¿LAS PIRÁMIDES SON OBRA DE UNA SUPERCIVILIZACIÓN?

Se usaron bloques de 100 y hasta 200 T. traídos de una cantera a 30 km. Están alineadas perfectamente con los puntos cardinales y el Cinturón de Orión. Los egipcios de esa época ni siquiera conocían el Hierro.

SOLUCIONES

Tú no puedes solucionar unos problemas con el mismo nivel de CONSCIENCIA que los creó. -Albert Einstein

EL HOMBRE QUE PIENSA POR SÍ MISMO

El hombre más peligroso para cualquier gobierno es el capaz de reflexionar... Casi inevitablemente, llegará a la conclusión de que el gobierno bajo el que vive es deshonesto, loco e intolerable. -H. L. Mencken

ESTRUCTURA SOCIAL PIRAMIDAL

Nuestro mundo está organizado de tal modo que una pequeña élite controla al resto a través de una jerarquía de jefes sobre otros jefes hasta llegar a los obreros en la base. El nivel de conocimiento separa a unos niveles de otros. -David Icke

GOBIERNO MUNDIAL O NUEVO ORDEN MUNDIAL

El objetivo de las élites es crear un gobierno mundial dictatorial, fascista, donde el Estado Policial es omnipresente y las libertades individuales no existen. -David Icke

NEGACIONISMO O ESCEPTICISMO CÍNICO

Condenar algo sin investigarlo previamente es la cota más alta de la ignorancia. -Albert Einstein

MEDIOS DE COMUNICACIÓN

La Opinión Pública lo es todo. Si está a tu favor, nada podrá salir mal. Si está en tu contra, nada podrá tener éxito. El que moldea la Opinión Pública tiene un mayor poder que el que hace las leyes. -Abraham Lincoln

RESPONSABILIDAD PERSONAL

Tú debes convertirte en el cambio que quieres ver en el mundo. -Mahatma Gandhi

EL PODER DE LA PROPAGANDA

Debe hacerse tan popular y tan simple que hasta el más estúpido la pueda entender. A la gente se la puede convencer de que el Paraíso es el Infierno, o a la inversa, de que la vida más horrible es el Paraíso. -Adolf Hitler, "Mein Kampf"

REPETIDORES

La mayoría de la gente es OTRA gente. Sus pensamientos son la opinión de otros, sus vidas una imitación, sus pasiones una cita de un libro. -Oscar Wilde

CREENCIAS

En religión y política, la gente casi siempre las adquiere, sin examinarlas, de autoridades que tampoco las han examinado y que, a su vez, las han adquirido de unos terceros cuyas opiniones no valen UNA PUTA MIERDA. -Mark Twain

PIRÁMIDE DE PODER

Es fácil que una pequeña élite controle a una amplia mayoria a través de estructuras jerárquicas donde cada uno se está en su sitio sin moverse y sin interesarse nunca por nada. -David Icke

DEBER

La cobardía pregunta si es seguro, la conveniencia si es cortés, y la vanidad si es popular. Pero la Consciencia pregunta si es JUSTO. Y siempre llega un tiempo donde uno debe tomar una postura que no es nada excepto JUSTA. -M. L. King

911 WAS AN INSIDE JOB!!

¿El atentado del 11-S fue ejecutado por el Gobierno en la Sombra de EEUU a través de infiltrados y aliados al más alto nivel en el ejército, los servicios secretos y los medios de comunicación?

¿MAGOS NEGROS CONTROLAN LA ECONOMÍA MUNDIAL?

¿El Dinero es el único Dios de este mundo porque lo controla TODO? ¿Los banqueros son los nuevos sacerdotes? ¿Los símbolos sagrados y ocultistas en los billetes atraen energías adecuadas a los fines de este clero?

¿EL 11-M FUE UN GOLPE DE ESTADO A FAVOR DEL PSOE?

Hay hechos documentados de sobra que demuestran que ciertos policías, miembros del servicio secreto, periodistas y jueces trabajaron para "dar un golpe de estado mediático" mintiendo, destruyendo pruebas o creando pruebas falsas.

¿ESTAMOS SOLOS EN EL UNIVERSO?

¿Otras especies y civilizaciones nos visitan con frecuencia? ¿Algunos son benéficos, otros son malvados, y la mayoría parece neutral o indiferente? ¿Los gobiernos cierran beneficiosos tratos mientras lo niegan todo?

¿NUESTRAS ÉLITES NO SON HUMANAS?

Con fama de endogámicos, herméticos, arrogantes, de "sangre azul", ¿nuestros líderes y reyes pertenecen a una raza distinta, con amplios y ancestrales conocimientos sobre la Realidad y lo Oculto?

¿NUESTROS POLÍTICOS SON TÍTERES?

¿Gente tan increíblemente estúpida e incompetente trabaja para "Amos Ocultos" que mueven sus hilos y a los que deben pagar los favores recibidos? ¿El "juego político" es una farsa para anestesiarnos?

¿SUPERTECNOLOGÍA EN LA ANTIGÜEDAD?

Es un hecho científico demostrable que ESTO no lo pudieron hacer tipos con lianas, troncos y herramientas de bronce. Tampoco podemos reproducirlo con nuestra tecnología actual.

martes, 1 de enero de 2013

David Flynn. Mysteries of Mars

Otro enlace para un vídeo ya publicado en la siguiente entrada del blog y que ya no está disponible:

http://circuloramirez.blogspot.com.es/2012/05/david-flynn-mysteries-of-mars.html

Vídeo:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnvO1frqAf0

Texto adjunto:


Publicado el 15/05/2012
David Flynn-The Watcher Forum: watcher.boardzero.com. Mars-Cydonia.http://www.mt.net/~watcher/2012.html..
  • Categoría

  • Licencia

    Licencia de YouTube estándar

2012 Year of Resurrection-David Flynn

Vídeo:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ou60mbgW41U

Texto adjunto:

Publicado el 08/03/2012
David Flynn's latest and final lecture on 2012 and its full meaning...from a conference of July 2008 in Roswell New Mexico. Very probably the most important talk Flynn has ever given.
David has gone on to be with The Lord--we will miss you.

The Gods of the Hebrew Bible

Fuente:

http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/Introduction%20to%20the%20Divine%20Council%20MTIT.pdf

Información:


Introduction to the Divine Council
Michael S. Heiser, PhD 
Excerpted from Mike’s book in progress 
(Chapter 3; footnotes not included) 


To this point we’ve learned that even before the very beginning of creation God was not alone.  There was a second, uncreated person with him, who shared his own essence and was an independent, but not autonomous, being.  As Christians we are familiar with this second person by such terms as “the Son,” and we believe that this second “deity person” became incarnated as Jesus of Nazareth.  In the Old Testament, “the Son” is manifest physically and visually, but is referred to by other names, such as Wisdom and the Word.  There are several other names taken by “the Son” in the Old Testament, and we’ll get to them.  For now, though, we need to look at the other members of God’s family and their relationship to “the Son.” 

