tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post5462192658149590372..comments2024-03-28T00:08:14.247-07:00Comments on Foster's Theological Reflections: Ta Panta-What It Denotes at TimesEdgar Fosterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comBlogger35125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-78519344467392315102016-04-22T13:23:54.337-07:002016-04-22T13:23:54.337-07:00I have found this a worthwhile read especially whe...I have found this a worthwhile read especially when comparing term for rulership and the relasionship to respective deities.<br /><br />https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/The_History_of_Government_from_the_Earli.html?id=GmTuAAAAMAAJ&redir_esc=yDuncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14509064648619505383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-23471580011087762062016-04-22T13:19:44.790-07:002016-04-22T13:19:44.790-07:00Well we can agree on this since many near eastern ...Well we can agree on this since many near eastern nations used the term sons of God for tribal rulers like it is used for Solomon so even if it is the original wording as much new scholarship on the subject when comparing lxx & DSS seems to assert, it still does not have to imply anything angelic.Duncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14509064648619505383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-55824715950795064852016-04-22T13:02:20.300-07:002016-04-22T13:02:20.300-07:00I don't want to misconstrue what you wrote, bu...I don't want to misconstrue what you wrote, but I was attempting to explain why NET rendered Deut 32:8 a certain way, and it just appeared that a view was then imputed which I most certainly do not hold. At best, you might infer that NET is basically saying Jehovah appointed demons over various geopolitical regions; however, my views (implicit or otherwise) were never part of the dialogue on this particular matter.<br /><br />NET says their idea is defended in Heiser's article. I'm familiar with his work, but I disagree with many of his assertions. But I'm personally not arguing for any special reading of Deut 32:8 at this point. It's possible that holy angels are being discussed there, but I wouldn't be dogmatic about the issue.<br /><br />Edgar Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-50939399085012716082016-04-22T12:39:04.597-07:002016-04-22T12:39:04.597-07:00I am not attempting to point out beleifs but only ...I am not attempting to point out beleifs but only the collection of evidence you have put forward and what conclusion it points too.<br /><br /> If NET is trying to communicate the idea that God assigned the angels over various dominions then this has to be reconciled with Matthew 4:8,9. Also our previous discussion about Michael and the princes of Greece and Persia.<br /><br />Gal 1:17 may be viewed the way you have stated.Duncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14509064648619505383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-36041184442749097382016-04-22T12:08:17.942-07:002016-04-22T12:08:17.942-07:00I'm surprised that you would think I believe J...I'm surprised that you would think I believe Jehovah assigned demons to be world rulers. That was not my point. I was addressing your quote from the NET Bible, and trying to explain why that translation is not saying that humans bear some heavenly/celestial aspect. Rather, NET is trying to communicate the idea that God assigned the angels over various dominions. My comments pertained to NET reasons for translation, not my personal beliefs.<br /><br />Regard Gal 1:16-17. 1:17 can be viewed as a claimax of 1:16. In other words, he did not consult with any frail human, not even with those men in Jerusalem. Compare Gal 1:1.<br /><br />He's emphasizing that he did not even gain confirmation from divinely appointed men or "flesh and blood."Edgar Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-43989754661579096502016-04-22T06:19:41.613-07:002016-04-22T06:19:41.613-07:00Reading between the lines of your argument. You ar...Reading between the lines of your argument. You are basically saying that Jehovah assigned demons to rule over each nation (civis). I know heisers work. I was already considdering sending you a link of his but in reality his arguments are all to support the idea of a trinity extant in the OT.<br /><br />Galatians 1:16 is followed by 17. Flesh and blood NOR going to the other apostles in Jerusalem ? Are they flesh and blood - why differentiate?Duncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14509064648619505383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-75887075172663721872016-04-21T20:54:55.117-07:002016-04-21T20:54:55.117-07:00According to BAGD [now BDAG], the expression SARX ...According to BAGD [now BDAG], the expression SARX KAI hAIMA denotes: "a man of flesh and blood . . . a human being in contrast to God and other supernatural beings Mt. 16:17; Gal. 1:16; Eph. 6:12 . . . because they are the opposites of the divine nature SARX KAI HAIMA BASILEIAN THEOU KLERONOMESAI OU DUNATAI 1 Cor. 15:50" (JoachJeremias, NTS 2, '56, 151-159 [See BAGD, p. 743]).Edgar Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-89118303414484141382016-04-21T20:51:52.672-07:002016-04-21T20:51:52.672-07:00The context of Eph 6:11-12 strongly indicates that...The context of Eph 6:11-12 strongly indicates that the rulers involved in the combat are spirits--not humans. Besides saying we do not wrestle with flesh and blood, vs. 11 also mentions the wiles or machinations of the Devil. So a contrast is made