"Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ" - 2 Corinthians 10:5 (KJV)
Thursday, December 3, 2015
Wednesday, December 2, 2015
Wednesday, November 11, 2015
Starbuck
I do not expect Starbucks to be Christian. Just like I do not expect ISIS to be Christian. However both are driven by anti-christian influences, which is not a world I wish to live in.
Before you jump on me for comparing the two, stop and think about this: Nazism started out as a small movement, Theosophy started as a small movement, redefining marriage started as a small movement, ISIS started out as a small movement, and now the once greatest influence in the world, (the church), is becoming a small movement. "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke
So please do not criticize any Christian who can discern the wrong in what Starbucks is doing. It is a deliberate marketing of evil influence on the society we live in. Instead wake up and discern the anti-christian world around you and decide to make a change. A christian should not be upset because of Starbucks, they should be upset because of the influence that this and many other factors will have on our children; and that, the Christian should find intolerable.
Wednesday, September 16, 2015
Tuesday, September 15, 2015
ADORATE (Worship) : Calvin was Right
ADORATE (Worship) : Calvin was Right: Is the Lord's Supper just a memorial? Calvin says absolutely not. And, he's right. Ironically, on something as central to the...
Saturday, June 27, 2015
Wednesday, June 17, 2015
Friday, June 12, 2015
Thursday, June 11, 2015
Wednesday, June 10, 2015
Tuesday, June 9, 2015
Wednesday, June 3, 2015
Sunday, May 31, 2015
Saturday, May 30, 2015
Friday, May 29, 2015
God Thoughts
People often don't think about God as they should. All of our opinions, ideas, and beliefs have a philosophical consequence that many of us ultimately ignore. God Thoughts is a blog about thinking through Biblical issues and doctrines. It is an attempt to get back to the basic truths of Christianity and defend the faith through logic.
Click on Posts or NewsFeed above to see the latest lessons and news that involve the Church of Christ.
Click on Posts or NewsFeed above to see the latest lessons and news that involve the Church of Christ.
The Biblical view of Atonement
There are three common theories of
the Atonement. We will briefly review 2 of them and then look at the scriptures
and the writings of the early church fathers for a better understanding.
1. The Satisfaction Model
The
Satisfaction Model (Objective or Latin or Vicarious Atonement): This is the
view that most Christians are very familiar with when it comes to the Doctrine
of Atonement. According to this view, Jesus Christ provides propitiation for
God’s judgment to reconcile sinners with God. The Objective atonement occurs in
this model as to change God’s attitude toward sinners, as once we were God’s
enemies. Vicarious atonement is the view within Satisfaction Model that Jesus
is the substitutionary sacrifice who died in our place.
This
theory was first penned by Anslem, Archbishop of Canterbury in the 11th
century. Essentially this theory of atonement was not the original
understanding of the work of Christ from the early Church but instead was an
extension of the medieval culture that Anselm lived in.
In his
book, Cur Deus Homo (Why God man?), Anselm seeks to understand the divine logic
of the atonement. He is concerned about utilizing tools of logic and learning
to articulate his faith (and I cannot argue with that necessity), he said “I do
not seek to understand in order that I may believe, but I believe in order to
understand.”
A
summary of Anselm’s argument in Cur Deus Homo
1.
The human race has offended God’s honor and
therefore has incurred an infinite debt.
2.
It would be unfitting and unjust for God to
accept humans as they are.
3.
Redemption requires repaying the infinite debt,
which fallen humanity cannot do
4.
It is unfitting that no human being should
attain the goal for which humanity was created.
Otherwise God would have pointlessly created humanity
5.
Therefore, in creating humanity, God freely
obligated himself to complete his work in humanity
6.
Only God can repay the debt, humanity ought to
repay it; therefore the one who does it must be both divine and human (that is,
a God-man).
7.
In order to redeem those who fell through Adam’s
sin, the God-man must be a descendant of Adam, not a new sort of creature or a
human from another “race.”
8.
Since the God-man is a good greater than the
evil of all sins, his voluntary death can make recompense for all sins if it is
given for their remission
Biblical
Material in support of the Satisfaction Theory (Sampling)
1.