I put “the Son” in quotation marks and used capitalization in the above paragraph to draw your attention.  God’s co-ruler and co-creator, the second deity person we think of as “the Son” since we are living after the incarnation, crucifixion, and resurrection of that person, is qualitatively different than God’s other sons.  That will be made clear as we progress.  And if you just asked yourself, “what other sons?” you’re tracking—and 
you wouldn’t be alone. God’s other sons are the focus of this chapter and the next.  What we’ll discuss here and in the next chapter is one of the most neglected, misunderstood, side-stepped—and critical—doctrinal areas in the Old Testament.  In fact, it is the backdrop for most of New Testament theology.   

I don’t make that last assertion lightly.  I’m not saying that without an understanding of this issue you can’t comprehend the Bible.  I’m saying that without it you can’t comprehend it precisely or fully, or even well.  You will inevitably miss out on the context for much of what goes on in the New Testament, a context understood and utilized by the apostles at every turn.  Remember back in the introduction when I talked about how the church has been missing the ancient context for its theology for millennia?  How we’ve lost the ancient Israelite and first century lenses for understanding what’s going on in the Bible?  Well, if the first two chapters haven’t demonstrated that for you, the next few will.  Read prayerfully and closely, because you’ll never look at your Bible the same way again once you meet God’s original heavenly family—the sons of God. 

We’ll start our introduction with an obscure but important passage, Job 38:4-7.  God is challenging Job, who wanted to know why he was suffering.  God’s general answer in Job 38-42 is that he doesn’t need to explain himself because he’s God. Part of that response reads:

4
Where were you [Job] when I laid the foundations of the earth? 
Speak if you have understanding! 
5
Who fixed its dimensions?  Surely you know! 
Or who measured it with a line? 
6
On what were its bases sunk? 

Who set its cornerstone, 

7
When the morning stars sang together 
And all the sons of God shouted for joy

There’s a lot to be said about this passage.  First, you probably noticed that God is basically asking Job (sarcastically) where Job was when God created the earth.  God refers to the time when he laid earth’s “foundations,” fixed and measured its “dimensions,” sank its “bases,” and set its “cornerstone.”  Second, you also no doubt noticed the underlined portion.  We learn from this text that, at the very moment of earth’s creation, there were already a number of “sons of God.”  These sons of God shouted for joy when they saw God’s creative power and handiwork.  You might be thinking the sons of God are the angels.  That’s a common assumption, but it’s wrong since the Hebrew word for angels (mal’akim) is completely different than the Hebrew behind “sons of God” (more on that below).  Third, you may have discerned that the two lines of verse 7 parallel each other.  That is, the sons of God who shout for joy are also identified as “morning stars” who “sang together.”  Such parallelism is the major feature of Hebrew poetry: one line renames or repeats another.  I won’t lapse into a lecture on Hebrew poetry—just make a mental note of the parallel, that the sons of God are identified with the heavenly starry host.  

The passage raises some questions.  Maybe you’re wondering if we can be sure that God’s description really does refer to the creation of the earth.  I’m going to keep my promise to save all the data that proves this for an appendix.1  By way of just one proof for now, though, you should know that the Hebrew words in Job for “laying the foundations” are the same words as used in other verses that undoubtedly refer back to 
the creation of the earth (see Psalm 102:25 [Hebrew, 26]; 104:5; Prov. 8:29; Isa. 48:13; 51:13, 16).  One verse in that list should jump out at you right away—Proverbs 8:29.  That’s the passage we read in Chapter One, where Wisdom claimed to be at God’s side serving as his assistant in creation!   This is clear biblical testimony that the sons of God who watched the show were watching God and his co-creator in action.  They were all there—before there were human beings. 

Why would I emphasize that last line when it seems so painfully obvious?  Because many Christian pastors and professors teach that the phrase “sons of God” refers to humans!  Granted, they do not make that mistake in this passage—the supernatural character of the sons of God is irrefutable in Job 38 since humans were not yet created.  However, in other passages, it is argued by not a few that “sons of God” refers to human beings.  The reason for this misguided conclusion requires a bit of background. 

In the original Hebrew, the phrase “sons of God” in Job 38:7 is beney elohim.2 You might recognize elohim as one of God’s names.  In fact, it is the most common name for Israel’s God, despite the fact that its “shape” or spelling is plural.  (Yes, you read correctly—plural).  Hebrew actually has two generic words for “God” (or any other foreign “god”):  the more common is el; the other is eloah.  In English we normally make words plural by adding “-s” or “-es” to words (“rats”; “horses”).  In Hebrew, plurals of masculine nouns end with “–im” (and God is always described with masculine pronouns in the Bible – “he”; “him”).  The word elohim is the plural of eloah; the plural of el is elim.   



The above discussion means that the word elohim all by itself can refer to either “God” (capitalized, the God of Israel) or “gods” (other divine beings).  We have to wait for the word to be put into a sentence to know which meaning is the focus.  We have words like this in English.  For example, the word “sheep” can be either singular or plural.  By itself we cannot tell which option is correct.  If we put “sheep” into the sentence, “The sheep is lost,” we know only one sheep is meant since the verb “is” requires its subject to be singular.  Likewise, “the sheep are lost” informs us that more than one sheep is in view.   

Over two thousand occurrences of the word elohim in the Hebrew text of the Old Testament point to the singular God of Israel.  We know this because of the grammar of the sentences in which the word occurs, as well as context.  Job 38:4 obviously refers to the God of Israel since the grammar there has the creator speaking in the first person singular (“I laid the foundations of the earth”).  At other times, God is referred to as ha-elohim, with the Hebrew definite article (the word for “the”) in front of elohim.  It was written this way to signal that the God of Israel was “THE God” (par excellence) among all other gods.  The grammar and context of any particular occurrence helps the reader make the decision about what to do with elohim. 

It shouldn’t be surprising that since God can be referred to as elohim and ha-elohim the Hebrew Old Testament attaches the phrase “the sons of” to both forms of God’s name.  At times the Hebrew text refers to the sons of God as beney elohim and at other times as beney ha-elohim.  There is no difference in meaning.  In the same manner, the Hebrew text occasionally reads beney elim—with the meaning “sons of God” (though plural in shape, elim refers to the singular God in that phrase, just like elohim does).3 One verse (see Psalm 82:6 below) uses the phrase beney elyon (“sons of the Most High”), since elyon is yet another name for God.  

The thought might have occurred to you that when the Hebrew writers referred to the God of Israel as “THE God” (par excellence) or “Most High” (greater and more exalted than all others) that this implies more than one god.  If that question crept into your mind, kudos to you!  You’d be correct—and that brings us to the reason why so many evangelical scholars and pastors want the “sons of God” to be human beings in certain passages.  They think having heavenly sons of God in certain passages puts polytheism in the Bible.   

This uneasiness is felt especially acutely in Psalm 82, since Psalm 82:1 and 82:6 identify the sons of God as plural elohim—gods.  But that is the literal and most straightforward understanding of the text.  What opponents of the obvious meaning of the text miss is that the presence of more than one god in the Bible does not mean polytheism as we commonly use that word.  If these last two sentences sound way out, stay with me.  Let’s take a look at Psalm 82 (note my insertion of Hebrew and grammatical terms and the underlining): 



A psalm of Asaph. 

