘messengers,’ or what we call ‘angels,’ when it was not used to refer to Yahweh . . . these אלהים ,previously understood as deities, had come to be understood as angels.”
But why must these terms refer to angels? Whence does this assurance emerge? Why does the same vocabulary mean one thing before the exile but another after? A tagged computer search of the Dead Sea Scrolls database reveals there are no lines from any Qumran text where a “deity class” term (אלהים /אלים]בני ([for a member of the heavenly host overlaps with the word מלאכים ,and so the conclusion is not data-driven. In fact, there are only eleven instances in the entire Qumran corpus where these plural deity terms and מלאכים occur within fifty words of each other. Scholars like C. Newsom, trying to account for the data, refer to these deities as “angelic elim,” a term that is oxymoronic with respect to the tier members of the divine council.
It is difficult to discern what else guides such a conclusion other than the preconception of a certain trajectory toward intolerant monotheism. Such reasoning unfortunately assumes what it seeks to prove. The plural deity words in texts composed after the exile cannot actually express a belief in a council of gods, because that would result in henotheism or polytheism. Rather, the word must mean “angels,” because that would not be henotheism or polytheism. The consensus reconstruction becomes the guiding hermeneutic.
Yahweh and El, or Yahweh-El in Psalm 82?
Psalm 82:1 is a focal point for the view that the tiers of the divine council collapsed in later Israelite religion.
God stands in the divine council;
in the midst of the gods he holds judgment.
א ִ֗הים ִנָ֥צּב ַבֲּעַדת־ֵ֑אל
ְבֶּ֖קֶרב ֱא ִ֣הים ִי ְשׁ ֽ ֹפּט׃
S. Parker in his “The Beginning of the Reign of God – Psalm 82 as Myth and Liturgy” states that, while “there is no question that the occurrences of elohim in verses 1a, 8 refer (as usually in the Elohistic psalter) to Yahweh,” and that “most scholars assume that God, that is Yahweh, is presiding over the divine council,” Yahweh is actually just “one of the assembled gods under a presiding El or Elyon.” Parker supports his conclusion by arguing that noting that the verb נצב”) stand”) in 82:1 denotes prosecution, not presiding, in legal contexts.
Psalm 82, then, depicts the high god El presiding over an assembly of his sons. Yahweh, one of those sons, accuses the others of injustice. His role is prosecutorial, not that of Judge. That role belongs to El. The fact that Yahweh is standing, which means he is not the presiding deity, alerts us to Yahweh’s inferior status.
Continuing with Parker’s interpretation of Psalm 82, the accusation that follows in verses 2-5 is uttered by Yahweh, the prosecutorial figure:
“How long will you judge unjustly,
and show partiality to the wicked? Selah
ַעד־ָמַ֥תי ִתּ ְשׁ ְפּטוּ־ָ֑עֶול
וּ ְפֵ֥ני ְ ֝ר ָשִׁ֗עים ִתּ ְשׂאוּ־ֶ ֽסָלה׃
Render justice to the weak and the fatherless;
Vindicate the afflicted and the destitute.
ִשׁ ְפטוּ־ַ֥דל ְוָי֑תוֹם
ָעִ֖ני ָוָ֣רשׁ ַה ְצִ ֽדּיקוּ׃
Rescue the weak and the needy;
deliver them from the hand of the wicked.”
ַפּ ְלּטוּ־ַ֥דל ְוֶא ְב֑יוֹן
ִמַ֖יּד ְר ָשִׁ֣עים ַהִ ֽצּילוּ׃
They have neither knowledge nor understanding;
they walk around in darkness;
all the foundations of the earth are shaken.
֤ל ֹאָ ֽי ְד ֨עוּ׀ ְו ֥ל ֹא ָי ִ֗בינוּ
ַבֲּחֵשָׁ֥כה ִי ְתַהָ֑לּכוּ
ִ֝י ֗מּוֹטוּ ָכּל־ ֥מוֹ ְסֵדי ָ ֽאֶרץ׃
These charges are immediately followed by the judicial sentencing, also considered to
come from Yahweh:
I said, “You are gods,
sons of the Most High, all of you;
אִני־ָ֭אַמְר ִתּי ֱא ִ֣הים ַאֶ֑תּם
וּ ְבֵ ֖ני ֶע ְל֣יוֹן ֻכּ ְלֶּ ֽכם׃
nevertheless, like humankind you shall die,
and fall like any prince.”
ָ֭אֵכן ְכָּאָ֣דם ְתּמוּ֑תוּן
וּ ְכַאַ֖חד ַה ָשִּׂ֣רים ִתּ ֽ ֹפּלוּ׃
To this point, Yahweh issues the charge and pronounces the sentence. No explanation is offered as to why, in the scene being created, the presumably seated El does not pronounce the sentence. In this reconstruction of the psalm, El apparently has no real function. He is supposed to be declaring the sentence, but the text does not have him doing so. At this juncture, Yahweh takes center stage again in the scene. Smith, whose interpretation is similar to Parker’s, notes that, “[A] prophetic voice emerges in verse 8, calling for God (now called elohim) to assume the role of judge over all the earth. . . . Here Yahweh in effect is asked to assume the job of all the gods to rule their nations in addition to Israel.” Parker concurs that after Yahweh announces the fate of the gods, “the psalmist then balances this with an appeal to Yahweh to assume the governance of the world.”
Psalm 82:8 reads:
Arise, O God, judge the earth;
for you shall inherit all the nations!
