{"id":226,"date":"2017-11-27T17:43:07","date_gmt":"2017-11-27T16:43:07","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/buch.jehovah-shammah.de\/?p=226"},"modified":"2020-01-17T19:02:11","modified_gmt":"2020-01-17T18:02:11","slug":"the-unseen-realm-vi","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/buch.jehovah-shammah.de\/index.php\/2017\/11\/27\/the-unseen-realm-vi\/","title":{"rendered":"The Unseen Realm – VI"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n

CHAPTER 36<\/p>\n

Lower Than the Elohim<\/span><\/p>\n

The last chapter left us with a life-changing thought: We are the children of God, destined to displace the defeated, disloyal sons of God who now rule the nations<\/em>. Believing followers of Jesus Christ are the fulfillment of God\u2019s plan to have humanity join the divine family-council and restore Eden.<\/p>\n

But that\u2019s still not the full story. We will be made like him (1 John 3:1\u20133<\/a>). We will become divine. In this chapter I\u2019ll unpack that in more detail, explaining what it means and doesn\u2019t mean, beginning with our introduction to the divine council after death\u2014or in life if we are alive when Jesus returns.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

JESUS, ANGELS, AND US<\/p>\n

No other passage in the New Testament is as powerful in its divine council theology as Hebrews 1\u20132<\/a>. Once you grasp the divine council worldview, these chapters explode. You\u2019ll re<\/span>cognize several terms and ideas we\u2019ve covered to this point.<\/p>\n

1<\/a> Although God spoke long ago in many parts and in many ways to the fathers by the prophets, 2<\/a> in these last days he has spoken to us by a <\/span>Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom also he made the world, 3<\/a> who is the radiance of his glory and the representation of his essence, sustaining all things by the word of power. Wh<\/span>en he had made purification for sins through him, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4<\/a> having become by so much better than the angels, by as much as he has inherited a more excelle<\/span>nt name than theirs (Heb 1:1\u20134<\/a>).<\/p>\n

Jesus is heir to all things because he is Yahweh, made flesh to provide a secure way of restoring humanity\u2019s place and role in a global Eden. He is superior to angels <\/span>(v. 4<\/a>). The writer explains in verses 5<\/a> and 6<\/a>:<\/p>\n

5<\/a> For to which of the angels did he ever say,<\/p>\n

\u201cYou are my son,<\/p>\n

today I have begotten you,\u201d<\/p>\n

and again,<\/p>\n

\u201cI will be his father,<\/p>\n

and he will be my son\u201d?<\/p>\n

6<\/a> An<\/span>d again, when he brings the firstborn into the world, he says,<\/p>\n

\u201cAnd let all the angels of God worship him\u201d (Heb 1:5\u20136<\/a>).<\/p>\n

Jesus is superior to the angels since he was \u201cbegotten\u201d as the son of God. The t<\/span>erm is an antiquated one that is seldom used in modern English. It has a wide range of meanings, from procreation to a more ambiguous \u201cbringing forth.\u201dBDAG, 193\u201394<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>1<\/a> Used of Jesus, the term cannot refer to being c<\/span>reated at some point in time. Jesus is Yahweh himself in human form, an idea that derives from the Old Testament.<\/p>\n

It is best to understand the term as \u201cbrought forth\u201d in the sense of revealed in a uni<\/em><\/span>que way<\/em>\u2014in this instance, the full incarnation of Yahweh. Jesus is the lone divine son who deserves worship, because he is the uncreated essence of Yahweh in a human body, now resurrected from death.<\/p>\n

<\/span>Because of the failure of Israel in the course of God\u2019s attempts to revive his Edenic rule and plan, we saw that he adopted a new strategy that would not fail. The Old Testament knows this as the new <\/span>covenant (Jer 31:31\u201333<\/a>), a covenant wherein the Spirit would instill God\u2019s rule in the hearts of believers. God could depend only on himself.<\/p>\n

Because God\u2019s original plan included human participation, <\/span>humanity could not be simply set aside. The solution was to become man and do what needed to be done in order to inaugurate the new Eden. And so he did. God himself became man in Jesus of Nazareth. His death and resurrection were the catalysts. This is why J<\/span>esus, at the Last Supper, referred to the new covenant in terms of his body and blood. The result of Jesus\u2019 obedience unto death, resurrection, and the coming of the Spirit is laid out by the writer of Hebrews, who uses God\u2019s plan to explain the distinction between Jesus and angels:<\/span><\/p>\n

7<\/a> And concerning the angels he says,<\/p>\n

\u201cThe one who makes hi<\/span>s angels winds,<\/p>\n

and his servants a flame of fire,\u201d<\/p>\n

8<\/a> but concerning the Son,<\/p>\n

\u201cYour throne, O God, is forever and ever,<\/p>\n

and the scepter of righteous is the scepter of your kingdom.<\/p>\n

9<\/a>  You have loved r<\/span>ighteousness and hated lawlessness;<\/p>\n

because of this God, your God, has anointed you<\/p>\n

with the olive oil of joy more than your companions.<\/p>\n

10<\/a> And,<\/p>\n

\u201cYou, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beg<\/span>inning,<\/p>\n

and the heavens are the works of your hands;<\/p>\n

11<\/a>  they will perish, but you continue,<\/p>\n

and they will all become old like a garment,<\/p>\n

12<\/a>  and like a robe you will roll them up,<\/p>\n

and like a garmen<\/span>t they will be changed;<\/p>\n

but you are the same, and your years will not run out.\u201d<\/p>\n

13<\/a> But to which of the angels has he ever said,<\/p>\n

\u201cSit down at my right hand,<\/p>\n

until I make your enemies a footstool for yo<\/span>ur feet.\u201d<\/p>\n

14<\/a> Are they not all spirits engaged in special service, sent on assignment for the sake of those who are going to inherit salvation? (Heb 1:7\u201314<\/a>).<\/p>\n

Did you catch the distinctions? Jesus inher<\/span>its rulership and dominion, angels do not. Angels are \u201cministering spirits\u201d who serve the human believers who inherit salvation and are adopted into Yahweh\u2019s family.<\/p>\n

Cast against what we learned in th<\/span>e last chapter, this is a bombshell. We<\/em> are the ones united to Christ, not angels. We<\/em> are the ones given the morning star, the credential for rule, by Jesus himself. We<\/em> are the ones who will be put ov<\/span>er the nations. To echo Paul once more: Don\u2019t you realize that you will judge angels<\/em>? (1 Cor 6:3<\/a>).<\/p>\n

The writer of Hebrews did.<\/p>\n

JESUS, OUR BROTHER IN THE COUNCIL<\/p>\n

Hebrews 2<\/a> builds on the superiority of Christ and its implications for believers.<\/p>\n

1<\/a> Because of this, it is all the more necessary that we pay attention to the things <\/span>we have heard, lest we drift away. 2<\/a> For if the word spoken through angels was binding and every transgression and act of disobedience received a just penalty, 3<\/a> how will we escape if we neglect so gr<\/span>eat a salvation which had its beginning when it was spoken through the Lord and was confirmed to us by those who heard, 4<\/a> while God was testifying at the same time by signs and wonders and various mir<\/span>acles and distributions of the Holy Spirit according to his will (Heb 2:1\u20134<\/a>).<\/p>\n

The word spoken by angels that was \u201cbinding and every transgression and act of disobedience received a just penalty\u201d? Of c<\/span>ourse\u2014the divine council was there at Sinai witnessing the delivering of the law.See chapter 21<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>2<\/a> Signs, wonders, miracles, and distributions of the Holy Spirit? Remember Pentecost and the conquest of Bashan?See chapter 33<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>3<\/a> Paul <\/span>saw the coming of the Spirit at Pentecost as the fulfillment of the defeat of Bashan\u2014symbolic of the forces of darkness (Eph 4:8\u201310<\/a>).<\/p>\n

The coming of the Spirit at Pentecost was, of course, the launch o<\/span>f the reclaiming of the nations. Hebrews 2:5\u20138<\/a> tells us that the ultimate outcome of that re-inheritance is the rule of those nations by believers, to whom the preeminent Christ has given authority:<\/p>\n

5<\/a><\/span> For he [God] did not subject to angels the world to come, about which we are speaking. 6<\/a> But someone testified somewhere, saying,<\/p>\n

\u201cWhat is man, that you remember him,<\/p>\n

or the son of man, that you care<\/span> for him?<\/p>\n

7<\/a> You made him for a short time lower than the angels;<\/p>\n

you crowned him with glory and honor;<\/p>\n

8<\/a>  you subjected all things under his feet (Heb 2:5\u20138<\/a>).<\/p>\n

Note that Hebrews is clear\u2014earth wasn\u2019t <\/span>created to be subject to the members of God\u2019s divine family, but to his human family. The council was with God in Eden, and so heaven and earth were meant to be transposed, but the task of administrating God\u2019s good world was <\/span>ours<\/em>. This despite the fact that we were lesser beings compared to God\u2019s divine family-council.<\/p>\n

The Old Testament text quoted in Hebrews 2:6\u20138<\/a> is Psalm 8:4\u20136<\/a>. The Hebrew reads<\/span> that humankind was created \u201ca little lower than the elohim<\/span>.\u201d And this is how it was in Eden. Humans were lesser than elohim<\/span>\u2014but God\u2019s plan was to elevate humanity to be included in his family, and ta<\/span>ke charge of God\u2019s new earthly domain.This is what led early Christian thinkers to speculate that it was envy that caused one member of the council, a trusted throne guardian, to plot against humanity. For example, the Apocalypse of Sedrach 5:1\u20132<\/a> reads: \u201cSedrach said to him, \u2018It was by your will that Adam was deceived, my Master. You commanded your angels to worship Adam, but he who was first among the angels disobeyed your order and did not worship him; and so you banished him, because he transgressed your commandment and did not come forth (to worship) the creation of your hands\u2019\u2005\u201d (James H. Charlesworth, ed., The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha<\/em> [New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983], 1:610<\/a>). See also Life of Adam and Eve<\/em> 16. Scholarly articles dealing with this subject include G. A. Anderson, \u201cThe Exultation of Adam and the fall<\/em> of Satan,\u201d Journal of Jewish Thought and Philosophy<\/em> 6:1 (1997): 105\u2013134 (= G. Anderson, M. E. Stone, and J. Trump, eds., Literature on Adam and Eve: Collected Essays<\/em>, Studia in Veteris Testamenti Pseudepigraphica 15 [Leiden: Brill, 2000], 83\u2013110); C. L. Patton, \u201cAdam as the Image of God: An Exploration of the fall<\/em> of Satan in the Life of Adam and Eve,\u201d Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers<\/em> 33 (ed. E. H. Lovering Jr.; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 1994), 294\u2013300.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>4<\/a><\/p>\n

For in subjecting all things, he left nothing that was not subject to him. But now we do not yet see all things subjected to him, 9<\/a> but we see Jesus, for a shor<\/span>t time made lower than the angels, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, so that apart from God he might taste death on behalf of everyone (Heb 2:8\u20139<\/a>).<\/p>\n

The second Yahweh of H<\/span>ebrews 1<\/a>, who is the essence of Yahweh, was incarnated as a man to taste death for everyone. And since he became man, we are his siblings. Someday, Jesus will introduce us to the council\u2014unashamed at <\/span>our humanity. He became as we are so that we might become as he is.<\/p>\n

10<\/a> For it was fitting for him for whom are all things and through whom are all things in bringing many sons to glory to perfect the <\/span>originator of their salvation through sufferings. 11<\/a> For both the one who sanctifies and the ones who are sanctified are all from one, for which reason he [Jesus] is not ashamed to call them brothers,<\/span> 12<\/a> saying,<\/p>\n

\u201cI will proclaim your name to my brothers;<\/p>\n

in the midst of the assembly<\/strong> I will sing in praise of you.\u201d<\/p>\n

13<\/a> And again,<\/p>\n

\u201cI will trust in him.\u201d<\/p>\n

And again,<\/p>\n

\u201cBehold, I and the children God has g<\/span>iven me.\u201d<\/p>\n

14<\/a> Therefore, since the children share in blood and flesh, he also in like manner shared in these same things, in order that through death he could destroy the one who has the power of death<\/span>, that is, the devil, 15<\/a> and could set free these who through fear of death were subject to slavery throughout all their lives (Heb 2:10\u201315<\/a>).<\/p>\n

This is an incredible text. Verse 10<\/a> speaks of Jesus as Go<\/span>d\u2019s cocreator, yet he became human. This same Jesus brought many sons into the divine family. Far from being embarrassed before the elohim<\/span> of his own council at becoming human\u2014becoming lesser for a sh<\/span>ort time\u2014Jesus revels in it. Standing in the council (\u201cin the midst of the assembly\u201d) he presents us: Behold\u2014look at me, <\/em>and the children Yahweh has given me. We are all together now\u2014forever<\/em>. And that<\/span> was the plan from the beginning:<\/p>\n

16<\/a> For surely he is not concerned with angels, but he is concerned with the descendants of Abraham. 17<\/a> Therefore he was obligated to be made like his brothers in all <\/span>respects, in order that he could become a merciful and faithful high priest in the things relating to God, in order to make atonement for the sins of the people. 18<\/a> For in that which he himself suffer<\/span>ed when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are tempted (Heb 2:16\u201318<\/a>).<\/p>\n

\n
\n

WE SHALL BE LIKE HIM<\/p>\n

Joining God\u2019s divine family is inextricably linked to the New Testament concept of becoming like Jesus\u2014becoming divine. The academic term describing this point of biblical theology is \u201ctheosis<\/span>.\u201dOne will encounter various synonyms in the scholarly literature, such as divinization, glorification, and deification.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>5<\/a> As one evangelical theologian laments:<\/p>\n

The idea of divinization, of redeemed human nature somehow participating in the very life of God, is found to a surprising extent throughout Christian history, although it is practically unknown to the majority of Christians (and even many theologians) in the west.Robert Rakestraw, \u201cBecoming like God: An Evangelical Doctrine of Theosis,\u201d Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society<\/em> 40.2 (1997): 255<\/a>. Theosis<\/em> is a significant element of Christian Orthodox theology, though Catholicism and all the major reformers embraced some form of the idea. Naturally, theological articulations will differ. See John McClean, \u201c\u2005\u2018Perichoresis,\u2019 \u2018Theosis\u2019 and Union with Christ in the thought of John Calvin,\u201d Reformed Theological Review<\/em> 68.2 (2009): 130\u201341; Vladimir Kharlamov, \u201cTheosis in Patristic Thought,\u201d Theology Today<\/em> 65.2 (2008): 158\u201368; S. T. Kimbrough Jr., \u201cTheosis in the Writings of Charles Wesley,\u201d St. Vladimir\u2019s Theological Seminary Quarterly<\/em> 52.2 (2008): 199\u2013212; Daniel B. Clendenin, \u201cPartakers of Divinity: The Orthodox Doctrine of Theosis,\u201d Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society<\/em> 37 (1994): 365\u2013379; Michael J. Christensen and Jeffery A. Wittung, eds., Partakers of the Divine Nature: The History and Development of Deification in the Christian Traditions<\/em> (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008). My own views on theosis<\/em> are in line with Rakestraw\u2019s. We do not become God or Jesus, as though joining the Trinity. We do not become deities on ontological par with Yahweh, akin to Mormon thought. Rather, we are made like him, receiving a glorified body of, as Paul puts it, \u201ccelestial flesh\u201d (1 Cor 15:42\u201354<\/a>). On the nature of this body, see Litwa (We Are Being Transformed<\/em>) below.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>6<\/a><\/p>\n

The concept of \u201ctheosis<\/span>\u201d has strong biblical roots, and extends from the divine council worldview, specifically the aspect of the original Edenic goal of having humans join the divine family.There have been a number of helpful studies of theosis<\/em>. See for example: G. L. Bray, \u201cDeification,\u201d New Dictionary of Theology<\/em> (ed. S. B. Ferguson, D. F. Wright and J. I. Packer; Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1988) 189<\/a>; M. David Litwa, \u201c2 Corinthians 3:18 and Its Implications for Theosis\u2019.\u201d Journal of Theological Interpretation<\/em> 2 (2008): 117\u201334; idem, We Are Being Transformed: Deification in Paul\u2019s Soteriology<\/em> (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift fur die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der Alteren Kirche 187; Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2012). Litwa\u2019s book has a thorough, up-to-date discussion on the nature of the celestial body (pp. 119\u2013171).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>7<\/a> In the beginning, God made humans to image him, to be like him, to dwell with him. He made us like his heavenly imagers and came to earth to unite his families, elevating humanity to share in divine life in a new world.<\/p>\n

The message of \u201ctheosis<\/span>\u201d is that, in Christ, we are being transformed into his likeness\u2014the perfect imager of God. The Spirit\u2014who, as we saw earlier in our study, \u201cis but isn\u2019t\u201d Jesus\u2014conforms us to Jesus\u2019 own image. Scripture is clear that immortality as a divinized human is the destiny of the believer, and that our present lives in Christ are a process of becoming what we are:<\/p>\n

Those whom he foreknew, he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his So<\/strong>n<\/strong>, so that he should be the firstborn among many brothers (Rom 8:29<\/a>).<\/p>\n

Now the Lord is the Spirit<\/strong>, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. 18<\/a> And we all, with unveiled face, reflecting t<\/strong>he glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image<\/strong> from glory into glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit (2 Cor 3:17\u201318<\/a>).<\/p>\n