God (elohim) stands in the divine council (literally, council of El); 
among the gods (elohim)  He pronounces judgment. 
2
 How long will you (plural) judge unjustly, 
showing favor to the wicked?      Selah. 
3
 Judge the wretched and the orphan, 
vindicate the lowly and the poor, 
4
rescue the wretched and the needy; 
save them from the hand of the wicked. 
5
 They neither know nor understand, 
they go about in darkness; 
all the foundations of the earth totter. 
6
 I said, “you (plural) gods (elohim)
sons of the Most High (beney Elyon), all of you (plural)
7
but you (plural) shall die as men do, 
fall like any prince. 
8
 Arise (the command is singular), O God (elohim),  
      judge (the command is singular) the earth, 
for you (singular) shall inherit all the nations. 

Despite the fact that it makes people uncomfortable, the text means what it says.4 In Psalm 82:1, the first elohim must be singular, since the Hebrew grammar has the word as the subject of a singular verb.  The second elohim must be plural, since the preposition in front of it (“in the midst of”) requires more than one.  You can’t be “in the midst of” one person.  And according to Psalm 82:1, the singular God (elohim) of Israel presides over an assembly or council of other gods (elohim). 5 Verse six makes it perfectly clear that these other elohim are the sons of the God of Israel.  In that verse God himself is speaking (“I said”) to the other elohim of that divine council, and he addresses them with the plural “you.” He says point-blank: “you are gods (elohim), all of you.”  The fact that he is speaking to a group (plural elohim) is made certain even in the English, since God also calls them “sons of the Most High.”  I made the observation above that the Hebrew 
word for angels is mal’akim (literally, “messengers”), an entirely different term than occurs for the sons of God.  If one still insisted against the inspired textual evidence that the two should be identified, you’d still need to explain why angels are called gods in light of Psalm 82:6.   

Some who object to the obvious meaning of the text may assert that this psalm is actually describing God the Father speaking to the other members of the Trinity.  This view results in heresy here, in some very obvious ways.  First, not all the members of the Trinity are “sons.”  The Holy Spirit is not the Son of God or a son of God.  Second, if the passage has the Trinity in mind, then God is charging them with corruption!  Verses 2-5 are quite clear that God is displeased with these other elohim in his council and has indicted them for their wicked rule. Third, this view would also have the Trinity sentenced to death!  They would die like mortals (“as men do”).  This can’t refer to the death of Christ for three reasons:  (a) the death sentence isn’t restricted to just one son of God; (b) the death sentence is for personal guilt and corruption; (c) the Son (note the capitalization) who is God’s own essence and uncreated, is superior to the other sons of God (more on that in a moment).  Fourth, it is evident from the last verse that the judgment of the sons of God, these other elohim, has something to do with God’s reclamation of the nations of the earth.  The implication is that the sons of God have been ruling the earth and doing it wickedly, and so they must be removed for God’s rule to come to full fruition.  In other words, they are an impediment or a nuisance (or at best a disappointment).  Certainly not the way we’d want to (or can) look at the Trinity. 



But what about the view that the elohim upon whom God has placed a death sentence are human rulers?  This, too, is incoherent.  Ask yourself some questions of the text.  What is the scriptural basis for the idea that God presides over a council of humans that governs the nations of the earth?  Some commentators who reject the face-value meaning of Psalm 82 like to argue that Israel’s council of seventy elders is in view here—that God is judging Israel’s judges or elders for their corruption.  This makes little sense, since at no time in the Scriptures did Israel’s elders ever have jurisdiction over all the nations of the earth.  In fact, as we’ll see in the next chapter, the situation is exactly opposite—Israel was separated from the nations to be God’s own possession and focus of his rule.  Moreover, since when do the corrupt decisions of a group of humans make the foundations of the earth totter (v. 5)?  Lastly, if these elohim are humans, why are they sentenced to die “like humans”?  This is nonsensical, and is defeated by the grammar and structure of the Hebrew text.
6  It would be akin to sentencing a child to grow up, or a dog to bark, or a human being to breathe.  The point of verse 6 is that, in response to the corruption of the elohim, they will be stripped of their immortality at God’s discretion and die like humans die.  A clear contrast is set up in the text. 

The real problem with the human view, though, is twofold.  This view cannot be reconciled with: (1) other references in the Hebrew Old Testament that refer to a divine council and other elohim; (2) other passages in the Hebrew Bible speak of an act of God to divide the nations of the earth among the sons of God as a punishment for their rebellion—before there was a nation of Israel.  Once you understand the texts we’ll examine below, Psalm 82 becomes completely coherent—and frankly brings most of the entirety of the Old Testament into proper focus.  For the remainder of this chapter we’ll focus on the first issue: references to a heavenly council that make it clear that the council of Psalm 82 is comprised of God and other supernatural beings.  We’ll tackle council functions and related concepts in the chapters that follow. 

There are several other places in the Hebrew Bible that speak of plural elohim and a heavenly council.  Perhaps the most familiar passages where the sons of God show up are the first two chapters of Job: 

Job 1:1ff. 

1 There was a man in the land of Uz named Job. That man was blameless and upright; he feared God and shunned evil. 2 Seven sons and three daughters were born to him; 3 his possessions were seven thousand sheep, three thousand camels, five hundred yoke of oxen and five hundred she-asses, and a very large household. That man was wealthier than anyone in the East. 4 It was the custom of his sons to hold feasts, each on his set day in his own home. They would invite their three sisters to eat and drink with them. 5 When a round of feast days was over, Job would send word to them to sanctify themselves, and, rising early in the morning, he would make burnt offerings, one for each of them; for Job thought, “Perhaps my children have sinned and blasphemed God in their thoughts.” This is what Job always used to do. 6 And it came to pass, when the sons of God presented themselves before the LORD, Satan came along with them. 7 The LORD said to Satan, “Where have you been?” Satan answered the LORD, “I have been roaming all over the earth.” 8 The LORD said to Satan, “Have you noticed My servant Job? There is no one like him on earth, a blameless and upright man who fears God and shuns evil!”  




Job 2:1ff.

1 Once again the sons of God presented themselves before the LORD. Satan came along with them to present himself before the LORD. 2 The LORD said to Satan, “Where have you been?” Satan answered the LORD, “I have been roaming all over the earth.” 3 The LORD said to Satan, “Have you noticed My servant Job? There is no one like him on earth, a blameless and upright man who fears God and shuns evil. He still keeps his integrity; so you have incited Me against him to destroy him for no good reason.” 4 Satan answered the LORD, “Skin for skin—all that a man has he will give up for his life. 5 But lay a hand on his bones and his flesh, and he will surely blaspheme You to Your face.” 6 So the LORD said to Satan, “See, he is in your power; only spare his life.”  

