I just wanted to extend a thanks to John Piper for his recent essay on his Desiring God blog. Dr. Piper’s short essay on Psalm 82 was entitled, “Putting the Gods in Their Place.” I hope you’ll all give it a read. (Thanks to those who brought it to my attention).
While I wish Dr. Piper hadn’t used scare quotes around the word gods, he doesn’t fudge the truth that the biblical writers believed the gods were real. In fact, he specifically (and accurately) connects the gods to the principalities and powers that Paul wrote about. Beyond that point, he takes a pastoral approach to the passage.
I’ve read too many evangelicals that basically end up saying the text in Psalm 82 just can’t mean what it plainly says. (“The gods are just people … move along citizens, nothing to see here”). Dr. Piper doesn’t do that. I don’t know if he has read my book The Unseen Realm or read any of my journal articles on Psalm 82 and the divine council. I’m going to ask Lexham to send him a copy of the book as a token of appreciation for not following the herd.
The essay (and the scare quotes) made me think of my first publishing experience. Way back in 2001 at the end of the editorial process for my article (“Deuteronomy 32:8 and the Sons of God”) in Dallas Seminary’s Bibliotheca Sacra journal, the editor (the late Roy Zuck) called me at home about the article. He told me understood what I was saying (the article had a whole section on Psalm 82) but was a little nervous about using the plural gods in the article. He was hesitant over what the readership response would be. I recommend that they substitute “plural elohim” for “gods” in the article. He loved the idea. What made me smile was that, of course, there was no difference in meaning, yet somehow the biblical Hebrew term made it “safer”! When I got the proofs, though, nothing in the article was changed. He just needed a ready answer for protest letters, I suppose. Anyway, a good memory.
For my thoughts on Jesus/John’s use of Psa 82:6 in John 10, see – http://www.nakedbiblepodcast.com/naked-bible-109-john-10-gods-or-men/
you’re welcome
didn’t know it was that old – thanks
probably; I’d think so.
yep, he does — back in 1994 I hadn’t even seen Psa 82 in Hebrew yet. Didn’t notice the date!
Not directly related but regarding sanctification of sons of God. Apostle John records the words of Jesus.
John 17:23 KJVS
[23] I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.
These sons of God in Ps 82 were lacking in one area that led to their corruption. They did not die to the flesh and the lusts of the flesh. This dying in the flesh is completely contingent upon the cross and the mystery of God, which is Christ in you the hope of glory, Col 1:26&27, Ro 8:3&4. This of course goes hand in hand with the supernatural aspect of God that you are delving into, and that a good deal of the Christian world knows nothing about. Charismatics receive the Holy Ghost but largely fail to study to show themselve approved, 2Ti 2:15. And their ministers are trained in theology schools whose theology is written by men who have not the Spirit of God. It is necessary to have the Spirit of God to understand the deep things of God, 1Co 2:10. It is necessary to have the Holy Ghost in order to be justified, part of which is to receive the frequent washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost that forms the new creature in Christ.
Titus 3:4-7 KJVS
[4] But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared, [5] Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; [6] Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour; [7] That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
Michael, a heads up regarding the wonder or sign of the woman in heaven, Re 12:1&3, which is apparently going to take place in the heaven as a astrological conjunction of stars, the sun, planets and the moon on Sept. 23, 2017. Actually, two wonders or signs are mentioned in the following verses.
Revelation 12:1-3 KJVS
[1] And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars: [2] And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered. [3] And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads.
For more on this see the first article at http://www.justifiedfreely. Your take on this would be appreciated. Then perhaps read the introduction and go from there. I am handicapped with nerve damage on the left side/left hand which makes typing slow so the 33 or so articles on my website represent years of work, are extremely scriptural, and reflect the truth of the scriptures that the Spirit showed me. I think you as a theologian, and someone who impresses me to be well versed in the scriptures will find value in them and may possibly learn from them. Luke
I’ll have a look!
Incidentally, there are other signs associated with the ones listed in Rev 12 in concert with the birth of the messiah that will not be present Sept 23, 2017. That means it isn’t a precise repetition. Many folks simply don’t look for the fuller picture — i.e., what (casting a wider net) was in the sky Sept 11 3 BC? I’d also add that know of no exegetical way to identify the birth signs with / as “the sign of the son of man,” or that the set of birth signs has anything to do with the second coming. They might, but there’s no clear exegetical proof for that idea.