We know that whenever he is revealed we will be like him<\/strong>, because we will see him just as he is (1 John 3:2<\/a>).<\/p>\n

May grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord, 3<\/a> because his divine power has bestowed on us all things that are necessary for life and godliness, through the knowledge of the one who called us by his own glory and excellence of character, 4<\/a> through which things he has bestowed on us his precious and very great promises, so that through these you may become sharers of the divine nature<\/strong> after escaping from the corruption that is in the world because of evil desire (2 Pet 1:2\u20134<\/a>).<\/p>\n

If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body<\/strong>. 45<\/a> Thus also it is written, \u201cThe first man, Adam, became a living soul\u201d; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit. 46<\/a> But the spiritual is not first, but the natural; then the spiritual. 47<\/a> The first man is from the earth, made of earth; the second man is from heaven. 48<\/a> As the one who is made of earth, so also are those who are made of earth, and as the heavenly, so also are those who are heavenly. 49<\/a> And just as we have borne the image of the one who is made of earth, we will also bear the image of the heavenly<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

50<\/a> But I say this, brothers, that flesh and blood is not able to inherit the kingdom of God, nor can corruption inherit incorruptibility. 51<\/a> Behold, I tell you a mystery: we will not all fall asleep, but we will all be changed, 52<\/a> in a moment, in the blink of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 53<\/a> For it is necessary <\/strong>for this perishable body to put on incorr<\/strong>uptibility, and this mortal body to put on immortality<\/strong> (1 Cor 15:44\u201354<\/a>).<\/p>\n

As so it is that when God\u2019s original plan was ruined by rebellion, God did not destroy humanity but promised that, one day, a human being would reverse the fall. When he had to disinherit humanity at Babel, he did not abandon the human race. Instead, he was so \u201cconcerned with the descendants of Abraham\u201d (Heb 2:16<\/a>) that he became a man.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

CHAPTER 37<\/p>\n

This Means War<\/p>\n

In the last few chapters we\u2019ve devoted attention to the inauguration of the kingdom of God. Yahweh\u2019s plan to revive the Edenic program was launched as part of his new covenan<\/span>t plan to become man to ensure success where Israel had failed. Yahweh\u2019s good rule would overspread the globe as originally intended.<\/p>\n

It would be a mistake, however, to presume that the gods of the na<\/span>tions would not resist\u2014or that they saw such resistance as pointless. This is not the view of the spiritual world the New Testament presents to us.<\/p>\n

Though originally given their dominions by Yahweh, t<\/span>he lesser elohim<\/span> had governed corruptly and had not maintained loyalty to the Most High. Instead, they embraced the worship that should have gone only to Yahweh (Deut 17:3<\/a>; 29:25<\/a>).<\/p>\n

Although Yahweh tol<\/span>d these elohim<\/span> that they would die like men (Psa 82:6\u20138<\/a>)\u2014that he would strip them of their immortality\u2014there is no indication that the threat tempered opposition to Yahweh. The New Testament makes it <\/span>clear that, once the powers of darkness understood that they had been duped by the crucifixion and resurrection, there was a sense that the timetable of their judgment had been set in motion (Rev 12:1<\/span>2<\/a>).<\/p>\n

The judgment against the elohim<\/span> in the divine council meeting of Psalm 82<\/a> had been linked to the repossession of the nations (Psa 82:8<\/a>; \u201cRise up, O God, judge the earth, because you shall inherit <\/span>all the nations\u201d). So long as that could be forestalled and opposed, the struggle would continue. And since Yahweh had linked that repossession to human participation, the forces of darkness had good reason to suppose that they could drag on the long war against<\/span> Yahweh. Yahweh had lived among his people in the days of Moses and the monarchy, and they had been lured away from him.<\/p>\n

The New Testament<\/span> describes a spiritual struggle in the unseen world in the wake of the inauguration of the kingdom of God. Understanding the portrayal of the conflict and its correlation with the Old Testament divine council worldvie<\/span>w is the goal of this chapter.<\/p>\n

\n
\n

THE UNSEEN COMBATANTS: General Terminology<\/p>\n

We saw earlier that the Hebrew Bible uses the term elohim<\/span> to speak of any inhabitant of the spiritual world. The word itself provides no differentiation amon<\/span>g beings within that realm, though hierarchy is certainly present. Yahweh, for example, is an elohim<\/span>, but no other elohim<\/span> is Yahweh. Nevertheless, the term elohim<\/span> tells us very little about how an anc<\/span>ient reader would have parsed the pecking order of the unseen realm. The same is true of certain Greek terms that are used in the New Testament.The angelology and demonology of the New Testament are the subjects of much scholarly controversy. Several phenomena work against a consensus on practically any issue: (1) New Testament terms may be used infrequently or rarely, and what usage exists is often ambiguous when it comes to addressing issues like how one type of spiritual entity relates to another; (2) Second Temple material that informs New Testament terminology and that provides parallels to certain statements at times conflicts and therefore fails to produce a coherent picture of the unseen world of Judaism after the Old Testament period; (3) it is at times difficult to know whether a New Testament writer makes a statement from the stance of a Hellenistic Jewish worldview, a more ancient framework, or a Greco-Roman perspective. Consequently, this chapter provides only a basic overview of the material. See the companion website<\/a> for more discussion of some of the issues presented here. Important scholarly works relating to the angelology and demonology of first-century Judaism and Christianity include Bennie H. Reynolds, \u201cUnderstanding the Demonologies of the Dead Sea Scrolls: Accomplishments and Directions for the Future,\u201d Religion Compass<\/em> 7.4 (2013): 103\u201314; Maxwell Davidson, Angels at Qumran: A Comparative Study of 1 Enoch 1\u201336; 72\u2013108 and Sectarian Writings from Qumran<\/em>, Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha Supplement Series 11 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1992); Aleksander R. Michalak, Angels as Warriors in Late Second Temple Jewish Literature<\/em>, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 330 (T\u00fcbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2012); Eric Sorensen, Possession and Exorcism in the New Testament and Early Christianity<\/em>, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 157, second series (T\u00fcbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2002); Kevin P. Sullivan, Wrestling with Angels: A Study of the Relationship between Angels and Humans in Ancient Jewish Literature and the New Testament<\/em> (Leiden: Brill, 2004); Graham H. Twelftree, Jesus the Exorcist: A Contribution to the Study of the Historical Jesus<\/em>, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 54, second series (T\u00fcbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1993); Guy Williams, The Spirit World in the Letters of Paul the Apostle: A Critical Examination of the Role of Spiritual Beings in the Authentic Pauline Epistles<\/em>, Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 231 (G\u00f6ttingen: Vandenhoeck &amp; Ruprecht, 2009).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>1<\/a><\/p>\n

When the subject of spiritual warfare surfaces, most s<\/span>tudents of Scripture think of angels and demons. Those terms are very broad and don\u2019t shed a great deal of light on how New Testament writers thought of rank and power in the unseen world.<\/p>\n

There are r<\/span>oughly 175 references to angels in the New Testament (aggelos\/angelos<\/span>). Like the Hebrew counterpart (mal\u02beak<\/span>), the term means \u201cmessenger.\u201d Fundamentally, the term describes a task performed by a divine<\/span> being, not what a divine being is<\/em>.The difference between ontology (what a being is) and function (what a being does) is easily illustrated. The word \u201chuman\u201d is an ontological term. Humans (regardless of gender) can be doctors, lawyers, mechanics, engineers, and messengers. All those terms describe functions or tasks. The word \u201cangel\u201d belongs to the latter classification.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>2<\/a><\/p>\n

The use of the term angelos<\/em> increased in the Second Temple period on through the New Testament so that its meaning became more generic, akin to daimonion<\/span>.As we\u2019ll see as the discussion continues, daim\u014dn<\/em> and daimonion<\/em> are neutral terms, requiring context to determine if a good or evil spiritual being is in view. References to \u201cangels\u201d being evil or sinister are infrequent in the New Testament (Matt 25:41<\/a>; 1 Cor 6:3<\/a>; 11:10<\/a>; 2 Cor 11:14<\/a>; 2 Pet 2:4<\/a>; Rev 9:11<\/a>), and in no case are we told of a primeval angelic fall before or during the Genesis creation or before the fall of humankind. Such an idea comes from Church tradition and widely influential writings like Milton\u2019s Paradise Lost<\/em><\/a>. References to \u201cangels that sinned\u201d look back to Genesis 6:1\u20134<\/a>, the only passage in the Bible that describes a rebellion of a group of divine beings. More generally, phrases like \u201cevil spirits\u201d either convey the broad notion that the great enemy, the Devil or Satan, has divine allies, or might perhaps draw on the origin of evil spirits via the death of Nephilim giants in Second Temple Jewish literature (e.g., 1 Enoch). On that topic, see Archie T. Wright, The Origin of Evil Spirits: The Reception of Genesis 6:1\u20134 in Early Jewish Literature<\/em>, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 198, second series (T\u00fcbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2013). Lastly, Dale Martin\u2019s recent article contains some good analysis of how Christian thinking after the New Testament influences today\u2019s Christian demonology in ways that lacks biblical support. However, Martin inexplicably misses the connection of what Paul says about demons to Deut 32<\/a> and Israel\u2019s Old Testament experience with idolatry (i.e., Martin connects it only to Graeco-Roman idolatry). See Dale Basil Martin, \u201cWhen Did Angels Become Demons?\u201d Journal of Biblical Literature<\/em> 129.4 (2010): 657\u201377. See the ensuing discussion and related sources in the footnotes along with chapter 38<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>3<\/a> That is<\/span>, it can be found on occasion outside the context of delivering a message in descriptions of a group of divine beings (e.g., Luke 15:10<\/a>).<\/p>\n

This widening of the term\u2019s semantics is shown in Hebrews 1:4\u2013<\/span>5<\/a>; 2:7\u20139<\/a>. In the second of these passages, the word angelos<\/em> is used when the writer quotes Psalm 8:4\u20136<\/a>, so that Hebrews 2:7<\/a> describes humankind as being \u201ca little lower than the angels,\u201d whereas the H<\/span>ebrew text of Psalm 8:5<\/a> has humanity being \u201ca little lower than elohim<\/span>.\u201d While the original Hebrew text could mean that humankind was created \u201ca little lower than God [elohim<\/span>],\u201d the Greek translation <\/span>that the writer of Hebrews is using (the Septuagint) interpreted elohim<\/span> as plural, and translated the word with angeloi<\/span> (\u201cangels\u201d). This shows us that angelos<\/em> had become a word deemed appropriate to g<\/span>enerally describe a member of the supernatural realm, just as elohim<\/span> is used in the Old Testament.See the discussion in chapters 3<\/a> and 4<\/a>. Some scholars argue that the word \u201cangel\u201d was used to downgrade or eliminate the idea of a divine council. This notion isn\u2019t coherent, since the Septuagint will also use theos<\/em> (\u201cgod\u201d) to translate plural elohim<\/em> or elim<\/em> whether occurring alone (Exod 15:11<\/a>; Psa 82:1b<\/a> [Greek: 81:1b<\/a>]; 95:3\u20134<\/a> [Greek: 94:3\u20134<\/a>]; 97:9<\/a> [Greek: 96:9<\/a>]) or in phrases like beney elohim<\/em> (Psa 29:1<\/a> [Greek: 28:1<\/a>]; Deut 32:43<\/a>, with the Dead Sea Scrolls). See R. B. Salters, \u201cPsalm 82:1 and the Septuagint,\u201d Zeitschrift f\u00fcr die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft<\/em> 103.2 (1991): 225\u201339. This notion, usually made to defend the idea of a religious evolution to monotheism from polytheism on the part of the biblical writers, is also flawed with respect to the Qumran material, where there are nearly 180 instances of plural elohim<\/em> or elim<\/em> in the sectarian material, many of which occur in explicit divine council contexts. See Michael S. Heiser, \u201cMonotheism and the Language of Divine Plurality in the Hebrew Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls,\u201d Tyndale Bulletin<\/em> 65.1 (2014): 85\u2013100.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>4<\/a><\/p>\n

The two Greek terms translated \u201cdemon\u201d in the New Testament are daim\u014dn<\/span> and daimonion<\/span>. Our word \u201cdemo<\/span>n\u201d is actually a transliteration of the Greek, not a translation. In classical Greek literature, which preceded the time of the New Testament, the term daim\u014dn<\/span> describes any divine being without regard<\/span> to its nature (good or evil). A daim\u014dn<\/span> can be a god or goddesss, some lesser divine power, or the spirit of the departed human dead.J. E. Rexine, \u201cDaim\u014dn<\/em> in Classical Greek Literature,\u201d Greek Orthodox Theological Review<\/em> 30.3 (1985): 335\u201361.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>5<\/a> As such, it is akin to Hebrew elohim<\/span> in its generic meaning.<\/p>\n

The <\/span>New Testament is silent on the origin of demons.Rev 12:7\u201317<\/a>, a passage often referenced for such an idea, clearly situates the battle described there as following the birth of the messiah (Rev 12:5<\/a>) and in association with the messianic birth. The major scholarly study on demonic origins in Jewish thought is Archie T. Wright, The Origin of Evil Spirits: The Reception of Genesis 6:1\u20134 in Early Jewish Literature<\/em>, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 198, second series (T\u00fcbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2013).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>6<\/a> There is no passage that describes a primeval rebellion before Eden where angels fell from grace and became demons. The origin of demons in Jewish tex<\/span>ts outside the Bible (such as 1 Enoch) is attributed to the events of Genesis 6:1\u20134<\/a>. When a Nephilim was killed in these texts, its disembodied spirit was considered a demon. These demons then roamed <\/span>the earth to harass humans. The New Testament does not explicitly embrace this belief, though there are traces of the notion, such as demon possession of humans (implying the effort to be re-embodied).<\/span><\/p>\n

Not surprisingly, in the New Testament, the terms daim\u014dn<\/span> and daimonion<\/span> are nearly always used negatively.Daimon<\/em> occurs once (Matt 8:31<\/a>) whereas daimonion<\/em> occurs over sixty times.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>7<\/a> That is, they refer to evil, sinister powers.The one exception is Acts 17:18<\/a>, where Greeks listening to Paul describe him by saying, \u201cHe seems to be a preacher of foreign divinities [daimonion<\/em>].\u201d The reference here is neutral.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>8<\/a> This is likely due to the use of the terms i<\/span>n the Septuagint, though the influence of Second Temple Judaism may be a factor. The Septuagint translators use daim\u014dn<\/span> once (Isa 65:11<\/a>) of a foreign god.The deity in question is Gad in the Hebrew Bible and Fortune in the Septuagint. See S. Ribichini, \u201cGad,\u201d in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible<\/em>, 2nd ed. (ed. Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter W. van der Horst; Leiden; Boston; Cologne; Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge: Brill; Eerdmans, 1999), 339<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>9<\/a> Daimonion<\/span> occurs nine times to refer to idols<\/span> (e.g., Psa 96:5<\/a> [Septuagint: 95:5<\/a>]) and foreign gods of the nations whom Israel was not to worship (e.g., Psa 91:6<\/a> [Septuagint: 90:6<\/a>]).The nine Septuagint instances include two in the book of Baruch. The deity in view in Psa 91:6<\/a> (Greek: 90:6<\/a>) is Qeteb.<\/em> See N. Wyatt, \u201cQeteb,\u201d in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible<\/em>, 673<\/a>. The New English Translation of the Septuagint (NETS) renders daimonion<\/em> as \u201cdemon.\u201d A foreign deity was, by definition (see Deut 32:8\u20139<\/a>, 17<\/a>) a \u201cdemon,\u201d a geographical guardian entity. See Chapters 4<\/a>, 14<\/a>, and 15<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>10<\/a><\/p>\n

In the New Testament, the verb equivalents to these nouns (da<\/span><\/span>imonao, daimonizomai<\/span>) refer to being possessed by a daim\u014dn<\/span> and are always negative. Daimonion<\/span> occurs in parallel to \u201cunclean spirit\u201d in several passages (e.g., Luke 8:29<\/a>; 9:42<\/a>; cf. Luke 4:33<\/a>).<\/p>\n

Oddly e<\/span>nough, only one verse in the Bible mentions Satan and demons together: \u201cSo if Satan also is divided against himself, how will his kingdom stand? For you say that I expel demons by Beelzebul\u201d (Luke 11:<\/span>18<\/a>). The verse strongly implies that Satan has authority over demons, but does not make it clear that all demons are under his authority or how this authority emerged. The Old Testament is silent on t<\/span>he matter since the noun sa\u1e6dan<\/span> was not a proper name and was not used of the enemy in the garden.See chapter 8<\/a>. By the time of the New Testament, Satan had become a proper name. See G. H. Twelftree, \u201cDemon, Devil, Satan,\u201d Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels<\/em> (ed. Joel B. Green and Scot McKnight; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1992), 163\u201371. Paul regularly gives the Greek term a definite article, which, unlike the situation in Hebrew, marks the word as either a proper name or title. Beyond this observation, though, confusion reigns with respect to Second Temple Jewish thinking about Satan. As Williams notes: \u201cMuch literature from the period makes no specific mention of Satan (notably: Ben Sirach, Philo, and Josephus). Furthermore, even when Satan is mentioned, it is commonly as a type<\/em> of angel, occurring frequently in the plural (\u2018the Satans\u2019). There was no standard nomenclature for this figure; we find no edifice which we may call the Jewish doctrine of Satan\u201d (Williams, Spirit World in the Letters of Paul the Apostle<\/em>, 88; emphasis added).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>11<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n

