Isaiah 45:5 vs Psalm 82:6

[WilliamL]

On 1/19/2016 at 9:46 AM, ProzacR said:

I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.

On 1/19/2016 at 9:46 AM, ProzacR said:

Explain please.

Context, context, context.

Ps. 82:1 God stands in the congregation of El /God;
He judges amidst/among elohim/gods. ...

6 I have said, Ye are elohim/gods; and all of you are sons of the most High. 7 But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.

The OT scriptural phrase "sons of God/the Most High" always refers to heavenly spiritual rulers, the elohim. This "congregation of El" is heavenly. Men always die like men; for elohim to die like men is what makes verse 7 stand out.

This whole psalm is a prophetic portrayal of the Judgment of the heavenly elohim when the Great Judge sits on his throne, as foretold in Dan. 7 and Rev. 4-5. His first judgment "in that Day" will be of the heavenly elohim, just as it was at the time of the Exodus Passover:

Ex. 12:12 ‘For I will pass through the land of Egypt on that night, and will strike all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment: I am the LORD.

This heavenly judgment of the elohim is also foretold here:

Is. 24:21 And it shall come to pass in that Day, that the LORD shall punish the host of the high ones that are on high, and the kings of the earth upon the earth.

[TrevorL]

 

Greetings WilliamL

On Thursday, January 21, 2016 at 2:53 AM, WilliamL said:

Context, context, context.

Ps. 82:1 God stands in the congregation of El /God;
He judges amidst/among elohim/gods. ...

6 I have said, Ye are elohim/gods; and all of you are sons of the most High. 7 But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.

The OT scriptural phrase "sons of God/the Most High" always refers to heavenly spiritual rulers, the elohim. This "congregation of El" is heavenly.

But the title “Elohim” is applied to the Judges in Exodus 21:6, 22:8-9 showing that these terms do not have such a sharp demarcation as you suggest. Sons of God, that is sons of elohim, is a lesser title than elohim. Sons of the Most High is a poetic parallel with much the same meaning as sons of elohim. Israel as a nation was God’s firstborn son.

Another example where “elohim” is used for the judge is:
1 Samuel 2:25 (KJV): If one man sin against another, the judge (Heb. Elohim) shall judge him: but if a man sin against the LORD, who shall intreat for him? Notwithstanding they hearkened not unto the voice of their father, because the LORD would slay them.

Another factor is that Psalm 82 is speaking of the role of the judges and not “heavenly spiritual rulers” as you suggest:
Psalm 82:2-4 (KJV): 2 How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah. 3 Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy. 4 Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked.

On Thursday, January 21, 2016 at 2:53 AM, WilliamL said:

Men always die like men; for elohim to die like men is what makes verse 7 stand out.

But this seems to be firstly a contrast to their present exalted position and other examples could be cited of a similar contrast, such as the King of Babylon. It could also indicate some judicial slaying, or judgement such as occurred with Hophni and Phinehas. If we consider the events of AD70, then this was also a judicial slaying of those who not only crucified Jesus, but hardened their hearts against the preaching of the Apostles. There is some evidence that many were slain by crucifixion, thus reflecting the death of Jesus, the Prince, “one of the princes”.

On Thursday, January 21, 2016 at 2:53 AM, WilliamL said:

This whole psalm is a prophetic portrayal of the Judgment of the heavenly elohim when the Great Judge sits on his throne, as foretold in Dan. 7 and Rev. 4-5. His first judgment "in that Day" will be of the heavenly elohim, just as it was at the time of the Exodus Passover:

Ex. 12:12 ‘For I will pass through the land of Egypt on that night, and will strike all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment: I am the LORD.

I find this rather astounding. The “gods” of Egypt were “no-gods”. Do you really believe that the gods of Egypt were literal gods. There is some suggestion that the plagues were directly in contrast to the false “gods” of the Egyptians, showing that the One God of Israel, Yahweh had control over all these elements, and that Moses was sent by God. Do you believe that the Egyptian gods were actually evil angels? What about the gods of Canaan, were they actual gods, actual individuals with limited power, or simply the imagination of their evil hearts? What about the gods of the Greco-Roman world?

I attempted to insert your perspective into the quotation of Psalm 82:6 by Jesus and his explanation of the significance of why these individuals were called “elohim” but failed. My assessment is that Jesus’ usage and overall explanation in John 10:33-36 only makes sense when we understand that Jesus is speaking of the judges.

Kind regards
Trevor

Edited January 23, 2016 by TrevorL

[WilliamL]

20 hours ago, TrevorL said:

  On 1/21/2016 at 8:53 AM, WilliamL said:

Context, context, context.

Ps. 82:1 God stands in the congregation of El /God;
He judges amidst/among elohim/gods. ...

6 I have said, Ye are elohim/gods; and all of you are sons of the most High. 7 But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.

The OT scriptural phrase "sons of God/the Most High" always refers to heavenly spiritual rulers, the elohim. This "congregation of El" is heavenly.

