Our reasoning becomes myopic when we refuse to think outside the box. I was discussing with a friend one day, and I asked him: "Have you ever thought about if lives existed in a planet far outside our galaxy, in a different realm and in another galaxy?" This universe is so vast that it'll take 100,000 years alone to travel outside our own galaxy, and there are billions of galaxies in the Universe (according to Science).

So it would be folly to think life only exists on Earth in all the whole Universe because the Bible says so. The Bible only speaks of earth and heaven. Its writers were limited in their knowledge of the Universe. Maybe in our solar system, life only exists on Earth out of all the 9 planets, but that's as far as science have been able to study. Strangely enough, in some far, far away galaxy, someone would also be thinking life only exists on his planet ...

Smartini:
Our reasoning becomes myopic when we refuse to think outside the box. I was discussing with a friend one day, and I asked him: "Have you ever thought about if lives existed in a planet far outside our galaxy, in a different realm and in another galaxy?" This universe is so vast that it'll take 100,000 years alone to travel outside our own galaxy, and there are billions of galaxies in the Universe (according to Science).

So it would be folly to think life only exists on Earth in all the whole Universe because the Bible says so. The Bible only speaks of earth and heaven. Its writers were limited in their knowledge of the Universe. Maybe in our solar system, life only exists on Earth out of all the 9 planets, but that's as far as science have been able to study. Strangely enough, in some far, far away galaxy, someone would also be thinking life only exists on his planet ...

Ur mention of some far far away galaxy reminds me of star wars boss
Soo hmm,the bible never makes the claim that we are alone, matter of fact it's quite the opposite. The bible does mention quite a number of other intelligent beings asides from man.
But if you're talking about the universe been populated by other intelligent beings made up of ordinary matter just like us(regardless of the biology), well that's kinda of a whole different ballgame. You can check out something called the[b] Fermi Paradox[/b] to get the gist of it.

omokoladejames:


Ur mention of some far far away galaxy reminds me of star wars boss
Soo hmm,the bible never makes the claim that we are alone, matter of fact it's quite the opposite. The bible does mention quite a number of other intelligent beings asides from man.
But if you're talking about the universe been populated by other intelligent beings made up of ordinary matter just like us(regardless of the biology), well that's kinda of a whole different ballgame. You can check out something called the[b] Fermi Paradox[/b] to get the gist of it.

I found your post quite interesting, so I looked you up. I like very much what I see, and I thought to say hi and encourage you to keep growing and progressing in the Truth.

The Bible Project sounds familiar to me, but the two videos I just sampled on Joshua and Sin are unfamiliar, so I don't think I have ever seen anything they have taught, but I was happy to see it. Of course, there is so much more to learn in the Bible, and given that spiritual growth is about a comprehensive appreciation (that is, the learning and believing) of everything that the Bible has to say in a systematic manner, I think it might take very many short videos indeed to work anyone through the systematic theology that is necessary to at the very least bring them to a certain basic level of spiritual maturity. But what I saw so far is brilliant. And your responses on this board are quite the same, in my opinion.

It is ridiculously rare to find people who love the Truth, so seeing what I have on your profile excites me.

For my part, I am quite strongly affiliated with https://ichthys.com. When it pleased God to Grant my pleas to learn the Truth, that was where He took me late in 2017. I haven't had even a moment of regret of finding that ministry. If I hadn't, I may not have appreciated The Bible Project as much as I do now. I think I am the type that needs the kind of treatment and handling that Ichthys does. I suspect that it is only from a position of some maturity that I could ever appreciate the very versatile summaries that I find on The Bible Project.

I pray that Grace and Mercy and Peace from the Father and our Lord Jesus continue to sustain and strengthen you in all your good endeavors to honor the One Who bought us with His Blood.

Ihedinobi3:

I found your post quite interesting, so I looked you up. I like very much what I see, and I thought to say hi and encourage you to keep growing and progressing in the Truth.

The Bible Project sounds familiar to me, but the two videos I just sampled on Joshua and Sin are unfamiliar, so I don't think I have ever seen anything they have taught, but I was happy to see it. Of course, there is so much more to learn in the Bible, and given that spiritual growth is about a comprehensive appreciation (that is, the learning and believing) of everything that the Bible has to say in a systematic manner, I think it might take very many short videos indeed to work anyone through the systematic theology that is necessary to at the very least bring them to a certain basic level of spiritual maturity. But what I saw so far is brilliant. And your responses on this board are quite the same, in my opinion.

It is ridiculously rare to find people who love the Truth, so seeing what I have on your profile excites me.

For my part, I am quite strongly affiliated with https://ichthys.com. When it pleased God to Grant my pleas to learn the Truth, that was where He took me late in 2017. I haven't had even a moment of regret of finding that ministry. If I hadn't, I may not have appreciated The Bible Project as much as I do now. I think I am the type that needs the kind of treatment and handling that Ichthys does. I suspect that it is only from a position of some maturity that I could ever appreciate the very versatile summaries that I find on The Bible Project.

I pray that Grace and Mercy and Peace from the Father and our Lord Jesus continue to sustain and strengthen you in all your good endeavors to honor the One Who bought us with His Blood.

@omokoladejames, I have just looked a little more at The Bible Project. I tested out their series on Spiritual Beings, and I was sorely disappointed. Genesis is very critical to biblical theology, and when it is improperly understood, very much of biblical Truth is lost to the believer. The very nature of God, the reason for mankind's existence, the unparalleled importance of Jesus Christ and His Cross, and the hope of all believers are wound up with Genesis. Without the Cross, nothing would ever have been created. But the Cross answers the doom of Man. The doom of Man, in turn, resulted directly from God's Answer to angelic rebellion in pre-human history. Finally, the Cross secures the Hope of Mankind and the Hope of all Creation too.

So, when we get mixed up about the beginnings of Creation in the manner that The Bible Project does, some error will shoot through the entire system of theology that is almost certain to cause critical damage or at least produce an extreme vulnerability in the Structure of Truth in our hearts.

I hope you will not take offence at this, my brother. My intent is to make sure that nothing I said before leads to a fatal sense of safety in a ministry that I have not found to be as safely reliable as I could demand of any human ministry. It is not to knock them or you. I still believe that they are far better than most other "teaching" ministries out there, all of whom do not deserve the name by a long mile.

Ihedinobi3:

I hope you will not take offence at this, my brother. My intent is to make sure that nothing I said before leads to a fatal sense of safety in a ministry that I have not found to be as safely reliable as I could demand of any human ministry. It is not to knock them or you. I still believe that they are far better than most other "teaching" ministries out there, all of whom do not deserve the name by a long mile.

No offense taken boss, I'm not affiliated with the bible project team and I doubt the guys behind the project would be offended also...

With that being said, I would like to offer some words on the issue u raised. Like u alluded to in ur writeup, the bible is really really deep and the biblical authors under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit were literary ninjas in the way they interwove themes and concepts together and how they were able to packed so much depth into seemly short texts. For instance, the story of Cain and Abel, which would take less than 10mins for the average reader to read through ,is packed with so much depth that for centuries, people with decades of bible knowledge under their belt are still parsing through it. Ancient readers of this text would recognise this concepts but sadly most of it is lost to modern day readers ,and I believe this is where the bible project comes in. I believe the goal of their videos is not to present deep theological breakdown of the scriptures but to ease 21 century readers into dropping our preconceived notion of the world and read the bible with a bit of understanding of the worldview in which the bible was written. We can't find the truth statements written in the bible if we keep trying to force our own will on the it. Their short videos help people ease into trying to understand the scriptures on its own terms without having them sit through long lectures...most people won't sit down and watch a 4hr lecture on the say the book of jonah for example( believe me I've tried getting friends interested in stuffs like this, but no luck so far ). With that as their focus , i think the bible project guys are doing a good job because at the very least, their videos try to get the broad gist across and hopefully get people to not only humbly begin to read God's word on it's own terms but to also let God's word read them(i personally believe,we not only read the scriptures, the scriptures also reads us and forces us to look inwards as we grow in our journey in Christ).