OBSERVATIONS ON PAUL\u2019S VOCABULARY<\/p>\n

The same ambiguity concerning the relationship between Satan and other divine beings hostile to God is found in Paul\u2019s writings. Since Paul mentions standing against the tactics of the devil in the same breath as a listing of other terms for supernatural enemies, Ephesians 6:11\u201312<\/a> informs us there is a relationship, but doesn\u2019t describe it in any specific way.<\/p>\n

Similar passages that many Bible readers presume are clear in this regard are actually not. For example, 2 Corinthians 4:4<\/a> refers to \u201cthe god of this age\u201d who has blinded humanity. Nearly all scholars identify this figure as Satan, but the name doesn\u2019t occur in the verse or the context.The identification with Satan is argued on two grounds: (1) the fact that the title here is similar to the epithet \u201cruler of this world\u201d in the Gospel of John (John 12:31<\/a>; 14:30<\/a>; 16:11<\/a>), whose identity would be difficult to reconcile with any other divine being than Satan; and (2) Paul\u2019s identification of the deception of people in the eschaton<\/em> with Satan (2 Thess 2:9\u201310<\/a>).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>12<\/a> Additionally, the phrase \u201cgod of this age\u201d may refer to God himself. It is possible that the verse draws on Isaiah 6:9\u201310<\/a> (Septuagint), where it is God who has blinded the eyes of those who don\u2019t believe.See Donald E. Hartley, \u201c2 Corinthians 4:4: A Case for Yahweh as the \u2018God of this Age\u2019\u2005\u201d (paper presented at the 57th Annual Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, Valley Forge, PA, 2005); Hartley, \u201cThe Congenitally Hard-Hearted: Key to Understanding the Assertion and Use of Isaiah 6:9\u201310 in the Synoptic Gospels\u201d (PhD diss., Dallas Theological Seminary, 2005).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>13<\/a><\/p>\n

Ephesians 2:2<\/a> speaks of \u201cthe prince of the power of the air\u201d (English Standard Version
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>esv<\/a>), another verse associated with Satan\u2014and which, upon closer examination, does not include any reference to the name or the devil.<\/p>\n

It is difficult to know precisely what Paul was thinking here. Recall our earlier discussion of the original rebel of Genesis 3<\/a> who was cast down to \u201cearth\u201d (Hebrew: \u02beerets<\/span>, a term that can refer to the ground or Sheol). It would be understandable to see that particular divine rebel as lord (first in rebellion and thus authority) of earth. This lordship could even extend to the \u201cair\u201d (the heavens), since that space was considered in ancient Israelite cosmology to be beneath God\u2019s domain, which was above the waters of the earth (Job 22:13<\/a>; Amos 9:6<\/a>; Pss 29:10<\/a>; 148:4<\/a>).See Michael S. Heiser, \u201cGenesis and Ancient Near Eastern Cosmology,\u201d Faithlife Study Bible<\/em> (ed. John D. Barry, Michael S. Heiser, Miles Custis, et al.; Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2012); G. F. Hasel, \u201cThe Polemic Nature of the Genesis Cosmology,\u201d Evangelical Quarterly<\/em> 46 (1974): 81\u2013102; John H. Walton, Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament: Introducing the Conceptual World of the Hebrew Bible<\/em> (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2006), 165\u201378<\/a>. The major scholarly study on ancient Israelite cosmology is Luis I. J. Stadelmann, The Hebrew Conception of the World: A Philological and Literary Study<\/em>, Analecta Biblica 39 (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute Press, 1970).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>14<\/a><\/p>\n

However, if Paul was thinking more in terms of Graeco-Roman cosmology, this explanation fails since the air was \u201cthe region below the moon and above the earth.\u201dFrank Thielman, Ephesians<\/em>, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2010), 123\u201324<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>15<\/a> The idea of Paul\u2019s using a Graeco-Roman backdrop for this phrase may get support from Paul\u2019s use of another term elsewhere: stoicheia<\/span>. That Greek lemma can refer to one of four things: (1) basic principles of religious teaching (e.g., law); (2) rudimentary substances of the physical world; (3) astral deities (astrological myths); (4) spiritual beings in general.See D. G. Reid, \u201cElements\/Elemental Spirits of the World,\u201d Dictionary of Paul and His Letters<\/em> (ed. Gerald F. Hawthorne, Ralph P. Martin, and Daniel G. Reid; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993), 229<\/a>. My listing is based on Reid\u2019s, but I have broken the possibilities down differently.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>16<\/a> Since this term is strongly rooted in Graeco-Roman cosmological thinking, it may be that Paul\u2019s reference to the \u201cair\u201d back in Ephesians is as well.The usage of stoicheia<\/em> in Heb 5:12<\/a> is a clear reference to religious teachings (the law). Second Peter 3:10<\/a>, 12<\/a> refers more literally to elements of the physical world. There is no consensus among scholars on Paul\u2019s use of the term (Gal 4:3<\/a>, 9<\/a>; Col 2:8<\/a>, 20<\/a>). The question is whether Paul is using the term of spiritual entities\/star deities in Gal 4:3<\/a>, 9<\/a> and Col 2:8<\/a>, 20<\/a>. Three of these four instances append the word to \u201cof the world\u201d (kosmos<\/em>; i.e., \u201cstoicheia<\/em> of the world\u201d), but this doesn\u2019t provide much clarity. Paul\u2019s discussion in Gal 4<\/a> and Col 2<\/a> includes spiritual forces (angels, principalities and powers, false gods) in the context, which suggests stoicheia<\/em> may refer to divine beings. He is contrasting stoicheia<\/em> to salvation in Christ in some way. Since Paul is speaking to both Jews and Gentiles, he might also be using the term in different ways with respect to each audience. Stoicheia<\/em> as law would make little sense to Gentiles, though it would strike a chord with Jews. My view is that in Gal 4:3<\/a> Paul\u2019s use of stoicheia<\/em> likely refers to the law and religious teaching with a Jewish audience in view (cf. Gal 4:1\u20137<\/a>). The audience shifts to Gentiles in 4:8\u201311<\/a>, and so it seems coherent to see stoicheia<\/em> in Gal 4:9<\/a> as referring to divine beings, probably astral deities (the \u201cFates\u201d). Gal 4:8<\/a> transitions to pagans, since the Jews would have known about the true God. The reference to \u201ctimes and seasons and years\u201d (4:10<\/a>) would therefore point to astrological beliefs, not the Jewish calendar. Paul is therefore denying the idea that the celestial objects<\/em> (sun, moon, stars) are deities. His Gentile readers should not be enslaved by the idea that these objects controlled their destiny. As a related issue, Paul\u2019s wording here cannot therefore be taken as a denial of the existence of other gods. Paul does deny their existence in 1 Cor 8:4\u20136<\/a>, which must not be interpreted against the context of 1 Cor 10:20\u201321<\/a>, as it relates to the same subject matter. Paul is just denying that celestial bodies are gods that control one\u2019s fate. This approach is also useful with respect to Col 2:8<\/a>, 20<\/a>, where the contexts seem to be pagan angel worship (i.e., worship of divine beings thought to have power over basic elements of the material world) and pagan asceticism. See E. Schweizer, \u201cSlaves of the Elements and Worshipers of Angels: Gal 4:3, 9 and Col 2:8, 18, 20,\u201d Journal of Biblical Literature<\/em> 107 (1988): 455\u201368<\/a>; Clinton E. Arnold, \u201cReturning to the Domain of the Powers: \u2018Stoicheia\u2019 as Evil Spirits in Galatians 4:3, 9,\u201d Novum Testamentum<\/em> 38.1 (January 1996): 55\u201376.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>17<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

PAUL AND THE DEUTERONOMY 32<\/a> WORLDVIEW<\/p>\n

Paul\u2019s writings reveal an awareness of the cosmic-geographical worldview that we\u2019ve been discussing at length in this book.<\/p>\n

One instance of daimonion<\/span> in the Septu<\/span>agint is particularly noteworthy as we begin exploring Paul\u2019s language. The term is used in Deuteronomy 32:17<\/a> to translate the \u201cdemons\u201d (Hebrew: shedim<\/span>), who are called elohim<\/span> in that same verse, who <\/span>had seduced the Israelites.The Septuagint also uses daimonion<\/em> to translate shedim<\/em> in its only other Old Testament occurrence: Psa 106:37<\/a>. Daimonion<\/em> is also the translation choice for references to \u201cgoat demons\u201d (se\u02bfirim<\/em>) in Isa 13:21<\/a> and \u201cdesert creatures\u201d (tsiyim<\/em>) in Isa 34:14<\/a>. Recall from the discussion of Azazel in Lev 16<\/a> (the Day of Atonement) that Israelites believed the desert to be the realm of sinister evil and were sacrificing to \u201cgoat demons\u201d (Lev 17:7<\/a>).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>18<\/a> The reference is important in light of Paul\u2019s warning about fellowshiping with demons (daimonion<\/span>) in 1 Corinthians 10:20\u201321<\/a> by eating meat sacrificed to idols. In that pa<\/span>ssage Paul quotes Deuteronomy 32:17<\/a>. The clear implication is that Paul considered these beings real and dangerous.See chapter 38<\/a> for more discussion of 1 Cor 10:20\u201321<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>19<\/a> This is why, in his earlier discussion of the issue of eating such meat, he acknow<\/span>ledged that there were other gods (theoi<\/span>) and lords among people who did not belong to Yahweh and Jesus (1 Cor 8:1\u20136<\/a>).English translations wrongly put these terms in ironic quotes in 1 Cor 8<\/a> as though Paul were jesting. 1 Cor 10:20\u201321<\/a> shows us he wasn\u2019t. Paul\u2019s discussion in 1 Cor 10<\/a> actually tracks through Deuteronomy 32<\/a>. See chapter 39<\/a> for a discussion of 1 Cor 10:20\u201321<\/a> and these points with sources for further study.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>20<\/a> Paul was well aware of the divine council worldview that had the nations under <\/span>lesser elohim<\/span> and considered them a threat to believers, as they had been to Israel.<\/p>\n

Taking Paul\u2019s comments in both 1 Corinthians 8<\/a> and 10<\/a> together (the subject matter is the same) helps us see that, <\/span>for Paul, there was an overlap between the words daimonion<\/span> and theos<\/span> (\u201cgod\u201d).In classical Greek literature, not every daim\u014dn<\/em> could be referred to with theos<\/em>. See Rexine, \u201cDaim\u014dn<\/em>,\u201d 339.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>21<\/a> The word theos<\/span> was used of high-ranking spiritual beings who had authority both in pantheons and geographical domains on<\/span> earth. The word theos<\/span>, then, has some conceptual overlap with those divine beings who were set over the nations.<\/p>\n

The apostle\u2019s vocabulary elsewhere makes it clear that he understood and presumed the <\/span>Deuteronomy 32<\/a> worldview:For a lengthy overview of Paul\u2019s adoption of this worldview, see Ronn Johnson, \u201cThe Old Testament Background for Paul\u2019s Principalities and Powers,\u201d (PhD diss., Dallas Theological Seminary, 2004). For brief discussions of individual terms see D. G. Reid, \u201cPrincipalities and Powers,\u201d in Dictionary of Paul and His Letters<\/em>, 746\u2013752<\/a>. Much of what we\u2019ve discussed to this point with respect to contextualizing New Testament theology (chs. 31\u201336<\/a>) by means of Old Testament theology, itself articulated within its own ancient Near Eastern context, presumes the Deut 32<\/a> worldview. Concepts such as the original goal of Eden, why the other nations have other gods, the divine sonship of Israel, Yahweh\u2019s covenantal relationship with Israel, and the need to reclaim the nations via a human, Davidic incarnation of Yahweh are inextricably tied to this worldview. As we saw in chapter 34<\/a>, both testaments frame this theology in terms of the 70 nations of Gen 10<\/a>, the world known to the biblical writers. We of course know that the world is a bigger place than these nations\u2014and so did God. That God\u2019s vision included all nations of the world as we (and he) knew it is evidenced by the \u201cuniversality\u201d of humanity\u2019s lost condition and the command to evangelize (e.g., Rom 3:9<\/a>, 23<\/a>; 5:12<\/a>, 18<\/a>; Titus 2:11<\/a>; Heb 5:9<\/a>). The Deut 32<\/a> worldview is no more restricted to the known nations of Gen 10<\/a> and Israel than the gospel is so confined. The theology of the Deut 32<\/a> worldview is straightforward and applies to all nations of the earth at any time period. All nations whose God is not Yahweh are under the dominion of lesser gods. All people whose God is not Yahweh are enslaved to lesser gods who cannot provide salvation, and who are unjust and unloving. This spiritual dilemma and its solution (believing loyalty to Yahweh) are the same today as in biblical times. This parsing of the human, earthly condition is the result of humanity\u2019s rebellion (at various stages), Yahweh\u2019s just punishment of those nations, and his subsequent decision to revive his original Edenic vision through a new people, Israel, whom he would create from a couple of his choosing. They would in turn be the conduit through whom disinherited humanity could be redeemed. While specific details are often lacking because readers are centuries removed from the ancient Near Eastern context of the Old Testament discussed in this book, a number of early church writers had an inkling of the Deut 32<\/a> worldview and its relationship to the gods of other nations. The best resource overviewing the thinking of early Christian writers on this subject is Gerald R. McDermott, God\u2019s Rivals: Why Has God Allowed Different Religions? Insights from the Bible and the Early Church<\/em> (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2007). McDermott is professor of religion and philosophy at Roanoke College in Salem, Virginia. He is familiar with the idea of the divine council (e.g., p. 16 and his third chapter: \u201cThe Lord of Hosts: The Old Testament and the Real Existence of Other Gods\u201d).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>22<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2022 \u201crulers\u201d (archont\u014dn<\/span> or arch\u014dn<\/span>)<\/p>\n

\u2022 \u201cprincipalities\u201d (arch\u0113<\/span>)<\/p>\n

\u2022 \u201cpowers\u201d\/\u201cauthorities\u201d (exousia<\/span>)<\/p>\n

\u2022 \u201cpowers\u201d (dynamis<\/span>)<\/p>\n

\u2022 \u201cdominions\u201d\/\u201clords\u201d (kyrios<\/span>)<\/p>\n

\u2022 \u201cthrones\u201d (thronos<\/em>)There is only one instance of this lemma in the New Testament: \u201cAll things in the heavens and on the earth were created by him, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones [thronoi<\/em>] or dominions or rulers or powers, all things were created through him and for him\u201d (Col 1:16<\/a>). The term is used in parallel to other lemmas that indicate geographical rule in supernatural contexts. See the discussion. Col 1:16<\/a> is of interest to scholars since it lists four lemmas: thronoi\u2014kuriot\u0113s\u2014archai\u2014exousiai<\/em>. Scholars have tried to discern a coherent hierarchical ordering in the list (i.e., presuming a descent in rank), but without success or consensus. External usage of the terms provides no consistency in hierarchical meanings.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„><\/span>23<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2022 \u201cworld rulers\u201d (kosmokrat\u014dr<\/span>)<\/p>\n

These lemmas have something in common\u2014they were used both in the New Testament and other Greek literature to denote geographical domain authority<\/em>. At times these ter<\/span>ms are used of humans, but several instances demonstrate that Paul had spiritual beings in mind. We\u2019ll briefly survey Paul\u2019s terminology.<\/p>\n

One of the Old Testament passages we looked at in addition to <\/span>Deuteronomy 32:8\u20139<\/a> to understand Yahweh\u2019s decision to put the nations under the authority of lesser gods was Daniel 10<\/a>. In that passage we saw that there were divine beings over the nations, called \u201cp<\/span>rinces\u201d (sar\/sarim<\/span>) by Daniel, and that the Septuagint refers to Michael as one of the chief archont\u014dn<\/span> or arch\u014dn<\/span>, depending on the manuscript evidence.This is not to exclude a relationship of the divine powers to human foes of Israel and Yahweh. As we\u2019ve seen with passages like Dan 7:20\u201328<\/a>; Zech 14:1\u20135<\/a>; and Isa 24:21\u201323<\/a>, the Bible envisions conflict where human and divine involvement overlap. This perspective is of course prominent in the Dead Sea Scrolls, particularly in The War Scroll<\/em><\/a> (1QM)<\/a>. Due to exaggerations and fantastic portrayals of spiritual warfare in popular Christianity and fiction, scholars are often hesitant to emphasize the supernatural element of Dan 10<\/a> and other passages. For example, see the discussion in David E. Stevens, \u201cDaniel 10 and the Notion of Territorial Spirits,\u201d Bibliotheca Sacra<\/em> 157 (2000): 410\u201331<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>24<\/a><\/p>\n

Ephesians 6:12<\/a> includes a number of the lemm<\/span>as listed above: \u201cOur struggle is not against blood and flesh, but against the rulers [arch\u0113<\/span>], against the authorities [exousia<\/span>], against the world rulers [kosmokrat\u014dr<\/span>] of this darkness, against the<\/span> spiritual forces [pneumatikos<\/span>] of wickedness in the heavenly places.\u201d<\/p>\n