In both these passages the Hebrew phrase translated, “the sons of God” is beney ha-elohim.  Although I have the familiar “Satan” in this passage, the Hebrew word here (sat[an) is best translated “The Adversary” since it has the definite article prefixed to it (hassat[an).  Hebrew does not prefix proper names with the article, and neither does English (I am not “the Mike”).  In the Intertestamental period and the New Testament era, sat[an  became a proper name for God’s arch enemy.  The word as used here actually refers to a being who exercises a prosecutorial function—one who accuses or indicts another person.  In the ancient Near East, to which the Old Testament culturally belongs, this was a specific role within the divine council (see Zechariah 3:1-7 for perhaps the classic passage on this function).   

The picture here is that the divine council is meeting for business, and The Adversary has a role in that meeting.  The Hebrew text is ambiguous as to whether he is a member of the council or one of the sons of God.7   He may simply be an “officer” of the council at its meetings. 8  One also encounters the sons of God (beney ha-elohim) in Deuteronomy 32:8 (in the Dead Sea Scrolls material; see the next chapter for this passage) and Genesis 6:1-4 (see Chapter 6).  Before moving on, take note of how the human view of the sons of God fails hopelessly here.  There is simply no way that the sons of God could be human beings in Job 1-2.   



One encounters the sons of God in the slightly variant spelling beney elim in two biblical passages.  In Psalm 29:1, a verse that has suffered greatly at the hands of translators, the other elohim are commanded to worship Yahweh: 

Ascribe to the LORD, O sons of God (beney elim),  
ascribe to the LORD glory and strength! 

It is quite clear from this text that Yahweh is to be worshipped by other elohim, not the other way around.  The God of Israel is qualitatively superior.  Psalm 89:5-7 (Hebrew, vv. 6-8) echoes the same thought, and specifically references the divine council: 

 5 
Let the heavens praise your wonders, O LORD, 
    your faithfulness in the assembly of the holy ones! 
6
 For who in the skies can equal the LORD,  
    Who can compare with the LORD among the sons of God (beney elim),
7
 a God greatly dreaded in the council of the holy ones
     held in awe by all around Him

I naturally underlined the phrase “sons of God” and obvious references to the divine council to draw your attention to their existence in the biblical text, but I also underlined “in the skies” and “all around him.”  The reason is to emphasize that these sons of God are in heaven and around God’s throne.  They are not a human council of judges.  Once again, the human view is completely inadequate.   

Perhaps the most striking scene of the divine council is found in I Kings 22.  In that passage, the reader is privy to an actual council meeting concerning the evil king Ahab.  I reproduce the whole chapter here (NRSV) for context (note the underlined portions): 

1 For three years Aram and Israel continued without war. 2 But in the third year King Jehoshaphat of Judah came down to the king of Israel. 3 The king of Israel said to his servants, “Do you know that Ramoth-gilead 
belongs to us, yet we are doing nothing to take it out of the hand of the king of Aram?” 4 He said to Jehoshaphat, “Will you go with me to battle at Ramoth-gilead?” Jehoshaphat replied to the king of Israel, “I am as you are; my people are your people, my horses are your horses.” 5 But Jehoshaphat also said to the king of Israel, “Inquire first for the word of the LORD.” 6 Then the king of Israel gathered the prophets together, about four hundred of them, and said to them, “Shall I go to battle against Ramoth-gilead, or shall I refrain?” They said, “Go up; for the LORD will give it into the hand of the king.” 7 But Jehoshaphat said, “Is there no other prophet of the LORD here of whom we may inquire?” 8 The king of Israel said to Jehoshaphat, “There is still one other by whom we may inquire of the LORD, Micaiah son of Imlah; but I hate him, for he never prophesies anything favorable about me, but only disaster.” Jehoshaphat said, “Let the king not say such a thing.” 9 Then the king of Israel summoned an officer and said, “Bring quickly Micaiah son of Imlah.” 10 Now the king of Israel and King Jehoshaphat of Judah were sitting on their thrones, arrayed in their robes, at the threshing floor at the entrance of the gate of Samaria; and all the prophets were prophesying before them. 11 Zedekiah son of Chenaanah made for himself horns of iron, and he said, “Thus says the LORD: With these you shall gore the Arameans until they are destroyed.” 12 All the prophets were prophesying the same and saying, “Go up to Ramoth-gilead and triumph; the LORD will give it into the hand 


of the king.” 13 The messenger who had gone to summon Micaiah said to him, “Look, the words of the prophets with one accord are favorable to the king; let your word be like the word of one of them, and speak favorably.” 14 But Micaiah said, “As the LORD lives, whatever the LORD says to me, that I will speak.” 15 When he had come to the king, the king said to him, “Micaiah, shall we go to Ramoth-gilead to battle, or shall we refrain?” He answered him, “Go up and triumph; the LORD will give it into the hand of the king.” 16 But the king said to him, “How many times must I make you swear to tell me nothing but the truth in the name of the LORD?” 17 Then Micaiah said, “I saw all Israel scattered on the mountains, like sheep that have no shepherd; and the LORD said, ‘These have no master; let each one go home in peace.’ ”18 The king of Israel said to Jehoshaphat, “Did I not tell you that he would not prophesy anything favorable about me, but only disaster?” 19 Then Micaiah said, “Therefore hear the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne, with all the host of heaven standing beside him to the right and to the left of him. 20 And the LORD said, ‘Who will entice Ahab, so that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead?’ Then one said one thing, and another said another, 21 until a spirit came forward and stood before the LORD, saying, ‘I will entice him.’ 22 ‘How?’ the LORD asked him. He replied, ‘I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ Then the LORD said, ‘You are to entice him, and you shall succeed; go out and do it.’ 23 So you see, the LORD has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these your prophets; the LORD has decreed disaster for you.” 24 Then Zedekiah son of Chenaanah came up to Micaiah, slapped him on the cheek, and said, “Which way did the spirit of the LORD pass from me to speak to you?” 25 Micaiah replied, “You will find out on that day when you go in to hide in an inner chamber.” 26 The king of Israel then ordered, “Take Micaiah, and return him to Amon the governor of the city and to Joash the king’s son, 27 and say, ‘Thus says the king: Put this fellow in prison, and feed him on reduced rations of bread and water until I come in peace.’ ” 28 Micaiah said, “If you return in peace, the LORD has not spoken by me.” And he said, “Hear, you peoples, all of you!” 



Note from this remarkable vision of the true prophet of Yahweh that the deliberative assembly is once again in the presence of God.  There is no possibility that this is a human council.   

There are other references to the corrupt gods of the nations—and not idols—outside immediate divine council contexts.  They affirm that other gods were part of the worldview of Israel in the Hebrew Bible.  The first list below contains passages where the word elohim or ha-elohim  is in the Hebrew text where you read “gods.”  The second list has verses where the Hebrew word is elim. 

The plural elohim / ha-elohim 

Psalm 86:8 - Among the gods there is none like you, O Yahweh; neither [are there any works] like your works.   