But as you have noticed, there's always going to be some drawbacks in trying to condense soooo much information into a 6min video. There's going to be many things left out and there's no hard and fast rule in choosing how to simplify some certain things or which things to leave out. This would boil down to judgement calls. But remember the target audience is people who are either new believers or people who would like to begin reading the scriptures as it should be read regardless of how long they have been reading it( I'm not trying to claim any superior knowledge over anybody but I've been in churches where almost every scripture that was quoted was quoted out of context...and it was not like the preachers were intentionally trying to deceive anyone but that's just how they've always read and understood the scriptures).
But for those who God has put it in their hearts to go a bit further, a 6min video would obviously not suffice, but luckily there are lots of lectures and sites out there by sound bible scholars to help one continue to grow. Even Tim Mackie (the main voice in the bible project videos) has hours and hours of lectures on his website where he goes deeper into several topics and like I said, the web is teaming with loads of OT/NT scholar, teachers and even schools of theology who offer great courses for free online (Dallas school of theology is a good one).

And finally, no one man or generation knows the whole truth, we all know in part. We all have blindspots, so it's ok for us to disagree on certain issues as long as it's not heretical(like those who try to use the bible to entertain sexual immorality or try to diminish the cross and the person of Christ). Concerning the spiritual beings series( I've personally not watched the whole series and can vaguely remember the ones I watched), it's fine if you disagree with the fundamentals of that particular series, There are many people who I listen to and respect that i don't agree with their take on certain topics... Sometimes it takes me months of chewing on the topic before I agree with them and sometimes I never agree with their take on it(no one is a 100% right all the time). It's all part of the journey.

Thanks for your words of encouragement and I pray God's hand would continue to guide and bless you. Have a wonderful Sunday.

omokoladejames:

I believe the goal of their videos is not to present deep theological breakdown of the scriptures but to ease 21 century readers into dropping our preconceived notion of the world and read the bible with a bit of understanding of the worldview in which the bible was written.

Why is this a thing? Is Yahweh stuck in time? He cannot update his work to speak about current events?

omokoladejames:


No offense taken boss, I'm not affiliated with the bible project team and I doubt the guys behind the project would be offended also...

With that being said, I would like to offer some words on the issue u raised. Like u alluded to in ur writeup, the bible is really really deep and the biblical authors under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit were literary ninjas in the way they interwove themes and concepts together and how they were able to packed so much depth into seemly short texts. For instance, the story of Cain and Abel, which would take less than 10mins for the average reader to read through ,is packed with so much depth that for centuries, people with decades of bible knowledge under their belt are still parsing through it. Ancient readers of this text would recognise this concepts but sadly most of it is lost to modern day readers ,and I believe this is where the bible project comes in. I believe the goal of their videos is not to present deep theological breakdown of the scriptures but to ease 21 century readers into dropping our preconceived notion of the world and read the bible with a bit of understanding of the worldview in which the bible was written. We can't find the truth statements written in the bible if we keep trying to force our own will on the it. Their short videos help people ease into trying to understand the scriptures on its own terms without having them sit through long lectures...most people won't sit down and watch a 4hr lecture on the say the book of jonah for example( believe me I've tried getting friends interested in stuffs like this, but no luck so far ). With that as their focus , i think the bible project guys are doing a good job because at the very least, their videos try to get the broad gist across and hopefully get people to not only humbly begin to read God's word on it's own terms but to also let God's word read them(i personally believe,we not only read the scriptures, the scriptures also reads us and forces us to look inwards as we grow in our journey in Christ).

But as you have noticed, there's always going to be some drawbacks in trying to condense soooo much information into a 6min video. There's going to be many things left out and there's no hard and fast rule in choosing how to simplify some certain things or which things to leave out. This would boil down to judgement calls. But remember the target audience is people who are either new believers or people who would like to begin reading the scriptures as it should be read regardless of how long they have been reading it( I'm not trying to claim any superior knowledge over anybody but I've been in churches where almost every scripture that was quoted was quoted out of context...and it was not like the preachers were intentionally trying to deceive anyone but that's just how they've always read and understood the scriptures).
But for those who God has put it in their hearts to go a bit further, a 6min video would obviously not suffice, but luckily there are lots of lectures and sites out there by sound bible scholars to help one continue to grow. Even Tim Mackie (the main voice in the bible project videos) has hours and hours of lectures on his website where he goes deeper into several topics and like I said, the web is teaming with loads of OT/NT scholar, teachers and even schools of theology who offer great courses for free online (Dallas school of theology is a good one).

And finally, no one man or generation knows the whole truth, we all know in part. We all have blindspots, so it's ok for us to disagree on certain issues as long as it's not heretical(like those who try to use the bible to entertain sexual immorality or try to diminish the cross and the person of Christ). Concerning the spiritual beings series( I've personally not watched the whole series and can vaguely remember the ones I watched), it's fine if you disagree with the fundamentals of that particular series, There are many people who I listen to and respect that i don't agree with their take on certain topics... Sometimes it takes me months of chewing on the topic before I agree with them and sometimes I never agree with their take on it(no one is a 100% right all the time). It's all part of the journey.

Thanks for your words of encouragement and I pray God's hand would continue to guide and bless you. Have a wonderful Sunday.

To be sure, I don't have many on this board over whom I rejoice just like I do over you. I am happy, very happy to read you here. It is very encouraging.

We agree on quite a lot, judging by the above. As you said, we may not agree on everything. There is probably only one believer in this world with whom I have found 100% agreement in everything so far, and he is the man who helped me to grow up spiritually, and who continues to support me in my spiritual progress. He too, in his turn, had a teacher who helped him grow up, but when he embarked on his own pastor-teaching ministry, he disagreed with his teacher on some things, both in doctrine and in practice. So, it's not like uniformity is the goal. The issue is allegiance to the Truth. No matter what, we must stand with what the Bible says. That is the greatest thing that I learned from Professor Robert Luginbill, the man of whom I just spoke. It is what I try to live by today.

As far as I'm concerned, anyone who believes in Jesus Christ, God become Man to die on the Cross for our sins and deliver us from the Judgment of the Lake of Fire, is my brother and my sister. I am not enemies with such a person. Because, however, of the lukewarm nature of the vast majority of believers today, I don't assume that these people are necessarily my friends in the Race. Very few of them in fact are committed to running at all, much less running well. When I find any who is showing zeal for the Truth, I do my best to help and encourage them. I take for granted that we will almost certainly not agree on everything, since we still live in a sinful body, but zeal for the Truth means that we will eventually converge at the βήμα or Tribunal of the Lord Jesus Christ, largely with each other's help, to receive our rewards for faithfulness and diligence in the Truth.

I suppose that it is possible that in the more comprehensive discussions of the Spiritual Beings concept, The Bible Project may clear up what I perceived to be fatal errors, and I do agree that as long as we are not carrying on heresies, we can, to some degree at least, safely disagree on what we believe and teach. I suppose the reason I am so concerned is that I know that it is not just the stacks of truths that we know and believe that counts but the integrity of the Truth-structure in our hearts that matters. Truth works just like a building or an organization. Every biblical truth fits in a very specific way with all other biblical truths in order to form one harmonious whole that operates in a very unique way. When "truth-bricks" are missing, in whole or in part, or damaged somehow, or even misaligned with each other, the integrity of the whole is compromised to some degree.

Of course, none of us is perfect, certainly not in understanding, but that does not mean that we should not fight for or push for the highest degree of accuracy in the Truth we believe in our hearts. If we don't, we are likely to be prancing about on an extremely dangerous battlefield pretty much half-naked and near-defenceless. Satan knows this and works very hard to corrupt the Truth so that we can be easier pickings for him. I know too many on this board who are enemies of the Cross today for just this reason: they were never properly taught the Scriptures, and they never particularly cared enough to learn, so the enemy stole them away.

This is actually what advises my activities on this board and elsewhere. I wish to help those who want or will receive my help to build a system of Truth in their hearts that is not only structurally sound but also powerfully versatile, so that no challenge thrown at them either by antichristians or by the affairs of this life will shake their Faith in the Lord. Apart from the incontrovertible fact that every believer goes through personal Tribulation for their Faith in the Lord, no matter what time or era that they are living in, our generation is the one that will pass through the Tribulation, so there is perhaps that much more urgency to prepare everyone who will allow it for the times pretty much immediately ahead of us.

I thank you very much indeed for your prayers. I am much encouraged both by them and by yourself. Peace from our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ be with you.

