Richard7
Well-known member
So sorry to hear, not familiar with Dr. Heiser, but I will pray for him tonight...
Richard
The gods of Psalm 82
- Thread starter dberrie2020
- Start date
Richard
organgrinder
Well-known member
I believe he is the guy you LDS generally cite as an authority for Psalm 82 council of the gods. You responded to a post and gave dberrie kudos where he mentioned him.
Last edited:
Richard7
Well-known member
So I may have, that does not mean I know him... why the contention when all I said was they are in my prayers, family and friends. Do you always see the negative in everything...
organgrinder
Well-known member
Made it seem like you didn't know who he was, not that you personally knew him. I'm sure he appreciates the prayers.
Elijah the Tishbite
Active member
That would mean the Bible and Book of Mormon would be obsolete dberrie2020
Super Member
dberrie2020 said:
The translation was 2020--three years old:
Psalm 82:1---New American Standard Bible 2020
God takes His position in His assembly;
He judges in the midst of the gods.
Which is quite a change from the 1995 translation:
Psalm 82:1---New American Standard Bible 1995
1 God takes His stand in His own congregation;
He judges in the midst of the rulers.
My point is if that much can change in just 25 years--100 year old scholarship may be obsolete.
The fact that some scholarship changes over time does not mean all scholarship is obsolete.
Any more than the changes in some Biblical verses -- due to modern discoveries of information being applied to specific verses--means the Bible is obsolete--IE
Psalm 82:1---New American Standard Bible 2020
God takes His position in His assembly;
He judges in the midst of the gods.
Which is quite a change from the 1995 translation:
Psalm 82:1---New American Standard Bible 1995
1 God takes His stand in His own congregation;
He judges in the midst of the rulers.
That isn't grounds to conclude the Bible is obsolete. There have been a number of Biblical translations which have undergone revision in the past decade or so, or new translations altogether.
The translation was 2020--three years old:
Psalm 82:1---New American Standard Bible 2020
God takes His position in His assembly;
He judges in the midst of the gods.
Which is quite a change from the 1995 translation:
Psalm 82:1---New American Standard Bible 1995
1 God takes His stand in His own congregation;
He judges in the midst of the rulers.
My point is if that much can change in just 25 years--100 year old scholarship may be obsolete.
The fact that some scholarship changes over time does not mean all scholarship is obsolete.
Any more than the changes in some Biblical verses -- due to modern discoveries of information being applied to specific verses--means the Bible is obsolete--IE
Psalm 82:1---New American Standard Bible 2020
God takes His position in His assembly;
He judges in the midst of the gods.
Which is quite a change from the 1995 translation:
Psalm 82:1---New American Standard Bible 1995
1 God takes His stand in His own congregation;
He judges in the midst of the rulers.
That isn't grounds to conclude the Bible is obsolete. There have been a number of Biblical translations which have undergone revision in the past decade or so, or new translations altogether.
Richard7
Well-known member
Yep, thx.
dberrie2020
Super Member
In all probability--99% of all LDS would not know who Michael Heiser was, if one were to mention his name. That's because, IMO--99% of all LDS aren't interested, nor would participate in most any of the discussions found here, especially about Psalm82:1. They just aren't interested in such things, for the main. And--the idea the LDS are focused on becoming gods, as some would suggest-- is a flat false idea. In my experience--the LDS are focused on their daily lives--and how they can serve--and how that service can change their lives--and the lives of those they serve.
I have never heard a discussion on Psalm 82 anywhere in the LDS church meetings. It would not be well received by the congregation, IMO.
But--sorry to hear about Heiser's condition, although plenty of scholars will pick up where he's left off.
Richard7
Well-known member
I totally agree, for many reasons, very good reasons such conversations may be best kept sacred.. many new persons are joining all the time and there is a time and a place for them to learn about it.... I'm not saying that it won't come up as a question by someone and we should strive always to be transparent and teach by the spirit sacred doctrine.
? ?
Baloney, the temples and endowments are for becoming a God and Goddess. It is about gaining eternal life and going back to live with their HF and becoming like him for the men, and that families are forever mostly a selling point for the women.
Equating a discussion on one bible verse and Michael Heiser to the church not teaching exaltation and eternal life is a joke DB.
For those that are not LDS, this song is arguably the "theme song" for the church. It is taught to every child as soon as they are able to learn...and what it teaches, passively and indirectly that they must become Gods and Goddesses to live where HF lives. Celestial glory in the last verse is becoming a God and Goddess.
- 1. I am a child of God,
And he has sent me here,
Has given me an earthly home
With parents kind and dear. - [Chorus]
Lead me, guide me, walk beside me,
Help me find the way.
Teach me all that I must do
To live with him someday. - 2. I am a child of God,
And so my needs are great;
Help me to understand his words
Before it grows too late. - 3. I am a child of God.
Rich blessings are in store;
If I but learn to do his will,
I’ll live with him once more. - 4. I am a child of God.
