Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Loomis · 09-08-2006, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dzim77

Heisler suggests ...

And besides that, who do you think you are fooling?

Two days ago you didn’t know anything about this stuff, and today you are pretending that you’ve researched it thoroughly. (Btw, his name is H_e_i_s_e_r)

I bet you know how to work Google. I’ll give you that much.

What does a superstitious person look like when he types on the Internet?

You can’t fool us!

You’re close-minded and have no genuine interest in learning the truth.

Be honest: Just admit it!

Loomis · 09-08-2006, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dzim77

Heisler suggests ...

Also, Heiser’s apology requires two Els and two Most Highs (which is absurd), and it also requires stretching the definition of “inherit.”

Then, when Heiser is done stating his case, he concedes that his is just one possible explanation - but special because it is appealing to Believers. It is concocted for only one purpose; to allow “monotheism” to save face.

All the best,

Loomis

dzim77 · 09-08-2006, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loomis

And besides that, who do you think you are fooling?

Two days ago you didn’t know anything about this stuff, and today you are pretending that you’ve researched it thoroughly. (Btw, his name is H_e_i_s_e_r)

I bet you know how to work Google. I’ll give you that much.

What does a superstitious person look like when he types on the Internet?

You can’t fool us!

You’re close-minded and have no genuine interest in learning the truth.

Be honest: Just admit it!

God bless you, Loomis. Please know that you are in my prayers.

Best wishes on your search for truth,
DZ

Loomis · 09-08-2006, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dzim77

Many have oberved ...

Have you observed that Psalm 82 appears to be “undoing” what Deuteronomy 32:8-9 does?

(Sans Yahweh?

)

Loomis · 09-08-2006, 11:37 AM

Hey dzim77,

What ever happened to the Canaanite god El?

What ever became of him?

Where did his followers go?

All the best,

Loomis

Amaleq13 · 09-08-2006, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dzim77

Sorry, didn't mean to sweep it under the rug or anything. I thought my explanation covered it.

No, it appeared to ignore it entirely and this more recent attempt doesn't do much better.

Quote:

Some interpret this phrase as 'sons of Israel'. Some say the original was 'angels of God' or 'sons of God'. (i'm sure you're aware of this).

Yes and I'm also aware that a plain reading of this passage certainly suggests that Yahweh should be considered as one of the "sons of El".

Quote:

Heisler suggests that perhaps God divided the nations among his angels and devoted himself to take special care of Israel as his chosen portion... using the common ANE conception of a divine assembly to illustrate this.

I can only assume this suggestion has its origin in Heisler's personal preference since it does not appear to derive from the text. There might be a basis for it had the passage included something like

...according to the number of the sons of El, keeping one for himself;

but that doesn't exist so I continue to be curious as to whether there is anything besides personal preference/faith supporting an interpretation that appears to be contrary to the plain reading.

Consider the following:
The Big Chief divided his land according to the number of his sons.
Billy was given the land called Green Pasture.

Are you seriously trying to suggest that the most reasonable interpretation of these statements is that The Big Chief is also Billy?

Quote:

So, either way, I stand by the interpretation that the passage is an illustration of God choosing Israel as his chosen nation and preparing a promised land for them.

I'm really only interested in whether you can support your personal preference with something other than your faith. So far, it does not appear that you can.

dzim77 · 09-08-2006, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

No, it appeared to ignore it entirely and this more recent attempt doesn't do much better.

Yes and I'm also aware that a plain reading of this passage certainly suggests that Yahweh should be considered as one of the "sons of El".

I can only assume this suggestion has its origin in Heisler's personal preference since it does not appear to derive from the text. There might be a basis for it had the passage included something like

...according to the number of the sons of El, keeping one for himself;

but that doesn't exist so I continue to be curious as to whether there is anything besides personal preference/faith supporting an interpretation that appears to be contrary to the plain reading.

Consider the following:
The Big Chief divided his land according to the number of his sons.
Billy was given the land called Green Pasture.

Are you seriously trying to suggest that the most reasonable interpretation of these statements is that The Big Chief is also Billy?

I'm really only interested in whether you can support your personal preference with something other than your faith. So far, it does not appear that you can.

My interpretation is consistent with the monotheistic view of the God of Israel, as he is portrayed throughout the OT. It is based on the context of the OT, the book of Deuteronomy, the fact that it's written in poetic form suggesting an illustration.

Here's a comparison in response to the Billy/Big Chief comparison....just to restate my interpretation.(this is just a comparison to respond to your Big Chief comparison, not to be taken literally, please.)

When the Lord divided up mankind into nations, he gave each nation their own land as their inherritance.
He set boundries for them according to the number of the fathers of the nations.
Jesus Christ chose for his own allotment the people of NewIsrael. NewIsrael is his chosen portion and inherritance.

In this case, The Lord and Jesus Christ are one and the same.

Loomis · 09-08-2006, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

I can only assume this suggestion has its origin in Heisler's personal preference since it does not appear to derive from the text. There might be a basis for it had the passage included something like

...according to the number of the sons of El, keeping one for himself;

but that doesn't exist so I continue to be curious as to whether there is anything besides personal preference/faith supporting an interpretation that appears to be contrary to the plain reading.

Fyi, Heiser pretends that El, the sons of El, and the Most High, are all indeed characters from the Canaanite pantheon. And those sons are each given a nation per the “table of nations” in Genesis 10-11. Heiser even admits that the number of nations/ sons (which is 70) is borrowed from the texts at Ugarit.

His apology (and we all knew that some day someone would invent one) is that since Jacob is not listed in the “table of nations,” that Deut 32:9 can not be portraying Yahweh as one of the sons.

Sorry I don’t have a link - I’m on my notebook. Go to Heiser’s web page and read the PDFs.

Loomis · 09-08-2006, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dzim77

When the Lord divided up mankind into nations, he gave each nation their own land as their inherritance.
He set boundries for them according to the number of the fathers of the nations.
Jesus Christ chose for his own allotment the people of NewIsrael. NewIsrael is his chosen portion and inherritance.

In this case, The Lord and Jesus Christ are one and the same.

Heiser disagrees with this. His arguments (showing that El, the sons of El, and the Most High, are all members of the Canaanite pantheon) are quite compelling.

I had to read his papers two or three times before I realized he’s catering to Believers.

All the best,

Loomis

Toto · 09-08-2006, 03:06 PM

Heiser on Wikipedia

Quote:

Michael S. Heiser was raised in Lebanon PA. He reports that he was always been fascinated with the paranormal (See: UFOs, Ghosts, ESP, Remote Viewing). He was introduced to Christianity by family friends, and became born again at age sixteen (with some hostility on his parent’s part, who suspected him of joining a cult).

He attended Lebanon High School and then Cedar Crest High, where he was presumably a very good student. He began pursuing his obsession with theology, particularly the language, context, and overall message of the Bible. This ultimately led him into earning an M.A. in Ancient History from the University of Pennsylvania, and an M.A. and Ph.D. in the Hebrew Bible and Semitic Languages from the University of Wisconsin-Madison (with a minor in Classical studies), all the while supporting himself working at various odd jobs and teaching on the college level as an adjunct.

. . .

Heiser's web site

09-08-2006, 11:37 AM	#125
Loomis Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: The recesses of Zaphon Posts: 969	Two Els + two "Most Highs" = fat chance Hey dzim77, What ever happened to the Canaanite god El? What ever became of him? Where did his followers go? All the best, Loomis

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.