Ihedinobi3:

I thank you very much indeed for your prayers. I am much encouraged both by them and by yourself. Peace from our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ be with you

Thanks alot boss... I would very much like to hear what u believe to be fatal errors in the way we understand the genesis story that might affect our understanding of the Cross though... Maybe on a separate thread so we don't continue derailing this thread more than we have already

Enjoy the rest of ur weekend boss...

omokoladejames:

Thanks alot boss... I would very much like to hear what u believe to be fatal errors in the way we understand the genesis story that might affect our understanding of the Cross though... Maybe on a separate thread so we don't continue derailing this thread more than we have already

Enjoy the rest of ur weekend boss...

That would be my pleasure. I rarely open threads because of my specific goals in my activities here, so if I may impose upon you, would you be so kind as to open the thread yourself? Please bear with me in this request.

Thank you. I hope that your own weekend has turned out well.

I have personally thought of this one day. And the answer I got from my inner man is that, God is so great and mighty that the earth is just too small to display His splendor. So He created other planets to demonstrate and show forth His glory. To tell man His awesomeness and inspire in him worship.

Ihedinobi3:

That would be my pleasure. I rarely open threads because of my specific goals in my activities here, so if I may impose upon you, would you be so kind as to open the thread yourself? Please bear with me in this request.

Thank you. I hope that your own weekend has turned out well.

That's going to be kinda hard since Im not sure the errors your are concerned about. But i'm sure one of this days, there will be a discussion on this forum on something similar and we can both jump in on the conversation

omokoladejames:

That's going to be kinda hard since Im not sure the errors your are concerned about. But i'm sure one of this days, there will be a discussion on this forum on something similar and we can both jump in on the conversation

I understand. I figured that that might be a hard thing to ask of you.

I think that although it is not exactly the subject of this thread, it is still within the general ambit of the discussion since the issue of spiritual beings in the videos had to do with the how the ancient peoples conceptualized the heavenly bodies among other things, so we could still have the conversation here. If you don't mind, I'll share the videos here and we can proceed from there:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLH0Szn1yYNeef2AIszbltRK15dgoxA_57

That's the playlist.

Ihedinobi3:

I understand. I figured that that might be a hard thing to ask of you.

I think that although it is not exactly the subject of this thread, it is still within the general ambit of the discussion since the issue of spiritual beings in the videos had to do with the how the ancient peoples conceptualized the heavenly bodies among other things, so we could still have the conversation here. If you don't mind, I'll share the videos here and we can proceed from there:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLH0Szn1yYNeef2AIszbltRK15dgoxA_57

That's the playlist.

@omokoladejames, the first and most important error, in my view, is in the idea that the writers of Scripture necessarily saw the world the same way that the rest of the ancient world did and this impacted what they wrote. This is neither a necessary assumption to make nor a good one. It is a dangerous one because if we look at the Bible purely through the lens of the ancient cultures, we are apt to get the wrong ideas about what God is saying.

Now, I don't mean that the Bible can be understood without reference to the contemporary cultures in which it was written. No. Every pastor-teacher who is worth his salt would take the trouble of understanding the cultures contemporary to the times of the writing of the Scriptures so that the cultural references that abound in the Bible can be interpreted properly. This would work, for example, to explain the laws of Moses and, as an illustration, why men who raped unbetrothed young Hebrew women were required by law to marry them. But it is important to make a difference between how the writers of Scripture saw the world as believers in the Lord God and how the unbelieving world did too, because if we do not, we will read ancient pagan concepts into the Bible.

The Egyptians, for example, worshiped the sun, regarding it not only as sentient but also as deity. Moses obviously did not worship the sun. But did he regard it as sentient when he wrote that the Lord God made it, among other extraterrestrial phenomena, to rule over the day? Did Paul consider it the same way more than a thousand years later when he said that there are heavenly bodies and earthly bodies and one glory of the sun and another of the moon etc? It would be a leap of logic to say so, since the language can be understood another way. Furthermore, if the rest of the Bible teaches that not only does "rule" not necessarily imply sentience but also that the universe is sometimes spoken of in anthropopathic terms, it means that it is a bad idea to assume that Moses, Paul, the psalmists, and Solomon necessarily thought of the sun and moon and the others as spiritual beings.

What the Bible actually teaches is that extraterrestrial phenomena like the sun, moon, and stars operate in ways that determine what happens on earth. For example, when the sun's rays reach a given part of the earth, the day begins, and when they are no longer visible, the night has come. The moon too rises to give less light at night, and help track the time, so that we can work out monthly cycles. The more we have learned of the Universe that God created too, the more we have come to see that the Universe outside the Earth affects events on Earth. We don't know even the tenth of it, but it is obviously so. That is what Rule means. The earth was created in the midst of a vast system that works to keep it habitable for human beings, and not only that, but also to limit the evil in human nature, as will be most clearly seen during the Tribulation with the use of asteroids and meteors and tsunamis to judge human evil at the time.

None of that makes the "heavenly bodies" sentient, nor does any of it mean that the writers of Scripture thought that the sun was a spiritual being.

What we can gain from understanding ancient cultures here is that their superstition and paganism must have come somehow from a corrupted understanding of the Pristine Truth that we find in Genesis. For example, it is entirely conceivable that although after the Flood, Noah's family did know of the Great God Who just destroyed all life apart from them, people like Ham and his descendants promptly rejected any notion that they should obey that God, so they forsook the Truth that they learned from Noah, and began to make things up on the basis of emotional preferences about the Nephilim that occasioned that destruction. This would lead to an entire religious system that culminated in the Tower of Babel in short order.

A corrupt appreciation of God's command that the sun and moon and stars should operate to order the times and seasons of the Earth would thus lead to worship of them, because Mankind rejects God Himself. This is what we can take away from an appreciation of the Bible in the context of ancient cultures, not that Moses thought like the Egyptians around him when he wrote Genesis.

But the Bible does speak of a heavenly host. And it talks of stars doing things in Revelation that you wouldn't expect giant gas balls to do. Of course, the Bible explains too through other things it says that angels are like stars because of their literal brightness. After all, in Daniel, we are told too that the righteous will shine the same way, and the Lord Jesus is said to be brighter in appearance than the Sun itself shining in all its strength, and He is called the Bright Morning Start too. So, we are to understand "heavenly host" in two ways: the physical luminary phenomena out in space AND the angelic beings. They are not to be considered the same, because when the Bible speaks of them, it makes enough of a difference between the two to warn us not to consider them the same. The failure to do this is what is and has always been paganism.

In Igboland, both in antiquity and today, the very Earth itself is considered a spiritual being (even in spite of its stark physicality), so are the waters, the sun, the moon, lightning and thunder, and the wind. None of this is warranted by the Bible at all. And it is not moreso just because we are speaking of Akkad, ancient Babylon, or ancient Egypt. We do see though that the Bible associates control of at least some of the physical phenomena like water and fire with the angels, so that there is an angel in Revelation that has power over fire, and there is also an angel of the waters in the same book. That is an example of some of these differences I spoke of.

In conclusion, the most important fatal error here is the one that attacks the utter separateness of the writers of the Scriptures from their contemporaries. We must recognize that separation or else we will fall into the trap of interpreting the Bible through pagan ideas. While the ancient peoples would have understood what Moses was writing, it would not have been because he agreed with them, it would have been because they would recognize the source of the Truth that had been twisted into their myths and religions.

If this error is fixed, it will address the other consequent but perhaps less dangerous errors about not only the Nature of God and the expression of that Nature in Creation, the Nature of the Angelic Rebellion, the Meaning of Man, the events of the Global Flood, the Tower of Babel, and the full Meaning of the Messiah. As it is, however tortured the route that they took to arrive at the Messiah, they did arrive there and addressed it correctly: the Lord Jesus is God Who became Man to come and die for our sins and reconcile us back to God. The trouble, of course, is that if anyone started attacking the vulnerabilities in this chain that led up to that most critical point, we are going to end up with a fledgling believer who believes in the Lord Jesus and is not entirely sure why. He may hang on to his Faith desperately so that he never falls away, but he will spend his entire life in defence, accomplishing very little else of value for the Lord, because his strength is so small.

Edited.

Ihedinobi3:

@omokoladejames, the first and most important error, in my view, is in the idea that the writers of Scripture necessarily saw the world the same way that the rest of the ancient world did and this impacted what they wrote. This is neither a necessary assumption to make nor a good one. It is a dangerous one because if we look at the Bible purely through the lens of the ancient cultures, we are apt to get the wrong ideas about what God is saying.