קוָּ֣מה ֱ֭א ִהים ָשׁ ְפָ ֣טה ָהָ֑אֶרץ
ִ ֽכּי־ַאָ֥תּה ִ֝תְנַ֗חל ְבָּכל־ַהגּוִֹ ֽים׃
Note Parker’s words in the preceding quotation closely. In Psalm 82:8 he has the psalmist appealing to Yahweh, called הים ִא ֱ֭in the Elohistic psalter, to rise up (מהָ֣קוּ (to assume governance of the world. This is considered the lynchpin to the argument that there are two deities in this passage, but it appears in reality to be the unraveling of that position. If the prophetic voice now pleads for Yahweh to rise up and become king of the nations and their gods, the verb choice (מהָ֣קוּ” ;rise up”) means that, in the council context of the psalm’s imagery, Yahweh had heretofore been seated. It is actually Yahweh who is found in the posture of presiding, not El. El is in fact nowhere present in 82:8. If it is critical to pay close attention to posture in verse 1, then the same should be done in verse 8. Doing so leads to the opposite conclusion for which Parker argues.
It is more coherent to have Yahweh as the head of the council in Psalm 82 and performing all the roles in the divine court. The early part of the psalm places Yahweh in the role of accuser; midway he sentences the guilty; finally, the psalmist wants Yahweh to rise and act as the only one who can fix the mess described in the psalm.
This alternative is in agreement with early Israelite poetry (Psalm 29:10; Exodus 15:18) that has Yahweh ruling from his seat on the waters above the fixed dome that covers all the nations of the earth and statements in Deuteronomy and First Isaiah that Yahweh is האלהים over all the heavens and the earth and all the nations.
It is also in concert with equations of Yahweh and El in the pre-exilic Deuteronomistic material like 2 Samuel 22:32 (והָ֑יה ְדיֵ֣עֲל ְבַּמ ִאלֵ ֖מי־ ִכּי” ;ִ֥For who is El but Yahweh?”). Finally, it fits cohesively with the
observation made by Smith elsewhere that the archaeological data shows that Asherah came to be considered the consort of Yahweh by the eighth century B.C.E. To quote Smith, “Asherah, having been a consort of El, would have become Yahweh’s consort . . . only if these two gods were identified by this time.”
This means that El and Yahweh would have been merged in the high God position in the pantheon by the eighth century B.C.E., begging the question as to why, at least two centuries later, there was a rhetorical need to draw attention to Yahweh as high sovereign.
Yahweh and El, or Yahweh-El in Deuteronomy 32:8-9?
Ultimately, the notion that El and Yahweh are separate deities in Psalm 82 must garner support from Deuteronomy 32:8-9, which most scholars see as pre-dating and influencing Psalm 82. Deuteronomy 32:8-9 reads:
When the Most High gave the nations as an inheritance, בַּהְנֵ֤חל ֶע ְלי ֙וֹן גּוִֹ֔ים when he divided mankind,
he fixed the borders of the peoples
according to the number of [the sons of God].
ְבַּה ְפִרי֖דוֹ ְבֵּ ֣ני ָאָ֑דם
ַיֵצּ ֙ב ְגֻּב֣ ת ַע ִ֔מּים
ְל ִמ ְסַ֖פּר [ בני האלהים]׃
But the LORD’s portion is his people,
Jacob his allotted inheritance.
ִ֛כּי ֵ֥חֶלק ְיהָ֖וֹה ַע֑מּוֹ
ַיֲע ֖קֹב ֶ֥חֶבל ַנֲחָל ֽתוֹ׃
The importance of Deuteronomy 32:8-9 for the view that Psalm 82 contains hints of an older polytheistic theology where El and Yahweh were separate deities is stated concisely by Smith:
The texts of the LXX and the Dead Sea Scrolls show Israelite polytheism which focuses on the central importance of Yahweh for Israel within the larger scheme of the world; yet this larger scheme provides a place for the other gods of the other nations in the world. Moreover, even if this text is mute about the god who presides over the divine assembly, it does maintain a place for such a god who is not Yahweh. Of course, later tradition would identify the figure of Elyon with Yahweh, just as many scholars have done. However, the title of Elyon (“Most High”) seems to denote the figure of El, presider par excellence not only at Ugarit but also in Psalm 82. That the text of LXX and the Dead Sea Scrolls is superior to MT in Deuteronomy 32:8-9 is not in dispute. At issue is the notion that the title Elyon in verse 8 must refer to El
rather than to Yahweh of verse 9. There are several reasons why separating Yahweh and El here does not appear sound.
First, the literary form of Deuteronomy 32 argues against the idea that Yahweh is not the Most High in the passage. It has long been recognized that a form-critical analysis of Deuteronomy 32 demonstrates the predominance of the lawsuit, or ריב pattern. An indictment (32:15-18) is issued against Yahweh’s elect people, Israel, who had abandoned their true Rock (32:5-6; identified as Yahweh in 32:3) and turned to the worship of the other gods who were under Yahweh’s authority. The judge—Yahweh in the text of Deuteronomy 32—then passes judgment (32:19-29).21 The point is this: as with Psalm 82, the straightforward understanding of the text is that Yahweh is presiding over the lawsuit procedures and heavenly court.
