The Unseen Realm? | Doug Wilson
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 фев 2022
- In this episode of Ask Doug, Pastor Doug Wilson answers the question, "Are you familiar with 'The Unseen Realm' and other works on angels and demons by Michael Heiser? What do you make of his stuff?"
Get more from Doug on Canon Plus: mycanonplus.com/tabs/discover...
Ask Doug is presented by Canon Press.
Get more from Doug on Canon Plus: mycanonplus.com/tabs/discover/pages/douglas-wilson
Not going to get more until you support the claim that his take on Calvinism was dumb.
One of the wonderful things Dr Heiser says is that if its in the bible, and it's weird, it's important.
I need to look into this
@@inkbythebarrelandpaperbyth6905 be ready to have your mind blown! Makes so much sense.
Yes, God preserved the entire Bible, He chose what's in it, so it's all there to be read and understood. Otherwise we'd just have the Gideon NT and Psalms if that was all that was important.
...and that is the exact opposite of what my Pastor says...he hates talking about the weird stuff...
@@anarchorepublican5954 lol, some people just don’t want the ‘weird’ stuff.. but the weird stuff always turns out to be extremely interesting to learn about.
Interesting, as someone schooled in Calvinism for years, I found his chapter to be really helpful. He interacts with texts the way they are presented and not with how they fit into a theological system. Yes, there are more texts to interact with to get the full picture (or at least the part of the picture God has given us at this time), but often we forget that the Bible predates our systematic theologies and we read, often unwittingly, through some lense that blocks what is actually there. Removing the lenses is part of Heiser' project.
You're correct, but Heiser fails to rise up to the challenge. He does not remove his own lens in approaching the text in that Calvinism chapter.
I still can't grasp Calvinism. Too much tribulation and spiritual attacks to make me concede that I don't fit in the " God's elect" predestinated sphere of grace.
Heiser attacks conservative Lutheran traditions too. But I think I'll stick with my Wisconsin Lutheran Church.
Heisers teaching on "Finding Jesus in the Old Testament. " is pretty good.
Flanuer Record has the best 17 part teaching thru the book of Revelation.
Amen re:the chapter on Calvinism! It was that goofy Molinism, middle-knowledge garbage.
@@DanAndreiVladut interesting stuff. I have wanted to read this book for a while.
And myself who also was saved in a Calvinistic church, went to Southern seminary, (all profs have to be calvinists) and having gobs of other books and resources from Calvinism and supporting Doug Wilson and Canon I am even less convinced of singular presentation to salvation as the proper reading of Ephesians 1 and 2. Romans 9-11 has nothing to with Calvinism or actual Jacob and Esau and everything to do with nations of Israel and Edom. But anyway...I still love all of it. But I've heard the arguments.
The one thing I don't care for his responses like Doug's who say 'well you didn't interact with it well' or ' you don't understand Calvinism' that just makes all of us who did belong and adhere in the past look like idiots. And also God would be too if Calvinism were true because he determined me to accept it and then reject it, though I love the Lord Jesus even more than I did when I was a Calvinist. Hmmmm
@@servicetech8538 God's elect is more about understanding God than it is about whether or not you 'fit the glove'. We are to be reminded that no one fits the glove without Jesus Christ. However, I do sympathize with your statement.
Heiser and Wilson have been two of the biggest influences on me. It's fun to see Wilson talk about Heiser here
I'm so pleased to hear this, Doug. Mike is an amazing, brilliant, and HUMBLE man.
Everyone here, please pray for Mike. He's not doing well at all.
As far as Calvinism, don't skip over that chapter. Don't be scared to read something that might go against your position.
For the life of me, IDK why any of us would take a label of "Calvinist." I never read about John Calvin in scripture.
Heiser moves beyond the denominational squabbles for the most part. He just sticks to scripture.
I can’t stand the Calvinist label. I doubt Calvin would have approved. It’s just what the Bible says.
Wilson was not suggesting to skip over the chapter because it would challenge us. He suggested to skip over it due to it not flowing well with the rest of the book and it also being a mischaracterization of Calvinism.
@@daven8905 and that’s the problem with Calvinists. They hate the title and say “it’s what the Bible says” so what you are saying is that anyone who disagrees with “Calvinism” also by extension disagrees with the Bible. But the fact is…it’s not “what the Bible says” it’s what philosophical interpretations of the scriptures say.
@@Scribeintheink okay!
I used to devour his content and I’ve learned a lot but he’s not that great of biblical theologian (like many scholars especially OT scholars) IMO. For him it’s mostly ANE context and 2nd temple context through which he interprets scripture. Not typology and the biblical canonical context. I believe the NT writers teach us how to read scripture and they see Christ and Satan etc. in OT scriptures where Heiser and other OT scholars don’t see it (I think in that respect they are definitely misguided) because they are committed to the critical and historical method (they have to if they want to be taken seriously in their academic field which is of course secular).
I did benefit from reading Heiser and his insights about the council, Sons of God etc. but I wouldn’t recommend adopting his overall method of reading the Bible. There are much better biblical theologians out there (theologians like Alastair Roberts or Peter Leithart and others) who interpret biblical passages based on biblical threads and not just the ANE context, so much more like the NT writers and that leads to a much more christian reading of the text and to a much greater connection between biblical books and an understanding of the great biblical narrative, the opposite of what is being done in many universities today where the Bible tends to get disjointed and not put together again (IMO Heiser operates in that world which is why he gets some things seriously wrong though he is definitely one of the better guys).
I like this "new trend" of reading the Bible and ACTUALLY believing what it ACTUALLY says. It's positively revolutionary! 😄
As a former charismatic with reformish theology in a reformed culture, I really can see the two steps from the country club paradigm at work. Excellent.
Former? You can be both! Join the Truth and Spirit club ;) They go nicely together!
Also, I use the label “Calvinish” for myself 😄
Charismatic and hold to sola scritpura, and the doctrines of grace... yes! I hold to all.
Heiser promoted reading Jubilees & Enoch, noncanonical books of heresy. He also believed in the existence of many "gods". May God have mercy on his soul.
Jude quotes Enoch...
@@natedowney9590❤bless you!
I really enjoy Heiser’s work and his podcast, “TheNaked Bible.” Appreciate this, Uncle Douglas.
Also read Mike's book "Reversing Hermon." It'll blow your mind.
I was far less impressed with that one, and very irritated that the footnotes weren't under the running text and were in the back of the book instead.
Is he calvinist or
@@CEOofSleep No. He has lots of Calvinist friends, but no.
Is it about...Hermoneutics?
Heiser is like a man who filters living waters of life through 8 tons of rotten dung and is then surprised the water comes out all brown, smelly and poisenous
Literally just went down the youtube rabbit hole of Heiser today. Never heard of him before, and Doug covers it in today's video. Perfect Timing! Cant wait to hear what he has to say.
Edit: Back after watching. Weird Charismatic here; thanks for inviting me over to the campfire chat ;)
I found Michael S Heiser reading The Second Coming of the New Age. He wrote the introduction.
All of these guys including Mike build their theology on extra biblical writings while they all say they do not. Mike Heiser is an open theist and he has redefined a lot of things. He came up with all kinds of new views that no one before him did for 2000 years. A that is dangerous.
@@Vynachadzavy actually, not all this comes directly from Heiser. His objective is to bring scholarly studies of the Bible, his and others, to the average person. There is much that wasn’t know to men like Calvin and others would created these so-called theological systems. Many things were not considered by them.