Edited.

I can understand why you would disagree with their position on how the biblical authors saw the world but rather than I giving you my own opinion, I would rather let the bible project guys themselves why they hold such positions. They have a podcast on their website where they discuss at length the subject matter on each video series they do. That way you can see the rationale and thinking behind each video and you can evaluate it on your own terms... I think the podcast series on God might be of help at see how they arrived at the positions they hold
https://thebibleproject.com/podcast/series/god-series/ ..
Like I said earlier boss, I don't necessarily agree with everything they propose but their way of looking at the old testament is actually not unique to them...quite a number of old testament and even Jewish scholars parse these passages the same way.( ofcourse that doesn't mean they are right though)... hope you check it out... you might end up still disagreeing with them in totality or might just agree with bits and pieces of what they are saying.

It is well boss...

omokoladejames:


I can understand why you would disagree with their position on how the biblical authors saw the world but rather than I giving you my own opinion, I would rather let the bible project guys themselves why they hold such positions. They have a podcast on their website where they discuss at length the subject matter on each video series they do. That way you can see the rationale and thinking behind each video and you can evaluate it on your own terms... I think the podcast series on God might be of help at see how they arrived at the positions they hold
https://thebibleproject.com/podcast/series/god-series/ ..
Like I said earlier boss, I don't necessarily agree with everything they propose but their way of looking at the old testament is actually not unique to them...quite a number of old testament and even Jewish scholars parse these passages the same way.( ofcourse that doesn't mean they are right though)... hope you check it out... you might end up still disagreeing with them in totality or might just agree with bits and pieces of what they are saying.

It is well boss...

It will take a little while to work through all the podcasts at the link, and I think that I'll do so in time, but at the moment I am near the end of the first one and I still find them largely in this fatal error that I spoke of.

However, they present as teachers of the Bible and have not asked my opinion of their position, so it is not really for them that I have said what I have said. I endorsed their project before and am only trying to add a necessary caveat to that endorsement for the sake of anyone who may listen to me.

But I thank you for the link. At this point in my own development, I am starting on a lot of research for a major teaching project of my own, so I often find things like this useful in one way or another.

Grace be with your spirit.

Ihedinobi3:

It will take a little while to work through all the podcasts at the link, and I think that I'll do so in time, but at the moment I am near the end of the first one and I still find them largely in this fatal error that I spoke of.

However, they present as teachers of the Bible and have not asked my opinion of their position, so it is not really for them that I have said what I have said. I endorsed their project before and am only trying to add a necessary caveat to that endorsement for the sake of anyone who may listen to me.

But I thank you for the link. At this point in my own development, I am starting on a lot of research for a major teaching project of my own, so I often find things like this useful in one way or another.

Grace be with your spirit.

Sorry I wasn't able to get back sooner.... I'm glad you are going through the material and i hope you get the time to supplement it with your own research so as not to get closed up in a knowledge bubble. I am of the believe that if you go through the materials and your own personal research, you'll see there's no way of reading paganism into the bible(quite the contrary, the biblical authors were very clear and intentional about this). But when people who think they are able to discredit the bible because they have read somethings about some ancient near eastern mythology, it would be easy to show where the worldviews converge and at the same time show how the bible was vastly different from it's surrounding cultures. Please once again boss, the aim is not to convince you to agree on every single thing(as long as we agree on the fundamentals of who Christ is, why He went to the cross and that He bodily arose on the third day, we have common ground to stand on) but as you said in your post, the material might be useful one way or another.

I'm glad to hear you are doing alot of research for your teaching project. This generation needs more teachers like you who are willing to take their time to dig into actual biblical hermeneutics and exegesis. There are too many opinions in the world today that are presented as facts, and with the amount of information accessible to people today, the simple answers that were enough for our parents, wont suffice in this generation( I know people who no longer believe much because, when they had tough questions, the answers given did not match-up with reality..... I'm personally learning how to say "i don't know" when I really don't know something,rather than doing a merrygoround of words and cause more damage to someone's faith).

I wish you all the best in your endeavors and may God bless and guide you.

omokoladejames:


Sorry I wasn't able to get back sooner.... I'm glad you are going through the material and i hope you get the time to supplement it with your own research so as not to get closed up in a knowledge bubble. I am of the believe that if you go through the materials and your own personal research, you'll see there's no way of reading paganism into the bible(quite the contrary, the biblical authors were very clear and intentional about this). But when people who think they are able to discredit the bible because they have read somethings about some ancient near eastern mythology, it would be easy to show where the worldviews converge and at the same time show how the bible was vastly different from it's surrounding cultures. Please once again boss, the aim is not to convince you to agree on every single thing(as long as we agree on the fundamentals of who Christ is, why He went to the cross and that He bodily arose on the third day, we have common ground to stand on) but as you said in your post, the material might be useful one way or another.

I'm glad to hear you are doing alot of research for your teaching project. This generation needs more teachers like you who are willing to take their time to dig into actual biblical hermeneutics and exegesis. There are too many opinions in the world today that are presented as facts, and with the amount of information accessible to people today, the simple answers that were enough for our parents, wont suffice in this generation( I know people who no longer believe much because, when they had tough questions, the answers given did not match-up with reality..... I'm personally learning how to say "i don't know" when I really don't know something,rather than doing a merrygoround of words and cause more damage to someone's faith).

I wish you all the best in your endeavors and may God bless and guide you.

It's okay. It's good to hear back from you. Everyone is busy, so that you make time to respond is appreciated.

Thank you for your kind words. Those with the pastor-teaching gift have a responsibility to be thoroughly prepared for the work of teaching the Truth, with spiritual growth, study in the original languages, and study in ancient history and church history, at least. Of course, this isn't easy at all, so there are many out there who have no preparation at all, even when they possess the gift at all, pretending to teach things they know next to nothing about.

As for the Bible Project, I completely agree that we are on the same side. I'm still quite convinced that they've got it wrong with the issue of Spiritual Beings and the issue of gods, but I'm still glad to have come across their work.

Thank you for your prayers, my brother. The Lord continue to strengthen you with His Grace.

Ihedinobi3:

.

@Ihedinobi3 ... Hey boss, hope your weekend was good.... I have this video on my timeline and I thought it might be of interest to you also based on your research work....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MXOOIEagxg

The speaker is Michael Heiser, a solid OT scholar and the scholar-in-residence for faithlife corp(the logos bible software people).

It's quite a long video but I think it would add some value to your work. Again boss, I do not mean to say one must agree with everything he says because of he's qualifications (only God is infallible) but I do believe I always learn a new way of parsing certain scriptures from listening to people like him.

Ps: Incase some of the stuffs he is alluding to in first hour are not quite clear, i believe watching this video first help might clear some things up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZKy1Xt2Ow0

Have a blessed week boss..
No vex say I'm sharing the video with u oo, u're the only person that I know that might be remotely interested in long lectures like this....

omokoladejames:


@Ihedinobi3 ... Hey boss, hope your weekend was good.... I have this video on my timeline and I thought it might be of interest to you also based on your research work....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MXOOIEagxg

The speaker is Michael Heiser, a solid OT scholar and the scholar-in-residence for faithlife corp(the logos bible software people).

It's quite a long video but I think it would add some value to your work. Again boss, I do not mean to say one must agree with everything he says because of he's qualifications (only God is infallible) but I do believe I always learn a new way of parsing certain scriptures from listening to people like him.

Ps: Incase some of the stuffs he is alluding to in first hour are not quite clear, i believe watching this video first help might clear some things up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZKy1Xt2Ow0

Have a blessed week boss..
No vex say I'm sharing the video with u oo, u're the only person that I know that might be remotely interested in long lectures like this....

Hello bro.

Yes, my weekend turned out well. I hope that yours did too.