Second, the separation of El and Yahweh in Deuteronomy 32:8-9 in part depends on the decision to take the כי of 32:9 as adversative, thereby denoting some contrast between Elyon of 32:8 and Yahweh of 32:9 (“However [כי ,[Yahweh’s portion is his people . . .”).
Other scholars, however, consider the כי of 32:9 to be emphatic: “And lo [כי ,[Yahweh’s portion is his people . . .” Other scholars accept the adversative use but do not separate El and Yahweh in the passage. Since scholarship on this construction lacks consensus, conclusions based on the adversative syntactical choice are not secure.
Third, Ugaritic scholars have noted that the title “Most High” (‘lyn or the shorter ‘l ) is never used of El in the Ugaritic corpus. In point of fact it is Baal, a second-tier deity, who twice receives this title as the ruler of the gods. The point here is to rebut the argument that the mere occurrence of the term עליון certainly points to El in Deuteronomy 32:8-9. Due to the well-established attribution of Baal epithets to Yahweh, the title עליון could conceivably point directly to Yahweh in Deuteronomy 32:8-9. It is also worth recalling that if Smith is correct that Yahweh and El were merged by the 8th century B.C.E. due to the transferal of Asherah to Yahweh as consort, then a Yahweh-El fusion had occurred before Deuteronomy
was composed. Hence it would have been natural for the author of Deuteronomy to have Yahweh as the head of the divine council. Indeed, what point would the Deuteronomic author have had in mind to bring back a Yahweh-El separation that had been rejected two hundred years prior?
Fourth, although עליון is paired with El in the Hebrew Bible, as Miller and Elnes point out, it is most often an epithet of Yahweh.27 Smith and Parker are of course well aware of this, but attribute it to “later tradition,” contending that, in Deuteronomy 32:8-9 the title of Elyon should be associated with El distinct from Yahweh. Again, this would be most curious if Yahweh and El had been fused as early as the eighth century. In this regard, it is interesting that other texts as early as the eighth century speak of Yahweh performing the same deeds credited to עליון in Deuteronomy 32:8-9. For example, Isaiah 10:13 has Yahweh in control of the boundaries (גבולות (of the nations.28 It appears that the presupposition of an early Yahweh and El separation requires the exegete to argue for “a later tradition” at this point.
Fifth, separating El and Yahweh in Deuteronomy 32:8-9 is internally inconsistent within Deuteronomy 32 and Deuteronomy at large. This assertion is demonstrated by the two preceding verses, Deuteronomy 32:6-7. Those two verses attribute no less than five well recognized El epithets to Yahweh, demonstrating that the redactors who fashioned Deuteronomy recognized the union of El with Yahweh, as one would expect at this point in Israel’s religion:
Is this how you repay the LORD,
O foolish and senseless people?
Is he not your father, who created you?
ֲה־ַלְיהָו ֙ה ִתְּג ְמלוּ־֔זֹאת
ַ֥עם ָנָ ֖בל ְו֣ל ֹא ָחָ֑כם
ֲהלוֹא־הוּ ֙א ָאִ֣בי ָקֶּ֔נ
Who made you and established you?
֥הוּא ָ ֽע ְשׂ ֖ ַ ֽוְיכֹ ְנֶ ֽנ ׃
Remember the days of old;
Consider the years of past generations;
Ask your father, and he will inform you,
Your elders, and they will tell you.
ְזכֹ ֙ר ְי ֣מוֹת עוָֹ֔לם
ִ֖בּינוּ ְשׁ֣נוֹת דּוֹר־ָו֑דוֹר
ְשַׁ֤אל ָאִ֙בי ֙ ְוַיֵ֔גְּד
ְזֵקֶ֖ני ְו֥י ֹא ְמרוּ ָ ֽל ׃
These verses clearly contain elements drawn from ancient descriptions of El and attribute them to Yahweh. At Ugarit El is called ‘ab’ adm (“father of mankind”) and tr ‘il’ abh ‘il’ mlk dyknnh (“Bull El his father, El the king who establishes him”). Yahweh is described as the “father” ( ביִ֣א (ָwho “established you” ( נֶ ֽנֹ ְיכ ְו .(ַ ֽYahweh is also the one who “created” Israel ( נֶ֔קּ (ָin verse six. The root *qny denoting El as creator is found in the Karatepe inscription’s appeal to ‘l qn’ rs (“El, creator of the earth”). At Ugarit the verb occurs in the El epithet ‘qny w’ adn ‘ilm (“creator and lord of the gods”), and Baal calls El qnyn (“our creator”). Genesis 14:19, 22 also attributes this title to El. Deut 32:7 references the לםָ֔עוֹ מוֹת ֣י”) ְages past”) and דוֹר֑וָדּוֹר־ נוֹת֣שׁ”) ְthe years of many generations”) which correspond, respectively, to El’s description (‘lm) and title ‘ab snm (“father of years”) at Ugarit.