@@herengone I am not saying that he is wrong on everything but that is exactly why he is so dangerous. How can a Calvinist with his very distinguished understanding of sovereignity of God embrace a guy who is open theist? Most of Heiser's ideas are not even coming for biblical canon but from many especially Gnostic ancient writings? A lots of ancient cultural and religious practices and beliefs he elevates almost to the level of inspired scripture. You people better open your eyes for crying out loud. This is really not that hard to see. Just take any few of his videos and it is right there.
@@Vynachadzavy To say Heiser raises Gnostic writings almost to inspired scripture is an exaggeration. Heiser clearly points out that the Bible writers often took known things pagans ascribed to their gods and attributed them to the One True God. As Heiser says the Bible was written for us but not to us. Early Christians knew nothing of Reformed or Arminian theology espoused in the 19th century. And, there is a reason the are two camps. I find some people very prideful in their theological view points. They get on their high horse when anything threatens their view point.
It was the apostle Paul who wrote about the simplicity that is Christ.
“But I fear, lest somehow, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, so your minds may be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.”
II Corinthians 11:3 NKJV
By the way, I have the Kindle version of The Unseen Realm which is searchable. There are only 4 references to Calvin and they are in the footnotes at the end of the book. Only one reference to the word reformed and that is in one of the same footnotes. It merely makes the point that people who have read certain theological writings like Calvin have a hard time divorcing themselves from those ideas reading the Bible, meaning they come with presuppositions.
😂😂😂 I’m a Pentecostal and I know what it’s like to be weird. 😂😂😂 love Doug.
I was just thinking the other day , "I would like to get someone's opinion I trust , about Heiser. Thanks
As Dr Heiser would say: if it’s strange, it probably important.
Exactly! And it should be researched
Here's how to do all of the true appointed times.
Children, listen CLOSELY. TRANSLATE FOR YOUR PEOPLE
This link below shows how you do the
appointed times and WHEN.
I watched and logged the moon for two years and here I
show you the EXACT days to do the feasts. Study this
and fix the calendar.
ruclips.net/video/185siLcVToI/видео.html
I like Doug’s sound judgment on this.
Here's how to do all of the true appointed times.
Children, listen CLOSELY. TRANSLATE FOR YOUR PEOPLE
This link below shows how you do the
appointed times and more importantly, WHEN.
I watched and logged the moon for two years and here I
show you the EXACT days to do the feasts. Study this
and fix the calendar.
ruclips.net/video/185siLcVToI/видео.html
What judgement and how is it sound without any argument.
I've been waiting for this
Michael Heiser doesn't teach Global flood, teaches a localized flood
This is true.
Not that it's a deal-breaker, but that put up a red flag with me.
So hugh ross and john lennox, Did god flood mountain Everest?
@@JulianArmy1 one theory is that mountains are a result of the flood narrative.
Not sure, but I’ve been told there are clam fossils on Everest.
@@JulianArmy1 No he didn't. It wasn't there before the Flood. Creation scientists believe that the earth underwent enormous changes at that time, explaining why we have a geologic column. Neither was Mount Hermon in existence before the deluge either. That's why the claims of the pseudegraphical Book of Enoch are nonsense
Dougs initial review was what promted me to pick it up years ago. Great book!
Btw, pretty sure the chapter isn't about calvinism, it's about free will. The role of the will is important to angelology.
Love Heiser, love Wilson 🕊️
Very good talk. Thanks Doug!
I'd love to hear Doug's take on the Enlightenment
Thanks very much! I was hoping to hear thoughts about Dr. Heiser’s work!
Thanks Doug Wilson - this is useful
For those that do read/watch Heiser, and start digging more.
I would recommend checking out Timothy Alberino.
He has a YT channel with good content.
And you can find him on other people’s podcasts/channels being interviewed or having discussions.
He has recently written a new book Birthright, I haven’t read it yet.
And one of his documentaries, True Legends: The unholy see, is available on Twitch.
His focus isn’t on OT scholarly work, but more on analyzing historical archaeological evidences and writings.
And what has been hidden from the masses in regards to our history, and how the supernatural interacted in our world.
He does delve into future ramifications and tries to connect where humanity/human power intersects with the supernatural in the present.
Which is somewhat speculative and does require a worldview of the future (which may not align with post-millennialism).
And he does believe that there was a lot of supernatural “activity” prior to man’s creation, but that the entire history of the universe is Christ-centered (not man-centered) and as a result actions in the supernatural order prior to our creation impact us.
And he believes that the genetic manipulation/transhumanism we currently see and are speeding toward, plays a big role in our future, just as it did in the days of Noah.
As always test the spirits, but from what I have seen he is doctrinally sound.
And works to explain what he knows/believes about ancient history (and more recent supernatural phenomena/events) within the Biblical framework and Christs redemptive work.
NYSTV/Midnight Ride, and Trey Smith (God in A Nutshell) are a couple others in the same vein.
But again there is a lot of current event/future speculation on those channels, but they also stay within a biblical framework in explanations, and remain sound doctrinally and Christ centered.
Obviously, no one will agree with all of their beliefs or conclusion, but still can gain insights.
Heiser's research seems to pair well with Christian identity too
It is a good book... Well worth reading.
I really appreciate the point about liberal scholars as sometimes taking the text more seriously and face-value, even thought they may be dismissive thereof. This is why I read unbelieving a liberal scholars often; their lack of fear often provides insights into the text that more conservative believing scholars are afraid to make.
I’m a former charismatic who now goes to a biblical church that teaches Calvinism (although I very much disagree with them on that) I really like to see calvinists and charismatics praising each others work. We need to unite around the gospel, we may disagree on other things, but we actually don’t disagree on much, love my reformed brothers and non Calvinist brothers alike.
I agree with what he’s said about how oftentimes the reformed guys are a bit out of their element being contrarian and “weird”. I saw that in spades during 2020. Right off the bat, I saw the goings on in clear black and white relief, while sadly, I saw my own dearly beloved, wise, and faithful Elders asking us to sit one row apart and such.
It was a growth season where suddenly some of the carefully conservative minds needed to recognize a time and a place for being skeptical towards perceived “authorities”.
The naked bible podcast and Mike's sermons are true content!
Yea. He teaches how to view scripture without loaded presuppositions and to read it in its intended context.
I very much enjoyed the chapter on Calvinism...
Me too
Thank you for this!! ‘The Mike’ is a very honorable man! I’d love you two to interact.
This is such an inside joke for Heiser fans. I love it! Well done 😂
@@goaliemelvin Lol. I call us heiser heads
Man, spot on about reformed believers and their shunning of those things in the Bible that demand greater inspection and debate.
That's a very interesting point at the end, it makes sense. Someone who affirms Scriptural Inerrancy is (rightly) bound to affirm what the Bible says as true. But that then may lead them to color what they believe the Bible is saying by what they already think is true. "Of course this passage should be interpreted to mean X, because X is true and the Bible is inerrant so of course it must align with what I 'know' (believe) to be true!".
Now that I think about it, I have seen this play out from Christians with all sorts of positions.
It's the only point worth listening to, the rest was rubbish.
I'll check it out.
Here's how to do all of the true appointed times.
Children, listen CLOSELY. TRANSLATE FOR YOUR PEOPLE
This link below shows how you do the
appointed times and WHEN.
I watched and logged the moon for two years and here I
show you the EXACT days to do the feasts. Study this
and fix the calendar.
ruclips.net/video/185siLcVToI/видео.html
One of the greatest blessings I've received from the Lord is letting the Bible speak for itself. I read it as it is, not how I want it to read, not how anyone tells me it should read. And, I've always looked at scripture this way.