Isaiah 53:4-5 (KJV) "Surely he hath borne
our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of
God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised
for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his
stripes we are healed."
2.
Mark 10:45 (KJV) For even the Son of man came
not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for
many.
3.
John 1:29 (KJV) The next day John seeth Jesus
coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin
of the world."
4.
1 Peter 2:24 (KJV) Who his own self bare our
sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto
righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.
5.
1 John 2:2 (KJV) And he is the propitiation for
our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
6.
Isaiah 53:10 (KJV) Yet it pleased the LORD to
bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering
for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of
the LORD shall prosper in his hand.
7.
Colossians 1:19-20 (KJV) For it pleased the
Father that in him should all fullness dwell; And, having made peace through
the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I
say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.
8.
Isaiah 53:6 (KJV) All we like sheep have gone astray; we have
turned everyone to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of
us all.
9. Mark 10:45
10. 2 Cor 5:21
At first glance it would seem that
Anselm was on to something. My only concerns are these:
1.
Is it scripturally accurate to elevate God’s
honor above God’s willingness to forgive?
2.
Why is a compassionate and forgiving God
considered unjust when He is willing to forgive?
3.
Is it an uncontested scriptural fact that man’s
debt was to God and if so why would God pay himself? Is that a ransom?
2. The Penal-Substitution Theory:
This
view was formulated by the 16th century Reformers as an extension of Anselm's
Satisfaction theory.
Anselm's
theory was believed correct in introducing the satisfaction aspect of Christ's
work and its necessity; however the Reformers saw it as insufficient because it
was referenced to God's honor rather than his justice and holiness and was worded
more in terms of a commercial transaction than a penal substitution.
This
Reformed view says simply that Christ died for man, in man's place, taking his
sins and bearing them for him. The bearing of man's sins takes the punishment
for them and sets the believer free from the penal demands of the law. The
righteousness of the law and the holiness of God are satisfied by this
substitution.
Is this
correct? Many Muslims point out rather appropriately, God is punishing an
innocent person. Is that morally good for God to do that?
3. The Classic (or Ransom) Model
This
theory is documented in the Writings of the early Church and reflect what was
understood by those who spoke Greek, thought in Greek and lived at a time that
was closer to the Apostles.
Did God forgive mankind their debt
that was owed to God, or did someone pay it for us? The Satisfaction model
simply states that God could not simply forgive our debt but rather teaches
that Jesus paid the debt for us. So God, the Father did not forgive us our debt
but received payment from someone else. The Satisfaction model therefore
teaches that God is not merciful to us but must satisfy justice through
payment. Also, how could God, under the satisfaction model, ever accuse mankind
of sin seeing that God had received payment in full?
In
Contrast, the Classical or Ransom Model teaches that God the Father actually forgave our
debt. Which view is correct? Matthew
18:21-27 - Forgiveness - Did the King forgive the Servants debt or did someone
else pay the debt. If God cannot and will not simply forgive our sins due to
the need for Justice, then why should we be under the same obligation to forgive
others? The Bible specifically teaches that if we don't forgive others then He
will not forgive us.
But if Jesus paid our debt, under
the Satisfaction model, then how could the King rightful reinstate the servants
debt in Matthew 18 when it had been paid in full? He could not because the debt was paid in full.
To whom was the debt or ransom paid?
The Satisfaction and Classical model
teach that Christ was the ransom for our sins.
1.
Matthew 20:28 –ransom
2.
1 Tim 2:6 -ransom
Under
the satisfaction model the ransom was paid to the Father. When someone is
kidnapped, to whom is the ransom paid? Under the Classical model the ransom was
paid to Satan and not the Father. In the
Garden, rather than to listen to God, Mankind chose Satan to be their master. As
a result, the whole of mankind came into captivity under Satan and Death.
Psalm 68:18 (KJV) Thou hast
ascended on high, thou hast led captivity captive: thou hast received gifts for
men; yea, for the rebellious also, that the LORD God might dwell among them.