Paul refers to these hostile beings in the unseen realm earlier in Ephesians. He wrote that God raised Jesus from the dead and \u201cs<\/span>eated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, far above every ruler [arch\u0113<\/span>] and authority [exousia<\/span>] and power [dynamis<\/span>] and dominion [kyrios<\/span>]\u201d (Eph 1:20\u201321<\/a> English Standard Version
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>esv<\/a>).Interestingly, some Septuagint manuscripts have \u201cpowers\u201d (dynamis<\/em>; plural: dynameis<\/em>) as the translation for the divine \u201chost\u201d in Dan 8:10<\/a>. See also Rom 8:38<\/a> for supernatural powers.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>25<\/a> It was only after Christ had <\/span>risen that God\u2019s plan was \u201cmade known to the rulers [arch\u0113<\/span>] and authorities [exousia<\/span>] in the heavenly places\u201d (Eph 3:10<\/a> English Standard Version
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>esv<\/a>). These cosmic forces are the \u201crulers [arch\u0113<\/span>] and authorities [exousia<\/span>]\u201d d<\/span>isarmed and put to shame by the cross (Col 2:15<\/a>). Had those \u201crulers\u201d [arch\u014dnt\u014dn<\/span>] known that the death of the messiah was necessary for God\u2019s plan to succeed, they never would have crucified Jesus (1<\/span> Cor 2:8<\/a>).Translation of the verse references in this paragraph are all from the esv<\/span>. The context of 1 Cor 2<\/a> is that of a divine plan\u2014divine knowledge. While arch\u014dn<\/em> (along with the rest of Paul\u2019s vocabulary) is found in the New Testament and elsewhere for human rulers, it makes little sense for Paul to see irony in the fact that humans didn\u2019t know God\u2019s mystery-plan involved the death and resurrection of the messiah. As Aune notes, \u201cThe term archontes<\/em> used as a designation for angelic beings first occurs in the LXX Dan 10:13<\/a>, and seven times in Theod. Dan 10:13<\/a>, 20\u201321<\/a>; 12:1<\/a>, where the LXX has strat\u0113gos<\/em>, \u2018commander,\u2019 \u2018magistrate,\u2019 all translations of the Aram \u015bar<\/em>, \u2018prince.\u2019\u2005\u201d That the rulers here are evil supernatural powers of darkness is an interpretation found in church fathers such as Origen, Tertullian, and Justin (see D. E. Aune, \u201cArchon,\u201d in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible<\/em>, 82\u201385<\/a>).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>26<\/a><\/p>\n

The reference to \u201cdominion\u201d in Ephesians 1:21<\/a> (kyrios<\/span>; plural: kuriot\u0113s<\/span>) is related to the word Paul uses to describe how unbelievers have many gods (theoi<\/span>) and \u201clords\u201d (kurioi<\/span>), but for<\/span> the believer there is only one God, Yahweh, and one Lord, Jesus (1 Cor 8:5<\/a>). These gods and lords are considered real by Paul and are a threat to believers (1 Cor 10:20\u201321<\/a>).<\/p>\n

The picture that thus eme<\/span>rges from the New Testament has points of both clarity and ambiguity.See Williams, Spirit World in the Letters of Paul the Apostle<\/em>, 127\u201340, for a survey of the interpretive problems and ambiguities.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>27<\/a><\/p>\n

It is clear that Satan is leader of at least some of the powers of darkness. As the original rebel, he likely ranked first (or w<\/span>orst) in terms of example in the minds of ancient readers. The fact that he is the one who confronted Jesus in the desert, an account we considered earlier, and offered Jesus the kingdoms of the world suggests as much. The lack of a clearly delineated hierarchy leaves the possibility that there are competing agendas in the uns<\/span>een world, even where there exists the common goal of opposition to Yahweh and his people.<\/span>Many New Testament scholars have commented on the New Testament\u2019s silence on how these divine beings might be related. See the companion website<\/a> for further discussion.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>28<\/a><\/p>\n

A second point of relative clarity is that Paul grasped the Deuteronomy 32<\/a> worldview. This should be no surprise given Paul\u2019s command of the Old Testament. The world in which the <\/span>newly inaugurated kingdom of God was now spreading was one dominated by invisible divine powers transparently described in the vocabulary of geographical rulership. We are not told how the terms relate to each other or precisely what they signify in a hierarchy, but the message of cosmic geography is pla<\/span>inly telegraphed.<\/p>\n

\n
\n

THE \u201cGLORIOUS ONES\u201d IN PETER AND JUDE<\/p>\n

Second Peter 2:10<\/a> and Jude 8<\/a> refer to the \u201cglorious ones\u201d (doksas<\/span>). The term probably refers to divine beings of the council close to God\u2019s glorious presence, sin<\/span>ce Second Temple period texts describe such beings.See 1QH 10:8<\/a>; 2 Enoch 22:7<\/a>, 10<\/a>; Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah 9:32<\/a>; Philo, <\/a>Spec. Leg.<\/em><\/a> 1.45<\/a>; T. Jud. 25:2<\/a>; T. Levi 18:5<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>29<\/a> These passages in 2 Peter and Jude speak of (human) blasphemers who rail against the glorious ones. The 2 Peter passage adds the note that angels,<\/span> though greater than those human blasphemers, would not dare to do such a thing. The wording suggests some distinction between angels and \u201cglorious ones\u201d in rank (and perhaps power). For example, 2 En<\/span>och 21:3<\/a> identifies Gabriel, widely described as an archangel in biblical and other Second Temple period texts, as one of \u201cthe glorious ones of the Lord.\u201dSeveral New Testament scholars follow this trajectory. Bauckham writes: \u201cThe term \u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u03b1\u03b9<\/span> (lit. \u2018glories\u2019) for angels is attested in the Dead Sea Scrolls (\u05e0\u05db\u05d1\u05d3\u05d9\u05dd<\/span>).\u2026 Probably they are so called because they participate in or embody the glory of God (cf. T. Jud.<\/em><\/a> 25:2<\/a>; T. Levi<\/em><\/a> 18:5<\/a>; Heb 9:5<\/a>; Philo, <\/a>Spec. Leg.<\/em><\/a> 1.8.45<\/a>). It is true that \u05e0\u05db\u05d1\u05d3\u05d9\u05dd<\/span> can also refer to illustrious men, noblemen (Isa 3:5<\/a>; 23:8<\/a>; Nah 3:10<\/a>; Ps 149:8<\/a>; 1QpHab 4:2<\/a>; 4QpNah 2:9<\/a>; 3:9<\/a>; 4:4<\/a>; 1QM 14:11<\/a>), but in these cases the Septuagint does not use \u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u03b1\u03b9<\/span>, and one would expect a more idiomatic Greek rendering if this were Jude\u2019s meaning. It is in any case an unlikely meaning, especially in view of the parallel statement in v 10a<\/a>. Clement of Alexandria already interpreted Jude\u2019s \u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u03b1\u03b9<\/span> as angels\u201d (Richard J. Bauckham, 2 Peter, Jude<\/em>, Word Biblical Commentary 50 [Dallas: Word, 1998], 57<\/a>). Bauckham\u2019s reference to Clement of Alexandria comes from the latter\u2019s Comments on the Epistle of Jude<\/em> (Ante-Nicene Fathers<\/em> 2:573<\/a>): \u201cThey \u2018speak evil of majesty,\u2019 that is, of the angels\u201d (cited in Gene L. Green, Jude and 2 Peter<\/em>, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament [Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008], 76\u201377<\/a>). Finally, J. N. D. Kelly observes: \u201cThis term cannot, any more than authority above and for much the same reasons, designate community leaders: this is quite out of keeping with the context, and there is no plausible instance of its bearing this sense.\u2026 In the light of the context (cf. 9<\/a>) and 2 Pet. 2:10 f.<\/a>, which borrows from this verse, there can be no doubt that it here denotes a class of angelic beings; and this usage of the noun is supported by LXX Ex. 15:11<\/a>. \u2018Glory\u2019 (doxa<\/em>) originally stands for the numinous radiance which belongs to God Himself (e.g. Ex. 24:16 f.<\/a>; 33:18\u201323<\/a>; Ps. 19:1<\/a>), but later the angels who surround Him come to be regarded as sharing in it (cf. Philo, <\/a>Spec. leg.<\/em><\/a> i. 8. 45<\/a>: \u2018by thy glory I understand the powers which keep watch around thee\u2019)\u201d (J. N. D. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude<\/em>, Black\u2019s New Testament Commentary [London: Continuum, 1969], 263<\/a>).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>30<\/a><\/p>\n

Recall that, in terms of the divine council<\/span> hierarchy of the Old Testament, \u201cangels\u201d would denote a low-level task or job description (transmitting a message as a messenger), as opposed to ruling over a geographical region, something assigned to \u201csons of God\u201d in the <\/span>Deuteronomy 32<\/a> worldview. In other words, in the spiritual world, just as in the human world, while divine beings (save for the unique Yahweh) are all of the same \u201cspecies,\u201d so<\/span>me have higher rank than others. The \u201chousehold\u201d metaphor discussed in chapter 3<\/a> is illustrative. While a pharaoh\u2019s administration might number thousands, there was nevertheless an inner circle of ind<\/span>ividuals that had greater access, status, and delegated power. Hence \u201cglorious ones\u201d are likely named because of closer access to God\u2019s glory.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n

SACRED SPACE AND REALM DISTINCTION<\/p>\n

The New Testament portrays the Christian life\u2014even the very Christian existence\u200b<\/em>\u2014as prompting a spiritual turf war. But we often don\u2019t pick up on the messaging.<\/p>\n

Sacred space and realm distinction are not just Old Testament concepts. We talked at length about these two concepts in earlier chapters in regard to the Israelite tabernacle and the temple. But New Testament language about them takes the reader in fascinating directions. Believe it or not, you are sacred space<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Paul in particular refers to the believer as the place where God now tabernacles\u2014we are the temple of God, both individually and corporately. This is most transparently seen in English translations in two passages where Paul tells the Corinthians, \u201cYou are God\u2019s temple\u201d (1 Cor 3:16<\/a>), and, \u201cYour body is the temple of the Holy Spirit\u201d (1 Cor 6:19<\/a>). The former speaks of the church corporately as the temple; the latter focuses on each believer individually.This observation is made not only on the basis of the wordings in context, but also grammar. The second person verb form in 1 Cor 3:16<\/a> (\u201cyou are God\u2019s temple\u201d) is grammatically plural.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>31<\/a> Paul also relays the same message:<\/p>\n

19<\/a> Consequently, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but you are fellow citizens of the saints [lit.: holy ones] and members of the household of God, 20<\/a> built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, 21<\/a> in whom the whole building, joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, 22<\/a> in whom you also are built up together into a dwelling place of God in the Spirit (Eph 2:19\u201322<\/a>).<\/p>\n

We are the place where God dwells\u2014the same presence that filled the temple in the Old Testament.<\/p>\n

The same concept is less obvious in other passages. For example, while most Christians will have heard of the tabernacle, most never discern that Paul transfers the language of the tabernacle to the believer to make the specific point that the same presence that oriented holy ground in Israel\u2019s camp indwells the believer. In 2 Corinthians the apostle writes:<\/p>\n

1<\/a> For we know that if our earthly house, the tent, is destroyed, we have a building from God, a house not made by hands, eternal in the heavens. 2<\/a> For indeed, in this house we groan, because we desire to put on our dwelling from heaven (2 Cor 5:1\u20132<\/a>).<\/p>\n

Paul compares the believer\u2019s body\u2014which he had called God\u2019s temple in his first letter to the Corinthians (1 Cor 6:19<\/a>)\u2014to a tent<\/em>. The Greek word translated \u201ctent\u201d is sk\u0113nos<\/span>, a term closely related to sk\u0113n\u0113<\/span>, the term used in 2 Corinthians 5:1\u20134<\/a> of Israel\u2019s tabernacle, and which is used in the Septuagint for the tabernacle (e.g., Exod 29:4<\/a>).<\/p>\n

The implications are startling. We have all likely heard the verse where Jesus says, \u201cWhere two or three are gathered in my name, I am there in the midst of them\u201d (Matt 18:20<\/a>). But put in the context of this other New Testament language, which in turn is informed by the Old Testament imagery of the tabernacle and temple, it means that wherever believers are and gather, the spiritual ground they occupy is sanctified amid the powers of darkness.<\/p>\n

If we could see with spiritual eyes, we would see a world of darkness peppered with the lights of Yahweh\u2019s presence, spreading out to meet each other, inexorably pressing and spreading out to take back the ground of the disinherited nations from the enemy. Of course we would also see those lights surrounded by darkness.<\/p>\n

The imagery requires perspective. At one time, not long ago, there was one light, meandering its way through the domains of hostile gods. That light nearly went out, scattered to all parts of the known world in tiny embers. But then another solitary, but great, light shone in darkness (Isa 60:1<\/a>; Matt 4:16<\/a>). That light would turn the darkness into light (Isa 42:16<\/a>), and the nations would be drawn to it (Isa 60:1\u20133<\/a>).<\/p>\n

The New Testament portrayal of the spiritual war doesn\u2019t hide the task from the reader. The people of God, in whom is the Name, the presence of Yahweh, are surrounded, as they have been before. The apostles understood that but were not faint of heart. There would be no surrender of holy ground in the midst of darkness. Some of the things they taught early believers to observe in fact commemorated the unseen conflict raging around them. Everyone had to choose a side.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\n

CHAPTER 38<\/p>\n

Choosing Sides<\/p>\n

Any veteran who has experienced combat will tell you that war is a terrible thing. Caught in such a conflict, you must take sides. Many modern people, particularly in developed countries, like to think that diplomacy and neutrality provide a more enlightened path. But some wars\u2014and some enemies\u200b\u2014don\u2019t offer that option. When an enemy wants nothing but your defeat and annihilation, neutrality means choosing death.<\/p>\n

The war raging in the unseen world for the souls of human imagers of Yahweh is that kind of war. Neutrality is not on the table. We\u2019ve seen from the writings of Paul in particular that the advance of Yahweh\u2019s kingdom rule was cast as a turf war pitting him against hostile divine beings. That spiritual conflict is shown most dramatically in two unlikely places.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

BAPTISM AS HOLY WAR<\/p>\n

First Peter 3:14\u201322<\/a> is one of the more puzzling passages of the New Testament. Set against the backdrop of the divine council worldview, however, it\u2019s actually quite comprehensible<\/span>.<\/p>\n

14<\/a> But even if you might suffer for the sake of righteousness, you are blessed. And do not be afraid of their intimidation or be disturbed, 15<\/a> but set Christ apart as Lord in your hearts, always rea<\/span>dy to make a defense to anyone who asks you for an accounting concerning the hope that is in you. 16<\/a> But do so with courtesy and respect, having a good conscience, so that in the things in which you a<\/span>re slandered, the ones who malign your good conduct in Christ may be put to shame. 17<\/a> For it is better to suffer for doing good, if God wills it, than for doing\u2005evil.<\/p>\n

18<\/a> For Christ also suffered once <\/span>for sins,<\/p>\n

the just for the unjust,<\/p>\n

in order that he could bring you to God,<\/p>\n

being put to death in the flesh,<\/p>\n

but made alive in the spirit,<\/p>\n

19<\/a> in which also he went and proclaimed to the spirits in pri<\/span>son,<\/p>\n

20<\/a> who were formerly disobedient, when the patience of God waited in the days of Noah, while an ark was being constructed, in which a few\u2014that is, eight souls\u2014were rescued through water. 21<\/a> And a<\/span>lso, corresponding to this, baptism now saves you, not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22<\/a> who is at the right h<\/span>and of God, having gone into heaven, with angels and authorities and powers having been subjected to him (1 Pet 3:14\u201322<\/a>).<\/p>\n

The overall theme of 1 Peter is that Christians must withstand persecution and<\/span> persevere in their faith. That much is clear in this passage. But what\u2019s with baptism, the ark, Noah, and spirits in prison? And does this text say that baptism saves us?<\/p>\n

To understand what Peter is <\/span>thinking, we have to understand a concept that scholars have called types<\/em> or typology<\/em>. Typology is a kind of prophecy. We\u2019re all familiar with predictive verbal prophecy\u2014when a prophet announces<\/em> that <\/span>something is going to come to pass in the future. Sometimes that comes \u201cout of the blue,\u201d with God impressing thoughts on the prophet\u2019s mind that the prophet then utters. The prophecy is spelled out. Types <\/span>work differently.<\/p>\n

A type is basically an unspoken<\/em> prophecy. It is an event, person, or institution that foreshadows something that will come, but which isn\u2019t revealed until after the fact. For e<\/span>xample, in Romans 5:14<\/a> Paul tells us that Adam was a typos<\/span> of Christ. This Greek word means \u201ckind\u201d or \u201cmark\u201d or type<\/em>\u2014it\u2019s actually where typology<\/em> comes from. Paul was saying that, in some way, Adam fo<\/span>reshadowed or echoed something about Jesus. In Adam\u2019s case, that something was how his act (sin) had an effect on all humanity. Like Adam, Jesus did something that would have an impact on all humanity\u2014his death and resurrection. Another example would be P<\/span>assover, since it prefigured the crucifixion of Jesus, who was called \u201cthe lamb of God.\u201d The point is that there was some analogous connection between the type (Adam) and its echo (Jesus), called the <\/span>antitype<\/em> by scholars.<\/p>\n