I believe this was made possible because of God, and also because I rarely attended church.
To be totally honest - I never much trusted Christians. Even though I am one (don't trust myself all that much, either 😄😉). Whenever I was around them I always thought "NO ONE is THAT good".
With 30 years of hindsight I now see, the church teaches you how to ACT like a Christian, not how to BE a Christian.
Big difference!!
Thanks.
I do wish the Pentecostals spoke more on this subject when I went to church. I think they were embarrassed by it, like you said. I also didn't hear the classic Moses and the flood, David and Goliath stories too in church, I think because they thought they'd be discrediting themselves talking about those bible stories.
I'll bet you'd be interested to know that all humans have mitochondrial DNA from one of three haplogroups, conveniently coded L,M,N, with the region of intersection being southwest Asia. This is because all humans have mtDNA from one of the three daughters-in-law of Noah.
Thanks to my parents having an interest in spiritual warfare and a class I had on Angleology in college I had a better grasp of biblical cosmology than most people I know, but it was Heiser's fuller elucidation of biblical cosmology that actually made it possible for me to accept Doug's arguments for postmillennialism. Before hearing Heiser, Doug's arguments didn't convince me to give up Premillennialism. They sounded hopeful and inspiring, but didn't seem to me to fit the whole counsel of scripture; but once Heiser described how Yahweh and Jesus engage in territorial warfare, that Him claiming physical ground has cosmic significance, then I literally shouted out in a burst of epiphany, "Oh, then I'm post mil!"
Wait Angelology is real thing lol?
Any chance you might discuss this topic with Dr. White?
May the Lord return! Amen. God is merciful. He always forgives. Never be ashamed to take your failures to him. He is for you, not against you! God is with you in the storm. He knows your troubles, he hears you! He is for you, on your side, always! It may feel silent at times, but he’s holding you close! May the Lord return soon! We are drawing closer. He is coming! Believe and trust in the Lord, you will be saved. Period. May the Lord bless you all! Hang in there family. Stay strong. It is not easy following the Lord. We are scoffed at. We give up our earthly dreams, our fleshly desires. What the enemy offers is short lived, but heaven is forever! Life may seem or be unfair, but God is with you! Always remember that. Things may get better or worse for you, but a kingdom awaits you! Finish the race! Repent daily and carry your cross. This world is fading fast. Your troubles are temporary! New channel here, I’d appreciate any kind of support. Don’t give up! God loves you so much! So do I. The Lord bless you!
Here's how to do all of the true appointed times.
Children, listen CLOSELY. TRANSLATE FOR YOUR PEOPLE
This link below shows how you do the
appointed times and more importantly, WHEN.
I watched and logged the moon for two years and here I
show you the EXACT days to do the feasts. Study this
and fix the calendar.
ruclips.net/video/185siLcVToI/видео.html
I've read all of Heiser's books (I think) and listened to scores, if not hundreds of hours of his lectures and I think Mr. Wilson may be giving the good doctor too much credibility here. Heiser is more like the Oxford professor mentioned above, i.e., he will state, "this is what the Bible teaches," but I am not confident that he believes any of it to be true. For example, he clearly teaches that Genesis 1-11 were written post-exile, as a polemic against Mesopotamian theology and never seems to come right out and say, "And it really happened." Instead, it's the old "mythology" tangent. He outright says that the Israelites believed in a flat earth, with an actual canopy covering the sky, with the literal throne of God resting above it and Sheol, Hades or Hell, being below the earth, etc. And he insists that Genesis One does NOT require literal six day creation and that it really has nothing to say to us about how the universe came into being other than, "God did it." When I have asked, at least two dozen times, in the comment sections of his videos, "Why should we trust God about things we cannot see, when He clearly got in wrong on things we can see" the silence is deafening. It really does appear that Heiser thinks that the Old Testament "weird stuff" is all there and important, but only because it bolsters certain theological arguments the Israelites were having with Mesopotamian religion; and that none of it actually had to have happened because the point was always theological, and had little to do with the "real" world. If I am wrong in this analysis, I am quite open to correction; but thus far, his evangelical fans seem to assume he is one of them, when in reality, he belongs more to the academy.
Well I have taken his courses, so might be biased here. The things you point out are true criticism under a modernist paradigm of the discussion of these topics, but the whole point of Dr. Heiser discourse is we should reject the modernist paradigm to analyze and bring conclusions to the table. And now in my experience beyond Heiser material the more you dive in ancient cultures it becomes more apparent that meaning was more important than scientifically factual as limitation of the paradigms that built the ancient cosmological view of the world, because being pragmatic came before proving something in a scientific sense. It's quite an incomplete answer from my part but in a more simple way the paradigm shift depend if we accept that ancient people even thou were equal to us in the capacity to have revelation and being used by God, were different in their approach to describing "reality", defining and debating concepts.
@@cristianfernandez1874 I couldn’t have said it better myself. Good stuff.
i don't care for anything heiser believes
@@hondotheology your loss mate
I used to devour his content and I’ve learned a lot but he’s not that great of biblical theologian (like many scholars especially OT scholars) IMO. For him it’s mostly ANE context and 2nd temple context through which he interprets scripture. Not typology and the biblical canonical context. I believe the NT writers teach us how to read scripture and they see Christ and Satan etc. in OT scriptures where Heiser and other OT scholars don’t see it (I think in that respect they are definitely misguided) because they are committed to the critical and historical method (they have to if they want to be taken seriously in their academic field which is of course secular).
I did benefit from reading Heiser and his insights about the council, Sons of God etc. but I wouldn’t recommend adopting his overall method of reading the Bible. There are much better biblical theologians out there (theologians like Alastair Roberts or Peter Leithart and others) who interpret biblical passages based on biblical threads and not just the ANE context, so much more like the NT writers and that leads to a much more christian reading of the text and to a much greater connection between biblical books and an understanding of the great biblical narrative, the opposite of what is being done in many universities today where the Bible tends to get disjointed and not put together again (IMO Heiser operates in that world which is why he gets some things seriously wrong though he is definitely one of the better guys).
Heiser is a flaming arminian. I am shocked Doug approves.
There are elect Arminians, and there are Calvinists who choose Christ.
But he uses the Book of Enoch which has many issues. Heavily.
As a charismatic who reads after and regularly listens to Doug Wilson (and other reformed guys), I loved this video lol
I am releived that Pastor Wilson looked favaoably on Dr. Heiser in general. I would have been sad if he had not. I just recently was referred to Pastor Wilson's podcasts and the first one I listened to had the reference to the "Brave, brave Sir Robin contingent." I instantly had a man crush on Pastor Wilson.
However, I also find Dr. Heiser a fantastic help in creating a framework for bibiocal understanding, so I would have been greatly saddened he had not likewise appreciated Dr. Heiser's work. As for the comment on the Calvinism, I will have to re-read that chapter. But, these sorts of disagreements don't bother me. I personally am working to articulate my belief on this topic, so contrary views on this are actually helpful. My man crush can survive this.
The Bible also teaches that the earth is founded on pillars, doesn’t move, and is enclosed by a tent shaped firmament. Is affirming that spiritual push-ups as well?
All of that is true from our perspective. It doesn't scientifically state those things are the case as brute facts.
@@joshf2218 well played.
Very interesting conversation, particularly in regards to the interdenominational differences.
We are meant to be as one body.