Additional input. What was in the sky on Sept 11, 3BC has no bearing on Re 12:1-3. Information in the NT accounts about the star the Wise Men followed is so scant , it was a star in the east, that any speculation about the similarity to the precise sign given in Re 12:1-3, really holds no weight in my mind. So how can one discount this wonder or sign, based on the fact it might have appeared in the past or a similar sign might have appeared in the past? No logic in that.
The star of Bethlehem doesn’t contradict anything in Rev 12. In fact, Rev 12 provides the explanation — it wasn’t a “star” the Magi saw, but a planet (Jupiter — which has retrograde motion, hence the moving star). Martin tracks the motion of Jupiter in his book and shows how it correlates with the Magi account.
Ernest Martin? I read a large part of his work. David Sielaff did a sons of God presentation which certainly had to have been inspired on you sons of God work regarding Ps 82. I had a long conversation on the phone with his wife Ramona when ordering some of his book one time. Very nice lady. Martin had great insight into the scriptures. It is hard to be absolutely certain what star the Maji followed. In his book The Secrets of Golgatha he mentions that the 12 tribes in the wilderness camped around the tabernacle and the layout represented the Hebrew Zodiac. What is of interest to the subject at hand, is that the tribe that camped due east of the tabernacle was the tribe of Judah. I am pasting what follows from the first article on my website regarding Re 12:1-2 to save on typing-
A couple nights ago I was playing around with the Stellarium app. I input the Sept. 23: 2017 date, and added the simulated land that forms the horizon and the sign of the woman was below the horizon in my location at that time of night. So I thought to try from a location further South. And then I thought, why not Israel. So I chose for the location Jerusalem in Israel, as it was one of the stored locations in the program. I looked for the Virgo constellation and panned the view around a bit, and due east came into view. The sun is just below the horizon illuminating the head of Virgo. In the app you can add or remove simple drawn images of the various constellations to appear over the stars of the constellations. And the constellation Leo the lion, with the 12 crowning stars was clearly visible above her head, just at dawn. Right at due east. Of course Venus is known as the day star and is one of the planets that completes the crown of 12 stars. Fittingly enough the brightest of all the stars in the Leo constellation. The time when I saw this was around 22 07 10, in the time field setting in the software. Two scriptures came to mind, so I found them. I felt the Spirit of the Lord move on me as I read them.
Matthew 24:27 KJVS
[27] For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
2 Peter 1:19 KJVS
[19] We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:
Both verses make reference to Venus,, which as you know is due east at dawn and is associated with Jesus. But to be honest a lot has to take place before Sept. 23, 2017. I hold great hope for the wonder of the sign in heaven taking place on that date. Michael I am in a lot of pain and weakness due to a incomplete spinal cord injury due to the accident that happened in 84. You have interest in the supernatural. The day of the accident my ex-wife’s, I have been divorced since 2003 and live alone, first cousin who is a Christian called me around noon and said she had a very vivid dream the night before. In that dream she said she saw I was in a very bad accident in which I was terribly hurt. She implored me to be careful. She lived 70 miles away and I think I only met her once. About 2 am the next morning I was driving too fast and went off the road and broke two vertebrae in my neck both in 3 pieces, and was paralyzed for 10 days. There were two other events that were odd that took place weeks before that accident. But I have typed enough for one night.
wow – thanks for this; I like stories of precognition (with or without dreams — it’s an interest of mine.
I have dreamed events and then later they happen just like in the dream. Trivial event but so specific that you can’t help but know to know they were precognitive. About a week before the accident I wrote about earlier I was at work. I was boning hams in the basement of a local meat packing plant. You would stand in the same place all night next to a conveyor removing the upper leg of a hog and cut it off from the hip joint. Lot of time to talk to the man next to you and daydream. I apparently said something and Harry the guy next to me, he is dead now, asked me what I said. I told him I really could not remember clearly. And Harry said “you said something like it is all going to change”. The he asked what I meant. Then it came back to me that I had a very strong feeling that my life was going to drastically change. My mother swears that the night of the accident she woke up about the time of night when it took place and she knew I had been badly hurt. She was in Florida on vacation. My older sister Barb dreams about things that happen. She dreamt that she was at a stop sign and saw movement out of the corner of her eye and slammed on the brakes and someone ran the stop sign at a high rate of speed. About a week later it happened just like she dreamed. As a matter of fact she said she recognized seconds before she slammed on the brakes it was her dream unfolding. I think the human mind is not limited by time. That being made in the image and likeness of God and Jesus Christ, we have the ability to perceive the future at some level of consciousness. That is what prophecy is when it operates in the church.