Since the El epithets of Deuteronomy 32:6-7 are well known to scholars of Israelite religion, those who argue that Yahweh and El are separate deities in Deuteronomy 32:8-9 are left to explain why the redactor of verses 6-7 would unite Yahweh and El and in the next stroke separate them. Those who crafted the text of Deuteronomy 32 would have either expressed diametrically oppositional views of Yahweh’s status in consecutive verses, or have allowed a presumed original separation of Yahweh and El to stand in the text—while adding verses 6-7 in which the names describe a single deity. It is difficult to believe that the scribes
were this careless, unskilled, or confused. If they were at all motivated by an intolerant monotheism one would expect this potential confusion to have been quickly removed.
Last, but not least in importance, the idea of Yahweh receiving Israel as his allotted nation from his Father El is internally inconsistent in Deuteronomy. In Deuteronomy 4:19-20, a passage recognized by all who comment on these issues as an explicit parallel to 32:8-9, the text informs us that it was Yahweh who “allotted” (חלק (the nations to the host of heaven and who “took” (לקח (Israel as his own inheritance (cf. Deuteronomy 9:26, 29; 29:25). Neither the verb forms nor the ideas are passive. Israel was not given to Yahweh by El, which is the picture that scholars who separate El and Yahweh in Deuteronomy 32 want to fashion. In view of the close relationship of Deuteronomy 32:8-9 to Deuteronomy 4:19-20, it is more
consistent to have Yahweh taking Israel for his own terrestrial allotment by sovereign act as Lord of the council.
Conclusion
The goal of this article was to critique the coherence of what have become broadly accepted interpretations of Psalm 82 and Deuteronomy 32:8-9. These interpretations and the argument for the evolution of Israelite religion that presupposes those interpretations have a number of incongruities for which to account. The issues are important in the effort to describe Israelite religion’s view of God at all stages.
June 3, 2021 at 6:01 pm#871223
gadam123
Participant
To Jews and Christians: Deuteronomy 32:8-9 is the most challenging passage to defend in the Bible.
Yes, I know it’s a somewhat obscure passage to pick out for that title, but, at least for me, I find it to be true. First, let’s look at the passage itself: “When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance, when he divided all mankind, he set up boundaries for the peoples according to the number of the sons of Israel. For the LORD’s portion is his people, Jacob his allotted inheritance.”
But when you see the other translation like NRSV:
8 When the Most High[a] apportioned the nations,
when he divided humankind,
he fixed the boundaries of the peoples
according to the number of the gods;
9 the Lord’s own portion was his people,
Jacob his allotted share.
At first glance, this might not seem like such a controversial passage. However, if we look a little closer, we can see that the passage is clearly referring to two different gods: “Most High” and “the LORD”. This is most evident when looking up the verse’s original Hebrew, where “Most High” is called “Elyon” and “the LORD” is called “Yahweh”, who we all know is the God that Jews and Christians serve now.
When I was a child, I was taught that things like this occurred because God has many different names. However, if you study what most experts now believe about the early Israelites, things begin to make sense. The ancient Israelites were very likely polytheistic, believing in the Canaanite pantheon of gods and goddesses. The peoples in the Canaanite region, including the Israelites, believed in a god who was above all the other gods, “El”. They also believed that every nation had their own regional god. In the Israelites’ case, this was “Yahweh”.
So why is this the most challenging passage in the Bible? Well, at least to me, it appears to be the clearest reference in the Bible to the Israelites’ early polytheistic beliefs. If the Bible is the inspired work of the one true God, then why is there a passage in it that seems to so clearly acknowledge the presence of other gods? It even relegates “Yahweh”, the God of the Bible, to a secondary status, saying that Jacob’s people are his, but that the other peoples of Canaan belong to others.
In short, Judaism and Christianity are absolutely built upon the tenet that there are no other gods but Yahweh. But the ancient Israelites, from whom Christianity grew from, did not seem to share those beliefs. In fact, Yahweh himself did not seem to share them in passages such as Exodus 20:3 – “You shall have no other gods before me”.
What do you say?
June 3, 2021 at 7:05 pm#871225
Berean
Participant
Gadam
1Corinthians 8:5,6
For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)
[6] But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
That’s enough for me