I’ve always understood difference would exist in the church due to varying inflections and emphasises on secondary issues; but the downright judgemental and often hostile exclusivity of some is (I believe) abhorrent to God, divisive within the church universal, off putting in the extreme to non believers and contrary to God’s will and therefore not reflecting either His plan nor His nature.
100% agreed
I have grave reservations about Heiser. He doesn't seem to believe in a global flood and thus thinks there were people who survived it - i.e. we are not all descended from Shem, Ham and Japheth. I'm not sure if he thinks that Adam and Eve were the progenitors of all mankind either. He's said he doesn't care whether God used evolution or special creation for the appearance of man on earth, and he doesn't seem hostile to the ideas of annihilationism and universalism. There are other things he's said that bother me, too, although there are a few things he's brought to light I agree with. Viewing God's Word through the lens of the ANE is troubling for me as well. Shouldn't it be the other way round?
Absolutely relevant and honestly it makes me excited to re-read passages now with a new insights.
No, I'm not a denominationalist and honestly ,both Frank Viola's book, "Pagan Christianity?" And Heiser's "Unseen Realm" I see how distorted the church is with how we view the Bible and seeing who God really is.
As for the 'sons of god,' Heiser's work makes see the relevance of that line. We see it again in the new testament, "behold what manner the love of the Father hath given unto us that we shall be called,'the sons of God.'
We're (the ekklesia) are replacing the former entourage around the throne of God to sit in Judgment.
God's Son wasn't conceived in rape as alleged in Unseen Realm with the nephilim. He was emmuculately conceived. The other 'sons of gods' were the unholy seed and wiped out as Israel conquered the Holy Land. Their descendants were giants and once killed off their spirits couldn't go to heaven again so they were stuck on earth. These spirits were the demons Christ was casting out during his ministry.
They hated his disciples and the church. Why? Because we're their replacements in heaven. Heiser's work makes a lot of sense. Leastwise to me.
(If you understand the covid orchestrators you'll also note they worship the ancient gods in Hollywood and in their own distorted way are trying to usher in the antichrist.
Omicron variant was introduced 666 days after covid. "Omicron" in ancient sumerian translates to, "scorpion men."
Just saying
Occultists, secret societies, black budget departments, Jesuits, Jewish Kabbalah, many elites and world leaders, etc are all worshiping those ancient gods.
Whether it be through rituals/human sacrifice, pharmakia, or even possibly actual scientific methods at the sub-atomic level (CERN) they want the portals open and access to the gods, and the knowledge they can get and use for their purposes.
Including the genetic knowledge/manipulation that was so prevalent in the days of Noah and is on its way back into our world.
The last 150 years or so, the human activity in the supernatural realm has been escalating, and the results are manifesting themselves in our realm.
And they may not all realize they are drawing from the same power source, although many probably do.
And so while the end goal/result may be similar, each are probably trying to come out on the top end of the resulting power structure.
But in the end the consequences are the same, an increase in Satanic/fallen supernatural entities presence, influence, power, and control of our physical world.
Kinda ironic (actually not, it was by design) how the people who have deceived the world into believing in evolution and everything has a natural explanation are the ones who have the most knowledge and belief in the supernatural, albeit evil supernatural power.
But hey if they ever do decide to show their hand in a supernatural display, it will make it that much easier to fool people into believing that they are the true god(s).
Since many don’t believe in God or have a Biblical foundation, when their mind is blown, they’ll just accept that “this must be him.”
@@shannoncrawford7212 You gotta go burn that book of enoch mate its gone to your head.
At first I thought, this dude is watching Star Wars cultish stuff...that's weird....
Then I read the nonsense you wrote, now it make sense. The parallels in comprehension and "thinking" are outstanding...
What's emmuculately? By en Emu, late at nigh? Immaculately.
Did the Nephilim had laser sabers too?
@@shannoncrawford7212 You kinda make sense, in the weirdest most unfahomable way possible. Stop reading Jung please.
@@einarabelc5 cynics, gotta love them. quick to bash slow to think
The obvious bias of saying it's really good and scholarly except the part where he disagrees with me is hilarious
Knowing full well I will receive a lot of fire from the Heiser fan-boys, I would seriously caution anyone reading Heiser. Some of the dangers, in particular, is that he interprets Scripture through the lens of ancient pagan beliefs, as if the ignorant, foolish, mystical beliefs of ancient pagans taint the trust-worthiness of the Scriptures. He rejects the infallibility of Scripture. He rejects penal substitutionary atonement. He is a strong critic of Reformed theology (and by strong, I mean he is strongly against it, but as Doug says he doesn't know what he's talking about and engages in a lot of straw-manning). Heiser may be *interesting* to read, but he is textbook "going beyond what is written". It's a journey that starts with a passage of Scripture and launches into a bunch of wild speculations and myths. It reminds me of 1 Timothy 1:4, which tells us not to "pay attention to myths and endless genealogies, which give rise to mere speculation rather than furthering the administration of God which is by faith."
And perhaps the most alarming of all, which I have seen asserted by his disciples, is the idea that you cannot "truly" understand the Gospel unless you understand his teaching on the "unseen realm".
So I would seriously approach his work with a critical eye. I do wish Doug would have been a bit more measured in his endorsement.
Heiser is like a man who filters living waters of life through 8 tons of rotten dung and is then surprised the water comes out all brown, smelly and poisenous
An important discovery from the scientific realm: Neanderthal (and Denisovan) DNA was 15-16ths human and 1-16th chimpanzee. We should conclude this was the end result of human-ape hybridization in Genesis 6:12.
Another great resource that's maybe a bridge between Heiser and some of the more mainstream guys is Tim Mackie from the Bible Project. His stuff is exceptionally rich.
And his visuals are amazing!
Just know that he has taught against the biblical, orthodox view of hell, as well as Christ’s penal substitutionary atonement.
@@davidrussell631
Are you a Protestant or a Catholic?
@@jesuschristsaves9067 Evangelical Protestant
@@davidrussell631
Then none of your doctrines beside the trinity are orthodox
I do not know of this author or his writings, but I do know that the Lord God created the Heavens and the Earth in the exact manner the Holy Bible said he did because God cannot lie. Furthermore, I know that the earthly powers have lied to us about everything. I look forward to the day when history books will no longer be nothing more than story books. Thank you again, Pastor Wilson, and may the Lord our God bless and keep you!
If I could sum up Heiser in one sentence it would be "did God really say?"
@@UnderTheFloor79 yep. Heiser is like a man who filters living waters of life through 8 tons of rotten dung and is then surprised the water comes out all brown, smelly and poisenous
@@subrje5546Why? He does not deny any of the major tenants of the faith.
I HAVE LEARNED SO NUCH WITH DR HEISER THAT ALMOTH NOONE ELSE WILL EVAN TRY TO EXPLAIN TO PEOPLE , I LOVE HIS WORK IT IS WHAT I HAVE BELIEVED A LONG TIME
I DO NOT LIKE WHEN PEOPLES TRADITION SAY'S THAT WRONG , CATHOLIC IS A BIG PROBLEM AS I WAS ONE
Re: Okay sans Calvinism chapter - I think Doug is missing the broader implications here. Most (all?) Calvinist view God as the only libertarian free being. Thus, a Calvinist overlay would have other (lesser) elohim’s actions forced/determined. While I suppose in theory it is possible to have these concepts function together, it really doesn’t seem to mesh with the divine counsel view that Heiser lays out. Heiser states at the end of Ch 7 “The choices made by human and nonhuman begins described in Genesis 3 were neither coerced nor needed by Yahweh for sake of his greater plan.” Nor would Calvinism fit Heiser’s man in the image of God view expounded on in Unseen Realm.