Peter uses typology in 1 Peter 3:14\u201322<\/a>. Specifically, he assumes that the great flood in Genesis 6\u20138<\/a>, especially the sons o<\/span>f God event in Genesis 6:1\u20134<\/a>, typified<\/em> or foreshadowed the gospel and the resurrection. For Peter, these events were commemorated during baptism. That needs some unpacking, since the points of correla<\/span>tion aren\u2019t apparent.<\/p>\n

In an earlier chapter we saw the tight connections between Genesis 6:1\u20134<\/a> and the epistles of 2 Peter and Jude.See chapter 12<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>1<\/a> We discovered that 2 Peter and Jude communicated something about t<\/span>he flood and the sons of God that wasn\u2019t found in Genesis, but which came from the Second Temple book of 1 Enoch. Specifically, 1 Enoch 6\u201315<\/a> describes how the sons of God (called \u201cWatchers\u201d in that an<\/span>cient book) who committed the offense of Genesis 6:1\u20134<\/a> were imprisoned under the earth for what they had done. That imprisonment is behind the reference to the \u201cspirits in prison\u201d in 1 Peter 3:19<\/a>.I am aware that some scholars seek to argue that these imprisoned spirits are the spirits of people, namely, the people who died in the flood. The most thorough treatment of this issue and the larger topic of the meaning of 1 Pet 3<\/a> is Bo Reicke, The Disobedient Spirits and Christian Baptism: A Study of 1 Peter 3:19 and Its Context<\/em>, Acta Seminarii Neotestamentici Upsaliensis 13 (Copenhagen: E. Munksgaard, 1946; repr., Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2005). Reicke (and other scholars of course) marshals solid evidence that reinforces a supernatural interpretation of the passage, one that was embraced in the early church and is found in the Apostles\u2019 Creed.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>2<\/a><\/p>\n

R<\/span>ecall that the prison to which the offending divine beings were sent was referred to as Tartarus in 2 Peter 2:4\u20135<\/a>. The Greek behind the terms is often translated \u201chell\u201d or \u201cHades\u201d in English, but thos<\/span>e renderings are a bit misleading. Tartarus of course has no literal geography. This is the language of the spiritual realm. Tartarus was part of the underworld (biblical Sheol), a place conceived as being inside the earth because, in ancient experience, that is where the dead go\u2014they w<\/span>ere buried. Broadly speaking, the underworld is not hell; it is the afterlife, the place or realm where the dead go. That \u201cplace\u201d has its own \u201cgeography.\u201d Some experience eternal life with God in the spiritual realm; others do not.<\/span>When terms like \u201chell,\u201d \u201cHades,\u201d \u201cheaven,\u201d \u201cSheol,\u201d etc. are understood in this context\u2014they all speak of the afterlife and its spiritual geography\u2014there is no need to criticize the Apostles\u2019 Creed or other early Christian teaching as being unbiblical. The Apostles\u2019 Creed says Jesus \u201cdescended to Hades.\u201d Jesus did not go to hell, the place of punishment. Rather, the point is that he went to the realm of the dead\u2014he died.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>3<\/a><\/p>\n

In the 1 Enoch story, the Watchers appealed their sentence and asked Enoch, the <\/span>biblical prophet who never died (Gen 5:21\u201324<\/a>), to intercede with God for them (1 Enoch 6:4<\/a>). God rejected their petition and Enoch had to return to the imprisoned Watchers and give them the bad news (<\/span>1 Enoch 13:1\u20133<\/a>; 14:4\u20135<\/a>). The point to catch is that Enoch visits the spiritual world in the \u201cbad section of town\u201d where the offending Watchers are being held.<\/p>\n

As was the case with 2 Peter 2:4<\/a> and its <\/span>mention of being imprisoned in Tartarus, this story from 1 Enoch was on Peter\u2019s mind in 1 Peter 3<\/a>. It is the key to understanding what he says.<\/p>\n

Peter saw a theological analogy between the events of Ge<\/span>nesis 6<\/a> and the gospel and resurrection. In other words, he considered the events of Genesis 6<\/a> to be types<\/em> or precursors to New Testament events and ideas.<\/p>\n

Just as Jesus was the second Adam for Paul, <\/span>Jesus is the second Enoch for Peter<\/em>. Enoch descended to the imprisoned fallen angels to announce their doom. First Peter 3:14\u201322<\/a> has Jesus descending to these same \u201cspirits in prison\u201d to tell them the<\/span>y were still defeated<\/em>, despite his crucifixion. God\u2019s plan of salvation and kingdom rule had not been derailed\u2014in fact, it was right on schedule. The crucifixion actually meant victory over every demo<\/span>nic force opposed to God. This victory declaration is why 1 Peter 3:14\u201322<\/a> ends with Jesus risen from the dead and set at the right hand of God\u2014above all angels, authorities and powers<\/em>. The messaging i<\/span>s very deliberate, and has a supernatural view of Genesis 6:1\u20134<\/a> at its core.<\/p>\n

So how does this relate to baptism? Our focus for answering that question is two terms in verse 21<\/a>, that baptism is \u201can app<\/strong><\/span>eal<\/strong> to God for a good conscience<\/strong> through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.\u201d<\/p>\n

The two boldfaced words need reconsideration in light of the divine council worldview. The word most often translated \u201cappea<\/span>l\u201d (eper\u014dt\u0113ma<\/span>) in verse 21<\/a> is best understood as \u201cpledge\u201d here, a meaning that it has elsewhere.BDAG, 285<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>4<\/a> Likewise the word \u201cconscience\u201d (suneid\u0113sis<\/span>) does not refer to the inner voice of right and wrong in th<\/span>is text. Rather, the word refers to the disposition of one\u2019s loyalties, a usage that is also found in other contexts and Greek literature.Ibid., 967\u201368<\/a>. BDAG glosses the lemma this way: \u201cattentiveness to obligation, conscientiousness\u201d (p. 968<\/a>). The entry and the secondary scholarship it cites for this meaning point to 1 Tim 1:5<\/a>; 1 Cor 10:25<\/a>, 27\u201329<\/a>; Heb 9:9<\/a>, 14<\/a> as New Testament examples. In these instances, it may be helpful to think of \u201cconscience\u201d as one\u2019s predilection or inner disposition in some behavioral direction (as opposed to a \u201cmoral gyroscope\u201d that parses good and evil). Contemporary texts such as 1 Clement 2:4<\/a>; 34:7<\/a> illustrate the former usage and meaning. See H. Osborne, \u201c\u03a3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03b4\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2<\/span>,\u201d Journal of Theological Studies<\/em> 32 (1931): 167\u201378; B. Reicke, The Disobedient Spirits and Christian Baptism<\/em>, 174\u201382 (more external examples); Margaret E. Thrall, \u201cThe Pauline Use of \u03a3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03b4\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2<\/span>,\u201d New Testament Studies<\/em> 14.1 (1967): 118\u201325; Paul W. Gooch, \u201c\u2005\u2018Conscience\u2019 in 1 Corinthians 8 and 10,\u201d New Testament Studies<\/em> 33.2 (1987): 244\u201354.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>5<\/a><\/p>\n

Baptism, then, is not what produces salvation. It \u201csaves\u201d in<\/span> that it reflects a heart decision: a pledge of loyalty to the risen Savior. In effect, baptism in New Testament theology is a loyalty oath<\/em>, a public avowal of who is on the Lord\u2019s side in the cosmic <\/span>war between good and evil.For how this plays out in both believer\u2019s baptism and infant baptism (presuming the latter is divorced from the doctrine of salvation), see the companion website<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>6<\/a> But in addition to that, it is also a visceral reminder to the defeated fallen angels. Every baptism is a reiteration of their doom in the wake of the gospel and the kingdo<\/span>m of God. Early Christians understood the typology of this passage and its link back to the fallen angels of Genesis 6<\/a>. Early baptismal formulas included a renunciation of Satan and his angels<\/em> for thi<\/span>s very reason.For example, see Tertullian: On the Crown<\/em> 3; On the Shows<\/em><\/a> 4<\/a>; On the Soul<\/em><\/a> 35.3<\/a>. See Ansgar Kelly, The Devil at Baptism: Ritual, Theology, and Drama<\/em> (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1985), 94\u2013105.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>7<\/a> Baptism was\u2014and still is\u2014spiritual warfare.<\/p>\n

RENEWING OUR VOW<\/p>\n

The second historic Christian rite, observing the \u201cLord\u2019s Supper\u201d or Communion, also has divine council associations, and again they are not so obvious. This time we need to begin in <\/span>1 Corinthians 8:1\u20136<\/a>:<\/p>\n

1<\/a> Now concerning food sacrificed to idols, we know that \u201cwe all have knowledge.\u201d Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up. 2<\/a> If anyone thinks he knows anything, he has not yet known<\/span> as it is necessary to know. 3<\/a> But if anyone loves God, this one is known by him.<\/p>\n

4<\/a> Therefore, concerning the eating of food sacrificed to idols, we know that \u201can idol is nothing in the world\u201d and tha<\/span>t \u201cthere is no God except one.\u201d 5<\/a> For even if after all there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many gods and many lords,<\/p>\n

6<\/a> yet to us there is one God, the Father,<\/p>\n

f<\/span>rom whom are all things, and we are for him,<\/p>\n

and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ,<\/p>\n

through whom are all things, and we are through him.This passage is frequently translated with \u201cgods\u201d and \u201clords\u201d in quotation marks, as though Paul wasn\u2019t serious about what he was saying. The Greek manuscripts have no such punctuation.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>8<\/a><\/p>\n

In 1 Corinthians 8<\/a> Paul was writing about whether it was permiss<\/span>ible to eat food sacrificed to idols. He decided that it was allowable because \u201can idol is nothing\u201d (8:4<\/a>) and people were no better if they ate or abstained (8:8<\/a>). However, he warned that believers wh<\/span>o lack such knowledge should abstain (8:9<\/a>).<\/p>\n

Although Paul bases his decision on the fact that idols are nothing, his comments in verses 4\u20136<\/a> tell us that he knew the entities behind them were real. He <\/span>knew his Old Testament.<\/p>\n

Early in our study when I introduced the divine council, I noted that the shema<\/span> of Deuteronomy 6:4<\/a>, the theological creed of Israel, was worded in such a way that the existence<\/span> of other gods was not denied (\u201cthe Lord our<\/em> God is one\u201d). Paul\u2019s wording in 1 Corinthians 8<\/a> has the same feel. In fact, most scholars believe that Paul specifically has the shema<\/span> in mind.See, for example, Larry Hurtado, One God, One Lord: Early Christian Devotion and Ancient Jewish Monotheism<\/em> (London: Continuum, 2003), 97\u201399. James also has the shema<\/em> in view when he writes, \u201cYou believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe, and shudder!\u201d (Jas 2:19<\/a>). Note that James does not say the demons believe in God and therefore tremble. He says that they believe that God is one<\/em>\u2014and that is what frightens them. A fundamental theological point of the shema<\/em> was that God had offered redemption to and through only one<\/em> nation and community: Abraham\u2019s descendants. Israel had been created by supernatural intervention after God had disinherited the nations of the earth (Gen 10<\/a>) at the Tower of Babel event (Gen 11:1\u20139<\/a>). Deut 32:8\u20139<\/a>, a passage at which we\u2019ve looked many times in this book, described that disinheritance: \u201cWhen the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when he divided mankind, he fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God. But the Lord<\/span>\u2019s portion is his people, Jacob his allotted heritage\u201d (esv<\/span>). After the judgment at the Tower of Babel, God called Abraham (Gen 12:1\u20133<\/a>). The two events are juxtaposed back-to-back. When God called Abraham and promised the creation of his \u201cportion,\u201d the nation of Israel, through Abraham and Sarah, he disinherited all other nations, allotting them to other heavenly beings, the sons of God. Those divine beings are elsewhere referred to as the host of heaven, gods (elohim<\/em>), and demons (shedim<\/em>) in Deuteronomy (Deut 4:19\u201320<\/a>; 17:3<\/a>; 29:24\u201326<\/a>; 32:17<\/a>). Old Testament theology puts these \u201csons of the Most High\u201d (Psa 82:6<\/a>) under judgment for not ruling justly and seducing the Israelites to worship them instead of the true God (Deut 29:24\u201326<\/a>; 32:17<\/a>; Psa 82<\/a>). There are two important theological points related to the shema<\/em> that touch on Jas 2:19<\/a>. First, all the people of the nations under the dominion of lesser elohim<\/em> were outside the plan of salvation. A Jewish follower of Jesus\u2014the audience of the book of James (Jas 1:1\u20133<\/a>)\u2014knew and rightly affirmed the shema<\/em>. Their faith in Jesus did not nullify the creed \u201cThe Lord our God is one\u201d since Jesus was the incarnate Yahweh (see chs. 16\u201318<\/a>). After the event of the cross, Abraham\u2019s seed was all believers, Jew and Gentile together (Gal 3:26\u201329<\/a>). Believing \u201cGod is one\u201d was still an expression of faith for a Jewish follower of Jesus that there was only one God who could provide salvation\u2014and he had done just that through the work of Jesus. Second, the rebellious sons of God also knew what the shema<\/em> meant. It reminded them that they were under judgment, sentenced to die like men (Psa 82:6\u20137<\/a>; see ch. 30<\/a>), and forever banished from the presence of the true God. That is what frightens them, not the reality of God\u2019s existence. See Christopher R. Bruno, \u2018God Is One\u2019: The Function of \u2018Eis Ho Theos\u2019 as a Ground for Gentile Inclusion in Paul\u2019s Letters<\/em>, Library of New Testament Studies 497; (London: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2013).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>9<\/a><\/p>\n

The book o<\/span>f Deuteronomy, in which the shema<\/span> occurs, of course has several references to other gods as real entities, considering them to be demons (Deut 32:17<\/a>). If the writer of Deuteronomy did not really belie<\/span>ve there were other gods, then he would have to deny the existence of demons as well. The writer knew there were other real gods, and so the shema<\/span> was demanding loyalty to Yahweh (\u201cour God\u201d), not deny<\/span>ing the existence of other gods.Deut 32:17<\/a> is regularly mistranslated in English versions, even producing results so confusing that they say the demons (shedim<\/em>) both are and are not gods (e.g., esv<\/span>). The proper translation is reflected in the leb<\/span>: \u201cThey sacrificed to the demons, not God, to<\/em> gods whom they had not known.\u201d See my article on this verse and its translation: Michael S. Heiser, \u201cDoes Deuteronomy 32:17 Assume or Deny the Reality of Other Gods?\u201d Bible Translator<\/em> 59.3 (July 2008): 137\u201345.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>10<\/a><\/p>\n

We can be sure that Paul was thinking of the demonic entities of Deuteronomy 32:17<\/a> with regard to this issue since he quotes that verse in 1 Corinthians 10:14\u201322<\/a>.Scholars have recognized that, in 1 Cor 10<\/a>, particularly in this section, Paul is tracing his argument by appealing to the story of Israel in Deut 32<\/a>. See Guy Prentiss Waters, The End of Deuteronomy in the Epistles of Paul<\/em>, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 221 (T\u00fcbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006), 131\u201347, esp. 134n12, where the author presents a long list of commentators who see an explicit connection between Deut 32:17<\/a> and 1 Cor 10:20<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>11<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

14<\/a> Therefore, my dear friends, flee from idolatry. 15<\/a> I am speaking as to sensible people; you judge what I am saying. 16<\/a> The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of<\/span> Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? 17<\/a> Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all share from the one bread. 18<\/a> Consider Israel<\/span> according to the flesh: are not the ones who eat the sacrifices sharers in the altar? 19<\/a> Therefore, what am I saying? That food sacrificed to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? 20<\/a> No, bu<\/span>t that the things which they sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons and not to God<\/strong>, and I do not want you to become sharers with demons<\/strong>. 21<\/a> You are not able to drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of de<\/strong><\/span>mons<\/strong>. You are not able to share the table of the Lord and the table of demons<\/strong>. 22<\/a> Or are we attempting to provoke the Lord to jealousy? We are not stronger than he is, are we? (1 Cor 10:14\u201322<\/a>).<\/p>\n

For Pa<\/span>ul the pagan gods were demons. This makes perfect sense when considered in light of Deuteronomy 32:17<\/a>, which makes exactly the same connection. It is interesting that Paul isn\u2019t completely categorical<\/span>\u2014he allows that meat sold in the market place can be eaten (1 Cor 10:25<\/a>)\u2014but is fearful of \u201cprovoking God to jealousy\u201d under other circumstances. This phrase is an important clue, for it is lifted fro<\/span>m Deuteronomy 32:16<\/a>\u2014the verse right before 32:17<\/a>, where the gods are called demons:<\/p>\n