Isaiah
49:21-25 (KJV) Then shalt thou say in thine heart, Who hath begotten me these,
seeing I have lost my children, and am desolate, a captive, and removing to and
fro? and who hath brought up these? Behold, I was left alone; these, where had
they been? Thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I will lift up mine hand to the
Gentiles, and set up my standard to the people: and they shall bring thy sons
in their arms, and thy daughters shall be carried upon their shoulders. And kings
shall be thy nursing fathers, and their queens thy nursing mothers: they shall
bow down to thee with their face toward the earth, and lick up the dust of thy
feet; and thou shalt know that I am the LORD: for they shall not be ashamed
that wait for me. Shall the prey be taken from the mighty, or the lawful
captive delivered? But thus saith the LORD, Even the captives of the mighty
shall be taken away, and the prey of the terrible shall be delivered: for I
will contend with him that contendeth with thee, and I will save thy children.
2 Timothy 2:25-26 (KJV) In meekness
instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them
repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; And that they may recover
themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his
will.
This is why Satan could offer Jesus
all the kingdoms of the world, because they were his to give.
Matthew
4:8-9 (KJV) Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and
sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; And saith
unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship
me.
2
Corinthians 4:2-5 (KJV) But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not
walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by
manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in
the sight of God. But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In
whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not,
lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God,
should shine unto them. For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord;
and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake.
Satan was willing to release
mankind if he could have the Son of God instead. The captivity means that Satan
knew that God has proclaimed the judgment on him of the lake of fire. In order
to counter this judgment, Satan made man a servant to him, knowing that God
would need to Judge man differently. Therefore if Satan always controlled man
in this manner, he would never enter the lake of fire, because he would be the
controller of death through sin.
When
Satan saw the coming of Christ, he was provided the opportunity to accept God
as a payment for man's servitude to Satan. So Satan would have to release any
man who freely wished to be released from his dominion because Christ paid that
ransom. Satan believed that God would reconcile man in Hades, which He did with
those who are on the paradise side of Hades, but He did not remain there. Satan believed
that this was a win -win for both God and man. God gets to be reconciled with
man and Satan remains on earth without the possibility of eternal judgment in
the lake of fire.
Satan
did not understand that because Jesus was not the seed of Adam and did not sin,
death could not contain him because Hades was for those who sin only.
This
is made evident with the ransom theory of atonement and no other theory of the
blood atonement lays claim to this concept of paying Satan a ransom. The Bible
specifically teaches that Jesus was a ransom. Does it make sense that when a
child is kidnapped, that the parents pay themselves a ransom?
There
are some that suggest that the ransom theory described God in an immoral light.
That is to say that God "tricked" Satan and that would be an immoral
act. Is it immoral for God to put all his enemies under his footstool? Do you
presume that Satan had a choice in accepting this?
What Scriptures confirm this? Let’s take a look:
“Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from
our Lord Jesus Christ, Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us
from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father:” - Galatians 1:3-4 (KJV)
Notice
the word “deliver.” Were we delivered from the wrath of the Father or from the
forces of Darkness? This scripture clearly says “this present evil world” so
who is the god of this world?
“How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and
with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the
devil; for God was with him.” Acts
10:38 (KJV).
Now who was oppressing us? The
devil that is Satan was oppressing us and that oppression was a form of
captivity that Satan demanded recompense for.
“In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if
God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; And
that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are
taken captive by him at his will.” 2
Timothy 2:25-26 (KJV)
This is
why the scriptures refer to Christ’s atonement as mankind being purchased with
the blood of Christ.
“Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock,
over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of
God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.” Acts 20:28 (KJV)
Purchased? Who did he purchase the church from, The
Father? Does that make sense? Does it really make sense that the parents pay
themselves when their children are kidnapped?
"Forasmuch then as the
children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part
of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of
death, that is, the devil;" Hebrews
2:14 (KJV)
Under
the satisfaction model the penalty was paid to the Father but under the
Classical Model the penalty of sin is death which is the natural consequence of
sin and Satan ruled this world with his power of temptation and vice. Sin was
more like a disease that no son of Adam could be cured of until Christ came.
When
reading the scriptures, it is very difficult at times to see a definitive
understanding of which model of atonement is correct. The proponents of the
satisfaction model look at the same scriptures as has been laid out her and use
them to justify the satisfaction model. The determining factor is to use
history as commentary. What did the early church believe about the working of
Christ? Those who live closer to the time and culture of Christ have a unique
perspective. A perspective that is untarnished from 2000 years of twisted human
thinking.