Heiser is like a man who filters living waters of life through 8 tons of rotten dung and is then surprised the water comes out all brown, smelly and poisenous
I agree I enjoyed Dr. Heiser and took some things with a grain of salt. I grew up in a Presbyterian church and was dismayed I was constantly told supernatural things in the Bible were not to be believed (demons do not exist Jesus and the disciples simply did not understand modern medicine). Personally either Jesus is the Son of God and perfectly understands He is talking to a demon or He does not, in which case His death and Resurrection are moot points. The Resurrection was and is clearly a supernatural event just like the Ascension. I hope that is about to be repeated in the Harpazo. John 13:36 “Lord, where are You going?” Simon Peter asked. Jesus answered, “Where I am going, you cannot follow Me now, but you will follow later.”
Thanks. I’ve enjoyed Michael Heiser’s podcast. 💪🙏🙏
Here's how to do all of the true appointed times.
Children, listen CLOSELY. TRANSLATE FOR YOUR PEOPLE
This link below shows how you do the
appointed times and WHEN.
I watched and logged the moon for two years and here I
show you the EXACT days to do the feasts. Study this
and fix the calendar.
ruclips.net/video/185siLcVToI/видео.html
@@ThePriestofYahuahYahushah Quit spamming this.
It's kinda of a rabbit trail I think, even though it's very interesting and alluring, and has some value but, I'm not sure R C Sproul would be too enamored with it. I've been wrong about many things so...I like it personally.
Heiser is like a man who filters living waters of life through 8 tons of rotten dung and is then surprised the water comes out all brown, smelly and poisenous
Micheal Heiser is very intelligent and I recommend checking his stuff out.
This was such a useful video. I secretly watch and love Michael S. Heiser's videos and, as a five-point-Calvinist myself, I feel kind of guilty for watching Dr. Heiser's stuff (he is obviously not a Calvinist). I remember thinking to myself "oh, there is so much to learn here" every time I saw one of Dr. Heiser's videos. Thank you pastor Wilson.
What? Secretly? Guilty? Trying not to offend your Calvinistic superiors?
Doug reads non calvinists all the time
@@jesuschristsaves9067 Trying to keep the doctrine clear.
@@michelnarvaez2615
And by clear you mean Calvinistic. That’s not keeping scriptural doctrine clear, that’s avoiding theology that disagrees with your presuppositions. Only someone who legitimately seeks truth will cover all corpus of biblical writing without guilt.
@@jesuschristsaves9067 Here's Scripture for you:
Total Depravity: (Genesis 6:5; Jeremiah 17:9; Romans 3:10-18).
Unconditional Election: (Romans 8:29-30;9:11; Ephesians 1:4-6, 11-12; 1 Kings 19:18).
Limited Atonement: (Matthew 1:21; John 10:11; 17:9; Acts 20:28; Romans 8:32; Ephesians 5:25).
Irresistible Grace: (John 6:37, 44; 10:16).
Perseverance of the Saints: (John 10:27-29; Romans 8:29-30; Ephesians 1:3-14).
There is a lot more scripture to support Calvinism, but I don't have the time. Besides, I'm not in the business of arguing with my brothers and sisters in Christ (I assume you are one).
As I have fought to make my faith my own I have always questioned each style of systematic theology as I get around to studying each area of faith. I grew up catholic, mostly listen to protestants and go to an evangelical church and I disagree on many topics with each of them. I have come to my own conclusions which are all biblical and doctrinal but just a little from this tradition and a little from that. My main goal has to never lose sight of the original context in which scripture was being written and that is what I appreciate about Dr. Heiser's work so much. I appreciate the writing of protestants but they read out of latin or english bibles and may not have spoken the original greek or hebrew. Aquinus had the same problem, never learned the original languages and relied on interpretations. I don't want to try and squeeze my theology into a box ready made by others unless that is what the bible is saying is true and I can be convinced of it in discussion and debate. Each branch of christianity seems to get so much right but has also been overly grecanized in my view because of the dominate culture the early church spread in. Dr. Heiser's work helps to alleviate that I feel. I am glad Doug knows of his work as well although I would love to hear more about what points Heiser brought up and how Doug answers them.
Same here. I'm reading the Dead Sea Scrolls, intertestamental literature, and the early church fathers to give the Bible context, not filtered through reformed theology or later Catholic traditions. There are things that are wrong in many denominations.
@@slash4216 100%. I was already thinking and studying this way but when I heard Dr. Heiser say "The was written for you but was not written to you." The lightbulb went off. That is an excellent way to put it. I need to understand the many different frames of refrence of the culture and events surrounding the different literature in scripture to make the best sense of it. The message and the theology tht comes out of it will be more accurate and just as innerrant.
Heiser is like a man who filters living waters of life through 8 tons of rotten dung and is then surprised the water comes out all brown, smelly and poisenous
Heiser is the best answer to the unfortunate "the old testament isn't important, you don't need to read it," Crowd, similar to Doug saying "skip over the Chapter on Calvinism. Doug, bless your heart, you and Dr. Heiser should spend sometime together.
Heiser is like a man who filters living waters of life through 8 tons of rotten dung and is then surprised the water comes out all brown, smelly and poisenous
What book??
I've been pretty wary of Michael Heiser, but maybe I'll give The Unseen Realm a read.
It's amazing. Don't be wary of him. He sticks with scripture alone.
What he says actually goes along with top philosophical arguments for God. It goes back to God being the first cause, but angels and humans possibly aren’t the next cause. God created other lesser Gods and God and the lesser gods creates humanity together. The lesser Gods are also given part dominion over the earth which actually accounts for a stronger moral argument for Christianity.
I'm afraid the Doug hasn't done enough research on this.
While the concepts that Michael Eisner brings up are certainly true the man himself has a clear ulterior motive. He is reintroducing Angel and Demon worship with all the subtlety of the Father of Lies.
Study the subject but beware of the man.
I used to devour his content and I’ve learned a lot but he’s not that great of biblical theologian (like many scholars especially OT scholars) IMO. For him it’s mostly ANE context and 2nd temple context through which he interprets scripture. Not typology and the biblical canonical context. I believe the NT writers teach us how to read scripture and they see Christ and Satan etc. in OT scriptures where Heiser and other OT scholars don’t see it (I think in that respect they are definitely misguided) because they are committed to the critical and historical method (they have to if they want to be taken seriously in their academic field which is of course secular).
I did benefit from reading Heiser and his insights about the council, Sons of God etc. but I wouldn’t recommend adopting his overall method of reading the Bible. There are much better biblical theologians out there (theologians like Alastair Roberts or Peter Leithart and others) who interpret biblical passages based on biblical threads and not just the ANE context, so much more like the NT writers and that leads to a much more christian reading of the text and to a much greater connection between biblical books and an understanding of the great biblical narrative, the opposite of what is being done in many universities today where the Bible tends to get disjointed and not put together again (IMO Heiser operates in that world though he is definitely one of the good guys).
Brian Hale what do you mean by reintroducing Angel and demon worship? Im genuinely interested in how you concluded that after reading his book or books.
1:34 - agreed.
From Heiser’s perspective, he got this “fringe” material from scholarly papers and articles. He’s very educated. There’s a minute or two in here which sounded like his work is not scholarly. I would say the opposite is the case.
Don't miss out on his fictional novels The Facade and The Portent. Biblical scholarship, black site intel ops, and the paranormal don't often cross paths in the fictional world and these books prove its a shame.