Psalm 95:3 - For Yahweh is a great God, and a great King above all gods

Psalm 96:4 - For Yahweh is great, and deserving of exceedingly great praise: he is to be feared above all gods

Psalm 97:7 - All who served images were put to shame; those who boasted in mere idols; even all the gods bow down before him [Yahweh, see v. 5 preceding] 

Psalm 97:9 - For you, O Yahweh, are Most High above all the earth: you are exalted far above all gods

Psalm 135:5 - For I know that Yahweh is great, and that our lord is above all gods

Psalm 136:2 - O give thanks to the God of gods: for his mercy endures for ever. 

Psalm 138:1 - I will praise you with my whole heart: before the gods will I sing praise to you. 
  
The plural elim 

Exodus 15:11 – Who is like you, O Yahweh, among the gods?  Who is like you, majestic in holiness, awesome in splendor, doing wonders? 9


Psalm 58:1 - Do you indeed decree what is right, O gods?  Do you judge people fairly? 10


It is common for those who resist the face-value meaning of the text of Psalm 82:1, 6 to argue at this point that such references to other gods are actually references to idols, or that they are figurative expressions—that Israelites didn’t really believe such beings exist.  The first objection is discussed in detail in the next chapter.  For now take another look at Psalm 97:7 in the above list.  It clearly distinguishes the gods from idols.  The psalmist mocks the people who bow down to idols, and adds that even the gods who the idols represent bow down to Yahweh!  The second objection is best addressed here. 


Those who want to argue that these references to other gods cannot be taken as reflecting what Israelites really believed don’t realize how that objection does injustice to both the biblical text and the God of Israel.  What I mean here is that, if the above verses are not conveying factual information relative to biblical theology, then God’s superiority is a mockery.  For example, if Moses is comparing Yahweh to beings that don’t exist, how is Yahweh glorified. To have Moses “really” saying “Who is like you, O Yahweh, among the beings that aren’t real” is to judge God’s greatness by nothing.  We’re greater than something that doesn’t exist!  So is a microbe.  This view unintentionally brings God down quite a few notches, to say nothing of the deception involved on Moses’ part—and even God’s since he inspired the words.  Saying “among the beings that we all know don’t exist there is none like Yahweh” is tantamount to comparing Yahweh with Mickey Mouse, Spiderman, or some fictional literary figure.  This reduces praise to a snicker.  It also makes the writer somewhat mentally unbalanced.  He sings Yahweh’s praise before beings he really believes aren’t there?   He commands the same imaginary beings to worship Yahweh (Psa. 29:1)?  Worse yet, Yahweh presides over a council of beings that don’t exist?  Why would the Holy Spirit inspire such nonsense? 

More substantive is the fact that those who don’t want to take the text for what it says in such verses fear that they might be affirming polytheism as part of the belief system of the biblical writers.  This is a concern only in that we use the word “monotheism” in a particular way that means “the belief that no other gods exist,” as opposed to “the belief that there is one unique God.” 11  Polytheistic religions typically have a group of gods who fight and scheme against one another for power, and sometimes leadership of the lead god in charge can (and does) change in such religions.  These systems also universally assume that the gods can be identified with parts of the creation, and that at least subset of the pantheon is basically equal in power and ability (or they have powers and abilities that offset the powers and abilities of the other “top tier” gods).  Other terms relevant to this question are also flawed, such as henotheism (the belief in one superior god among other gods) and monolatry (the belief that you should worship only one god though others exist).  These terms are deficient in that they do not sufficiently describe what the biblical writers believed.  Henotheistic systems can have the lead god toppled and replaced by another god who then becomes “superior” (one wonders on what grounds, since just prior to that the god was inferior).  Monolatry fails to articulate why one God is superior and what criteria make him superior—it comments only on worship.   


Israel’s faith cannot be adequately understood by any of the terms above as we understand them today.  The faith described in the Hebrew Bible is one that has one, single “species unique” Deity, who created other lesser deities to rule under his authority.  By definition they are qualitatively inferior since they are created beings.12  The God of Israel alone is Creator of all that is, the lone sovereign, the only uncreated being, the only omnipotent and omniscient being there is, and thus the single legitimate object of our worship.  One word may not be sufficient to capture all this, but the Hebrew Old Testament makes this understanding abundantly clear.  To say that a divine council of plural elohim means polytheism requires ignoring Israel’s description of its God and the other gods. 


The “species-uniqueness” of Yahweh also answers the question of how the co-creating and co-ruling Son is different than the other sons of God.  God’s “special agent” (the Word, Wisdom) is unique in that he is Yahweh’s own uncreated essence.  This “second Yahweh” is repeatedly identified with the Son (Jesus) in the New Testament since he became incarnate as Jesus of Nazareth.  This explains why Jesus is described in 
the New Testament as monogenes, a Greek term typically (and poorly) translated “only begotten.”  You no doubt recall from an earlier chapter that there is a difference between “created” and “begotten.”  I didn’t get into the Greek terminology there, but it’s helpful now.   

“Only begotten” is an unfortunately confusing translation, especially for modern readers. It does sound to us as though the “only begotten” Son had a beginning because we aren’t used to the old English word.  The confusion should never have happened, though, since monogenes actually doesn’t mean “only begotten.”  The controversy extends from an old misunderstanding of the root of the Greek word.  For many years monogenes was thought to have derived from two Greek terms, monos (“only”) and gennao (“to beget, bear”).  Scholars of Greek linguistics have discovered, though, that the second part of the word monogenes does not come from the Greek verb gennao, but rather the noun genos (“class, kind”).  The term literally means “one of a kind” or “unique” with no connotation of time or origin.  The validity of this understanding is borne out by the New Testament itself.  In Hebrews 11:17, Isaac is called Abraham’s monogenes—but it is crystal clear from the Old Testament that Isaac was not the only son Abraham had begotten, since he had also fathered Ishmael prior to Isaac.  The term must mean that Isaac was Abraham’s “unique” son, for he was the son of the covenant promises and the line through which Messiah would come.  Many of the more recent versions of the Bible have opted to translate monogenes as “only,” but this confuses readers when they come across references to other sons of God in the Old Testament.   

The end result of all this is that the Hebrew Old Testament teaches that Israel’s God was utterly unique—not just in terms of ability, but also in essence as the lone pre-existent and uncreated being.  The God of Israel had a co-ruler and co-creator, who was his own unique essence manifested as a second person.  This second person went by many names, two of which (Word, Wisdom) we have already discussed, and was viewed by New Testament writers as being incarnated in Jesus.  The other sons of God can make no such claims.  They are of another “species” and thus by definition beneath the Father and Son.  They serve Yahweh and his co-sovereign in the divine council and accept their punishments for disobedience.  The essence and status of the Father and Son will never and can never change.  They will not be displaced or usurped as polytheism and henotheism allow, because they are unmatched and unmatchable in essence and power.  There is only one Yahweh, and his co-regent, the Son is him. 



As explosive as this chapter is, it only prepares us for what’s to come.  The divine council shows up in other quite unexpected places, some of the most important passages in the Bible.  Their story is at the heart of God’s original intention for humanity, the Fall, the story of Israel and the nations, and the ancient plan for the redemption of humanity.  We need only lose the scales of tradition that have covered out eyes.  Your journey into the world of the patriarchs and prophets has just begun. 
  