"But
Christ is our redemption because we had become prisoners and needed
ransoming. I do not enquire as to His
own redemption, for though He was tempted in all things as we are, He was
without sin, and His enemies never reduced Him to captivity" - Oregin
Volume 9, 318
"This
slain lamb has been made, according to certain hidden reasons, a purification
of the whole world, for which, according to the Father's love to man, He
submitted to death, purchasing us back by His own blood from him who had got us
into his power, sold under sin. And He
who led this lamb to the slaughter was God in man, the great High-Priest, as he
shows by the words: "No one taketh My life away from Me, but I lay it down
of Myself. I have power to lay it down,
and I have power to take it again." - Oregin Volume 9, pg 377
"He
did indeed show Himself to be long-suffering in the matter of the correction of
man and the probation of all, as I have already observed; and by means of the
second man did He bind the strong man, and spoiled his goods, and abolished death, vivifying that man who
had been in a state of death. For as the first Adam became a vessel in his
(Satan's) possession, whom he did also hold under his power, that is, by
bringing sin on him iniquitously, and under colour of immortality entailing
death upon him. For, while promising that they should be as gods, which was in
no way possible for him to be, he wrought death in them: wherefore he who had
led man captive, was justly captured in his turn by God; but man, who had been
led captive, was loosed from the bonds of condemnation." - Irenaeus Volume
1, pg 456
"We
--who were but lately created by the only best and good Being, by Him also who
has the gift of immortality, having been formed after His likeness
(predestinated, according to the prescience of the Father, that we, who had as
yet no existence, might come into being), and made the first-fruits of creation
--have received, in the times known beforehand, [the blessings of salvation]
according to the ministration of the Word, who is perfect in all things, as the
mighty Word, and very man, who, redeeming us by His own blood in a manner
consonant to reason, gave Himself as a redemption for those who had been led
into captivity. And since the apostasy tyrannized over us unjustly, and, though
we were by nature the property of the omnipotent God, alienated us contrary to
nature, rendering us its own disciples, the Word of God, powerful in all
things, and not defective with regard to His own justice, did righteously turn against
that apostasy, and redeem from it His own property, not by violent means, as
the [apostasy] had obtained dominion over us at the beginning, when it
insatiably snatched away what was not its own, but by means of persuasion, as
became a God of counsel, who does not use violent means to obtain what He
desires; so that neither should justice be infringed upon, nor the ancient
handiwork of God go to destruction. Since the Lord thus has redeemed us through
His own blood, giving His soul for our souls, and His flesh for our flesh,
[4452] and has also poured out the Spirit of the Father for the union and
communion of God and man, imparting indeed God to men by means of the Spirit,
and, on the other hand, attaching man to God by His own incarnation, and bestowing
upon us at His coming immortality durably and truly, by means of communion with
God,--all the doctrines of the heretics fall to ruin." - Irenaeus, Against
Heresies: Book V , Volume 1, pg 527
“Ignatius replied, ‘I mean Him who crucified my sin, with
him who was the inventor of it, [1410] and who has condemned [and cast down]
all the deceit and malice of the devil under the feet of those who carry Him in
their heart.’ – Ignatius, Volume 1, pg 129
It would
seem that at least the Ransom Theory of atonement is the original understanding
of the scriptures.
Friday, May 22, 2015
Thursday, May 14, 2015
Monday, April 27, 2015
Wednesday, April 22, 2015
Tuesday, April 21, 2015
Monday, April 20, 2015
Once Saved Always Saved?