Heiser's "divine council" theology is flawed because he twisted or otherwise distorted key passages, such as Psalm 82, Deuteronomy 32:8, 4:19, and others. Psalm 82 is about human judges, not alleged and speculative "divine beings," since we have no Scripture showing "divine beings" engaging in judging human activity as shown in verses 2-4. It's human judges who have been guilty of what verses 2-4 claim.
I recommend reading the book "The Unbiblical Realm: Refuting the Divine Council of Michael Heiser’s Deuteronomy 32 Worldview" by Heath Henning.
Those interested in videos on this topic can check out my series called "The UnBiblical Realm: Refuting Michael Heiser's Divine Council w/Heath Henning.
Heiser used his liberal education and imported the "divine council" idea into his evangelical views, and has duped the evangelical world into accepting liberal theology cloaked in evangelical garb.
Dear Doug
After watching this video a couple of times i got the impression that maybe you don't want to rock the boat to a certain extent.
Dr. Heiser is also on Canon Press
But you are gracious and kind even though I know you take a different position on his view of
Theistic determinism.
TULIP / Calvinism
It's well observed that you are not afraid to take a strong position on others who don't share your view on predestination ?
Why is this ? No one challenges
Dr. David Jeremiah and he is by my estimation a man of God.
But certainly not a Calvinist.
Any thoughts ?
Sincerely Stephen.
Just an observation maybe I'm wrong ?
Is this true? Heiser is on canon press?
His fiction is actually pretty fun to read too.
I got the audio book, I'm not far in, but it's mazing! Frankly, it isn't shaking my world few, only affirming some things I have already began to believe. For example, I came to a conclusion that if other gods existed, then the All Mighty made them. I was thinking about that in the context of atheist criticism. I've seen debates where an atheist will ask the crowd if they believe in Thor. He concludes by saying, "I just believe in one less god than you do." It's a clever thing to say. Presently, I have no issue saying that a god people called Thor existed or exists. However, if he does he was created by the uncreated YHWH.
I recommend the book. Certainly an interesting thing to think about.
Reformed theology is one step away from the country club. I would add that it IS the country club and the country club is where you will meet the powers and principalities.
If angels/demons could procreate with human women and this was a great evil, why does the OT law never mention it as a sin to be avoided or the prophets never condemn women for doing it? Did the flood somehow effect the ability of angels/demons to procreate with humans?
The flood wiped out the seed of those angels and the angels are held in Tartarus per the insight from Peter and Jude (Judas).
No need to warn for what is now prevented from occurring.
And both men tie that sin along with other sexual or unnatural sins being mentioned in their passages on the subject.
@@KMANelPADRINO but their offspring was on the earth even afterwards.
@@arminius504
Actually no. It says the Nephilim were on the earth afterwards. As a category, demons or fallen spiritual beings were on the earth.
The children born to them, the Gibborim or warriors/heroes of old were just that: of old. They don’t live anymore.
In Genesis 6, you'll notice that God lays the blame for the whole debacle at the feet of men. Demonic manifestation - as far as I understand - is solicited. Because of what it says in Jude 6, I think we are witnessing an episode of demonic possession en masse - and all at the behest of wicked men. Does that at least answer in some way your first question?
Two steps from The country club
classic LOL
Currently studying 1 Corinthians using Dr. Randle Smith's videos and chapter 1&2 cover this issue of "I am Calvanist, I am Arminian, I am pre-millenial , I sm dispensentional" etc...Calvin did not die for my sins, nor did Doug, nor did Baptists etc. We as Christians are to stay loyal to the message not the messenger. And it is God who gives growth....so I find it uttterly ridiculous that Christians go by these lables. We belong to God through Christ.
Read the text, if you do not understand, research it with the same vigour we look for money...then pray about it and make up you mind based on your understanding and research. But always always keep an open mind snd be willing to learn.
Knowlege puffs up...but love builds up.
See, it’s the fact his read on Calvinism and debate are soooo bad that I have a hard time trusting his (Michael Heiser) main works..
Just one single problem with Mr Heiser theology, that his opinions for and Old earth creation is painfully bad, using eisegesis instead of exegesis for the creation account.
Heiser is like a man who filters living waters of life through 8 tons of rotten dung and is then surprised the water comes out all brown, smelly and poisenous
I have to agree with Heiser about calvanism, it's not logically coherent and the calvanist spend more time defending it than Christianity
You can scratch the same itch by reading Meredith Kline.
...📖💪🏼a push back to post-enlightenment Modernist (Fundamentalist) assumptions..."spiritual push-ups"(4:20)
Boom
Michael heiser is great.
Cessationism seems to be an enlightenment category. Now I'm curious to know if the book addresses any of that.
The arrogance of how Heiser was dismissed was painful to hear.
The Chapter on Calvinism is great.
Why listen to a creature that says it’s angels God is talking to when He says “let us make man in our image.” ?
Heiser is like a man who filters living waters of life through 8 tons of rotten dung and is then surprised the water comes out all brown, smelly and poisenous
Heiser missed the mark on Calvinism but I agree, it's really helpful. I think he's right about most of his interpretations it flows and coheres very well.
Here's how to do all of the true appointed times.
Children, listen CLOSELY. TRANSLATE FOR YOUR PEOPLE
This link below shows how you do the
appointed times and more importantly, WHEN.
I watched and logged the moon for two years and here I
show you the EXACT days to do the feasts. Study this
and fix the calendar.
ruclips.net/video/185siLcVToI/видео.html
For those unaware, Michael Heiser in this book spends a few chapters, 8 and 9 I believe, proving methodically and precisely how Calvinism is absolutely wrong, heretical, and unbiblical. One of the great proof texts he uses is 1 Samuel 23:10-13. It's where David asks the Lord about what Saul and the men of a city will do if he and his men stick around. The Lord tells him precisely what Saul and the men of the city will do, at which point David makes the decision to leave the area, which causes those things the Lord told him about to NOT OCCUR. It's one of the great evidences against the heresy of Calvinism in God's word. So for those of you that wish to see the truth about Calvinism being a trash lie, this book is fantastic.
But, Doug Wilson is on record saying that Michael Heiser is wrong about Calvinism and the subject doesn't belong in Heiser's book "Unseen Realm". I trust Douglas Wilson on Calvinism. Brilliant man, brilliant mind.
One thing that I took away from heiser's work is a cosmological view of the struggle that I have been born into that was engaged before my time and is going to carry on through the future. The thing that I find uplifting challenging I don't know if I'm using the right word it gives me purpose to know that God has arranged things and has chosen me to fit into his plan and it's not just sitting on a cloud playing the harp. He has councils and he listens to his creatures and wants us to participate in his creation. I find that invigorating.
People who attack Calvinism have an odd tendency not to know what it is. See: Chesterton.
That’s what Calvinists say when ever someone offers a legitimate critique of Calvinism. The teaching is just not in scripture.
@@jesuschristsaves9067 That's a proposition, not an argument.
Also, the book of Romans is pretty straightforward.
@@robertlewis6915
Yes it is;
_“And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert grafted in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree; Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. Thou wilt say then, _*_The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in._*_ Well; _*_because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith._*_ Be not highminded, but fear: For _*_if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee._*_ Behold therefore the goodness and _*_severity of God: on them which fell,_*_ severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: _*_otherwise thou also shalt be cut off._*_ And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: _*_for God is able to graft them in again._*_ For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree? For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.”_
Romans 11:17-25 KJV
Oh! You wanted Roman’s 9? I was under the assumption that chapter and verses didn’t exist when Paul wrote this letter.