                                                 
1
 See Appendix __ for a full discussion. 
2
 I am using only English letters to “spell” this Hebrew term rather than strictly proper transliteration for reasons of convenience for English readers. 
3
 See Appendix __ for how elim in this phrase still points to a singular being.  However, elim by itself and not following “sons of” (Hebrew, beney) can only mean plural “gods” (cf. Job 41:17). 
4
 See Appendix __ for a detailed analysis of the Hebrew grammar and syntax of Psalm 82. 
5
 What follows in this chapter is a basic introduction to the divine council.  Aside from the Appendixes 
related to this chapter, for more information on the divine council see E. Theodore Mullen, “Divine 
Assembly,” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, vol.2 (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 214-217; S. B. Parker, “Council (Sod),” in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible (Eerdmans, 1999); and Michael S. Heiser, “Divine Council,” in Dictionary of the Old Testament: Wisdom, Poetry & Writings (Intervarsity Press, forthcoming). 
6
 See Appendix __. 
7
 The questions are difficult to answer given the paucity of the biblical material relevant to the discussion.  See Appendix __. 
8
 We will discuss Satan in more detail in other chapters. 
9
 This verse requires a brief comment.  All scholars and translators agree (due to the obvious context) that the Hebrew text here is elim.  I mention this because the plural here is spelled with the normal “y” [yodh]. This note is important because of the next verse in the discussion, Psalm 58:1.  Many English translations do not recognize the shortened spelling in that verse and so translations are often confusing (e.g., the word gets translated as something to do with “silence”).  At other times, the reference to plural gods is deliberately obscured (e.g., NIV, “rulers”).  Some of the more recent translations get Psalm 58:1 right (ESV, NRSV). 
10
 See the above footnote.  Also note the content of this verse – that it has the gods judging humanity 
unjustly, just like Psalm 82.  See the next chapter for the rulership of the gods / sons of God and their 
corruption. 
11
 The word as coined in the 17th century as an antonym to atheism, and subsequently imposed on the 
ancient Semitic (Israelite) mind by modern people. 
12
 Those passages that have the God of Israel creating the other gods of the council are detailed in the next chapter. 

Introduction to the Divine Council

Fuente:

http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/HeiserIVPDC.pdf

Información:


THE DIVINE COUNCIL 

A term used by Hebrew and Semitics scholars for the heavenly host, the pantheon of divine beings who administer the affairs of the cosmos.  All ancient Mediterranean cultures had some conception of a divine council.  The divine council of Israelite religion, known primarily through the psalms, was distinct in important ways.   

1. Textual Evidence 

1.1. The Council of the Gods / God 

Comparison of the Hebrew Bible with other ancient religious texts reveals overlaps between the divine councils of the surrounding nations and Israel’s version of the heavenly bureaucracy.  The parade example is the literature from Ras Shamra (Ugarit).  Translated shortly after their discovery in the 1930s, these tablets contain several phrases describing a council of gods that are conceptually and linguistically parallel to the Hebrew Bible.  The Ugaritic council was led by El, the same proper name used in the Hebrew Bible for the God of Israel (e.g., Is 40:18; 43:12).  References to the “council of El” include: phr )ilm ("the assembly of El/ the gods”; KTU 1.47:29, 1.118:28, 1.148:9); ph}r bn )ilm ("the assembly of the sons of El/ the gods”; KTU 
1.4.III:14); mphrt bn )il ("the assembly of the sons of El”; KTU 1.65:3; cf. 1.40:25, 42);  dr bn )il ("assembly [circle, group] of the sons of El”; KTU 1.40:25, 33-34); and (dt )ilm ("assembly of El / the gods”; KTU 1.15.II: 7, 11).  Phoenician texts, such as the Karatepe inscription, also describe a Semitic pantheon: wkl dr bn )lm (“and all the circle/group of the sons of the gods”; KAI 26.III.19; 27.12). 


The (dt )ilm ("assembly of El / the gods”) of Ugaritic texts represents the most precise parallel to the data of the Hebrew Bible.  Psalm 82:1 uses the same expression for the council ((dt )ilm), along with an indisputably plural use of the word )eloh|m (“God, gods”): “God ()eloh|<m) stands in the council of El/the divine council (ba(a5dat-)el); among the gods ()e5loh|<m) he passes judgment.”  The second occurrence of )eloh|m must be plural due to the preposition “in the midst of.”  The Trinity cannot be the explanation for this divine plurality, since the psalm goes on to detail how Israel’s God charges the other )e5loh|<m with corruption and sentences them to die “like humankind.”  Psalm 89:5-7 [6-8] places the God of Israel “in the assembly of the holy ones” (biqhal qedos\|<m) and then asks “For who in the clouds can be compared to Yahweh? Who is like Yahweh among the sons of God (be5ne )el|m), a god greatly feared in the council of the holy ones (be5
sod qedo4s\|<m)?”  Psalm 29:1 commands the same sons of God (be5ne )el|m) to praise Yahweh and give him due obeisance.  These heavenly “sons of God” (be5ne )eloh|<m, or the be5ne ha)eloh|<m) appear in other biblical texts (Gen 6:2.4; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; and Deut 32:8-9, 43 [LXX, Qumran]; Heiser, “Deut 32:8”).   

Another biblical Hebrew term matching Ugaritic terminology is do<r, which often means “generation” but, as with Ugaritic and Phoenician dr, may also refer to the “circle” (group) of gods; that is, the divine council (Amos 8:14 [emendation]; Ps 49:20; 84:11).   

1.2. The Abode and Meeting Place of the Divine Council 

At Ugarit the divine council and its gods met on a cosmic mountain, the place where heaven and earth intersected and where divine decrees were issued.  This place was at the "source of the two rivers" (mbk nhrm) in the "midst of the fountains of the double-deep" (qrb )apq thmtm).  This well-watered mountain was the place of the "assembled congregation" (phr m(d).  El dwelt on this mountain and, with his council, issued divine decrees from the “tents of El” (dd )il) and his "tent shrine” (qrs ; KTU 1.1.III:23; 1.2.III:5; 1.3.V:20-21; 1.4.IV:22-23; 1.6.I:34-35; 1.17.VI:48). In the Kirta Epic, El and the gods live in “tents” ()ahlm) and “tabernacles” (msknt; KTU 1.15.3.18-19).  The Ugaritic god Baal, the deity who oversaw the council for El (see below) held meetings in the “heights” (mrym) of Mount S[apa4nu, apparently located in a range of mountains that included El’s own abode.  In Baal's palace in S[apa4nu there were “paved bricks” (lbnt) that 

made Baal's house "a house of the clearness of lapis lazuli" (bht thrm )iqn)um). 