15<\/a> And Jeshurun [Israel]See Sharon Pace Jeansonne, \u201cJeshurun,\u201d The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary<\/em> (ed. David Noel Freedman; New York: Doubleday, 1992), 3:771\u201372<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>12<\/a> grew fat, and he kicked;<\/p>\n

you grew fat, you bloated, and you became obstinate;<\/p>\n

and he aban<\/span>doned God, his maker,<\/p>\n

and he scoffed at the rock of his salvation.<\/p>\n

16<\/a> They made him jealous with strange gods;<\/p>\n

with detestable things they provoked him.<\/p>\n

17<\/a> They sacrificed to the demons, not God,<\/p>\n

to g<\/span>ods whom they had not known,<\/p>\n

new gods who came from recent times;<\/p>\n

their ancestors had not known them (Deut 32:15\u201317<\/a>).<\/p>\n

It\u2019s pretty clear that Paul was worried about sacrificing to demons with respect t<\/span>o the whole issue of meat sacrificed to idols. The meat wasn\u2019t really the issue; being involved in the sacrifice was. Apparently some in the Corinthian church had gone beyond eating the meat to actual participation, assuming that since an idol was just a piece of wood or stone, the<\/span>ir participation wouldn\u2019t offend God. Paul had to teach them that this wasn\u2019t true, and used the Lord\u2019s Table as an analogy (<\/span>1 Cor 10:14\u201318<\/a>).<\/p>\n

For Paul there was no middle ground. Participation at the Lord\u2019s Table meant solidarity with and loyalty to Yahweh. The Lord\u2019s Table commemorated not only Jesus\u2019 death (1 Cor 1<\/span>1:23\u201326<\/a>) but the covenant relationship Yahweh had with the participants. Violating that relationship by participating in sacrifices to other gods was tantamount to siding with the gods of the nations.<\/p>\n

DELIVERED UNTO SATAN<\/p>\n

Baptism and the Lord\u2019s Table were rites of allegiance. The family of Yahweh was to keep itself whole and faithful to Yahweh, and those rites expressed that faithfulness. This cont<\/span>ext also helps us understand a controversial phrase in 1 Corinthians 5<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Within the Church, there were at times lapses of loyalty when members of the \u201chousehold of faith\u201d (Gal 6:10<\/a>) transgressed the mo<\/span>ral and doctrinal boundaries set by Yahweh. In such cases, Paul directed believers to remove fellow family members who were unrepentant from the church (1 Cor 5:9\u201313<\/a>). More specifically, Paul demanded<\/span> that the disloyal be \u201c[handed] over \u2026 to Satan\u201d (1 Cor 5:5<\/a>). Paul further noted the goal of such a decision is \u201cfor the destruction of the flesh, in order that his spirit may be saved in the day of t<\/span>he Lord.\u201d<\/p>\n

What did Paul mean by these phrases? With respect to the \u201cdestruction of the flesh,\u201d Paul often used the word \u201cflesh\u201d (sarkos<\/span>) to refer to the physical body, but he sometimes used it to refe<\/span>r to the self-deception of trusting in our own works to merit God\u2019s favor, or an ungodly manner of life.BDAG, 916<\/a>; H. R. Balz and G. Schneider, Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament<\/em> (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1993), 3:231<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>13<\/a> Since there is no indication that someone expelled from the church was going to die immediate<\/span>ly as a result, this second usage makes the most sense in 1 Corinthians 5<\/a>. Paul is insisting that the unrepentant person be dismissed from the church to live in his or her sin and endure the consequen<\/span>ces of the behavior. Since salvation was not based in any way on human merit, the erring believer would be saved in the end, but care must be taken to avoid self-destructive sinful behavior from leading other believers astray.<\/span><\/p>\n

But what about \u201chanded over to Satan\u201d? Recall that the Israelites viewed their land as holy ground and the territory of the non-Israelite nations as controlled by demonic go<\/span>ds. Israel was holy ground because that was where the presence of Yahweh resided. The opposite was true everywhere else.<\/p>\n

In the last chapter, we saw that gatherings of believers were viewed the same w<\/span>ay. God\u2019s presence was no longer in the Jerusalem temple, but in the temple which is the body of Christ (1 Cor 3:16\u201317<\/a>). The Corinthian church was therefore \u201choly ground\u201d; outside that gathering was t<\/span>he demonic realm. To be expelled from the church was to be thrust into the realm of Satan.<\/p>\n

The spiritual war brought on by the inauguration of the kingdom of God offers no neutrality. Just as Moses de<\/span>manded \u201cWho is on the Lord\u2019s side?\u201d (Exod 32:26<\/a> English Standard Version
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>esv<\/a>) in the wake of the golden calf debacle, so the question is put to every person today. There is salvation in no other name\u2014the name of Jesus, who wa<\/span>s and is the Name, the presence of Yahweh, who tabernacled on earth (John 1:14<\/a>) in flesh for the salvation of the nations.<\/p>\n

\n
\n

<\/span><\/span>Section Summary<\/em><\/p>\n

The kingdom of God is already a present reality, but isn\u2019t yet realized. John the Baptist announced it. He introduced its king. Jesus preached its arrival and demonstrated what life in<\/span> God\u2019s Edenic world could and would be like: no disease, no infirmity, no demonic opposition.<\/p>\n

Many people think of the New Testament as a recounting of the life of Jesus and the apostles sprinkled wit<\/span>h a collection of letters sent by Paul to churches with odd names. While we follow these men and their lives and read the correspondence, the New Testament is so much more.<\/p>\n

The New Testament marks the<\/span> rebirth of a struggle thousands of years in the making. The people of God have been isolated and under foreign rule. The divine presence of the days of Moses, David, Solomon, and the prophets is nothing but memory. When angels<\/span> visit Mary and Zechariah to announce the impending births of Jesus and John, centuries of divine silence are broken. Thirty years later, Judea will explode. The unseen spiritual conflict is even more volatile.<\/span><\/p>\n

Every chapter of the New Testament provides a glimpse into this conflict. The cosmic geography of the Old Testament is evident in the New. Where Jesus goes and wh<\/span>at he says and does when he gets there is framed by confrontation with unseen powers. The conflict pursues him unto death\u2014as God had planned, and as Jesus provoked. The kingdom of God establishes a permanent beachhead at the foot of the cross and the door of the empty tomb.<\/span><\/p>\n

The rest of the New Testament draws heavily on Old Testament motifs. Jesus is gone but present, just as Yahweh was in heaven <\/span>invisible yet on earth in human form. The seed of Abraham, scattered to the winds in exile, turn out to function like spiritual cell groups secretly planted in every nation under the dominion of the hostile gods. The kingdom spreads slowly but relentlessly, one new believer at a time. Every church is a new pocket of resista<\/span>nce, every baptism another pledge of allegiance to the Most High, every celebration of the Lord\u2019s Supper a <\/span>denial of fellowship with lesser masters and a proclamation of the success of Yahweh\u2019s mysterious plan.<\/p>\n

The lines are drawn. The stakes are high. The enemy desperate. T<\/span>he fullness of the Gentiles will come, all Israel will be saved, and the Deliverer will come from the heavenly Zion.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s just a matter of time.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

<\/span><\/span>PART 8<\/p>\n

THE KINGDOM NOT YET<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n

CHAPTER 39<\/p>\n

Final Verdict<\/p>\n

We\u2019ve come to the place in the divine story line where the present must give way to the future. Many scholars and Bible students have proposed all sorts of things for interpreting what the Bible says about end times, but anything approximating precision is not possible.<\/p>\n

The reason for this is straightforward. Old Testament prophecy for the messianic solution to the salvation of humanity and restoration of Eden was deliberately cryptic.See chapter 28<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>1<\/a> So it is with prophecy yet awaiting fulfillment. The biblical text is riddled with ambiguities that undermine the certainty of modern eschatological systems. The New Testament writers who speak about prophetic fulfillments didn\u2019t<\/em> always interpret Old Testament literally. Much is communicated through metaphor framed by an ancient Near Eastern worldview. Consequently, our modern expectations about how a given prophecy will \u201cwork\u201d are inherently insecure.See the companion website<\/a> for examples of these interpretive obstacles.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>2<\/a><\/p>\n

Rather than offer yet another speculative system about end times, my goal over the next three chapters is to show you how the divine council cosmic-geographical worldview we have been exploring sheds significant light on how the long war against Yahweh ends. As with everything else in biblical theology, what happens in the unseen world frames the discussion.<\/p>\n

Though the kingdom story of the Bible is rarely taught with it in mind, the divine council plays an important role throughout that story\u2019s unfolding. The scriptural pattern is that, when God prepares to act in strategic ways that propel his kingdom forward, the divine council is part of that decision making. The council is the vehicle through which God issues his decrees. The purpose of this particular chapter is to take a look back at the council\u2019s role in the unfolding purposes of God and its final meeting, when God moves to initiate the consummation of his plan to restore Eden at the expense of the hostile powers of darkness.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

EDEN, BABEL, SINAI, AND ISRAEL: Acts in Council and Human Failure<\/p>\n

From the very beginning of the human drama revealed in Scripture, the divine council of Yahweh was on the scene.See chapters 5<\/a> through 9<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>3<\/a> We saw at the beginn<\/span>ing of our journey that Yahweh announced his will to create humanity: Let us make humankind in our image and according to our likeness<\/em> (Gen 1:26<\/a>). Yahweh created humankind as his imager, as he had cre<\/span>ated his divine family, so that they could participate in administering his affairs. In this case, that meant spreading his influence and the wonder of Eden throughout the rest of the earth. Humanity would multiply God\u2019s image through procreation (<\/span>Gen 1:27\u201328<\/a>; 5:1<\/a>) to steward the vast planet and its life.<\/p>\n

The original human imagers failed. Yahweh and his council next appear in the disastrous event<\/span> at Babel. Yahweh comes down to observe the disobedience of his human imagers (Gen 11:6<\/a>). He had spared a remnant after the great flood and repeated the instructions he\u2019d given Adam and Eve (Gen 9:1<\/a>).<\/span> But instead of overspreading the earth, humanity had congregated at Babel (Babylon). Instead of taking Yahweh\u2019s influence and knowledge into the world, they sought to bring Yahweh to themselves.<\/p>\n

In r<\/span>esponse, Yahweh said to his council, Let us go down and confuse their language there<\/em> (Gen 11:7<\/a>), and then did so. He also decided that he was done working with humanity. Once people dispersed, Yahweh <\/span>disinherited them, putting them under the authority of lesser elohim<\/span> (Deut 32:8\u20139<\/a>).See chapters 14<\/a> and 15<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>4<\/a> He would now create his own people from a man and his wife too old to bear children, Abraham and Sarah. Israel woul<\/span>d be Yahweh\u2019s portion on the planet (Deut 32:9<\/a>). Through Abraham\u2019s descendants, the rest of the nations would be blessed (Gen 12:1\u20133<\/a>).<\/p>\n

The Israelites wound up in Egypt under hard bondage. God raised u<\/span>p Moses to deliver them and to be his agent of divine power against the gods of Egypt. After leading his people back to Mount Sinai, Yahweh and his council gave the fledgling nation of Israel the law.Deut 33:1\u20132<\/a>; Acts 7:52\u201353<\/a>; Gal 3:19<\/a>; Heb 2:2<\/a>; See chapter 21<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„><\/span>5<\/a> All that was left at that point was to bring them to the land he had promised them. To that end, Yahweh went with them in visible human form, the Angel in whom was the Name. But Israel failed.<\/p>\n

At va<\/span>rious times in the history of Israel\u2019s short-lived monarchy, the council is seen in fleeting glimpses. They are there when prophets are commissioned to urge loyalty to Yahweh and warn of punishment for reb<\/span>ellion (Isa 6:1\u20137<\/a>; Ezek 1<\/a>; Jer 1<\/a>; 23:21\u201322<\/a>). The prophet Micaiah pulls back the curtain of heaven, where we see Yahweh and his assembly of divine beings deciding the fate of Ahab (1 Kgs 22:13\u201328<\/a>)<\/span>. Israel ultimately fails once more. Yahweh sends them, of all places, to Babylon as punishment.<\/p>\n

ALL IS NOT LOST<\/p>\n

The council re-emerges after the exile in three significant scenes we\u2019ve looked at before.<\/p>\n

While in exile, the prophet Daniel has a vision of a divine council scene. The vision is reco<\/span>rded in Daniel 7<\/a>. As we discussed at length earlier, Daniel sees the enthroned God of Israel (the \u201cAncient of Days\u201d) amidst multiple thrones (Dan 7:9<\/a>).See chapters 29<\/a> and 30<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>6<\/a> The divine court is present, this time to decid<\/span>e the future fate of earthly empires (Dan 7:9\u201312<\/a>), portrayed by four beasts (Dan 7:1\u20138<\/a>).<\/p>\n

Once the decision is rendered\u2014that the fourth beast must be destroyed and the other beasts will have their domi<\/span>nion diminished while they await destruction, a second Yahweh figure emerges, coming upon the clouds (Dan 7:13<\/a>). God gives this divine \u201cson of man\u201d everlasting dominion over all \u201cpeoples, \u2026 nations, a<\/span>nd languages\u201d (Dan 7:14<\/a>). The appointed king shares his dominion with the \u201choly ones of the Most High\u201d and \u201cthe nation of the holy ones of the Most High\u201d (Dan 7:22<\/a>, 27<\/a>). Though set in the place of the<\/span> people\u2019s exile\u2014in Babylon\u2014the vision communicates an ultimate victory of God and the reclamation of all nations through this son of man.The reference to \u201clanguages\u201d in Dan 7:14<\/a> adds clarity to the reference to the division of nations at Babel, which division is correlated with multiplicity of languages (Gen 11:1\u20139<\/a>).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>7<\/a><\/p>\n

The setting of Psalm 82<\/a> is not as clearly telegraphed as Dani<\/span>el 7<\/a>, but most scholars would place it during the exile.This placement is often due to a preconceived notion of an Israelite evolution out of polytheism to monotheism, which allows Psa 82<\/a> to be cast as a \u201ckilling off\u201d of the gods. I reject the evolutionary idea for a number of reasons. The presumption is flawed on several levels and results in a forced reading of Psa 82<\/a> and Deut 32:8\u20139<\/a>. See Michael S. Heiser, \u201cDoes Divine Plurality in the Hebrew Bible Demonstrate an Evolution from Polytheism to Monotheism in Israelite Religion?\u201d Journal for the Evangelical Study of the Old Testament<\/em> 1.1 (2012): 1\u201324<\/a>; Heiser, \u201cMonotheism and the Language of Divine Plurality in the Hebrew Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls,\u201d Tyndale Bulletin<\/em> (forthcoming).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>8<\/a> As I\u2019ve noted earlier, when the nations of the earth are taken back by Yahweh, the lesser elohim<\/span> of those nations will be displaced by Yahweh\u2019<\/span>s reconstituted council, his earthly sons and daughters made divine and set over the nations.See chapter 35<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>9<\/a> Those gods who had received their authority over nations from Yahweh but who had led people away from the<\/span> Most High will have their authority terminated in Psalm 82<\/a>. The gods themselves \u201cwill die like men\u201d when Yahweh has reclaimed what is his (Psa 82:6\u20138<\/a>).<\/p>\n

Divine council members still loyal to Yahweh co<\/span>me into view once more as the exile of Judah is ending. As the sins of the Davidic dynasty and its people are pardoned, Yahweh directs his council in a series of grammatically plural commands:<\/p>\n

1<\/a>  \u201cCo<\/span>mfort; comfort my people,\u201d says your God.<\/p>\n

2<\/a> \u201cSpeak to the heart of Jerusalem, and call to her,<\/p>\n

that her compulsory labor is fulfilled, that her sin is paid for,<\/p>\n

that she has received from the hand of <\/span>Yahweh double for all her sins\u201d (Isa 40:1\u20132<\/a>).See chapter 31<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>10<\/a><\/p>\n

The context of Isaiah 40<\/a> is a new beginning for Israel. God is acting to bring about a transition in Israel\u2019s status. She must return to Zion and await <\/span>her coming king.There is much more to this than the rebuilding of a temple and Zerubbabel\u2019s return. On Zerubbabel\u2019s lineage, see Derek Kidner, Ezra and Nehemiah: An Introduction and Commentary<\/em> Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries 12 (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1979). Kidner notes (pp. 40\u201341<\/a>) of Zerubbabel: \u201cHe is known as the son of Shealtiel (3:2, et al.) who was Jehoiachin\u2019s eldest son. But the Heb text of 1 Chr 3:19<\/a> makes Zerubbabel the son of Pedaiah, who was a younger brother of Shealtiel. If this is the true text, it implies a levirate marriage of Pedaiah to the widow of Shealtiel, whereby the firstborn was reckoned as Shealtiel\u2019s to keep the family name in being (cf. Deut 25:5f.<\/a>; Ruth 4:10<\/a>). As Shealtiel\u2019s heir, he would be first in line for the throne.\u201d Scholars quite naturally draw from this lineage the idea that many Jews would have had hopes for a royal (Davidic) restoration, possibly in messianic terms. While it is true that Zerubbabel was in the line of David, the biblical material dating to the time of the return from exile and afterward bears abundant testimony to the fact that he was not the promised heir to the Davidic covenantal throne. Two items are, in my view, telling in this regard. First, while the prophet Zechariah casts Zerubbabel as God\u2019s agent for completing the temple (Zech 4:6\u20139<\/a>), the prophet\u2019s eschatological outlook for the nation\u2019s destiny is more focused on Joshua the high priest (Zech 3:1\u201310<\/a>; 6:9\u201315<\/a>). \u201cJoshua,\u201d of course, is in Hebrew Yeshua (\u201csalvation\u201d), the Hebrew equivalent of Jesus. Given the hindsight of the New Testament, there seems to be a play on words here if not a foreshadowing. Second, the name Zerubbabel means \u201cseed of Babel.\u201d While neither the name nor the scriptural account of Zerubbabel amounts to a blemish on his character, it would seem that the name cryptically informs us of some theological messaging: Yahweh had taken his seed out of Babel (i.e., delivering them), but Yahweh would not have his ultimate Davidic king bear any attachment to Babylon. This may be why, although the nation was Yahweh\u2019s son, Matthew saw no analogy to Yahweh calling his seed out of Babylon (Israel, God\u2019s son, was there because of apostasy), but did<\/em> see an analogy with Egypt (Hos 11:1<\/a>; Israel was there because God gave Jacob instructions to go there; Gen 46:1\u20134<\/a>). We also ought to be able to discern that this return would not be the<\/em> kingdom of God because of the terms of the new covenant of Jer 31:31\u201333<\/a>. Both Jeremiah and Isaiah describe kingdom living as a transformed society, one that cannot be accomplished without the presence of the Spirit and the divine messiah, as well as humans made divine. See J. J. M. Roberts, \u201cThe Divine King and the Human Community in Isaiah\u2019s Vision of the Future,\u201d in The Quest for the Kingdom of God: Studies in Honor of George E. Mendenhall<\/em> (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1983), 127\u201336.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>11<\/a> A voice within the council then cries out (again, in plural commands):<\/p>\n