You’re most certainly correct. Everything in the above passage demonstrates the opposite of what Calvinists teach specifically in regards to salvation and man’s ability to respond to god’s grace on his own volition.
@@jesuschristsaves9067 Except that passage isn't talking about personal salvation? It's talking about the gentiles being grafted into Israel's tree and Israel's apostates being cut off from it.
" So I ask, did they stumble in order that they might fall? By no means! Rather, through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel jealous. 12 Now if their trespass means riches for the world, and if their failure means riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their full inclusion mean!" Romans 11:11-12
He's clearly NOT addressing personal salvation; instead he's addressing the favored status of Israel and how it was lost, or rather opened to the whole world.
(Are you arguing against predestination, the doctrine of the elect, or the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints? I'm unclear.)
What about Romans 3?
9 What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin, 10 as it is written:
“None is righteous, no, not one;
11 no one understands;
no one seeks for God.
12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
no one does good,
not even one.”
^How can man be a participant in his own salvation?
(Doctrine of the Elect and the Radical Depravity of Man)
what about Romans 8?
What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? 32 He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things? 33 Who shall bring any charge against God's elect? It is God who justifies. 34 Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died-more than that, who was raised-who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us. 35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword? 36 As it is written,
“For your sake we are being killed all the day long;
we are regarded as sheep to be slaughtered.”
37 No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. 38 For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.
^What can pry man free from God's grasp? His own actions? I'm pretty sure that 'anything else in all creation' covers that.
(Doctrine of the Perseverance of the Saints)
Does not 'elect' imply that God chose us and not we ourselves? (predestination)
As a side note, if God created the world, how can it be anything but predestined? He set up the start condition; even if He were somehow conformed to the Deistic model, that would effectively predestine all that happened, barring something not under His sovereignty intruding. And if you're arguing that ANYTHING is not under God's sovereignty, we've got bigger fish to fry here.
i have been taught that historically human language has always been in a flux , ever changing . some stuff with heiser or john wilson maybe so,maybe not .both could use a good dose of occam's razor. what has not changed since the genesis fall is the seed its planting,water sun and ground . agrarian is the universal language and family the meaning and purpose for staying alive. bee gees recused.
I actually don’t like Heiser. I really wanted to, but whenever I read him, he seems to be very influenced by secular scholarship which reads pagan beliefs into the Bible and fails to see the Bible, and the Israelite culture, as having its own distinctive view on the subject. Heiser seems to get that on a certain level but still seems to publish sloppy takes which include way too much secular thought.
The Bible provides a spiritual worldview. If you are living in the east like I do, you'll need the biblical spiritual worldview to confront the eastern spiritualism. Heiser's work is very important in this context. For some from the west it may seem irrelevant, that's because they do not have the eastern context
@@princens350 I don’t think it’s irrelevant. That’s why I was enthusiastic to get into Heiser’s work. I just think he does a poor job at it in what I’ve encountered with him. He also dismisses church history while elevating secular takes on pagan culture. His methodology is just poor.
I agree completely that he reads the Bible through a pagan culture lens. He also interprets the Bible through a theological lens that is not Orthodox Christian. He interprets certain passages by discounting options because they infer that God infringes upon man or angels free wills in some way. He believes in freewill (God can't obstruct or impede any choice we make) throughout our life. Even Arminians don't take freewill to this extreme. They believe in a freewill choice for salvation but believe in the Sovereignty of God over our choices throughout life like Calvinists do. Heiser is like the open theist in this belief. He differs from open theism in that he believes somehow in the end God will bring about his will but without impeding freewill without explaining how. This is very close to open theism with "sovereignty backloaded" to just the end of time to fulfill prophecy in Scripture. Heiser also does not believe in Original sin or predestination. By those definitions, he could be defined a pelagian heretic. Why would Doug Wilson endorse him?
Heiser is like a man who filters living waters of life through 8 tons of rotten dung and is then surprised the water comes out all brown, smelly and poisenous
I'm a studying reformed theology,I find it appealing but I'm also interested in the ENTIRE Bible (meaning the unseen realm and everything in between). I hope to be both "intellectual" and weird maybe we could make the bible both intellectually appealing and "fun" to unbelievers and lukewarm Christians etc
Thanks Douglas :)
Here's how to do all of the true appointed times.
Children, listen CLOSELY. TRANSLATE FOR YOUR PEOPLE
This link below shows how you do the
appointed times and WHEN.
I watched and logged the moon for two years and here I
show you the EXACT days to do the feasts. Study this
and fix the calendar.
ruclips.net/video/185siLcVToI/видео.html
I have respected Dr. Heiser and his work. And yet, even he falls into that camp that just can't help but caricature Calvinism. Why do so many otherwise learned men do this?
Because we have been taught our entire lives that we have to earn/achieve what we want to happen. We have to put in the effort, that it is about what WE have to do. Also, I think that growing up in Western society, we are naturally all about our freedoms and opposition to kings/rulers/dictators. To suddenly be told that you have been wrong your entire life by the Word of God is a pretty jarring experience for everyone, some to a greater extent than others. Many just have a really hard time letting that mindset go and accepting that it isn't about us.
because its easy
@@douglasmcnay644 As someone who is both "Calvinist" (I hate that term but it gets the point across) and a lover of liberty as a gift from God to every image bearer, I disagree with your assessment of why Westerners caricature and dismiss a Calvinist reading of Scripture. People love rulers, they love kings, they love abdicating responsibility. Just look around you at the events of the last few years for proof of this. In fact, the American Revolution was spearheaded by Presbyterian ministers - so much so, that in England at the time the war was known as the "Presbyterian Revolt". It isn't a disregard for rulers in general that drives the post-Enlightenment West away from Calvinism; it is a disregard for God in particular as ruler, as decision maker, as king, that I see as the driving force behind it.
For every argument against Calvinism, there is a Calvinist who says, "the arguer just doesn't understand Calvinism." This is why the Christians in the other sandboxes don't like you.
@@MissingTrails Wow! "For every argument" and "...don't like you." how utterly un-Christian. Is there any Christian charity in your heart or simply hate for Calvinists. You say you have arguments. Speak them. Don't hide behind generalities and ad hominem arguments. Unless, of course, all you have in your quiver is hate. If so, as Paul said,
"Test yourself to see if you are in the faith; examine yourselves! Or do you not recognize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you-unless indeed you fail the test?"
And elsewhere said,
"Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only such a word as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, that it may give grace to those who hear. And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. And be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you."
May God grant that this be so for you.
Why’s everyone gotta comment an essay?
I have concerns about some of the doctrines that Dr. Michael Heiser teaches after watching many
videos of Heiser teaching about the so called “Council of the gods”. I looked at the passages he uses to
support his theory and considered his interpretations. Unfortunately, Heiser seems to consistently use
poor arguments and bad biblical interpretations to support his theories while ignoring and dismissing
passages that clearly contradict his view. The possible implications of introducing a council of gods
and claiming that Jesus was a member of this council are dangerous in my opinion.
I believe Heiser misinterprets Psalm 82 and Deuteronomy 32:8. I will try to show what I believe is a
more likely interpretation of both those passages and why Heiser is wrong.
God takes His stand in His own congregation;
He judges in the midst of the rulers.
How long will you judge unjustly
And show partiality to the wicked? Selah.
Vindicate the weak and fatherless;
Do justice to the afflicted and destitute.
Rescue the weak and needy;
Deliver them out of the hand of the wicked.