These descriptions are present in the Hebrew Bible with respect to Israel’s God and his council.  Yahweh dwells on mountains (Sinai or Zion; e.g., Ex 34:26; 1 Kings 8:10; Ps 48:1-2).  The Jerusalem temple is said to be located in the “heights of [yarkete] the north [s[a4po,n].”  Zion is the "mount of assembly" (har mo(e4d), again located in yarkete sa4po,n (Is 14:13).  Additionally, Mount Zion is described as a watery habitation (Is 33:20-22; Ezek 47:1-12; Zech 14:8; Joel 3:18 [Hebr., 4:18]).  A tradition preserved in Ezekiel 28:13-16 equates the "holy mountain of God" with Eden, the "garden of God."  Eden appears in Ezekiel 28:2 as the “seat of the gods” (mos\ab )eloh|<m).  The description of Eden in Gen 2:6-15 refers to the "ground flow" that "watered the entire face of the earth." At Sinai Moses and others saw Yahweh and feasted with him (Ex 24).  The description of this banquet includes the observation that under God's feet was a paved construction of "sapphire stone" (libnat hassapp|r; Ex 24:10), just as with Baal’s dwelling.  Other striking parallels include Yahweh’s frequent presence in the tabernacle (mis\kan) and Zion as Yahweh's tent ()o4
hel; cf. Is 33:20; Ps 26:8; 74:7; 1 Chron 9:23). 



1.3 The Structure and Bureaucracy of the Divine Council 

The council at Ugarit apparently had four tiers (Smith, Origins, 41-53).  The top tier consisted of El and his wife Athirat (Asherah).  The second tier was the domain of their royal family (“sons of El”; “princes”).  One member of this second tier served as the vice regent of El, and was, despite being under El’s authority, given the title “most high” (Wyatt, “Titles,” 419).  A third tier was for “craftsman deities,” while the lowest tier was reserved for the messengers (ml)km), essentially servants or staff.  The Ugaritic council is at times described as a court with a prosecutorial figure called the satan present, whose job was to enforce divine legislation and 
point out transgression (Handy, “Authorization”).   

Evidence for exactly the same structures in the Israelite council is tenuous.  Despite the fact that popular Israelite religion may have understood Yahweh as having a wife (Asherah; Hess), it cannot be sustained that the religion of the prophets and biblical writers contained this element or that the idea was permissible.  There is also no real evidence for the craftsman tier.  However, the role of the satan, the Accuser, is readily apparent (Job 1:6ff.; 2:1ff.).  In the divine council in Israelite religion, Yahweh was the supreme authority over a divine bureaucracy that included a second tier of lesser )e5loh|<m (the be5ne )el|m, bene )eloh|<m, or the be5ne ha)eloh|<m), and a third tier of mal)ak|m (“angels”).  In the book of Job some members of the council apparently have a mediatory role with respect to human beings (Job 5:1; 15:8; 16:19-21; cp. Heb 1:14).  

The vice regent slot in the Israelite council represents the most significant difference between Israel’s council and all others.  In Israelite religion, this position of authority was not filled by another god, but by Yahweh himself in another form.  This “hypostasis” of Yahweh was the same essence as Yahweh but a distinct, second person.  This is most plainly seen via the Name theology of the Hebrew Bible and the so-called “Angel of Yahweh” (cf. Ex 23:20-33 for the Angel’s connection to the Name, the essence of Yahweh; Heiser, “Divine Council,” 34-67). 


2.  Monotheism in the Hebrew Bible and the Divine Council 

2.1 Biblical Polytheism? 

Many scholars have concluded that the presence of a divine council in the Hebrew Bible means that Israel’s religion was at one time polytheistic (there are many gods) or henotheistic (there are many gods, but one is preferred) and only later evolved to monotheism.  Polytheism and monolatrous henotheism both presume “species sameness” among the gods.  Henotheism in particular assumes the possibility of a power struggle for supremacy in the council, where the supreme authority could be displaced if another god defeats or outwits him.  This does not reflect orthodox Israelite religious belief.  The biblical data indicate that orthodox Israelite religion never considered Yahweh as one among equals or near equals.  The biblical writers refer exclusively to Yahweh as “the God” (ha4)e5loh|<m; I Kings 18:39) when that term occurs with respect to a singular entity.  Yahweh is the “true God” ()eloh|<m )emet; Jer 10:10).  The assertion points to the belief that, while Yahweh was an )e4loh|<m, he was qualitatively unique among the )eloh|<m. The primary distinguishing characteristic of Yahweh from any other )e4loh|m was his pre-existence and creation of all things (Is 45:18), including the “host of heaven” (Ps 33:6; 148:1-5; cf. Neh 9:6), language that at times clearly refers to the other divine beings (cf. Job 38:7-8; 1 Kings 22; Is 14:13; cp. Deut 4:19-20; 32:8-9, 43 [LXX, Qumran]; with Deut 17:3; 29:25; 32:17).  Yahweh’s utter uniqueness to all other )e4loh|<m is monotheism on ancient Semitic terms, and orthodox Israelite religion reflects this at all stages. 


2.2 Plural )eloh|<m as Human Beings? 

Many scholars understand the plural )eloh|<m of Psalm 82 and 89 as human rulers, namely the elders of Israel, no doubt due to the specter of polytheism.  This position is highly problematic.  If these )e4loh|<m are humans, why are they sentenced to die “like humans”?  A clear contrast is intended by both the grammar and structure of the Hebrew text (Prinsloo; Handy, “Sounds”).  At no time in the Hebrew Bible did Israel’s elders ever have jurisdiction over all the nations. There is no scriptural basis for the idea that God presides over a council of humans that governs the nations of the earth.  In fact, the situation is exactly the opposite—Israel was separated from the nations to be God’s own possession, while the other nations were abandoned by Yahweh to the rule of other )eloh|<m in the wake of the incident at Babel (Deut 4:19-20; 32:8-9 [LXX, Qumran]; cp. Dan 10:13, 20; Heiser, “Deut 32:8”).  It is also difficult to see how the corrupt decisions of a group of humans would shake the foundations of the earth (Ps 82:5).  Furthermore, it is clear from Psalm 89 that the “sons of God” (be5ne )el|m) in “the council of the holy ones” (be5sod qedo4s\|<m) meet “in the clouds” (bas\s\ah[aq; Ps 89:6 [Hebr. 89:7]).   

The lesser )eloh|m are not merely idols.  Deuteronomy 32:17, when understood against a broad view of Deuteronomy’s statements about gods and idols, nullifies this explanation: “They sacrificed to demons (s\e4d|<m) who are not God (e5loah; a singular noun), to gods ()e4loh|<m) they did not know; new gods that had come along recently, whom your fathers had not reverenced.”  If the lesser )eloh|m are demons, their existence cannot be denied.  One psalmist (Ps 97:7), while mocking the lifeless idols, demands that the lesser )e4loh|<m worship Yahweh, a puzzling command if there were no such entities. 


2.3 “No Other Gods Beside Me”? 