In the wilderness prepare the way of the Lord;<\/p>\n

make straight in the desert a highway for our God (Isa 40:3<\/a> English Standard Version
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>esv<\/a><\/span>).<\/p>\n

A lone voice responds to the call in Isaiah 40:6<\/a>.In Isa 40:6<\/a>, the traditional Hebrew text reads \u201cand someone said\u201d (literally, \u201ca voice said\u201d). The Dead Sea Scrolls read: \u201cAnd I said.\u201d The latter has the prophet himself responding, which implies he is present in the council, a description that aligns with Isaiah\u2019s prophetic call in Isaiah 6<\/a>. It also makes an application to a prophetic figure like John the Baptist more comprehensible. Many scholars consider the reading from the Dead Sea Scrolls to be superior and authentic. For the divine council context of Isaiah 40<\/a>, see Cross, \u201cThe Council of Yahweh in Second Isaiah,\u201d 274\u2013277; Seitz, \u201cThe Divine Council: Temporal Transition and New Prophecy in the Book of Isaiah,\u201d 234\u2013235<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>12<\/a> The fact that the gospel writers quoted this passage with respect to John the Baptist and his message links the coming of the king with the mess<\/span>iah, Jesus of Nazareth.<\/p>\n

With the coming of Jesus the restoration of the kingdom is inaugurated. It was formalized at Jesus\u2019 baptism, the beginning of his public ministry, and made irreversible at the <\/span>crucifixion and resurrection. The divine son and servant succeeded\u2014and will succeed\u2014where Israel, God\u2019s human and corporate son and servant, failed.<\/p>\n

Yahweh\u2019s rule on earth is progressing and advancing<\/span> against unseen powers of darkness and humanity enslaved to those powers. The kingdom has a clear goal: the reclamation of the nations and restoration of Eden on a global scale. The result of accomplishing that goal will be the fulfillment of God\u2019s or<\/span>iginal intention of having a family-council of divine and human imagers. Humanity will become divine and displace the lesser elohim<\/span> over the nations <\/span>under the authority of the unique divine son, the resurrected Jesus.<\/p>\n

We live in this period of advancement. We are already in God\u2019s kingdom, but not yet. Our bodies are earthly tabernacles for the glo<\/span>ry that we have yet to fully experience. We are in the process of becoming what we are\u2014the divine-human children and household-council of Yahweh.<\/p>\n

When God once again moves to initiate the final phase <\/span>of his plan, the council will again meet. We can see what has yet to happen when we read Revelation 4\u20135<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\n
\n

YAHWEH\u2019S ELDERS IN COUNCIL<\/p>\n

Scholars have long identified John\u2019s vision in Revelation 4\u20136<\/a> as a divine council scene.Joseph M. Baumgarten, \u201cThe Duodecimal Courts of Qumran, Revelation, and the Sanhedrin,\u201d Journal of Biblical Literature<\/em> 95 (1976): 59\u201378, esp. 65\u201370. Baumgarten writes: \u201cIt is surprising that scholars who deal with the exegetical problems associated with the twenty-four elders make no mention of the fact that the participation of the elders in the final judgment is a well-established Jewish concept with roots in biblical and apocalyptic thought. The heavenly tribunal itself is a familiar element of biblical imagery which has been compared with its cognates among the pagan cultures of the ancient Near East\u201d (p. 67).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>13<\/a> One New Testament specialist in the book of Revelation notes:<\/p>\n

The focus of the throne vision is God enthroned in his heavenly court surrounded by a variety of angelic beings or lesser deities (angels, archangels, seraphim, cherubim) who function as courtiers. All such descriptions of God enthroned in the midst of his heavenly court are based on the ancient conception of the divine council or assembly found in Mesopotamia, Ugarit, and Phoenicia as well as in Israel.David E. Aune, Revelation 1\u20135<\/em>, Word Biblical Commentary 52A (Dallas: Word, 1998), 277<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>14<\/a><\/p>\n

Given the ground we\u2019ve covered to this point, the description of John\u2019s vision will be quite familiar:<\/p>\n

1<\/a> After these things I looked, and behold, an open door in heaven, and the former voice that I had heard like a trumpet speaking with me was saying, \u201cCome up here and I will show you the things which must take place after these things.\u201d 2<\/a> Immediately I was in the Spirit, and behold, a throne was set in heaven, and one was seated on the throne. 3<\/a> And the one seated was similar in appearance to jasper and carnelian stone, and a rainbow was around the throne similar in appearance to emerald. 4<\/a> And around the throne were twenty-four thrones, and seated on the thrones were twenty-four elders dressed in white clothing, and on their heads were gold crowns. 5<\/a> And from the throne came out lightnings and sounds and thunders, and seven torches of fire were burning before the throne, which are the seven spirits of God. 6<\/a> And before the throne was something like a sea of glass, like crystal, and in the midst of the throne and around the throne were four living creatures full of eyes in front and in back. 7<\/a> And the first living creature was similar to a lion, and the second living creature was similar to an ox, and the third living creature had a face like a man\u2019s, and the fourth living creature was similar to an eagle flying. 8<\/a> And the four living creatures, each one of them, had six wings apiece, full of eyes around and inside, and they do not have rest day and night, saying,<\/p>\n

\u201cHoly, holy, holy is the Lord God All-Powerful,<\/p>\n

the one who was and the one who is and the one who is coming!\u201d<\/p>\n

(Rev 4:1\u20138<\/a>).<\/p>\n

The thrice-holy worship takes us back to Isaiah 6:3<\/a>, an obvious divine council scene. Other points of similarity to other council visions include the creatures (cf. description of cherubim in Ezek 1<\/a>; 10<\/a>); wings on the creatures (cf. seraphim of Isa 6<\/a>); God enthroned (Isa 6<\/a>; Ezek 1<\/a>; Dan 7<\/a>), multiple thrones (Dan 7<\/a>); the gemstones, colors, and sea of glass (Ezek 1<\/a>); divine spirits (1 Kgs 22<\/a>). John\u2019s vision in fact combines earlier divine council features in this one vision.G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text<\/em>, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle, Cumbria: Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 1999), 320\u201322<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>15<\/a><\/p>\n

God is surrounded by twenty-four enthroned elders. The identification of these elders has produced much debate. It has been proposed that the twenty-four are<\/p>\n

\u2022 heavenly beings, either cosmic counterparts to the twenty-four priestly divisions of Israel or divine representatives of the twelve tribes of Israel and the twelve apostles;<\/p>\n

\u2022 glorified human believers representing all believers;<\/p>\n

\u2022 Old Testament believers (cf. Heb 11<\/a>); or<\/p>\n

\u2022 nonhuman members of the divine council.Aune lists these and other approaches (Revelation 1\u20135<\/em>, 288\u201389<\/a>).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>16<\/a><\/p>\n

The scene\u2019s description in Revelation 5<\/a>distinguishes the elders from angels (Rev 5:11<\/a>) and specifically has the elders, not the angels, in close proximity to the throne encircling God as a council, imagery akin to Daniel 7<\/a>.See Aune, Revelation 1\u20135<\/em>, 286<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>17<\/a> Our discussion in chapter 35<\/a> about the divinization of humans after death or resurrection makes it possible that the elders are humans made divine. However, the inclusion of martyrs in the scene in Revelation 6:9\u201311<\/a> seems to require that the elders are also distinct from glorified believers. While it is true that both the elders and the martyrs are described in white robes (Rev 4:4<\/a>; 6:11<\/a>), the martyrs receive their robes subsequent to the description of the elders, and are not referred to as elders when that occurs.Identification of the elders as divine beings versus humans is not essential to identifying the scene as a divine council session. Identification of the elders with the people of God is not erased if the elders are divine beings since the purpose of the council assembly is the final phase of God\u2019s triumph on earth and the fact that God\u2019s original intent was to include humans in his council rule. Heaven and earth, divinity and humanity, are not easily separable when it comes to the divine council and God\u2019s plan for humanity.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>18<\/a><\/p>\n

On one level, identification of the elders as human is quite consistent with other divine council material we\u2019ve discussed, particularly the presentation of glorified believers by Jesus in the divine council (Heb 1\u20132<\/a>).See chapter 36<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>19<\/a> Conversely, identifying them as divine doesn\u2019t impinge on the human presence in the council. Heaven and earth, divinity and humanity, are not easily separable when it comes to the divine council and God\u2019s plan for restoration of Eden.<\/p>\n

The interpretive significance of seeing the elders as divine members of Yahweh\u2019s council is that such a reading dovetails with Old Testament divine council scenes involving the judgment of the nations and their gods.<\/p>\n

The choice of \u201celders\u201d to describe the council derives from Isaiah 24:23<\/a>, a passage that, not coincidentally, is apocalyptic in genre like the book of Revelation.<\/p>\n

21<\/a> On that day the Lord will punish<\/p>\n

the host of heaven, in heaven,<\/p>\n

and the kings of the earth, on the earth.<\/p>\n

22<\/a> They will be gathered together<\/p>\n

as prisoners in a pit;<\/p>\n

they will be shut up in a prison,<\/p>\n

and after many days they will be punished.<\/p>\n

23<\/a> Then the moon will be confounded<\/p>\n

and the sun ashamed,<\/p>\n

for the Lord of hosts reigns<\/p>\n

on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem,<\/p>\n

and his glory will be before his elders (Isa 24:21\u201323<\/a>English Standard Version
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>esv<\/a>).<\/p>\n

Isaiah 24:23<\/a> describes an apocalyptic judgment on the divine enemies of Yahweh and the kings of earth aligned with them.The phrase \u201chost of heaven\u201d is at times used as frequent generic designation for divine beings\u2014members of the nonterrestrial world, good or evil (e.g., 1 Kgs 22:19<\/a> and 2 Kgs 17:16<\/a>, respectively). However, it is distinctly associated with those lesser elohim<\/em> set over the nations who are enemies of Yahweh and his people (Deut 4:19<\/a>; 17:3<\/a>).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>20<\/a> When their judgment is final, Yahweh will be glorified \u201cbefore his elders.\u201d Scholars who have focused on this unusual language in Isaiah have drawn attention to the divine character of the elders by means of two trajectories: (1) comparative passages about elders in the Old Testament to establish that the term specifically refers to select members of a royal household; and (2) similarities in the descriptions of the elders in Revelation 4\u20135<\/a> and those of divine beings in other heavenly council scenes.See John D. W. Watts, Isaiah 1\u201333<\/em>, rev. ed., Word Biblical Commentary 24 (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2005), 389<\/a>; Timothy M. Willis, \u201cYahweh\u2019s Elders (Isa 24,23): Senior Officials of the Divine Court,\u201d Zeitschrift f\u00fcr die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft<\/em> 103.3 (1991): 375\u201385. Many scholars seek to identify the elders in this passage with Israel\u2019s human elders due to the reference to Zion and Jerusalem, as well as passages like Exod 24:9\u201311<\/a>, where Moses, Aaron, Nadab, Abihu, and 70 elders saw the God of Israel. For that reason, some seek to translate \u201chis elders\u201d as \u201cits elders\u201d (i.e., the elders of Zion or Jerusalem). If this were the case, one would expect a feminine suffix pronoun to grammatically align with these feminine nouns. The form in Isa 24:23<\/a> is the plural noun (\u201celders\u201d) plus third masculine singular suffix. This form occurs in only one other place in the Hebrew Bible, Psa 105:22<\/a>, where the context is clearly select court officials of the king\u2019s (Pharaoh\u2019s) household. Additionally, the references to Zion and Jerusalem do not require a literal reading, since those terms are also clearly attested eschatological concepts<\/em> in apocalyptic contexts and, more generally, in New Testament biblical theology. See C. C. Newman, \u201cJerusalem, Zion, Holy City,\u201d Dictionary of the Later New Testament and Its Developments<\/em> (ed. Ralph P. Martin and Peter H. Davids; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1997).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>21<\/a><\/p>\n

The purpose of the council meeting is threefold: (1) exaltation of the Lamb that was slain (Rev 4:11<\/a>; 5:11\u201312<\/a>); (2) celebration of the Lamb\u2019s victory (Rev 5:1\u20135<\/a>), an event that made his followers \u201ca kingdom and priests to our God, and they shall reign on the earth\u201d (Rev 5:10<\/a>); and (3) opening of the seven seals (Rev 6<\/a>).Aune notes, \u201cThe book or roll with seven seals can be understood as containing the entire scenario of eschatological events through 22:5<\/a>. The seven seals encompass the seven trumpets, while the seventh trumpet encompasses the seven bowls\u201d (Revelation 1\u20135<\/em>, 276<\/a>).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>22<\/a> The scene in Revelation 4\u20136<\/a> shows us that New Testament writers were attentive to the Old Testament pattern of divine council activity at momentous junctures in God\u2019s planning. The divine council scene in Revelation 4\u20136<\/a> launches Yahweh\u2019s final judgment on the earth described in Isaiah 24:23<\/a>, the ultimate outcome of which aligns with Daniel 7<\/a>, where the son of man obtains everlasting dominion and shares it with the holy ones and the people of the holy ones loyal to him and Yahweh.In regard to the divine council scene in Rev 4\u20135<\/a>, Baumgarten notes, \u201cThe judgment is not merely an episode, but serves as the framework which unifies the various apocalypses\u201d (Baumgarten, \u201cDuodecimal Courts,\u201d 66). Baumgarten specifically links the passage to the judgment of the gods of the nations in Psa 82<\/a> (p. 69).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>23<\/a><\/p>\n

Revelation 4\u20136<\/a> sets the stage for the final confrontation between Yahweh and his people on the one hand and the powers of darkness and those under their dominion on the other. As we\u2019ll see in the next two chapters, the engagement is not only for the souls of humanity and the nations of the earth, but for mastery of the unseen realm itself.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

CHAPTER 40<\/p>\n

Foe from the North<\/p>\n

The epic saga of the Bible began with God\u2019s original intention to rule over his new creation through human imagers, all the while being present with his heavenly imagers. Heaven had come to earth. We saw how it all went awry in the wake of God\u2019s decision to grant freedom to his imagers, both divine and human. The decision was necessary, for the creature could not truly be like the creator without sharing this attribute, the ability to truly exercise free will and choose between loyalty and rebellion.<\/p>\n

What seems to us to be a long, drawn-out divine plan to restore that which was fallen was equally necessary. It might seem that God could have just stepped in after the fall and eliminated free will and the divine and human rebels who had abused it. Eden would be ensured and that would be that. While that would produce the desired end, the original means<\/em>\u2014free participation in God\u2019s creation by God\u2019s free-will agents, designed to be like him\u2014would have been abandoned, amounting to a very flawed idea and spectacular failure. A resolution like that isn\u2019t fitting (or desirable) for the God of the Bible. God\u2019s original objective must come about in the way he intended.<\/p>\n

Earthly geography, as many historians have pointed out, is a key part of human destiny. For ancient Israelites, geography had both literal and supernatural qualities. To this point, our discussion of both aspects has been oriented by two factors: (1) the cosmic-geographical worldview that emerged from the Babel incident (Deut 32:8\u20139<\/a>), where Yahweh disinherited the nations and decided to raise up his own people from Abraham; and (2) the region of Bashan, the northernmost region of the promised land. In this chapter, we will focus on the second of those, since there was, in Israelite thinking, a psychological and supernatural dread of lands to the north. These fears were intertwined, in ancient thinking, with the great eschatological enemy known as the antichrist.<\/p>\n