between humanity and Satan/his demons. Arming oneself with the panoply of God only makes sense if wicked spiritual forces are being discussed. See Gal 1:16.Edgar Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-70995706896090900662016-04-21T20:45:21.683-07:002016-04-21T20:45:21.683-07:00Duncan, for Deut 32:8 (NET), read the footnote tha...Duncan, for Deut 32:8 (NET), read the footnote that explains why NET renders the verse that way. Part of one note states:<br /><br />The phrase is also attested in Ugaritic, where it refers to the high god El's divine assembly. According to the latter view, which is reflected in the translation, the Lord delegated jurisdiction over the nations to his angelic host (cf. Dan. 10:13-21), while reserving for himself Israel, over whom he rules directly. For a defense of the view taken here, see M. S. Heiser, “Deuteronomy 32:8 and the Sons of God,” BSac 158 (2001): 52-74.<br /><br />The translation apparently is not teaching that human rulers possess some celestial aspect.Edgar Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-10776671790849379212016-04-21T10:49:23.975-07:002016-04-21T10:49:23.975-07:00https://books.google.ca/books?id=KphVAgAAQBAJ&...https://books.google.ca/books?id=KphVAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA128&lpg=PA128&dq=ktisis+governing+founding&source=bl&ots=hxP2JG8naY&sig=j6Qr6MoNvaYtZVEc7Sqdvf518C8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi1-7_BjaDMAhUOw2MKHZdMDP0Q6AEILTAB#v=onepage&q=ktisis%20governing%20founding&f=false<br /><br />Interesting that there is some level of relationship with satrap.<br /><br />https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/47-flesh-and-blood-did-not-reveal-it<br /><br />Even if "flesh and blood" indicates humanity. What it is contrasted with is just as important.Duncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14509064648619505383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-56667635593304872892016-04-21T08:34:52.809-07:002016-04-21T08:34:52.809-07:00Dare I ask for proof that all governments were col...Dare I ask for proof that all governments were colored by a heavenly element in hebraic thinking? I'm wondering what that means.Edgar Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-24382532878938044062016-04-21T08:27:34.305-07:002016-04-21T08:27:34.305-07:00I cited Corinthians to show how the flesh and bloo...I cited Corinthians to show how the flesh and blood language could be used as synecdoche to signify humanity. It's also used in Matthew 16, where Jesus tells Peter that flesh and blood did not reveal the Son of Man to him (past). In both cases, flesh and blood seem to mean the same thing. <br /><br />My comments had nothing to do with proving that the new creation is a hierarchy of angels. The point is that flesh and blood represents the human sphere in Ephesians 6 and elsewhere.<br /><br />For the new creation, see 2 Corinthians 5:17.Edgar Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-22558643354015563572016-04-21T06:09:08.811-07:002016-04-21T06:09:08.811-07:001 Corinthians 15:50 is framed in the future not pa...1 Corinthians 15:50 is framed in the future not past as "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom" - the Christ - the NEW creation. 1 Corinthians 12:26,27. This is not flesh and blood this is the action (spirit) of a collective. If you move this to a heavenly perspective they are still not a hierarchy of angels.Duncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14509064648619505383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-31562990348274322502016-04-21T05:35:17.448-07:002016-04-21T05:35:17.448-07:00In response to one of your links, I never said tha...In response to one of your links, I never said that ktisis can't be used for earthly/human political structures. However, I don't think it's limited to that application as other texts illustrate.Edgar Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-48182181974406570672016-04-21T05:32:43.040-07:002016-04-21T05:32:43.040-07:00Even if we read Eph 6:11-12 as you suggest, he sti...Even if we read Eph 6:11-12 as you suggest, he still writes that the struggle is not against flesh and blood. Flesh and blood is synecdoche for "humanity." See 1 Cor 15:50. The wicked spiritual forces mentioned in Ephesians are not human (not flesh and blood). 1 John 5:19 actually backs the idea for spiritual rules of this age. The "wicked one" is Satan. As for the evidence, please see the commentary I posted, like the one from Dunn.<br /><br />Edgar Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-26097845662339349892016-04-21T04:17:50.153-07:002016-04-21T04:17:50.153-07:00I do not think that there is any getting away from...I do not think that there is any getting away from the tradition and understanding of angels in relation to earthly structures of government:-<br /><br />Deut 32:8 - NET Bible<br />When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance, when he divided up humankind, he set the boundaries of the peoples, according to the number of the heavenly assembly.