His promises are sure;
Celestial glory shall be mine
If I can but endure.
DB you might not want it, like or even believe it...but the fact remains that the church teaches and there is no other doctrine in the church that is more important to its end goal, which is, for the worthy man...becoming a God. You can blame me all you want for bringing this out to others, but all I am doing is sharing opening what your church teaches.
If 99% of Mormons and Christians alike, have never heard of MH and the psalms 82 argument...why do you bring it up...one reason only...to support your God complex, the church has forced on you, that emotionally you don't want to discuss it openly. It is that obvious DB.
Why keep the most important teaching of the church secret Ralf? Don't you believe a new prospecting member that is going to give 10% or more of their income and time to the church should know the church teaches that men can become Gods and have virgin wives given to him? I mean come on Ralf...that just might be something you might want to mention.I totally agree, for many reasons, very good reasons such conversations may be best kept sacred.. many new persons are joining all the time and there is a time and a place for them to learn about it.... I'm not saying that it won't come up as a question by someone and we should strive always to be transparent and teach by the spirit sacred doctrine.
? ?
Richard7
Well-known member
Why not be honest and I shall be..... the scriptures are very plain on this in the Bible... Line upon line, milk before the meat... do you ever wonder why God wrote this into the Scriptures? I'm sure you do, and I'm sure you're going to tell me... not sure what you mean by virgin wives, but I'm sure you can source that for me.
Ralf we are discussing the D&C... if you want to source what the Bible teaches that is even close to what the D&C reads...fine...start a thread and I promise I will contribute.
Virgin/s is the word that Joesph chose...it can mean just that, a virgin, or it could mean a chaste single woman, a widower or divorcee. But we know that Joseph was married and sealed to women who were already married, as was Jane Law, and Kimbal's wife, which there is evidence that he fancied both for a relationship. So, this is not an easy thing to sort out.
Richard7
Well-known member
You lost me, you said we can be Gods and have virgins in heaven.... can you please validate that, I'm interested and very excited... chuckle.
And on top of that I will discuss whatever a person asks me, member, new member, etc. Wouldn't that be being transparent...
19 And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new and everlasting covenant, and it is sealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of promise, by him who is anointed, unto whom I have appointed this power and the keys of this priesthood; and it shall be said unto them—Ye shall come forth in the first resurrection; and if it be after the first resurrection, in the next resurrection; and shall inherit thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths—then shall it be written in the Lamb’s book of Life, that he shall commit no hmurder whereby to shed innocent blood, and if ye abide in my covenant, and commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, it shall be done unto them in all things whatsoever my servant hath put upon them, in time, and through all eternity; and shall be of full force when they are out of the world; and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.
20 Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore, shall they be from a everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have call power, and the angels are subject unto them.
21 Verily, verily, I say unto you, except ye abide my law ye cannot attain to this glory.
And
61...And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood—if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse another, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else.
62 And if he have ten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified.
63 But if one or either of the ten virgins, after she is espoused, shall be with another man, she has committed adultery, and shall be destroyed; for they are given unto him to multiply and replenish the earth, according to my commandment, and to fulfil the promise which was given by my Father before the foundation of the world, and for their exaltation in the eternal worlds, that they may bear the souls of men; for herein is the work of my Father continued, that he may be glorified. section 132.D&C
So I am asking...in your own words, break all this down...being you are going to be transparent.
Richard7
Well-known member
Thank you for giving us the Second Anointing ...
Easy, the second part is about marriage and sealing on this earth, you stated we can become Gods in heaven have many virgins... not exactly what you're claiming good buddy...
dberrie2020
Super Member
So that's what Paul meant here!
1 Corinthians 15:40-41---King James Version
40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.
41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.
LOL...what a troll...Joseph Smith, the God maker, used this passage to force a God complex on weak minded folks. He taught that it is a tiered level of heavens, and that the top level was reserved for only Mormon men gullible enough to think they can become Gods and can have scores of virgin wives.
I believe it simply means that our body here on earth, is different form our resurrected body, what do you think it means DB...? My guess is it means as I described above.
Elijah the Tishbite
Active member
celestial bodies are immortal heavenly bodies [flesh and bone], and terrestrial bodies are mortal earthy bodies,[flesh and blood] it's about bodies and not heavens
Wow...that was exhaustive....
Where does it read second anointing? I think you need to go to section 124 for that.
But verses 19-21 read that men that enter into the ELC, will become Gods.
and verses speaks of the adding of virgins to those, like Abraham and the others in verse one, had. If your argument is that the virgins, you married are only for this world...then that's a tough argument. Many women are sealed by proxy today... do you do the endowment work for the dead?
The point is LDS scripture teach men can have virgins given unto them...your splitting hairs as a defense is evident ralf, that you have no real answers for what is taught.
It's simply amazing that you boast so highly that you have the truth...yet you have such a hard time accepting what is taught?
Would you sustain a motion to remove section 132 from the standard works?