 

20 hours ago, TrevorL said:

But the title “Elohim” is applied to the Judges in Exodus 21:6, 22:8-9 showing that these terms do not have such a sharp demarcation as you suggest. Sons of God, that is sons of elohim, is a lesser title than elohim. Sons of the Most High is a poetic parallel with much the same meaning as sons of elohim. Israel as a nation was God’s firstborn son.

Israel is never spoken of as "the sons of God." That term is only used in Scripture of heavenly angelic powers. If you had any evidence to the contrary, you would have posted it. The congregation of El is in heaven, where the elohim are.

Job 1:6 Now there was a day when the sons of God [beny elohim] came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them.

21 hours ago, TrevorL said:

Do you really believe that the gods of Egypt were literal gods. There is some suggestion that the plagues were directly in contrast to the false “gods” of the Egyptians, showing that the One God of Israel, Yahweh had control over all these elements, and that Moses was sent by God. Do you believe that the Egyptian gods were actually evil angels? What about the gods of Canaan, were they actual gods, actual individuals with limited power, or simply the imagination of their evil hearts? What about the gods of the Greco-Roman world?

Eph. 6:12 For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.

If you say that there are not small-g gods/elohim that have been and continue to be worshiped on earth, and that grant limited powers to their disciples, you are blind.

[TrevorL]

 

Greetings again WilliamL

On Sunday, January 24, 2016 at 0:08 PM, WilliamL said:

Israel is never spoken of as "the sons of God." That term is only used in Scripture of heavenly angelic powers. If you had any evidence to the contrary, you would have posted it. The congregation of El is in heaven, where the elohim are.

It seems that we have a different perspective on the term “sons of God”. For example:
Genesis 6:4 (KJV): There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
I do not accept the view that “the sons of God” in the above to be heavenly beings, but those of the line of Seth in comparison to the line of Cain.

Also I take the following as bookends to the theme of the sons of God:
Genesis 1:26-27 (KJV): 26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Luke 3:38 (KJV): Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

1 John 3:1-3 (KJV): 1 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not. 2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. 3 And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.

The following seems pretty close to the concept that God is the Father of the nation, and therefore the individuals within the nation are sons of God.
Exodus 4:22-23 (KJV): 22 And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the LORD, Israel is my son, even my firstborn: 23 And I say unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me: and if thou refuse to let him go, behold, I will slay thy son, even thy firstborn.

What is sometimes remarkable concerning the Psalms, is that some very important NT teachings are based on a verse of the Psalms. Consider two verses in Psalm 110:
Psalm 110:1 (KJV): The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Psalm 110:4 (KJV): The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.
Both of these are widely quoted and expounded in the NT, and without these two verses we would be very much the poorer in our understanding of the position and work of our Lord Jesus Christ.

On the same basis I am content with my understanding of Psalm 82, especially with the link to the judges in Exodus, and Christ’s comments in John 10. The Psalm stands upon its own message.

If we could imagine a range of 1-10 on our understanding of this, and I suggest that you are 3 and I am 8 on this scale, when we approach Psalm 82 with our previous understanding and teaching environment, then we apply our present view to this Scripture. Psalm 82 may help you to go to position 2, and my view may move me to position 9 on the scale. I had hoped, not to immediately move you to 8, but if you had a closer look at Psalm 82 I would hope to help you to go to position 4 on the scale.

On Sunday, January 24, 2016 at 0:08 PM, WilliamL said:

If you say that there are not small-g gods/elohim that have been and continue to be worshiped on earth, and that grant limited powers to their disciples, you are blind.

Your suggestion of small gods reminds me of the Catholic position of patron saints. I am not sure if you consider this as a different scale or position altogether. My Dad bought a 2nd-hand car but it had a St Christopher badge on the dashboard. He took it off, but it also covered a hole. He decided to reverse the badge instead. He used to joke that he never had an accident in that car. Do you accept the Catholic claim that these semi-gods have some influence in the earth today?

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[WilliamL]

On 1/25/2016 at 9:56 PM, TrevorL said:

It seems that we have a different perspective on the term “sons of God”. For example:
Genesis 6:4 (KJV): There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
I do not accept the view that “the sons of God” in the above to be heavenly beings, but those of the line of Seth in comparison to the line of Cain.

Of course you don't. But Enoch said that was the case. Genesis 6:1-2 is a direct quote by Moses from the Book of Enoch. Jude and Peter likewise spoke of the fallen angels "who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own [heavenly] habitation:" "God did not spare the[se] angels who sinned, but cast them down to Tartarus..." Jude 6, 2 Peter 2:4 In fact, Jude directly quotes the Book of Enoch twice. So I will believe these saints' testimony over your opinion, even if you want to rate your understanding a 10.

[TrevorL]

Greetings again WilliamL

Just now, WilliamL said:

Of course you don't. But Enoch said that was the case. Genesis 6:1-2 is a direct quote by Moses from the Book of Enoch. Jude and Peter likewise spoke of the fallen angels "who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own [heavenly] habitation:" "God did not spare the[se] angels who sinned, but cast them down to Tartarus..." Jude 6, 2 Peter 2:4 In fact, Jude directly quotes the Book of Enoch twice. So I will believe these saints' testimony over your opinion, even if you want to rate your understanding a 10.