<br /><br />So individuals may well be seen as flesh and blood (although this is a term that relates to sacrifices) but ALL governments were colored by a heavenly element in Hebraic thinking.Duncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14509064648619505383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-63918419811248639792016-04-21T03:26:13.371-07:002016-04-21T03:26:13.371-07:00https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=c9cAb3WhVpgC&a...https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=c9cAb3WhVpgC&pg=PA71&lpg=PA71&dq=ktisis+authority+structure&source=bl&ots=TmrClAFPhw&sig=uvmWGI0QCQiEpRm4YsqMzVi3rvg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiQkNCtwZ_MAhULKMAKHeHMA8oQ6AEIOTAG#v=onepage&q=ktisis%20authority%20structure&f=falseDuncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14509064648619505383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-38753006976206582772016-04-21T03:23:42.304-07:002016-04-21T03:23:42.304-07:00https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=LjzBLCdAGbMC&a...https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=LjzBLCdAGbMC&pg=PA119&lpg=PA119&dq=ktisis+authority+structure&source=bl&ots=Z7KZI9t6Ly&sig=AJvq_SlIg7MrvTMNqEI252ALq_8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiQkNCtwZ_MAhULKMAKHeHMA8oQ6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q=ktisis%20authority%20structure&f=falseDuncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14509064648619505383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-71320118298123174032016-04-21T03:23:28.345-07:002016-04-21T03:23:28.345-07:00As for Ephesians 6:11-12 - while it does indicate ...As for Ephesians 6:11-12 - while it does indicate the devils hand at work in the situation it does say προς τους κοσμοκρατορας του σκοτους του αιωνος τουτου and this can be read as the world rulers of the >>darkness<< *of this age*.<br /><br />You already know about the DSS war scroll - a spiritual warfare against an physical empire (including dark & light) - kittim (Rome). <br /><br />This is all about governmental systems (1 john 5:19).<br /><br />As for heavenly structures - what ancient Hebrew evidence's can support this?Duncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14509064648619505383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-35792391284245954102016-04-20T22:30:22.541-07:002016-04-20T22:30:22.541-07:00James Dunn's commentary on Colossians: https:/...James Dunn's commentary on Colossians: https://books.google.com/books?id=liqNBAAAQBAJ&pg=PR4&dq=james+dunn+colossians+commentary&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwja68m6_57MAhVMLSYKHZogCfUQ6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q=james%20dunn%20colossians%20commentary&f=false<br /><br />See his remarks and references for Col 1:16.Edgar Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-72459036421883776112016-04-20T22:03:58.324-07:002016-04-20T22:03:58.324-07:00Here are some links that might be useful:
https:/...Here are some links that might be useful:<br /><br />https://books.google.com/books?id=1YoUBBVGBGEC&pg=PA176&dq=thrones+and+lordships+angels+colossians+1:16&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi3ubij-J7MAhWD7SYKHSRcCEUQ6AEIITAB#v=onepage&q=thrones%20and%20lordships%20angels%20colossians%201%3A16&f=false<br /><br />https://core.ac.uk/download/files/95/9045092.pdfEdgar Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-47822851076350567412016-04-20T21:43:45.966-07:002016-04-20T21:43:45.966-07:00Duncan,
What about Eph 6:11-12? Don't we hav...Duncan, <br /><br />What about Eph 6:11-12? Don't we have an example of governmental language applied to heavenly structures there? Col. 1:15-16 also explictly applies the language about governments, thrones, etc, not just to things on earth, but to things in the heavens. I don't know how you understand those verses, which seem to indicate something about heavenly structures. <br /><br />My original post had nothing to do with Christ as the beginning or the firstborn of all creation. I was only discussing ta panta and that's all. But it seems that the use of firstborn in 1:15 is not synonymous with the occurrence of the same term in 1:18. While I believe the verses are related, and that it's possible to read 1:15 in the light of the new creation, other features of the text remind one of Gen 1:26-27. I also don't see how we can leap over 1:16-17 when trying to understand 1:15.Edgar Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-62160295091236670332016-04-20T16:22:52.786-07:002016-04-20T16:22:52.786-07:00Where are the ancient examples of such structures ...Where are the ancient examples of such structures in heavwn? Where you are using this to project backward it can just as easily project forward in time "who is the beginning, the first born from the dead that he should be in all things preminent."Duncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14509064648619505383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-47305694203123608382016-04-20T07:49:07.227-07:002016-04-20T07:49:07.227-07:00Revelation 5:13 is not necessarily a parallel, but...Revelation 5:13 is not necessarily a parallel, but it illustrates how a first century Christian writer might have communicated the idea of cosmos. Similarly, Colossians could be conveying the same concept with different words. Ephesians 6:12 is not parallel with Galatians 5 & 6, right? If so, how?<br /><br />I'm not sure what you mean by ten words<br /><br />Edgar Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00280475259670777653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13958708.post-40078419773880394052016-04-20T07:13:14.421-07:002016-04-20T07:13:14.421-07:00At Revelation 5:13 the "cosmos" of "...At Revelation 5:13 the "cosmos" of "creatures" is defined (comprehensively) with some similarity, but by no means parallel.<br /><br /><br />Ephesians 6:2 - compare Galatians 5:16ff, 6:16. - doesn't all of this boil down to being guided by ten of the words?Duncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14509064648619505383noreply@blogger.com