1 Corinthians 13:12-13 KJVS
[12] For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known. [13] And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.
It is interesting the spin that is often put on that verse, and in that chapter but then what is said next is ignored.
1 Corinthians 14:1-5 KJVS
[1] Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts , but rather that ye may prophesy. [2] For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him ; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries. [3] But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort. [4] He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church. [5] I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.
Michael, I can remember as a young Catholic boy, I was very excited about being Confirmed. In catachism they read the second chapter of Acts, tongues of fire, speaking in tongues. I even went in the back of church and read that chapter a couple times on my own filled with anticipation. The dry and long ceremony in Latin was a big disappointment and I quearied the Sister about why I did not speak in tongues. Twenty some years later I did speak in tongues and it was a most powerful Spiritual experience. I experience frequently the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Ghost, Titus 3:5-7. I groan in the Spirit, Ro 8:26, quite often. These manisfestations of the Holy Ghost offset the pain and weakness in my life due to the spinal cord injury.
yep; didn’t see that, so Dr. Piper was on the ball way back when.
yep; didn’t see the date; guess they just recycle these things — but it was appreciated nonetheless.
yep – several others have noted this, too – thanks!
I’m just appreciating the fact that he denied they were people!
I’d recommend Johnson’s dissertation on the P & P as well:
http://www.godawa.com/chronicles_of_the_nephilim/Articles_By_Others/Johnson%20-%20Old%20Testament%20Background%20for%20Pauls%20Principalities%20and%20Powers%20(Diss).pdf
loved the first sentence!
yep – me too. There are folks in Piper’s church and institute (at least a few years ago) that followed my work and blogs. Met them at ETS. Hopefully they’ve had an impact.
I’m not sure if you watched Piper’s take on 1 Pt 3:18-20
http://www.desiringgod.org/labs/how-do-you-decrypt-confusing-bible-verses
In the “Heiser theology,” what’s the difference between angels and “gods”? Wouldn’t we simply understand that “angels” are a subset of “gods” — demons being the other subset?
elohim is the OT umbrella term (= spiritual being). mal’ak (“angel, messenger”) is a job description — it describes what a spiritual being does, not what it is. In Hellenistic culture, aggelos/angelos becomes one of two generic terms for good spirit beings. The other generic term, daimon, was a neutral term, but in the plural (as in NT usage) it meant evil spiritual beings. This is the term (along with the longer daimonion) that is translated “demons”. These are not, however, the “demons” of the OT (shedim — occurs twice). Those are territorial entities.
I could go on with lot of other terms that describe rank (not ontology). But you need to read The Unseen Realm for more.
Of course the text means what it says — but what does it mean BY what it says? I’m no Origenian: I don’t automatically take a given passage allegorically. But in the case of a baldly *poetic* passage, why should we automatically rule out “gods” as a metaphor?
(Sigh…) Maybe it’s happened somewhere, sometime, but so far in my own reading on this subject, I’ve seen neither Dr. Heiser nor anyone who writes in the same vein (usually springboarding off of MSH’s works) actually discuss or acknowledge *WHY* talk of other “gods” bothers evangelicals.
The answer is startlingly simple: As a subculture – and, let’s be fair, partly because the Bible itself uses “God” as a pseudonym for Yahweh – we’ve grown accustomed to using the term “God” specifically for YAHWEH. Moreover, the Bible itself periodically speaks exactly the same way: e.g., “I am [Yahweh], and there is no other; besides Me there [are] no [elohim].” (Isa. 45:5) (I adapted that from the NASB. Normally in Eng. trans. we see the verb-phrase “there IS [no god],” but there’s no verb in the Hebrew at this point; thus I infer “are” rather than “is,” in keeping with the plural /elohim/.)