Thank you for the links. I watched (or rather, listened to) the second video. I think that Heiser may be missing the Bible's point, and that may explain some of the errors in the things that he said, but he wasn't all wrong. I certainly don't agree with the crux of his position, which he shares with The Bible Project too, by the way, that the Bible writers were that much in sync with their cultures in writing. I don't believe that because the medium of En-dor called Samuel in the interim state a god (and the term she used also means "mighty ones" ), that Jeremiah thought that departed believers are gods. Granted that the Hebrews didn't necessarily think of all gods as worthy of worship, the Bible does show that a misunderstanding of and an unwarranted fascination with the spiritual realm tends to lead to idolatry. That, in fact, is a huge reason why it is a bad idea to define Jeremiah's thinking by the medium of En-dor's, for example.

The use of material like this for me is that I have a strong apologetic bent in my pastor-teaching gift, so understanding the errors that can take believers captive is something that I tend to do, even unwittingly. What I see in material such as these is usually a sprinkling of correct ideas stemming from a tight grip on the fundamental Truth of the Bible, that is, that the Lord Jesus is God Who became Man to die for our sins, in a wrong system of theology. That is, on the whole, the picture that Heiser paints is, at least, problematic and worrisome, if not quite dangerously wrong. I haven't seen a private agenda yet in what I have seen, so it is my opinion that this kind of erroneous approach to the Bible comes from never having learned from a gifted and prepared teacher so that one can know exactly how to read the Bible. In other words, these may be the errors of a novice in the Scriptures.

As I said, I make these comments for clarity about where I, as a Bible teacher, stand. It isn't so much to get you to agree with me or to simply knock other teachers. So, please receive them in like spirit. As for me, as I said, I'm grateful for the videos. I do have use for them, even if I don't agree with them.

Ihedinobi3:

Hello bro.

Yes, my weekend turned out well. I hope that yours did too.

Thank you for the links. I watched (or rather, listened to) the second video. I think that Heiser may be missing the Bible's point, and that may explain some of the errors in the things that he said, but he wasn't all wrong. I certainly don't agree with the crux of his position, which he shares with The Bible Project too, by the way, that the Bible writers were that much in sync with their cultures in writing. I don't believe that because the medium of En-dor called Samuel in the interim state a god (and the term she used also means "mighty ones" ), that Jeremiah thought that departed believers are gods. Granted that the Hebrews didn't necessarily think of all gods as worthy of worship, the Bible does show that a misunderstanding of and an unwarranted fascination with the spiritual realm tends to lead to idolatry. That, in fact, is a huge reason why it is a bad idea to define Jeremiah's thinking by the medium of En-dor's, for example.

The use of material like this for me is that I have a strong apologetic bent in my pastor-teaching gift, so understanding the errors that can take believers captive is something that I tend to do, even unwittingly. What I see in material such as these is usually a sprinkling of correct ideas stemming from a tight grip on the fundamental Truth of the Bible, that is, that the Lord Jesus is God Who became Man to die for our sins, in a wrong system of theology. That is, on the whole, the picture that Heiser paints is, at least, problematic and worrisome, if not quite dangerously wrong. I haven't seen a private agenda yet in what I have seen, so it is my opinion that this kind of erroneous approach to the Bible comes from never having learned from a gifted and prepared teacher so that one can know exactly how to read the Bible. In other words, these may be the errors of a novice in the Scriptures.

As I said, I make these comments for clarity about where I, as a Bible teacher, stand. It isn't so much to get you to agree with me or to simply knock other teachers. So, please receive them in like spirit. As for me, as I said, I'm grateful for the videos. I do have use for them, even if I don't agree with them.

It is well boss... Maybe someone else on the timeline might find the lectures useful in some small way. And just as an aside, the guys u alluded to as novices in the scriptures are actually PhD level bible teachers. They are the bible teachers to bible teachers and it's the work that people like him do that informs bible translators and helps further the understanding of the biblical languages...but that's besides the point sha, I just thought u might find some nuggets of knowledge from the body of work that others have done as u do ur research and that's part of the reason I shared the video with you.
Also your statement that what was referred to in 1 Samuel 28:13 ("mighty ones" is not a good translation here) and how it connects to Jeremiah somehow implies that departed believers are also gods in the way we understand the the word "god" is still somewhat of a mystery to me and Im not sure how u got that from the talk. Maybe u were distracted with other stuffs and missed the points along the line but that's fine.
Enjoy the rest of your week boss.
Edited

omokoladejames:


It is well boss... Maybe someone else on the timeline might find the lectures useful in some small way. And just as an aside, the guys u alluded to as novices in the scriptures are actually PhD level bible teachers. They are the bible teachers to bible teachers and it's the work that people like him do that informs bible translators and helps further the understanding of the biblical languages...but that's besides the point sha, I just thought u might find some nuggets of knowledge from the body of work that others have done as u do ur research and that's part of the reason I shared the video with you.
Also your statement that what was referred to in 1 Samuel 28:13 ("mighty ones" is not a good translation here) and how it connects to Jeremiah somehow implies that departed believers are also gods in the way we understand the the word "god" is still somewhat of a mystery to me and Im not sure how u got that from the talk. Maybe u were distracted with other stuffs and missed the points along the line but that's fine.
Enjoy the rest of your week boss.
Edited

I am sorry if I offended you with what I said. Putting you off was not what I wanted, although I considered it a possible risk in what I said. As I said, you are one of a very small group that I have met on here who seems to have actually learned something of the Truth of the Bible and who actually seems to care about that Truth, so my intent with respect to you is to encourage you in this Truth, if at all I can.

About the qualifications of Bible teachers, while formal education, especially of such depth or height, certainly has some value in preparing for the job of teaching the Bible, it is neither necessary nor always useful to understanding the Bible for, well, immature believers. In fact, it can be pretty dangerous for such. Nor is it necessary at all for mature believers either. The only group of believers for whom that kind of education is actually useful are mature ones with the pastor-teaching gift, because spiritual maturity in consonance with their gift helps them to parse the information they get correctly without losing biblical truth. But even without a formal education, a pastor-teacher who has been taught by another can still do a decent job of Bible-teaching.

The point in which we disagree here is how one learns the Bible. It is not by going to a seminary or listening to people with high-sounding qualifications. Not only is this clear from the Bible (Ephesians 4:11-16; 2 Timothy 2:2), but personal experience and observation easily bear that out. I certainly did my best growing up to listen to everyone who seemed to have the right qualifications. I ended up with more than thirty years of much spiritual confusion and insecurity. It was only when I found Professor Robert Luginbill of Ichthys.com that things turned around for me.

Now, if seminaries and schools were taught by only gifted and prepared Bible teachers, and each student is diligent to restrict themselves to one teacher and pay attention and believe what they hear, then these sorts of qualifications you mentioned would mean something. But that is not the case. The nature of this world makes it pretty much certain that you will not grow spiritually in a seminary or University just by going to class and doing all your coursework. For this reason, spiritual growth and preparation for ministry has been happening much behind the scenes throughout the Church Age. Paul trained Timothy and Titus, at least, and we don't see a formal track involved in that. Today, I am trained by a Bible teacher who is practically invisible on the theological stage. In my turn, I will possibly do the same too. So, no, men like Heiser are not necessarily the Bible teachers who train Bible teachers. Many like him are still novices in the Faith, in spite of all their academic qualifications. And this is something that shows once they attempt to teach the Bible, just like Heiser did.

As for Bible translators and understanding original languages, Heiser's work is actually the sort of thing that hinders such progress. You see, what he did is read the Bible and then make assumptions that are neither truly supported by the Bible nor by standard scholarship outside the Bible and then impose those assumptions on Bible scholarship. Let me demonstrate:

The medium of En-dor calls Samuel in the interim state elohim. The Bible reports that she did. Then, Heiser assumes from that (and other examples like that) that the inspired writers thought that departed believers are elohim, at least in the same sense that the medium did. This is exactly similar to the argument that Nephilim survived the Flood because the cowardly spies in Numbers claimed that they saw them in Canaan.

This is a bad assumption to make. At the very least, it is not a good one. There is a leap of logic from observing that the medium of En-dor thought of departed saints like Samuel as elohim to concluding that Jeremiah who recorded the story thought the same. That is not good reasoning. Jeremiah was merely being accurate in his report. Once you make such leaps of logic, you begin to read things into the Bible that are not there.

If biblical scholars buy this whole train of thought, then it will not help translations and scholarship in any way. Rather it will cause a revision of previous scholarship, which may have been correct. In fact, that is what I suspect is happening with much of biblical scholarship right now. The revision of the NIV to produce a completely different translation in 2011 than what was last edited in 1984 is probably an example of such degradation in Bible scholarship. I personally expect more of that to happen as the Tribulation draws closer.

