Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected
Библията Тв | PentecostalTheology.com
A Speculative angelic order chart Most High God (first Jehovah) vs Christ (second Jehovah)
Can anyone explain this? Rick Wadholm Jr
Charles Page [12/03/2015 10:01 PM]
does this imply subordinate role for Jesus and the women in the church?
Is Jesus subordinate to the Father (1st Jehovah) and women are subordinate to the men?
Charles Page [12/03/2015 10:04 PM]
Jesus is ‘a’ God and the Father is ‘the’ God. We are ‘gods’ (little gods – heard that on TV last evening) We are made in God’s image.
John Conger [12/03/2015 10:09 PM]
For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. 28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.What are your thoughts on this?
Charles Page [12/03/2015 10:23 PM]
it doesn’t mean a subordination of roles/function/person
Jesus wasn’t an emissary. He did not act as one subordinate to His Father He acted as one equal to the Father.
dynamic monarchianism has Jesus a representative of God “a God” (Gabriel, archangel) he is subordinate to the Father. The Jewish leaders would be accepting of this from Jesus but he insisted on equality with the Father and this was blasphemy according to them.
Any subordination of the son to the Father is a compromise of God. Subordination is acceptable in most Christian theologies (many will say why argue about trivial theology)
However the fundamental faith rest on this trinitarian concept. There are separate functions but the same God. Three persons one God.
Charles Page [12/03/2015 10:26 PM]
isn’t this chart Seventh Day Adventist?
Charles Page [12/03/2015 10:27 PM]
it could as well be JW
Charles Page [12/03/2015 10:28 PM]
it is a modern popular Evangelical view of God
John Kissinger [12/04/2015 1:51 PM]
Man shall not do theology by Google alone 🙂
John Kissinger [12/05/2015 11:19 AM]
Call for Papers: Divine Sonship in Jewish and Christian Antiquity http://ntvmr.uni-muenster.de/web/apokalypse-edition/open?p_p_id=33&p_p_lifecycle=0&p_p_state=normal&p_p_mode=view&_33_struts_action=%2Fblogs%2Fview&_33_urlTitle=call-for-papers-divine-sonship-in-jewish-and-christian-antiquity
Varnel Watson
got to be careful with those Isara Mo
Isara Mo
Troy Day
Never seen an angel in my life.
Come to think of it neither have I seen a principality or authority or rulers of this dark world..
The one person I see often is Jezebel..
Isara Mo
Eyes like glowing coals in their sockets..and very very long claws in left hand.. and a bounty of hair
Mike Partyka
Can we assume then there is a hierarchy of demons as well ?
Varnel Watson
is this from Heiser and his pagan heresies?
Mike Partyka
Troy Day no I’m asking if the Bible shows cherubim, archangels, and seraphim could there be a distinction in fallen angels order.
Varnel Watson
Mike Partyka this is does – but are they in order Heiser introduced the 2nd YHWH + 72 sons of God
Mike Partyka
Troy Day just bad translations of Deuteronomy
Isara Mo
I don’t know where people get this kind of stuff..
The Bible doesn’t give explicit angelic order..but we can add the coordinates…..and make up. the angelic order..
There is sth one can gather from the book of revelation regarding the angelic order.. but it is skimpy.
24 Elders
The 4 living beings
Cherubims
Seraphim.
These words are in the Bible..
I know angels minister..but as to rank and position… I am ignorant completely
Varnel Watson
is it somewhat heretical or what?
Isara Mo
Troy Day
Difficult to say.
In the OT visible angelic visitation seemed common but for one incident where God sent an angel to loose Peter from prison we don’t see angelic visitation. In the NT.
From this visitations we interpret them as angels of good news or war.. possibly angels of healing(?) but we don’t see straightforward narrations
Isara Mo
Troy Day
As I say it is difficult to say.
John was in the spirit and penned what he saw. It was one incident and possibly there were angelic ranks but God wanted us to get the central message of the testimony of events to come not the rank and file of His army.
In Hebrews 21 there is mention of a joyful assembly of thousand and ten thousand of angels..
No mention of their titles or epaulets.
Some fortunate people claim to see angels so it is very possible from these witnesses we get the info on the angelic ranks..
Joe Absher
Isara Mo
https://youtu.be/7MlHxe9wh24
Joe Absher
No naked women . thank you .
Varnel Watson
she is no angel
Isara Mo
Joe Absher
Silhouette of naked woman yes..
Outilne of bust and bulk long hair..feline stretching on the coach.. Vampire.
Yes.
That is one..Unchanged.
Thanks for reminding me.
Then the second one of claws on left arm and glowing eyes..like coals on fire..
But as Troy says she was no an angel..
Isara Mo
Troy Day
She is BUT fallen?
Varnel Watson
Isara Mo I stated my point pretty clear below
Varnel Watson
Isara Mo Mike Partyka Heiser was a consultant on this little video. It sums of his other-realm-ology rather succinctly with us without mentioning any specific pagan texts.
I don’t interpret in Genesis the sun and moon ruling day and night to mean they were spiritual entities. Nations around Israel worshipped them, but I do not see where they are presented as evil or rebellious creations elsewhere in scripture. Is interpreting Genesis to mean the sun and moon are intelligent beings, sons of God, maybe even, members of the divine council interpreting the Bible through a pagan lens?
FIRST OFF Heiser is not the author of neither of all these notions combined in his 2004 dissertation (“The Divine Council in Late Canonical and Non-Canonical Second Temple Jewish Literature,” [Ph.D. diss., University of Wisconsin-Madison, 2004]
While he was writing it Alan Segal produced in 2002 the TWO POWERS IN HEAVEN: Early Rabbinic Reports about Christianity and Gnosticism
And James McGrath and Jerry Truex ‘TWO POWERS’ AND EARLY JEWISH AND CHRISTIAN MONOTHEISM (JBS 2004 – a killer 30pg work)
Heiser’s views came much later obviously in attempt to interact with the prior publications The careful reader should first note the extra Biblical references to early rabbinicalism, gnosticism and in the extra step Heiser took into
Non-Canonical Second Temple Jewish Literature (which is a major deviation in restoring the lost writ of the first temple tradition)
Segal argued that the two powers idea was not deemed heretical in Jewish theology until the second century C.E but the truth of the fact is that it is considered heretical in Jewish Orthodoxy and it always has. Heiser built on that notion toying with Persian dualism still unable to discern any coherent religious framework within Orthodoxy
Heiser proceeded on the said notion to bridge the gap between Segal and the Hebrew Bible. The said Gap could not be bridged via the Bible alone so he used a secular and very dualistic Canaanite religious context to suggest
1. An “original model” for the two powers – basic dualism opposing Biblical monotheism
2. role of the vice-regent of the divine council
3. a high sovereign God (El) who rules heaven and earth through the agency of a second, appointed god (Baal) – which will be later taken by Gnostics, Paulikians, Bogomils and other early Christian heresies
4. the elohim of the OT then was not God the Father but any false deity that was worshipped including Baal and false-god demons
5. Finally a second Yahweh introduced by Heiser as the OT Jesus was both sovereign and vice regent in the head of the divine council (claimed in his later work on Rev. 12 if I remember correctly).
Having laid a foundation that monotheism is compatible with divine plurality, which is not Biblical
Heiser turned to argue for plurality within Yahweh Himself in the The Jewish Trinity via Logos Mobile Ed course while the common thread tying these texts together is their attempts to identify the “second Yahweh”.