Echoing such biblical – BIBLICAL – wording, in the evangelical subculture it is very much the norm that when we say “God,” capital ‘G’, we are referring specifically and only to YAHWEH. Isaiah 45:5 in its own context appears to equate Yahweh with /elohim/.
I point this out NOT because I disagree with Dr. Heiser’s translation and reasoning re. the /elohim/ — but to point out that it’s useless and unfair to criticize evangelicals for failing to “get it” (my phrase) if we don’t first discuss what we mean when we say “God” or “god(s).” If you simply open the discussion (debate) by saying “The Bible teaches a plurality of gods” — before addressing what the Heb. term for “G/god” actually MEANS in its ancient context, and how PART of its semantic range has been picked up in English — then guess what? Your evangelical audience is going to freak out and accuse you of teaching polytheism/idolatry!!!
My understanding is that /el/ essentially means “strong one,” or, more loosely, we could construe that as “superhuman/supernatural one.” If we (teachers or scholars addressing an evangelical audience) established that definition, first of all, we could then proceed to point out that the Bible teaches a plurality of “strong ones” — but that Yahweh is a UNIQUE “Strong One.” When the contextual issue is explained first, THEN your audience will understand that you’re NOT suggesting there are competitors or equals to Yahweh! THAT’s why some have reacted negatively to Dr. Heiser’s writings: they mistakenly think he’s suggesting there’s “more than one Yahweh.”
And, with all due respect to Dr. Heiser’s scholarship (which I really do appreciate), at times I’ve got the impression from his writings (but more so from Brian Godawa’s book ‘When Giants Were Upon the Earth’, for which Dr. Heiser wrote the forward) that traditional Christians “don’t believe there are multiple supernatural beings.” Of course they do! Christians with even a modicum of biblical literacy have understood from childhood that there are multiple supernatural beings. They just haven’t normally referred to them as “gods.” They haven’t normally understood the semantic range of the term /el[ohim]/.
Address THAT fundamental issue, and you’ll automatically win over most evangelicals to the concept of the “divine council.”
Now, all that said . . . that still doesn’t mean Dr. Heiser has correctly interpreted Psalm 82. Even if we grant the translation “gods,” that still doesn’t negate the possibility that “gods” is being used /metaphorically/ to refer to human rulers or judges. For one thing, v. 7 implies this possibility, since supernatural beings cannot literally “die.” Secondly, Jesus appears to give this very interpretation when he cites Psa. 82 in John 10:34-35. He says that Yahweh “called them gods, to whom the word of God came” (v. 35): the phrase “to whom the word of God came” implies /human recipients/ of that Word, not angelic beings. Third, the precedent for this interpretation of Psalm 82 was already set with Moses and the first generation of Israelite judges in Exodus 4:16; 7:1; 22:8-9.
An alternate “superhuman” interpretation is that offered by the editors of the NET Bible. First they translate the Hebrew of v. 1 as follows: “God stands in the assembly of El; in the midst of the gods he renders judgment.” Then they offer this commentary, appended to the name “El”: “. . . . The present translation assumes this is a reference to the Canaanite high god El, who presided over the Canaanite divine assembly. (See Isa 14:13, where El’s assembly is called ‘the stars of El.’) In the Ugaritic myths the phrase ’dt ’ilm refers to the ‘assembly of the gods,’ who congregate in King Kirtu’s house, where Baal asks El to bless Kirtu’s house (see G. R. Driver, /Canaanite Myths and Legends/, 91). If the Canaanite divine assembly is referred to here in Ps 82:1, then the psalm must be understood as a bold polemic against Canaanite religion. Israel’s God invades El’s assembly, denounces its gods as failing to uphold justice, and announces their coming demise.”
If I were only reading Psa. 82 in isolation, I’d be leaning toward the NET’s suggestion. However, this would require that in John 10:35 Jesus meant for us to understand that God gave His word to Canaanite deities — “those to whom the word of God came”!! Therefore because of Jesus’ partial explanation, I go with the “human rulers/judges” interpretation.
I don’t believe any of Dr. Heiser’s arguments can overturn this (yet this doesn’t undermine his “divine council” idea, which may be established on the basis of other passages that refer to the “elohim”).