As for the links, as I said before, I do find them useful. As I said also, not everything that Heiser or the Bible Project says is wrong. Of course, what I see is a very poor theology in their position, one that even if it has no ulterior motives right now for existing, provides very fertile ground for the sowing of very dangerous lies that can derail Faith in the end. I do appreciate the enthusiasm or hunger that I think that I see in them, that desire to understand and explain the Scriptures to others, but even zeal can be misguided. Mine certainly was for many years (I have years of posts on this forum as proof). And I certainly appreciate, very deeply appreciate your own love for the Truth and your dedication to learning it. But how can I serve you in good conscience if I do not point out to you whether this love and dedication is being rightly directed? In fact, I would much rather not say anything that you may find offensive and discouraging in your pursuit of the Truth of the Bible. I have only said what I have here because I jumped the gun the first time I commented on The Bible Project. I am a Bible teacher. Some people may be listening to me, unbeknownst to me. If I give them the wrong ideas about things that may be dangerous to them by what I say about other teachers, ministries, and "systems of truth," I would be failing in my duties to tend and feed the Lord's sheep.

As for the whole business of how we conceptualize the term "god" today, I do see what both the Bible Project and Heiser are saying. God is quite obviously not a personal name. But even today in the 21st century, pretty much everyone knows that. Atheists pretend that the word implies a specific entity, because it gives them wiggle room in debates, but in English, we differentiate between "God," the Transcendent and Great Being Who made all things, and "gods," who may be His Agents or may be impressive creatures and even humans that fire our imagination in one way or another. This thing is evident in all cultures across the world. In Igbo culture, for example, the departed dead are regarded as part of the rank and file in the spiritual realm that answers overall to the Chi-Ukwu or the Chi-na-Eke, and although they are generally called ichie, they are also mmuo (spirit), which is a synonym sometimes for chi (god). You can see the similarity in that thought with the medium of En-dor. It is actually a pagan thought that shoots through all cultures.

Now, I still am not clear why they are so interested in making this observation about how the words are used today. It seems to me that it is only indicative and preparatory for something that they actually want to say, but I don't yet know what. But the biblical position is thus:

The Trinity is the true God, the One in Whom all Authority resides. The angels (including the cherubim, who are only the highest rank of angels, not a different order of creature) are sons of God because they were created to exercise God's Authority over Creation, using their free will to choose whether to remain loyal to God in doing so or to rebel against Him (since they were all created loyal to Him, that is, holy) in doing so. They are "gods" because they all act as God's deputies in varying ways and to varying degrees over the Creation presently extant. Adam was created in the exact same role. That is why he too is called a son of God in Luke 3. But his choice to rebel put him under Satan's dominion, so his descendants are mostly not really acting as God's deputies anymore. We are not exactly rulers of this earth in the sense that we were created to be. However, some human beings have been acting as God's deputies over the human race since the beginning. Adam was given rule over Eve, and thus all men have rule over their households and are answerable to God for how they exercise their authority. Furthermore, when communities form, those who rule are also God's deputies answerable to God for the people over whom they rule. All rulers, therefore, are "gods" and sons of the Most High. In fact, this is one place that Heiser was quite obviously wrong. Psalm 82 was about human rulers, not angels. Proverbs bears this out, as does Romans 13 and 1 Peter 2.

Biblical theology is only truly formed from what the Bible says, not from what we think it says. That is, if the Bible says that the witch of En-dor thought of Samuel as a god, then that is what it says. It does not say that Samuel was a god. I should also explain that while you and I can speak of gods as we have been in this conversation, the Hebrew means "mighty ones" (elohiym is a plural of majesty for "God" ). This does play into the whole business of deputying for God. God's deputies do possess real power to bring their will to bear upon their spheres of authority, so they are "mighty" in a very literal sense. That too is why we are taught to pray for rulers, rather than defy them or rebel against them, as we see in 1 Timothy 2. Their power is real. The same is also why this whole exorcism business (that is, the deliverance ministry economy) is so wildly dangerous. Even rebel angels still have real authority and power, and we ought never to meddle with them without God's express injunction, and He has not given such an injunction again since the Bible was completed by the apostles and their special companions.

In other words, Heiser and the Bible Project are not reading the Bible as it was written. They are reading into it assumptions that are warranted neither by the Bible nor by any external evidence (and any external evidence is necessarily suspect, by nature).

Again, I ask you not to be offended by the above. This is only my duty as a teacher. I certainly don't require you to believe me or agree with me. I have said what I have said because I am convinced that it is true. Have a good week yourself, my friend.

Ihedinobi3:

I am sorry if I offended you with what I said. Putting you off was not what I wanted, although I considered it a possible risk in what I said. As I said, you are one of a very small group that I have met on here who seems to have actually learned something of the Truth of the Bible and who actually seems to care about that Truth, so my intent with respect to you is to encourage you in this Truth, if at all I can.

About the qualifications of Bible teachers, while formal education, especially of such depth or height, certainly has some value in preparing for the job of teaching the Bible, it is neither necessary nor always useful to understanding the Bible for, well, immature believers. In fact, it can be pretty dangerous for such. Nor is it necessary at all for mature believers either. The only group of believers for whom that kind of education is actually useful are mature ones with the pastor-teaching gift, because spiritual maturity in consonance with their gift helps them to parse the information they get correctly without losing biblical truth. But even without a formal education, a pastor-teacher who has been taught by another can still do a decent job of Bible-teaching.

The point in which we disagree here is how one learns the Bible. It is not by going to a seminary or listening to people with high-sounding qualifications. Not only is this clear from the Bible (Ephesians 4:11-16; 2 Timothy 2:2), but personal experience and observation easily bear that out. I certainly did my best growing up to listen to everyone who seemed to have the right qualifications. I ended up with more than thirty years of much spiritual confusion and insecurity. It was only when I found Professor Robert Luginbill of Ichthys.com that things turned around for me.

Now, if seminaries and schools were taught by only gifted and prepared Bible teachers, and each student is diligent to restrict themselves to one teacher and pay attention and believe what they hear, then these sorts of qualifications you mentioned would mean something. But that is not the case. The nature of this world makes it pretty much certain that you will not grow spiritually in a seminary or University just by going to class and doing all your coursework. For this reason, spiritual growth and preparation for ministry has been happening much behind the scenes throughout the Church Age. Paul trained Timothy and Titus, at least, and we don't see a formal track involved in that. Today, I am trained by a Bible teacher who is practically invisible on the theological stage. In my turn, I will possibly do the same too. So, no, men like Heiser are not necessarily the Bible teachers who train Bible teachers. Many like him are still novices in the Faith, in spite of all their academic qualifications. And this is something that shows once they attempt to teach the Bible, just like Heiser did.

As for Bible translators and understanding original languages, Heiser's work is actually the sort of thing that hinders such progress. You see, what he did is read the Bible and then make assumptions that are neither truly supported by the Bible nor by standard scholarship outside the Bible and then impose those assumptions on Bible scholarship. Let me demonstrate:

The medium of En-dor calls Samuel in the interim state elohim. The Bible reports that she did. Then, Heiser assumes from that (and other examples like that) that the inspired writers thought that departed believers are elohim, at least in the same sense that the medium did. This is exactly similar to the argument that Nephilim survived the Flood because the cowardly spies in Numbers claimed that they saw them in Canaan.

This is a bad assumption to make. At the very least, it is not a good one. There is a leap of logic from observing that the medium of En-dor thought of departed saints like Samuel as elohim to concluding that Jeremiah who recorded the story thought the same. That is not good reasoning. Jeremiah was merely being accurate in his report. Once you make such leaps of logic, you begin to read things into the Bible that are not there.

If biblical scholars buy this whole train of thought, then it will not help translations and scholarship in any way. Rather it will cause a revision of previous scholarship, which may have been correct. In fact, that is what I suspect is happening with much of biblical scholarship right now. The revision of the NIV to produce a completely different translation in 2011 than what was last edited in 1984 is probably an example of such degradation in Bible scholarship. I personally expect more of that to happen as the Tribulation draws closer.

