The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the Bible

by Michael S. Heiser

Psalm 82 states that the gods were being condemned as corrupt in their administration of the nations of the earth.

Except this is exactly how Jesus uses the term gods in John 10:34 and 35. It is also used this way several times in Exodus.

rationalism,

This sounds like he is saying that the biblical writers or people of the past weren't rational. Of course the books of Wisdom, the arguments of Jesus and the letters of Paul all are predicated on rational thought but whatever.

But the biblical writers and those to whom they wrote were predisposed to supernaturalism.

Except the whole point of the Old Testament is to remove the pagan supernatural thought process and instead focus on the Word of God as written.

abandoned or glossed over.

These are difficult passages for evangelicals? The burning bush, Gideon, etc? Can they walk on their hindlegs and traverse their houses without needing help?

Supernatural.

So this is the hard to read one? Angels and ministers of grace forfend!

archangel

A term only used once to single out one angel but sure, follow pseudo-dionysus and ascribe a whole ranking system because of one angel.

elohim by nature inhabit the spiritual world.

Except where it isn't which you only mention in a footnote telling people you talk about it on your website. Was your publisher running out of paper?

God’s divine council is an assembly in the heavens, not on earth. The language is unmistakable. This is precisely what we’d expect if we understand the elohim to be divine beings. It is utter nonsense if we think of them as humans. There is no reference in Scripture to a council of human beings serving Yahweh in the skies (Jews or otherwise).

By your own accidental admission you are proven wrong. If the council is made up of "holy ones" in your Psalms quote, they cannot be corrupt. God can address more than one council.

The importance of this list can be summarized with one question:

Where are the human judges called elohim you mentioned in your own footnote? That question? And you blame anyone who doesn't agree with you of cherrypicking.

The solution is much more straightforward, one that an ancient Israelite would have readily discerned. What we have is a single person (God) addressing a group—the members of his divine council.

So we can't say it is the trinity because that is reading the New Testament into the old. But you believe there are references to a two person Godhead and inferences to a third person throughout the Old Testament, but not here?

womb.

Ah yes, the Bible can't be saying this thing cause then I'd be dead wrong about that thing. But you got rid of all your filters, right?

We know certain animals have these abilities because of carefully conducted research in the field of animal cognition.

Ah, so if the animals are simikar in any regard, the whole thing has to be called off. What about Baalim's donkey? It had speech and greater intelligence than it's rider. Being similar is not being the same.

And if intelligent extraterrestrial life is ever discovered, that would also undermine such definitions.

Except that they would also have to be created by God. Unless you believe there is another creative deity in the universe.

To be human is to image God.

So this is axiomatic? It's true because it must be true? Because without this your entire belief structure falls apart. And if this is true even of a fertilized egg, what other bodily excretions is it true of? I could paraphrase Luther's rebuttal of transubstantiation here. Every drop of blood is sacred, from anyone, no matter what. So I assume as well as being pro-life you are also anti-war and against the death penalty. Also are we made in the image of the council as well?

As in heaven, so on Earth.

Could we stop with this. I know you are trying to echo the Lord's Prayer but it's really just a different way of saying the alchemical, "As above, so below."

imagers—humankind,

So we are God's idols?

nonhuman.

We discovered that is your belief. I believe in heavenly beings, even that they are in a council as shown in Job. But you take it all blasphemously too far.

gods.

And there is no danger what so ever of using the worship of Baal to interpret scripture.

But “very good” is not perfect.

So God intentionally made the Earth imperfect? You say very good means complete, but complete isn't perfect, yet a perfect God was willing to rest when His perfect work wasn't finished. This doesn't make sense.

job.

Except that the words he uses to describe what he has been up to shows the territory he believes to be his domain. Through the fall, Satan was granted dominion of the Earth, which is why he is allowed into God's council.

saṭan

Except in the New Testament where the serpent of old is called the Devil and Satan.

uppity,

That's a nice euphemism for contempt and open defiance.