Martin Luther wrote: “No sin can
separate us from Him, even if we were to kill or commit adultery thousands of
times each day. Do you think such an exalted Lamb paid merely a small price
with a meager sacrifice for our sins?”[i]
There is a
specific result in our Christian community into which are children are raise by
certain philosophical consequences to false theologies:
“The 2009 Collier
Township shooting, also referred to as the 2009 Bridgeville LA Fitness
shooting, was a murder-suicide that took place on August 4, 2009 in an LA
Fitness health club in Collier Township, a suburb of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
The attack resulted
in four deaths, including that of the perpetrator who took his own life. Nine
other people were injured. The fitness center is approximately 10 miles (16 km)
south of Pittsburgh, in The Great Southern Shopping Center, a strip mall
located near Bridgeville.”[ii]
The
murderer from the above story was a “Christian” man by the name of George
Sodini. George was a 48 year old man who was trained in the “Right Attitude”
Workshop whose teachings include the concept that “nice guys must die.”[iii]
George was
also a practicing Once saved always saved “Christian”. He wrote on his blog:
“Soon I will see God and Jesus.
At least that is what I was told. Eternal life does NOT depend on works. If it
did, we will all be in hell. Christ paid for EVERY sin, so how can I or you be
judged BY GOD for a sin when the penalty was ALREADY paid. People judge but
that does not matter. I was reading the Bible and The Integrity of God
beginning yesterday, because soon I will see them.”[iv]
Dr. Robert
Morey attempts to describe this doctrine in his book
While the Scriptures repeatedly warn
us that it is possible for someone who professes to be saved to fall away from
the faith (Heb. 6:4-6), this is in contrast to someone who actually possesses
true salvation. The Apostle John tells us that a true believer cannot fall
away.
[He goes on to cite 1 John 2:19, as
his proof text for this doctrine]
They went out from us, but they did
not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have
remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us. (1
John 2:19 NIV)[v]
There
are philosophical consequences to the “Once Saved always saved” doctrine that
have have led to the perversion of cultures throught the ages. This is not the
belief of the early church either. In fact, much of the understanding of
salvational doctrine has become distorted since the times of the Apostles.
Consider a few quotes from the early church Fathers:
“For he who keeps these shall be
glorified in the kingdom of God; but he who chooses other things shall be
destroyed with his works. On this account there will be a resurrection, on this
account a retribution.” -- Barnabas circa 70 -- 130
“Take heed, beloved, lest his many
kindnesses lead to the condemnation of us all. For thus it must be unless we
walk worthy of him, and with one mind do those things which are good and well
pleasing in his sight.” -- Clement of Rome, the first epistle of Clement, circa
96
“Let us therefore earnestly strive to
be found in the number of those that wait for him, in order that we may share
in his promised gifts. But how, beloved, shall this be done? If our
understanding be fixed by faith towards God; if we earnestly seek the things
which are pleasing and acceptable to him; if we do the things which are in
harmony with his blameless will; and if we follow the way of truth, casting
away from us all unrighteousness and iniquity, along with all covetousness,
strife, evil practices, deceit, whispering, and evil speaking, all hatred of
God, pride and haughtiness, vainglory and ambition. For they that do such
things are hateful to God; and not only they that do them, but also those that
take pleasure in them that do them.” - Clement of Rome, the first epistle of
Clement, circa 96
“The tree is made manifest by its
fruit. So those who profess themselves to be Christians will be recognized by
their conduct.... It is better for a man to be silent and be a Christian, then
to talk and not be one.” - Ignatius circa 105, page 55
“This, then, is our reward if we will
confess him by whom we have been saved. But in what way will we confess him? We
confess him by doing what he says, not transgressing his commandments, and by
honoring him not only with our lips, but with all our heart and all our mind...
Let us, then, not only call him Lord, for that will not save us. For he says,
"not everyone who says to me, Lord, Lord, will be saved, but he that works
righteousness." For that reason, brethren, let us confess him by our
works, by loving one another.” - Second Clement circa 150 volume 7 page 518
“When we hear, "your faith is
saved you," we do not understand him to say absolutely that those who have
believed in any way whatever will be saved. For works must also follow. But it
was to the Jews alone that he spoke this utterance. Those persons were Jews who
kept the law and lived blamelessly. All they lacked was faith in the Lord. No
one, then, can be a believer and at the same time be licentious.” -- Clement of Alexandria, circa 195, volume 2,
page 505.
[i] Letter
From Luther to Melanchthon, Letter 99, 1 August 1521. Cited in :Bercot, David
(2009-10-15). Will the Theologians Please Sit Down (p. 176). Scroll Publishing
Co.. Kindle Edition.