As for the links, as I said before, I do find them useful. As I said also, not everything that Heiser or the Bible Project says is wrong. Of course, what I see is a very poor theology in their position, one that even if it has no ulterior motives right now for existing, provides very fertile ground for the sowing of very dangerous lies that can derail Faith in the end. I do appreciate the enthusiasm or hunger that I think that I see in them, that desire to understand and explain the Scriptures to others, but even zeal can be misguided. Mine certainly was for many years (I have years of posts on this forum as proof). And I certainly appreciate, very deeply appreciate your own love for the Truth and your dedication to learning it. But how can I serve you in good conscience if I do not point out to you whether this love and dedication is being rightly directed? In fact, I would much rather not say anything that you may find offensive and discouraging in your pursuit of the Truth of the Bible. I have only said what I have here because I jumped the gun the first time I commented on The Bible Project. I am a Bible teacher. Some people may be listening to me, unbeknownst to me. If I give them the wrong ideas about things that may be dangerous to them by what I say about other teachers, ministries, and "systems of truth," I would be failing in my duties to tend and feed the Lord's sheep.

As for the whole business of how we conceptualize the term "god" today, I do see what both the Bible Project and Heiser are saying. God is quite obviously not a personal name. But even today in the 21st century, pretty much everyone knows that. Atheists pretend that the word implies a specific entity, because it gives them wiggle room in debates, but in English, we differentiate between "God," the Transcendent and Great Being Who made all things, and "gods," who may be His Agents or may be impressive creatures and even humans that fire our imagination in one way or another. This thing is evident in all cultures across the world. In Igbo culture, for example, the departed dead are regarded as part of the rank and file in the spiritual realm that answers overall to the Chi-Ukwu or the Chi-na-Eke, and although they are generally called ichie, they are also mmuo (spirit), which is a synonym sometimes for chi (god). You can see the similarity in that thought with the medium of En-dor. It is actually a pagan thought that shoots through all cultures.

Now, I still am not clear why they are so interested in making this observation about how the words are used today. It seems to me that it is only indicative and preparatory for something that they actually want to say, but I don't yet know what. But the biblical position is thus:

The Trinity is the true God, the One in Whom all Authority resides. The angels (including the cherubim, who are only the highest rank of angels, not a different order of creature) are sons of God because they were created to exercise God's Authority over Creation, using their free will to choose whether to remain loyal to God in doing so or to rebel against Him (since they were all created loyal to Him, that is, holy) in doing so. They are "gods" because they all act as God's deputies in varying ways and to varying degrees over the Creation presently extant. Adam was created in the exact same role. That is why he too is called a son of God in Luke 3. But his choice to rebel put him under Satan's dominion, so his descendants are mostly not really acting as God's deputies anymore. We are not exactly rulers of this earth in the sense that we were created to be. However, some human beings have been acting as God's deputies over the human race since the beginning. Adam was given rule over Eve, and thus all men have rule over their households and are answerable to God for how they exercise their authority. Furthermore, when communities form, those who rule are also God's deputies answerable to God for the people over whom they rule. All rulers, therefore, are "gods" and sons of the Most High. In fact, this is one place that Heiser was quite obviously wrong. Psalm 82 was about human rulers, not angels. Proverbs bears this out, as does Romans 13 and 1 Peter 2.

Biblical theology is only truly formed from what the Bible says, not from what we think it says. That is, if the Bible says that the witch of En-dor thought of Samuel as a god, then that is what it says. It does not say that Samuel was a god. I should also explain that while you and I can speak of gods as we have been in this conversation, the Hebrew means "mighty ones" (elohiym is a plural of majesty for "God" ). This does play into the whole business of deputying for God. God's deputies do possess real power to bring their will to bear upon their spheres of authority, so they are "mighty" in a very literal sense. That too is why we are taught to pray for rulers, rather than defy them or rebel against them, as we see in 1 Timothy 2. Their power is real. The same is also why this whole exorcism business (that is, the deliverance ministry economy) is so wildly dangerous. Even rebel angels still have real authority and power, and we ought never to meddle with them without God's express injunction, and He has not given such an injunction again since the Bible was completed by the apostles and their special companions.

In other words, Heiser and the Bible Project are not reading the Bible as it was written. They are reading into it assumptions that are warranted neither by the Bible nor by any external evidence (and any external evidence is necessarily suspect, by nature).

Again, I ask you not to be offended by the above. This is only my duty as a teacher. I certainly don't require you to believe me or agree with me. I have said what I have said because I am convinced that it is true. Have a good week yourself, my friend.

@omokoladejames, I should make this correction: you are right that Heiser and The Bible Project don't hold that gods like the ones in Psalm 82 and 1 Samuel 28 are to be worshipped.

The more I consider it, the more I see that the problem is not in the conception of God and gods. My first red alert was the description/definition of spiritual beings in The Bible Project that put the sun, moon, and other heavenly bodies in the spiritual realm. Perhaps I didn't understand what they were saying about it. Right now, my problem with Heiser is when he says things like how the council in Psalm 82 is necessarily the same as the one in Psalm 89 and how Genesis 1 is speaking of God as deciding with the angels to make Man.

This sort of thing is rife in the things that they say, and I think I let them confuse other things they rightly said, like that the ancient world conceived of a spiritual world where there was a plethora of entities. I certainly hold that all the religions and cultural mores of the world, especially the very old ones began from Eden and are only corruptions and twists of the Truth, that is, that they are caricatures of what the human race began with. So, I am also of the opinion that the Bible was written to straighten things out, to, if you will, recall us to the Truth and expand it to answer the growing complexity of human existence. So, when Heiser mentions the Enuma Elish, I consider that my typical answer to arguments of that sort from antichristians is that the Bible need not have either preceded such tales or copied them. It need only be the correct version of the facts caricatured by such made-up stories.

I think that I also have a significantly different view of inspiration than they do. That would be a major difference, if I am understanding them correctly.

Ihedinobi3:

I should make this correction: you are right that Heiser and The Bible Project don't hold that gods like the ones in Psalm 82 and 1 Samuel 28 are to be worshipped.

The more I consider it, the more I see that the problem is not in the conception of God and gods. My first red alert was the description/definition of spiritual beings in The Bible Project that put the sun, moon, and other heavenly bodies in the spiritual realm. Perhaps I didn't understand what they were saying about it. Right now, my problem with Heiser is when he says things like how the council in Psalm 82 is necessarily the same as the one in Psalm 89 and how Genesis 1 is speaking of God as deciding with the angels to make Man.

This sort of thing is rife in the things that they say, and I think I let them confuse other things they rightly said, like that the ancient world conceived of a spiritual world where there was a plethora of entities. I certainly hold that all the religions and cultural mores of the world, especially the very old ones began from Eden and are only corruptions and twists of the Truth, that is, that they are caricatures of what the human race began with. So, I am also of the opinion that the Bible was written to straighten things out, to, if you will, recall us to the Truth and expand it to answer the growing complexity of human existence. So, when Heiser mentions the Enuma Elish, I consider that my typical answer to arguments of that sort from antichristians is that the Bible need not have either preceded such tales or copied them. It need only be the correct version of the facts caricatured by such made-up stories.

I think that I also have a significantly different view of inspiration than they do. That would be a major difference, if I am understanding them correctly.

It is well sir... And please sir, it was't annoyance that I was trying to convey in my last post, I was just trying to convey that regardless of whether we think a person is wrong or not, we should try not to diminish them or their lives work. For example many phd level biologist wholeheartedly believe in Abiogenesis(which i personally think is wrong) but i'll still take it as an unfair assesment of them if someone was to say they are novices in biology. Thats the only reason i brought up their credentials, it wasn't to elevate them in anyway and from all our previous conversations, you can attest to the fact that i've always maintained that anybody can be wrong regardless of how the world perceives them...We all have blind spots and only God is infallible..Kindly accept my apologies if my statements came across as aggressive.

I should make this correction: you are right that Heiser and The Bible Project don't hold that gods like the ones in Psalm 82 and 1 Samuel 28 are to be worshipped.