I appreciate your response. I hope you did not take my scale of 1-10 as indicating that 10 is better than 1. I used this only as a scale between two different views. I used Genesis 6:1-2 to indicate that in my opinion the term “sons of God” can apply to non-angelic beings, even though from your response you endorse your view that this must be angelic beings. I am not familiar with the “Book of Enoch”. It is not contained within the canon of inspired books of the Bible, so I would like to express my reservations in accepting this. My present view of the reference in Jude and 2 Peter is that this is referring to the incident of Korah, Dathan and Abiram, or rather that this is one of the possible explanations.

One problem is that I do not believe that the angels marry or have children, possibly expressed in the following:
Luke 20:34-36 (KJV): 34 And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage: 35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage: 36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.

Moses was appointed as “Elohim” to Pharaoh:
Exodus 7:1 (KJV): And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god (Heb. Elohim) to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.

I am interested in the subject of the Name of God, Yahweh and the various titles such as El, Eloah, Elohim, El Shaddai and others, and the meaning of all these in their various contexts. Have you considered some of these? Also how do you view the meaning and use of Elohim in Genesis 1:1 and especially Genesis 1:26-27? One that caught my attention is where Jacob uses the expression “El-eloho-Israel”:
Genesis 33:20 (KJV): And he erected there an altar, and called it Elelohe-Israel.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[WilliamL]

10 hours ago, TrevorL said:

I am not familiar with the “Book of Enoch”.

Clearly. But Jude was, and Peter, and many of the eminent ante-Nicence elders, who included the book in their personal canons. You only accept in your understandings the canon established after Rome married the Church, and influenced it greatly. The biblical canon is all inspired, but that does not mean there are not other inspired works. Or that ancient Jewish, Greek, and other histories can be ignored and suppressed, as the institutional Church has demanded. (Have you ever even considered the reason why Peter used the Greek term Tartarus in 2 Peter 2:4? That should give you insight about exactly what angels he was talking about, if you care to do the research.)

10 hours ago, TrevorL said:

I appreciate your response. I hope you did not take my scale of 1-10 as indicating that 10 is better than 1. I used this only as a scale between two different views.

On 1/25/2016 at 9:56 PM, TrevorL said:

If we could imagine a range of 1-10 on our understanding of this, and I suggest that you are 3 and I am 8 on this scale, when we approach Psalm 82 with our previous understanding and teaching environment, then we apply our present view to this Scripture. Psalm 82 may help you to go to position 2, and my view may move me to position 9 on the scale. I had hoped, not to immediately move you to 8, but if you had a closer look at Psalm 82 I would hope to help you to go to position 4 on the scale.

Sorry, you can't backtrack and say that you were not rating your understanding considerably superior to mine.

[TrevorL]

Greetings again WilliamL,

14 hours ago, WilliamL said:

Clearly. But Jude was, and Peter, and many of the eminent ante-Nicence elders, who included the book in their personal canons. You only accept in your understandings the canon established after Rome married the Church, and influenced it greatly. The biblical canon is all inspired, but that does not mean there are not other inspired works. Or that ancient Jewish, Greek, and other histories can be ignored and suppressed, as the institutional Church has demanded. (Have you ever even considered the reason why Peter used the Greek term Tartarus in 2 Peter 2:4? That should give you insight about exactly what angels he was talking about, if you care to do the research.)

I appreciate your response. No I have not considered the history and detail that you have now provided. Since I posted yesterday I checked 3 Bible Dictionaries, but none of these gave me the conviction that the “Book of Enoch” is an inspired text. I will try to research “Tartarus” with my limited but usually adequate reference library.

14 hours ago, WilliamL said:

Sorry, you can't backtrack and say that you were not rating your understanding considerably superior to mine.

If this was taken that way, then my use of this figure was wrong and offensive and I apologise. Perhaps I could have used View A, A1, A2, A3 and View B, B1, B2, B3 possibly meeting at A5 and B5, but this is a bit clumsy. I appreciate the discussion that we have had and your sharing.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[RustyAngeL]

On 1/19/2016 at 1:31 PM, Rick_Parker said:

This is the problem with pulling a verse out of context and comparing it to another verse out of context. In Isaiah, GOD is talking to Cyrus, the king of Persia; HE is telling him that HE, GOD, has empowered him to be king of the world even though Cyrus did not know GOD. In the Psalm, it is a plea for justice. Note that the minor "god" is used, not "God" and was not therefore comparing man to GOD. Instead, the verse is saying that man was above all else on Earth; mighty ones, and judges; yet still subject to the "Most High" (GOD). Verse 7 continues "But you shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes."

Very well explained and stated Rick.  Thank you .

[RustyAngeL]

On 1/20/2016 at 11:07 AM, other one said:

the problem is that the word or term god is used for many different gods....   and the Bible tells us that  there are many gods and lords...   but we must be careful of mixing them with our God....     for to us he/they are the only one.    While the others may be deity (higher than a mere human) they are not in the same level as Our God.

Amen and when refereeing to our God, the creator of the universe we have to careful to use a capital G.  An was stated above there are many gods and lords but only one true God that is our God.