[ii]
Murderpedia, http://murderpedia.org/male.S/s/sodini-george.htm
Accessed 03/28/2014
[iii] Video,
George Sodini at The Right Attitude Workshop Intro Part 1, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VDvZYcrq0o,
Accessed: 03/28/2015
[iv] Blog of
George Sodini. http://raincoaster.com/2009/08/05/ george-sodinis-blog-the-plan,
3 Sept 2009.Cited in: Bercot, David (2009-10-15). Will the Theologians Please
Sit Down (p. 177). Scroll Publishing Co.. Kindle Edition.
[v] Ph. D.
Dr Robert a. Morey, A Christian Student's Survival Guide,Xulon Press, 2010, pg
6
Saturday, April 18, 2015
Richard Dawkins - Mind Virus
How do you know what is good?
In 2011, Richard Dawkins, made the statement that religion was like a virus (Richard Dawkins - Religion a Virus, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rG9tUodfKU), or a “mind virus” as he puts it. Well for him to argue against religion, means that he believes in a correct pattern of thinking, one pattern that religious people are not following. What is interesting about this is that this atheist has no foundation for this in his worldview. How does he know wrong thinking from right thinking if he does not believe in an absolute standard of right and wrong?
Friday, April 17, 2015
Wednesday, April 15, 2015
Tuesday, April 7, 2015
Wednesday, April 1, 2015
Tuesday, March 24, 2015
Wednesday, March 18, 2015
Tuesday, March 3, 2015
Christian Clubs Rejected on College Campuses for Being Discriminatory - Christian News Headlines
So wouldn't rejecting a Christian group the right to practice their religion be discriminatory?
Christian Clubs Rejected on College Campuses for Being Discriminatory - Christian News Headlines
Christian Clubs Rejected on College Campuses for Being Discriminatory - Christian News Headlines
New Fern Discovery Pokes Hole in Evolutionary Theory Assumptions
Again Evolutionsts think that they have found a "missing link" and yet the discovery is no different than if I hybrid a tomato.
New Fern Discovery Pokes Hole in Evolutionary Theory Assumptions - Christian News Headlines
New Fern Discovery Pokes Hole in Evolutionary Theory Assumptions - Christian News Headlines
Thursday, February 26, 2015
Angelology
“Blessed are
those who watch for him. For they make themselves like the Angels, whom we call
‘watchers.’”
-
Clement of Alexandria (circa 195)
Angelology
Some of the most powerful creatures in existence. Our imagination has not
ceased to develop new ideas about them through the centuries though all of them
cannot be true. The angels are a major decoration at Christmas every year and
is the subject of countless works of art. They randomly appear at different
narratives through the bible and have herald the coming of the Lord.
Angels do make appearances in other narratives in other cultures and
nations in the history of the world. Many non-human figures found in hieroglyphics
and artifacts may represent a corrupted form of angels. The Roman-Greco world
embraced the concepts of many human looking divine creatures.
Angels make an appearance on the biblical stage in both the Old and New
Testaments but who are they? What are their jobs? Where did they come from? Our
society seems to make a big deal about them but not very many know the history
behind them or have a universal doctrine about them.
It is important to note that the Bible gives us very little information
about angels, therefore, we must be careful in the conclusions we draw but we
do have a tremendous amount of evidence to look at from the Old and New
Testament as well as the extra biblical materials. Up front I will say that the
Bible is inspired and authoritative but this does not mean that some extra
biblical material is not historically accurate. Some of these narratives are
simply myth and others are hoaxes but we must examine them none the less.
First the Hebrew word for angel is mala'ak (מַלְאָךְ).
According to Strong’s, it can mean ambassador, angel, king, or messenger
depending on the context that it used with. It is usually referring to the
heavenly being, however not always. [i] It
is equivalent to the Greek word, angelos from which the English word “angel” is
obviously derived. However, in both Hebrew and Greek, the term simply means
"messenger" and was used for both God's messengers as well as those
of a king or ruler on Earth.