I'm glad that you see the point they are trying to make.Bible scholars are realizing that the word "god"(Elohim) does not carry the same meaning to the biblical authors as it does to us modern readers(I use the term scholars,so that there it doesn't come across as if it's just this two who are pushing personal theologies...U can verify it). Just like how the word "girl" to someone living in the middle ages just meant a child(whether male or female), the word Elohim is better understood as meaning a disembodied spirit(divine beings) to an ancient isrealite. It doesn't carry the same baggage of attributes we attribute to it like worship,alligence, ominpotent etc. Part of what brings confusion for modern readers to the word elohim is the fact that it is used for Yahweh but at the same time it used for many other types of spiritual beings(angels,false gods,spirit of a dead person) and also one or two other places in the bible that one can argue that humans were in view in the text(one doesn't need to go there, but the argument can still be made). But almost in every case where the word elohim is used in the bible, a spiritual being is in view, so it makes sense when the biblical authors use the word Elohim for Yahweh also because Yahweh is also a Spirit. But He is a Unique Spirit(No other spirit can be compared to Him) and He is the sole creator of everything both visible and invisible, which includes other spirits and He is the only one who is Sovereign over all. But the biblical authors were usually clear who they were talking about when they use Elohim for Yahweh in contrast to other spiritual beings.Usually they either used the article "ha-" in conjuction with the word elohim to specify or used words like "Elohim of elohim" or Elohim ḥayyim("the living God" etc. So though the word 'god' is not technically a wrong translation,it might just carry many unnecessary connotations to it for a modern day reader who has already been pre-configured to attach some 21st century meaning to the word. Hence why spirit or divine being might be a better way of understanding how the biblical authours viewed the word "god'. That was the point that was been made and you can also see this thought process been reflected in modern translations in places like 1 Samuel 28 where the appearance of samuel is translated as spirit,divine being,ghost etc and also psalm 82 where the gods are usually translated as divine being...
I can understand why you would say that elohim can also be translated as "mighty ones" in 1 samuel 28 because of its root word ' El ' which connotes strength or power and also used for God in the bible ,majorly in connection with the divine attributes like El Shaddai, El Elyon and also with names connected with the God of isreal like Samu-el,Beth-el,Micha-el etc, but I'm of the opinion that translating elohim as "mighty ones" in 1 samuel 28 would give the wrong meaning of what the author was trying to convey in the text.

Ofcourse we can disagree in how the biblical authors viewed the word god in the OT and that what they meant by god is what we mean by it, that would fine but what usually surprised me was how you took what was said in a very different way and i wasn't sure how you were getting there. If i hadn't watched those videos myself or actually tried to verify it in my own little way and all i had was what you were writting , I would have lost hope in many bible translations and lost hope in solid christain institution. But i am glad you agree for now that what is being said cannot lead one down the wrong path in anyway(atleast concerning how the isrealites viewed the word god) and if i may say also its of my opinion that it would actually help people clear up the misconceptions that the early isrealites were in some way polytheist or henotheist.

I think that I also have a significantly different view of inspiration than they do. That would be a major difference, if I am understanding them correctly.

I'm not sure what you mean here sir as i know they and every serious believer believes the scriptures to be the word of God. I think this might also stem from a misunderstanding of their position.

God bless u sir

It is well sir... And please sir, it was't annoyance that I was trying to convey in my last post, I was just trying to convey that regardless of whether we think a person is wrong or not, we should try not to diminish them or their lives work. For example many phd level biologist wholeheartedly believe in Abiogenesis(which i personally think is wrong) but i'll still take it as an unfair assesment of them if someone was to say they are novices in biology. Thats the only reason i brought up their credentials, it wasn't to elevate them in anyway and from all our previous conversations, you can attest to the fact that i've always maintained that anybody can be wrong regardless of how the world perceives them...We all have blind spots and only God is infallible..Kindly accept my apologies if my statements came across as aggressive.



I'm glad that you see the point they are trying to make.Bible scholars are realizing that the word "god"(Elohim) does not carry the same meaning to the biblical authors as it does to us modern readers(I use the term scholars,so that there it doesn't come across as if it's just this two who are pushing personal theologies...U can verify it). Just like how the word "girl" to someone living in the middle ages just meant a child(whether male or female), the word Elohim is better understood as meaning a disembodied spirit(divine beings) to an ancient isrealite. It doesn't carry the same baggage of attributes we attribute to it like worship,alligence, ominpotent etc. Part of what brings confusion for modern readers to the word elohim is the fact that it is used for Yahweh but at the same time it used for many other types of spiritual beings(angels,false gods,spirit of a dead person) and also one or two other places in the bible that one can argue that humans were in view in the text(one doesn't need to go there, but the argument can still be made). But almost in every case where the word elohim is used in the bible, a spiritual being is in view, so it makes sense when the biblical authors use the word Elohim for Yahweh also because Yahweh is also a Spirit. But He is a Unique Spirit(No other spirit can be compared to Him) and He is the sole creator of everything both visible and invisible, which includes other spirits and He is the only one who is Sovereign over all. But the biblical authors were usually clear who they were talking about when they use Elohim for Yahweh in contrast to other spiritual beings.Usually they either used the article "ha-" in conjuction with the word elohim to specify or used words like "Elohim of elohim" or Elohim ḥayyim("the living God" etc. So though the word 'god' is not technically a wrong translation,it might just carry many unnecessary connotations to it for a modern day reader who has already been pre-configured to attach some 21st century meaning to the word. Hence why spirit or divine being might be a better way of understanding how the biblical authours viewed the word "god'. That was the point that was been made and you can also see this thought process been reflected in modern translations in places like 1 Samuel 28 where the appearance of samuel is translated as spirit,divine being,ghost etc and also psalm 82 where the gods are usually translated as divine being...
I can understand why you would say that elohim can also be translated as "mighty ones" in 1 samuel 28 because of its root word ' El ' which connotes strength or power and also used for God in the bible ,majorly in connection with the divine attributes like El Shaddai, El Elyon and also with names connected with the God of isreal like Samu-el,Beth-el,Micha-el etc, but I'm of the opinion that translating elohim as "mighty ones" in 1 samuel 28 would give the wrong meaning of what the author was trying to convey in the text.

Ofcourse we can disagree in how the biblical authors viewed the word god in the OT and that what they meant by god is what we mean by it, that would fine but what usually surprised me was how you took what was said in a very different way and i wasn't sure how you were getting there. If i hadn't watched those videos myself or actually tried to verify it in my own little way and all i had was what you were writting , I would have lost hope in many bible translations and lost hope in solid christain institution. But i am glad you agree for now that what is being said cannot lead one down the wrong path in anyway(atleast concerning how the isrealites viewed the word god) and if i may say also its of my opinion that it would actually help people clear up the misconceptions that the early isrealites were in some way polytheist or henotheist.


I'm not sure what you mean here sir as i know they and every serious believer believes the scriptures to be the word of God. I think this might also stem from a misunderstanding of their position.

God bless u sir

I largely agree with you. As for the meaning of "elohiym," I think I have it on good authority that the literal meaning is "mighty ones." I'm not saying that the literal meaning is always the right one to translate the expression. For example, the Lord God is Elohiym, but we don't understand "Elohiym" there to mean that the Lord God is "mighty ones." It's a plural of majesty in His Case, so we know that when the term is used for Him, we mean the Almighty, or the Most High God, or even simply God.

The context will generally decide, therefore, how to translate the word when it is used. However, in 1 Samuel 28, I would say that the medium was terrified, not unlike Daniel later was when he saw a vision of an archangel. It is not unlikely that that fear led to her qualifying Samuel in the wrong manner. She was an unbeliever, after all.

I apologize for how I reacted to them. I tend to hurry through large material, especially because I do have a lot on my plate much of the time, and I'm always rather wary of Bible teachers. There are many out there who are doing all kinds of harm, both wittingly and unwittingly.

As for the difference I perceive between me and them with respect to inspiration, you may be right. I find that I have to listen to them carefully, so as to not misunderstand them. But some things I heard led me to think that it might be the case. For example, I don't believe that Scripture writers necessarily wrote only things that made sense within the context of their culture. If that were the case, 1 Peter 1:10-12 would be false. Clearly, prophecy meant that in some cases, the prophetic writer was speaking of things much wider than their native culture. They didn't always have native knowledge of the things that they wrote. Very much indeed was revealed to them. So, quite often, the answer to what they meant is not really in their culture, but in the Bible itself independent of any human culture. That is what I was concerned about. But, as I said, I may have misunderstood them again here.

It was good talking to you. I'm sorry that you have deactivated your account. Your presence here was an encouragement to my spirit.