June 3, 2021 at 7:09 pm#871226
Berean
Participant
The ministry of angels is also very important:
1:14 Are not all spirits in the service of God, sent to minister to those who are to inherit salvation?
June 3, 2021 at 7:28 pm#871227
gadam123
Participant
Hi Berean,
Gadam
1Corinthians 8:5,6
For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)
[6] But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
That’s enough for me
Yes that is very easy choice. You need not worry about the other scriptures that too Old (Testament).
June 4, 2021 at 2:27 am#871229
GeneBalthrop
Participant
Adam….The real question is , does Berean actually believe that what he quoted, seeing he believes Jesus is his God, and a ‘PREEXISTING’ Jesus, who created everything. Many trinitarians quote scriptures, and what Jesus said, but few it seems “actually” believe him and what he said. IMO
peace and love to you and yours Adam……..gene
June 4, 2021 at 5:19 am#871231
Danny Dabbs
Participant
Gadam,
Deuteronomy 6:4 Hear, Israel: Yahweh is our God; Yahweh is one:
Mark 12:29 Jesus answered, “The greatest is, ‘Hear, Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one:
June 4, 2021 at 6:45 am#871232
Berean
Participant
Gene
God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
[2] Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
[3] Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high
Author
Posts

Viewing 20 posts - 22,401 through 22,420 (of 25,930 total)

←1 2 3…1,1201,1211,122…1,295 1,296 1,297 →

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Recent Replies

Forums

Forum Topics

POPULAR WRITINGS

Study Tools

ABOUT THIS SITE

Navigation

Did Jesus Christ exist before his birth on Earth?

Recent Replies

Forums

Forum Topics

POPULAR WRITINGS

Study Tools

ABOUT THIS SITE

TOPICS

Navigation

Log in with your credentials

Forgot your details?

Create Account