Three terms are found in the Old
Testament for angel. These are probably better understood as species or
classifications of Angels. Right now you may be saying to yourself, “three
terms?” because you were only taught two. One may be controversial but it is
fallacious to ignore it because it is controversial. As we go through, there is an entire section
for each of the species of angels for you to have an in depth look at them but
here there will be a brief overview. The first species of angel is the Seraphim
(שָׂרָף, singular Seraph). The name
simply means flame, burning, or fiery serpent[ii]
and in the bible it only shows up twice, both times in Isaiah, and both times
in one chapter: Isaiah 6.
The second species is more common in the biblical writings, and is transliterated
into English as "Cherub." In the bible, these angels are described as
having a particularly unusual form. The most descriptive narrative on them
appears in Ezekiel 1:4-28. Whether this is their normal appearance, it is
difficult to say but probable. They reappear in Revelation in virtually the
same form. And are most known by images on the old temple, because they were
considered the guardians of the temple.
There is a possible third classification for Angels as well but this is
not specifically biblical. I say this because the word in the bible is often
used to in referring to idols. However it is possible that this meaning derived
from an earlier understanding. This would be the word Teraphim. The etymology
of this word is very difficult and has truly challenged scholars through the
years. However it does seem probable that this word once referred to Angels
that appeared in a human form and then became the idols worship by other pagan
cultures. “Teraphim is a loan word from Hit tarpi(s), which “denotes a spirit
which can on some occasions be regarded as protective and on other malevolent”
and which is parallel in lexical texts to Akk sedu, ‘spirit, demon’”[iii]
Teraphim may refer to a classification of angel that appears completely
human and we see in scripture many instances of people seeing angels but they
did not know they were angels at first. These would be the Teraphim angels.
Now this Teraphim word has a great dark side to it. In ancient times this
word came to be understood with child sacrifice in order to divine information
from spirits. The ancient book of Jasher refers to this practice in great
detail “And this is the manner of the images; in taking a man who is the first
born and slaying him and taking the hair off his head, and taking salt and
salting the head and anointing it in oil, then taking a small tablet of copper
or a tablet of gold and writing the name upon it, and placing the tablet under
his tongue, and taking the head with the tablet under the tongue and putting it
in the house, and lighting up lights before it and bowing down to it. And at
the time when they bow down to it, it speaketh to them in all matters that they
ask of it, through the power of the name which is written in it.”[iv]
In many cultures of ancient times this became a regular practice and they
people would place the corpses of the “teraphim” into the walls of their house
so that regular communication with the spirit would be possible. “And Pharaoh
rose up in the night, he and all his servants and all the Egyptians, and there
was a great cry throughout Egypt in that night, for there was not a house in
which there was not a corpse. Also the likenesses of the first born of Egypt,
which were carved in the walls at their houses, were destroyed and fell to the
ground. Even the bones of their first born who had died before this and whom
they had buried in their houses, were raked up by the dogs of Egypt on that
night and dragged before the Egyptians and cast before them.”[v]
Archaeological evidence for this practice has been found throughout the
middle east and it was not restricted to first born sons in many instances. The
skulls of young and old, male and female have been used in the differing
religious rituals of the area.[vi]
Another term, and not a specific classification, that is generally
thought to refer to angels, is translated "the sons of God". How to properly
understand the term is a topic of great controversy, especially in Genesis
6:1-4, where the reader is told that the sons of God had sex with the daughters
of men:
“And it came to pass, when men began
to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, that
the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took
them wives of all which they chose. And the LORD said, My spirit shall not
always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an
hundred and twenty years. 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.”
Now this is highly contested among scholars today but
there is only always one truth. So three possible explanations for this
incident have been proposed among schools today. We will examine each one and
determine the one that best fits with the ancient writings.
[i]
See Genesis 32:6, Numbers 20:14 and Joshua 6:17 for alternate translations.
[ii]
Strong's Talking Greek & Hebrew Dictionary. Strong's Number 8314
[iii]
Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, Pieter Willem van der Horst, Dictionary of
Deities and Demons in the Bible, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1999,pg 845
[iv]
Jasher 31:41
[v]
Jasher 80:44-46
[vi]
Michelle Bonogofsky, “Neoloithic plastered Skulls and Railroading
Epistemologies,” The Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 331
(August 2003): 1-10
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)