They do not know nor do they understand;
They walk about in darkness;
All the foundations of the earth are shaken.
I said, “You are gods,
And all of you are sons of the Most High.
“Nevertheless you will die like men
And fall like any one of the princes.”
Arise, O God, judge the earth!
For it is You who possesses all the nations.
- Psalm 82:1-8
First, regarding Psalm 82, Heiser claims that the “elohim” in this chapter are not earthly judges but
rather divine beings created by God to be the gods of the nations.
The problem with this claim is that two times in Exodus, Moses is called elohim. The first time Moses
is said to be as God. The second time, he is simply called God. The translators added the word “as” in
italics to help the reader understand the context but that word was not in the original for Exodus 7:1
You are to speak to him and put the words in his mouth; and I,
even I, will be with your mouth and his mouth, and I will teach you
what you are to do. Moreover, he shall speak for you to the
people; and he will be as a mouth for you and you will be as God
to him.
- Exodus 4:15-16
Then the Lord said to Moses, “See, I make you as God to
Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron shall be your prophet.
- Exodus 7:1
Notice that God gave words to Moses to speak and also called him God (elohim). I don't take this to
mean that Moses was actually God or a god but rather that Moses was representing God.
In Exodus 22:8-9, the Hebrews are instructed to bring disputes the the elohim and that the elohim
render a judgment. Based on the fact that Moses was called elohim in his capacity of representing God
and the context of this passage, the rendering of judges for elohim appears to be correct.
If the thief is not caught, then the owner of the house shall appear
before the judges, to determine whether he laid his hands on his
neighbor’s property. For every breach of trust, whether it is for ox,
for donkey, for sheep, for clothing, or for any lost thing about which
one says, ‘This is it,’ the case of both parties shall come before the
judges; he whom the judges condemn shall pay double to his
neighbor.
- Exodus 22:8-9
When Jesus quotes Psalm 82 in John 10:34, he argues that since scripture referred to those to whom the
word of God came (Moses and the judges) as elohim, they should not charge him with blasphemy for
calling himself the son of Elohim when he is doing the miracles expected of the messiah. Basically,
Jesus's point is that even if he was just a man, since he was clearly sent by God as demonstrated by the
miracles he was performing, calling himself the son of God is not blasphemy since the law referred to
Moses and the judges as elohim. Jesus's argument only makes sense if Psalm 82 is in fact referring to
human judges.
Jesus answered them, “I showed you many good works from the
Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?” The Jews
answered Him, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for
blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to
be God.” Jesus answered them, “Has it not been written in your
Law, ‘I said, you are gods’? If he called them gods, to whom the
word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), do you
say of Him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world,
‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’? If I
do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me; but if I do
them, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, so that
you may know and understand that the Father is in Me, and I in
the Father.”
- John 10:32-38
Heiser also makes the claim that the wording about the congregation of Psalm 82:1 can only refer to an
assembly in the heavens however we see similar wording in Psalm 74 regarding the children of Israel.
Remember Your congregation, which You have purchased of old,
Which You have redeemed to be the tribe of Your inheritance;
And this Mount Zion, where You have dwelt.
- Psalm 74:2
Heiser argues that the judgment for the unjust elohim in Psalm 82 being death only makes sense if they
are divine beings. This really doesn't work because in many different Psalms, a judgment of death
often refers to damnation, not just physical death. To condemn a human judge with death makes
perfect sense because it is almost certainly referring to the final judgment. Its my understanding that
Heiser's own interpretation of the word “death” here is referring to the final judgment when God will
cast the gods into hell, so its kind of weird that he thinks that sort of thread makes no sense if it was
applied to human judges.
The second passage that Heiser uses to support the council of the gods doctrine is Deuteronomy 32:8
“When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance,
When He separated the sons of man,
He set the boundaries of the peoples
According to the number of the sons of Israel.
- Deuteronomy 32:8
Apparently there is a variant reading of this text that uses the term “sons of God” instead of “sons of
Israel”. Heiser makes a big deal about this and claims that this is teaching that God divorced the
nations and appointed gods to rule over them. All the gods eventually rebelled and led the nations into
idolatry.
The problem with all of this is that none of it is found in scripture and even if the correct reading of
Deuteronomy 32:8 is “sons of God” the context of the passage shows that the meaning would still be
the sons of Israel. For either variant reading, the meaning is the same. We know this because Moses
referred to the Israelites as sons and daughters of God again withing the same passage.
“The Lord saw this, and spurned them
Because of the provocation of His sons and daughters.
“Then He said, ‘I will hide My face from them,
I will see what their end shall be;
For they are a perverse generation,
Sons in whom is no faithfulness.
- Deuteronomy 32:19-20
It is clear that Moses was referring to the sons of Israel based on the whole context of Deuteronomy 32.
Heiser raises the objection that Deuteronomy 32:8 could not possibly be referring the the sons of Israel
because when the Lord divided the nations at Bable, Israel was not a nation. This objection only works
if God didn't know the future and didn't have a plan for Israel to one day posses that land. Since God
does know the future, this objection is nonsense.
Another issue I have with Michael Heiser is his methodology for interpreting scripture. He often says
that scripture must be interpreted in context and that we must enter the mindset of the Ancient Israelites
to understand the old testament and enter into the mindset of second temple Judism to understand the
New Testament. He then often pivots to saying they were part of the broader culture and so we must
use that broader cultural lens. This often includes things like the Epic of Gilgamesh and the Book of
Enoch. A scholar by the name of Amar Annus published work on Mesopotamian myths and Heiser
teaches that in order to understand the book of Genesis you have to understand Annus's book about
these pagan mythologies. Here is a quote from Heiser:
“Annus did his work in 2010, this is why I tell pastors if your
commentary of Genesis is published before 2010 and doesn't interact
with Annus, it is by definition obsolete. You are by definition
interpreting the passage out of context, not in context.” - Michael Heiser
I think this is a dangerous and foolish way to interpret scripture. God constantly warned the Israelites
not to copy the pagans and not mix their religions. Also, the majority of the new testament era Jews
rejected Christ so I can't see how getting into their mindset will help us understand what they didn't
understand or believe. Jesus said if they had believed Moses they would have believe him. In fact, we
are not to pay attention to Jewish myths and commands of those who turn away from the truth.
In conclusion, the council of gods doctrine that Heiser teaches is not found in scripture and the
passages that Heiser references do not mean what he claims. I don't think we should use extra biblical
writings to generate new doctrines not found in scripture.
@@UnderTheFloor79 thanks man. Heiser is like a man who filters living waters of life through 8 tons of rotten dung and is then surprised the water comes out all brown, smelly and poisenous
heiser gets his stuff from ancient jewish paganism. he uses the apocryphal books as canon if they fit his "unseen realm" wackiness
He is also a weasel in how he talks about various topics. Like when he is pushing a narrative that isn't popular he pretends it's not his view but that he is just presenting various views.
@@UnderTheFloor79 his popularity is very important to him
Does he use them as Canon or context? My reading has led me to the latter conclusion.
Heiser is like a man who filters living waters of life through 8 tons of rotten dung and is then surprised the water comes out all brown, smelly and poisenous
Bible math is confusing to most. When a day is like a thousand years and a thousand years a day does time even have a simple understanding? To put oneself in Job's position and lament to the Creator is different than speaking falsehoods about him. Liberty is not something to condemn but to embrace.
Of course you object to the chapter on Calvanism! Eisner actually said most Christians have trouble accepting his concepts, but Pentecostals do. I'm actually pleasantly surprised that Doug supports this book.