I’ve run into some odd explanations for that, such as, “Maybe animals back then could walk and talk.” That sort of speculation is aimed at preserving an overliteralized view of the text,

Hold on, you go to crazy places with your ideas of what the Bible says and you are going to accuse others of being overliteral? Also wouldn't the story of Baalim's donkey lend creedence to the idea animals could speak. Makes more sense than "oh, she knew it was a divine being."

being.

I actually agree that the serpent is Satan, but this is the biggest stretch to get there I could imagine.

There is no indication that, had she borne children before the fall, Eve would have felt no pain at all.

So not only was the world not created perfect, but there was pain in paradise. That's awful. Why would a loving God intend pain for only one gender for eternity?

mortal injury

AND THEY COULD DIE?!?!?! Your view of paradise sucks!

Eve was redeemed through childbearing

So she was saved by works? I don't think you are interpreting Paul correctly.

reference,

Or a misunderstanding of what a snake does when it flicks its tongue out.

important.

Oh good, I was worried this wasn't crazy enough.

lineage.

No, but it is implied from how Cain's descendents separated from the rest.

Nephilim.

Only if you take a ridiculous view of the Nephilim. They were great warriors and tall. Nothing more.

exegesis.

It's called reason. What you want to believe is impossible.

time.

No one said there was. It is just describing what happened.

view.

Well the previous chapter just got done seperating humanity into two groups and it identifies the righteous as the sons of God, language quite common for the Bible.

A close reading of Genesis 6:1–4 makes it clear that a contrast is being created between two classes of individuals, one human and the other divine.

Sure, except that it doesn't. I wonder where you could have got this idea?

king

Except that God explicitly states He never wanted Israel to have a king.

They describe an episode from the time of Noah

No, it mentions an angelic rebellion and then how things were in Noah's day.

1 Enoch.

Yeah, if this book didn't exist neither would your entire argument. But hey, at least you aren't imposing ideas from outside the Bible onto what the Bible says.

The presence of this item in books like 1 Enoch and, subsequently, in the New Testament, is a clear indication that Jewish writers between the testaments were aware of the Mesopotamian context of Genesis

No, this makes it clear for 1 Enoch.

but once they had assumed flesh,

So angels were, of their own accord, able to do the same thing as Jesus when He put on our flesh.

problem,

But not the problem of being fanfiction which you will take as fact from here on out.

transgression.

Almost like that's not what it is doing at all. Also, if Genesis 6 is just a metaphorical polemic, doesn't that mean it didn't happen and can therefore be safely ignored?

who survived the flood

And this idea, so God created a world wide flood to kill the giants and missed? So two different angelic rebellions and a failed giantcide, your god isn't doing so well.

We aren’t told how the elohim Yahweh assigned to the nations became corrupt,

So God gave up these other nations to subordinates that He couldn't trust? A third rebellion? Really! How unfair for your god to blame us for rebelling when apparently everyone who knows him turns on him.

David can’t worship as he should if he is not on holy ground. The

What!? David is complaining he is having to do mercenary work for heathens. Not that he can't worship outside of Israel. That's insane.

by which Naaman showed his faith and kept his vow to the true God, Yahweh.

So Elisha honors a misguided request for dirt and you take that as cosmic significance? Naaman was a pagan trying to honor God (the real one, not your fake) the best way he knew and Elisha accepted that with grace. Nothing more. God did not bind Himself by geography nor place false gods over other countries.

Babel.

So they rebelled the second they were put in charge? Is your god written by George R.R. Martin?

WE LEARNED FROM DEUTERONOMY 32:8–9 THAT YAHWEH PLACED THE nations under the governance of junior elohim—the sons of God of his divine council.

Well that's what you claimed. And then your god was immediately betrayed because apparently nobody likes him.

This isn’t the kind of language one would expect if Abraham was hearing only a sound.

And not to pick too many nits because this is one of the few places you could be right, but avision could also be a dream and therefore no physical manifestation is neccesary.

radar.

Should have been ages before now. Do your people not read the Bible?