How is one to reconcile Israel’s divine council with statements in the Hebrew Bible that “there is none beside” Yahweh?  Such statements are taken by critical scholars as evidence that Israel had shed its polytheism, and by others as necessitating the strained interpretations noted above.  Neither view can be sustained in light of the references to plural )e4loh|<m and )el|m in Second Temple period Jewish texts (roughly 185 in the Qumran material alone; Heiser, “Divine Council,” 189-210) and the Jewish belief in “Two Powers” in heaven during that same period (Segal).  Analysis of the Hebrew text demonstrates that several of the most common phrases in the Hebrew Bible allegedly used for denying the existence of other gods (e.g., Deut 4:35, 39; 32:12, 39) appear in passages that affirm the existence of other gods (Deut 4, 32).  The result is that these phrases express the incomparability of Yahweh among the other )e4loh|<m, not that the biblical writer contradicts himself, or that he is in the process of discovering monotheism. The situation is the same in Isaiah 40-66.  Isaiah 40:1-8 is familiar to scholars (via the plural imperatives in 40:1-2) as a divine council text (Cross, Seitz).  Isaiah 40:22-26 affirms the ancient Israelite worldview that described heavenly beings with heavenly host terminology (Heiser, “Divine Council,” 114-118).  That Isaiah’s “denial statements” should be understood as statements of incomparability, not as rejections of the existence of other gods, is made clear in Isaiah 47:8, 10, where Babylon boldly claims, “I am, and there is none else beside me.”  The claim is not that Babylon is the only city in the world, but that she has no rival.   


Some would argue that the descriptions of a divine council are merely metaphoric. Metaphoric language, however, is not based on what a writer’s view of reality excludes.  Rather, the metaphor is a means of framing and categorizing something that is part of a writer’s worldview.  When the biblical writer asserts, “Who is like you, O Lord, among the gods ()e4loh|<m, )el|m; Deut 10:17; Ex 15:11)?” these statements reflect a sincere belief and are neither dishonest nor hollow.  Comparing Yahweh to the ancient equivalent of an imaginary or fictional character cheapens the praise.  The Psalms contain many exclamations of the incomparability of Yahweh to the other gods (Ps 86:8, 95:3; 96:4; 135:5; 136:2).  David (Ps 138:1) proclaims that he will sing the praise of the God of Israel “before the gods” (neged )eloh|<m), a declaration that makes little sense if lesser )e4loh|<m did not exist. 

3.  The Divine Council, Jewish Binitarianism, and New Testament Christology 

Numerous descriptions and epithets of Ugaritic El and Baal are attributed to Yahweh in the Hebrew Bible (Day, 13-127; Smith, “Early History,” 32-107).  This was done for polemic reasons to challenge the authority of El and Baal.  For the Israelite, high sovereignty and chief administration of the cosmos was conducted only by Yahweh.  Nevertheless, Israel’s own divine council had a bureaucratic hierarchy, and that order is consistently described in terms of Yahweh being both the high Sovereign and the vice regent.  Orthodox Israelite religion instead had Yahweh as sovereign and a second person who was Yahweh’s mediating essence as the vice regent of the council.  This structure reflected Israel’s belief in Yahweh’s ontological uniqueness as creator of all things, including the other )e4loh|m of the council.  The notion of two distinct deities at the top of the hierarchy was unthinkable to Israel.   


This religious structure is the backdrop to the ancient Jewish acceptance of two powers in heaven (Segal).  Since both powers were believed to be good, the belief does not reflect Zoroastrian influence.  The belief in two powers in heaven was a contributing factor in the advent of what scholars have termed “binitarian monotheism” in Second Temple period Judaism (Hurtado, “Binitarian”), which in turn contributes to our understanding of the advent of New Testament Christology.  This contextualizes the description of Jesus as the monogenes (“unique”; Grudem, 1233ff.) son of God in the New Testament.  Since the Hebrew Bible is clear that there are other sons of God (be5ne< [ha])eloh|<m), New Testament writers clarify that Jesus, as the same essence as the Father, is unique among all heavenly sons of God. 

Bibliography 

Richard J. Clifford, The Cosmic Mountain in Canaan and the Old Testament (HSM 4; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1972); Frank Moore Cross, "The Council of Yahweh in Second Isaiah." JNES 12 (1953): 274-277; John Day, Yahweh and the Gods and Goddesses of Canaan (JSOTS 265; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994); Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: AN Introduction to Bible Doctrine (Leicester, England; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Inter-Varsity Press; Zondervan, 1994); Lowell K. Handy, "Sounds, Words, and Meanings in Psalm 82," JSOT 47 (1990): 60-73; idem, "The Authorization of Divine Power and the Guilt of God in the Book of Job: Useful Ugaritic Parallels," JSOT 60 (1993): 107-118; idem, Among the Host of Heaven: The Syro-Palestinian Pantheon as Bureaucracy (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1994); Michael S. Heiser, "Deuteronomy 32:8 and the Sons of God," BibSac 158 (2001): 52-74; idem, "The Divine Council in Second Temple Literature," Ph.D. diss., University of Wisconsin-Madison, 2004; R. S. Hess, “Yahweh and his Asherah? Epigraphic Evidence for Relgious Pluralism in Old Testament Times,” in One God, One Lord in a World of Religious Pluralism, ed. A.D. Clarke and B.W. Winter (Cambridge: Tyndale House, 1991) 5-33; Larry W. Hurtado, One God, One Lord: Early Christian Devotion and Ancient Jewish Monotheism (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988); idem, "The Binitarian Shape of Early Christian Worship," in The Jewish Roots of Christological Monotheism, Papers from the St. Andrews Conference on the Historical Origins of the Worship of Jesus, ed. Carey C. Newman, James R. Davila and Gladys S. Lewis (SupJSJ 63; Leiden: Brill, 1999) 187-213; E. Theodore Mullen, Jr., The Divine Council in Canaanite and Early Hebrew Literature (HSM 24; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1980); idem, “Divine Assembly,” ABD 2.214-217; Simon B. Parker, "Sons of (the) God(s)," DDD, 794-798; W. S. Prinsloo, “Psalm 82: Once Again, Gods or Men?” Bib 76:2 (1995): 219-228; Alan F. Segal, Two Powers in Heaven: Early Rabbinic Reports about Christianity and Gnosticism (Leiden: Brill, 1977); Christopher R. Seitz, "The Divine Council: Temporal Transition and New Prophecy in the Book of Isaiah," JBL 109:2 (1990): 229-247; Mark S. Smith, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel's Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001); idem, The Early History of God: Yahweh and Other Deities in Ancient Israel (2nd ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002); Nicholas Wyatt, “The Titles of the Ugaritic Storm God," UF 24 (1992): 403-424. 










THE DIVINE COUNCIL . COM

Enlace:

http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/

Contenido:

      THE DIVINE COUNCIL . COM

"[The divine council is] the heavenly host, the pantheon of divine beings who administer the affairs 
of the cosmos. All ancient Mediterranean cultures had some conception of a divine council. The divine 
council of Israelite religion, known primarily through the psalms, was distinct in important ways."
Michael S. Heiser, Dictionary of the Old Testament: Wisdom, Poetry, & Writings; ed. Tremper Longman and Peter Enns; InterVarsity Press, 2008