\"Foe<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

LITERAL GEOGRAPHICAL NORTH: Harbinger of Doom<\/p>\n

Because it sat on the eastern Mediterranean Sea, Canaan found itself sandwiched between the homelands of ancient Near Eastern civilizations that would vie<\/span> for control of the entire region: Egypt and Mesopotamia. Canaan, and therefore the people of Israel, would find itself being invaded from the north and south by foreign armies on the move. It would be occupied as a buffer zone between competing powers.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Bible records a number of such incidents. But the most traumatic incursions into Canaan were always from the north. In 722 bc Assyria conquere<\/span>d the ten tribes of the northern Israelite kingdom and deported them to many corners of its empire. In a series of three invasions from 605 to 586 bc, Babylon destroyed the southern kingdom, comprisin<\/span>g only two tribes, Judah and Benjamin. Both Assyria and Babylon invaded Canaan from the north, since they were both from the Mesopotamian region. The trauma of these invasions became the conceptual backdrop for descriptions of the final, eschatologica<\/span>l judgment of the disinherited nations (Zeph 1:14\u201318<\/a>; 2:4\u201315<\/a>; Amos 1:13\u201315<\/a>; Joel 3:11\u201312<\/a>; Mic 5:15<\/a>) and their divine overlords (Isa 34:1\u20134<\/a>; Psa 82<\/a>).See Joel Aaron Reemtsma, \u201cPunishment of the Powers: Deut 32:8 and Psalm 82 as the Backdrop for Isaiah 34,\u201d (paper presented at the annual meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, November 19, 2014; San Diego, CA; Ronald Bergey, \u201cThe Song of Moses (Deut 32:1\u201343) and Isaianic Prophecies: A Case of Intertextuality?\u201d Journal for the Study of the Old Testament<\/em> 28:1 (2003):33\u201354; Thomas A. Keiser, \u201cThe Song of Moses as a Basis for Isaiah\u2019s Prophecy,\u201d Vetus Testamentum<\/em> 55 (2005): 486\u2013500.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>1<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

It is hard to overstate the trauma of the Babylonian invasion. The northern tribes, too, had met an awful fate, the outcome of which was well known to the occupants of the kingdom of Judah. But Judah<\/span> was David\u2019s tribe, and Jerusalem the home of Yahweh\u2019s temple. As such, the ground was holy and\u2014or so the kingdom of Judah thought\u2014would surely never be taken by the enemy. But Zion\u2019s inviolability turned out to be a myth. Jerusalem and its temple wer<\/span>e destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar in 586 bc. The incident brought not only physical desolation but psychological and theological devastation.<\/p>\n

The destruc<\/span>tion of Yahweh\u2019s temple and, consequently, his throne, would have been cast against the backdrop of spiritual warfare by ancient people. The Babylonians and other civilizations would have presumed that the gods <\/span>of Babylon had finally defeated Yahweh, the God of Israel. Many Israelites would have wondered the same thing\u2014or that God had forsaken his covenant promises (e.g., Psa 89:38\u201352<\/a>). Either God<\/span> was weaker than Babylon\u2019s gods or else he had turned away from his promises.<\/p>\n

Prophets like Ezekiel, Daniel, and Habakkuk, raised up by God during the exile, had a different perspective. Yahweh had su<\/em><\/span>mmoned<\/em> foreign armies under the command of other gods to punish his own people. Yahweh was in control. Spiritual disloyalty was what had led to the situation.<\/p>\n

THE SINISTER, SUPERNATURAL NORTH<\/p>\n

The word \u201cnorth\u201d in Hebrew is tsaphon<\/span> (or zaphon<\/span> in some transliterations). It refers to one of the common directional points. But because of what Israelites believed <\/span>lurked in the north, the word came to signify something otherworldly.See Ludwig Koehler et al., The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament<\/em> (Leiden; New York: Brill, 1999), 1046\u201347<\/a> (esp. entry number 7); Cecelia Grave, \u201cThe Etymology of Northwest Semitic sapanu<\/em>,\u201d Ugarit-Forschungen<\/em> 12 (1980): 221\u201329.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>2<\/a><\/p>\n

The most obvious example is Bashan. We\u2019ve devoted a good deal of attention to the connection of that place with the realm of the <\/span>dead and with giant clan populations like the Rephaim, whose ancestry was considered to derive from enemy divine beings. Bashan was also associated with Mount Hermon, the place where, in Jewish theology, the rebellious sons of God of <\/span>Genesis 6<\/a> infamy descended to commit their act of treason.<\/p>\n

But there was something beyond Bashan\u2014farther north\u2014that every Israelite associated with other gods hostile<\/span> to Yahweh. Places like Sidon, Tyre, and Ugarit lay beyond Israel\u2019s northern border. The worship of Baal was central in these places. These cities of Phoenicia and Syria were Baal\u2019s home turf.One could also include the Hittites, since Jebel al-Aqra, Mount Zaphon, was also central to Hittite religion. See H. Niehr, \u201cZaphon,\u201d in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible<\/em>, 2nd ed. (ed. Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter W. van der Horst; Leiden; Boston; Cologne; Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge: Brill; Eerdmans, 1999), 927<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>3<\/a> The fa<\/span>ct that the center of Baal worship was just across the border was a contributing factor in the apostasy of the northern kingdom of Israel.<\/p>\n

Specifically, Baal\u2019s home was a mountain, now known as Jebel <\/span>al-Aqra\u02bf, situated to the north of Ugarit. In ancient times it was simply known as Tsaphon<\/span> (\u201cnorth\u201d; Tsapanu<\/span> in Ugaritic). It was a divine mountain, the place where Baal held council as he ruled the g<\/span>ods of the Canaanite pantheon.Scholars disagree as to whether references to Baal\u2019s council should be taken as his own divine council, separate from El\u2019s council, or whether the rule of El\u2019s council as El\u2019s vice regent is in view. All agree the latter is certain, while the former notion of Baal also having a separate council is uncertain.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>4<\/a> Baal\u2019s palace was thought to be on \u201cthe heights of Tsapanu\/Zaphon<\/span>.\u201dFor Ugaritic texts, see KTU<\/em><\/a> 1.4 v:55<\/a>; vii:6<\/a>; KTU<\/em><\/a> 1.3 i:21\u201322<\/a>; 1.6 vi:12\u201313<\/a>; KTU<\/em><\/a> 1.3 iv:1<\/a>, 37\u201338<\/a>; 1.4 v:23<\/a>. See also W. Herrmann, \u201cBaal,\u201d in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible<\/em>, 133<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>5<\/a><\/p>\n

Baal was outranked only by El in Canaanite religion. However, Baal ran all of El\u2019s affairs, which e<\/span>xplains why Baal was called \u201cking of the gods\u201d and \u201cmost high\u201d at Ugarit and other places.For Ugaritic texts, see KTU<\/em><\/a> 1.16.iii:6<\/a>,8<\/a>; KTU<\/em><\/a> 1.3.v:32<\/a>; 1.4.Iv:43<\/a>; 1.4.viii:50<\/a>. See Nicolas Wyatt, \u201cThe Titles of the Ugaritic Storm-God,\u201d Ugarit Forschungen<\/em> 24 (1992): 403\u201324; Herrmann, \u201cBaal,\u201d in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible<\/em>, 131\u201339<\/a>; J. C. L. Gibson, \u201cThe Theology of the Ugaritic Baal Cycle,\u201d Orientalia Roma<\/em> 53.2 (1984): 202\u201319.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>6<\/a> In Ugaritic texts, Baal is \u201clord of Zaphon\u201d (ba\u02bfal tsapanu<\/span>).See H. Niehr, \u201cBaal Zaphon,\u201d in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible<\/em>, 152\u201353<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>7<\/a> He is also called a \u201cprince\u201d (zbl<\/span> in Ugaritic)<\/span>. Another of Baal\u2019s titles is \u201cprince, lord of the underworld\u201d (zbl ba\u02bfal \u02bearts<\/span>).The word ba\u02bfal<\/em> in Ugaritic and Hebrew means \u201clord, master.\u201d Note the word \u02bearts<\/em> in the title. It is the common word for \u201cearth, land\u201d in Ugaritic, and also Hebrew (\u02beerets<\/em>, \u02bearets<\/em>). We briefly discussed this word in chapters 10<\/a> and 11<\/a> with respect to the nachash<\/em> (\u201cserpent\u201d) being cast down to the earth\/underworld.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>8<\/a> This connection to the realm of the dead of course dovetails with our discussion of the themes associated with the se<\/span>rpent figure from Genesis 3<\/a>. It is no surprise that zbl ba\u02bfal<\/span> becomes Baal Zebul (Beelzebul) and Baal Zebub, titles associated with Satan in later Jewish literature and the New Testament.See chapters 10\u201311<\/a>. On Beelzebul, see Matt 10:25<\/a>; 12:24<\/a> (cf. Mark 3:22<\/a>; Luke 11:15<\/a>) and Matt 12:27<\/a> (cf. Luke 11:18<\/a>, 19<\/a>). Beyond agreeing that there is certainly an association, scholars disagree on the precise etymological development and conceptual relationships between Baal-zebul, Baal-zebub (2 Kgs 1:2<\/a>, 3<\/a>, 6<\/a>, 16<\/a>) and Beelzebul. See W. Herrmann, \u201cBaal Zebub,\u201d in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible<\/em>, 154\u201356<\/a>; E. C. B. MacLaurin, \u201cBeelzeboul,\u201d Novum Testamentum<\/em> 20:2 (1978): 156\u201360.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>9<\/a><\/p>\n

In short, w<\/span>hen an Israelite thought of the north in theological terms, he or she thought of Bashan, Mount Hermon, and Baal. Later Jews would have made connections to the great adversary of Genesis 3<\/a>.<\/p>\n

This backdr<\/span>op will help us understand how Jews living in the latter parts of the Old Testament period on through the Second Temple period and the New Testament era thought about end times\u2014the time of God\u2019s final judgment o<\/span>f evil and the ultimate restoration of his rule. But for that we need to start with the concept of exile.<\/p>\n

STILL IN EXILE<\/p>\n

One of the great misconceptions of biblical study is that the return of the Jews from Babylon in 539 bc and the years following solved the problem of Israelite exile. It didn\u2019t<\/em>. The pro<\/span>phets had envisioned the return of all twelve tribes<\/em> from where they had been dispersed. That didn\u2019t happen in 539 bc or any other time framed by the Old Testament.<\/p>\n

Jeremiah 23:1\u20138<\/a> is one of the clear<\/span>est examples of this expectation:<\/p>\n

1<\/a> \u201cWoe to the shepherds who destroy and scatter the flock of my pasture,\u201d declares Yahweh. 2<\/a> Therefore thus says Yahweh, the God of Israel concerning the shepherds wh<\/span>o shepherd my people, \u201cYou yourselves have scattered my flock, and you have driven them away, and you do not attend to them. Look, I will punish you for the evil of your deeds,\u201d declares Yahweh. 3<\/a> \u201cTh<\/span>en I myself will gather together the remnant of my flock from all the lands where I have driven them<\/strong>, and I will bring them back to their grazing place, and they will be fruitful, and they will become<\/span> numerous. 4<\/a> And I will raise up over them shepherds, and they will shepherd them, and they will no longer fear, and they will not be dismayed, and they will not be missing,\u201d declares Yahweh.<\/p>\n

5<\/a> \u201cLook,<\/span> days are coming,\u201d declares Yahweh,<\/p>\n

\u201cwhen I will raise up for David a righteous branch,<\/p>\n

and he will reign as king, and he will achieve success,<\/p>\n

and he will do justice and righteousness in the land.<\/p>\n

6<\/a> <\/span>In his days Judah<\/strong> will be saved,<\/p>\n

and Israel<\/strong> will dwell in safety,<\/p>\n

and this is his name by which he will be called:<\/p>\n

\u2018Yahweh is our righteousness.\u2019<\/p>\n

7<\/a> \u201cTherefore look, days are coming,\u201d declares Yahweh, <\/span>\u201cwhen they will no longer say, \u2018As Yahweh lives, who led up the Israelites from the land of Egypt,\u2019 8<\/a> but \u2018As Yahweh lives, who led up, and who brought the offspring of the house of Israel from the la<\/strong><\/span>nd of the north and from all the lands where he had driven them<\/strong>.\u2019 Then they will live in their land.\u201d<\/p>\n

Verse 3<\/a> is explicit\u2014Yahweh promises to bring back his people from all<\/em> the places where they have b<\/span>een scattered. Both kingdoms, Judah and Israel, will one day be brought back to the land (v. 6<\/a>). The specific note that \u201cthe house of Israel\u201d will be returned from \u201cthe land of the north\u201d and \u201call the<\/span> lands\u201d where they were dispersed is an unambiguous reference to the first captivity of the ten \u201clost tribes\u201d of Israel.<\/p>\n

Other passages are clear in this regard as well. In Ezekiel 37<\/a>, the famous visi<\/span>on of the dry bones, Yahweh says,<\/p>\n

16<\/a> \u201cSon of man, take a stick and write on it, \u2018For Judah, and the people of Israel associated with him\u2019; 17<\/a> then take another stick and write on it, \u2018For Joseph (the <\/span>stick of Ephraim) and all the house of Israel associated with him.\u2019 And join them one to another into one stick, that they may become one in your hand. 18<\/a> And when your people say to you, \u2018Will you no<\/span>t tell us what you mean by these?\u2019 19<\/a> say to them, Thus says the Lord God: Behold, I am about to take the stick of Joseph (that is in the hand of Ephraim) and the tribes of Israel associated with him.<\/span> And I will join with it the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, that they may be one in my hand. 20<\/a> When the sticks on which you write are in your hand before their eyes, 21<\/a> then say to them, Th<\/span>us says the Lord God: Behold, I will take the people of Israel from the nations among which they have gone, and will gather them from all around, and bring them to their own land (Ezek 37:16\u201321<\/a> English Standard Version
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>esv<\/a>).<\/p>\n

<\/span>Again, both Israel and Judah are mentioned, and Yahweh\u2019s people will be gathered from the nations<\/em> (note the plural) in which they have been dispersed.<\/p>\n

What this means is that Jews living in the time o<\/em><\/span>f Jesus saw the nation as still being in exile<\/em>.This psychological conditioning, brought on by biblical explanations of apostasy for the exile, was one of the reasons that absolute obedience to Torah became central to Judaism. Layers of law keeping were added to Torah to prevent violation. The restoration of the tribes (or more punishment) was at stake.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>10<\/a> Ten of the tribes had not yet returned (and many Jews had stayed in Babylon when given the chance). Was Yahweh going to deliver them? Could the powers<\/span> of darkness be finally overcome?<\/p>\n

DELIVERANCE \u2026 AND OPPOSITION<\/p>\n

Part of the reason Jews expected a military deliverer in their messiah is that the prophets had taught that the regathering of all the tribes of Israel and Judah went hand<\/span> in hand with the appearance of a great messianic shepherd-king. Ezekiel 37<\/a>, the passage we just looked at that described the restoration of all the tribes, adds this element:<\/p>\n

24<\/a> My servant David shal<\/span>l be king over them, and they shall all have one shepherd. They shall walk in my rules and be careful to obey my statutes. 25<\/a> They shall dwell in the land that I gave to my servant Jacob, where your f<\/span>athers lived. They and their children and their children\u2019s children shall dwell there forever, and David my servant shall be their prince forever. 26<\/a> I will make a covenant of peace with them. It shal<\/span>l be an everlasting covenant with them. And I will set them in their land and multiply them, and will set my sanctuary in their midst forevermore (Ezek 37:24\u201326<\/a> English Standard Version
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>esv<\/a>).<\/p>\n

In terms of biblical theology, th<\/span>is expectation was fulfilled in the inauguration of the kingdom of God and at Pentecost. Not only was the reclamation of the disinherited nations launched at that event, but it was accomplished by mea<\/em><\/span>ns of pilgrim Jews from all the nations in which they had been left in exile, now converted to faith in Jesus, the incarnate Yahweh, and now inheritors of the Spirit and the promises of the new covenant<\/em><\/span>.<\/p>\n

As Paul said in Galatians 3<\/a>, anyone who followed Christ was a true offspring of Abraham\u2014Jew or Gentile. Jews from every nation of exile had returned to the land to serve as catalysts for a greater<\/span> regathering, the apostolic mission of the Great Commission. In Ephesians 4<\/a> Paul had cast Pentecost as the defeat of Bashan, the region to the north, ground zero for spiritual warfare in Israelite thi<\/span>nking. If we thought only in terms of Pentecost, it would look as if the dark lord of the dead (Baal Zebul)\u2014identified with Satan by this time\u2014was beaten.<\/p>\n

But that would be a premature conclusion. It <\/span>also wouldn\u2019t work with what followed Ezekiel 37<\/a>\u2019s deliverance-from-exile and coming-shepherd-king prophecy. In the wake of all that good news, trouble would come\u2014from the north.<\/p>\n

GOG, MAGOG, AND BASHAN<\/p>\n

The prophetic description in Ezekiel 38\u201339<\/a> of the invasion of \u201cGog, of the land of Magog\u201d (Ezek 38:1\u20133<\/a>, 14\u201315<\/a>) is well known and the subject of much interpretive dispute, both s<\/span>cholarly and fanciful. One of the secure points is that Gog will come from \u201cthe heights of the north\u201d (38:15<\/a>; 39:2<\/a>). While many scholars have focused on the literal geographic aspects of this phrasing<\/span>, few have given serious thought to its mythological associations in Ugaritic\/Canaanite religion with Baal, lord of the dead.<\/p>\n

An ancient reader would have looked for an invasion from the north, but wo<\/span>uld have cast that invasion in a supernatural context. In other words, the language of Ezekiel is not simply about a human invader or human armies. An ancient reader would also have noticed that this invasion would come at a time when the tribes had been united and dwelt in<\/span> peace and safety within the promised land\u2014in other words, once the period of exile had ended.<\/p>\n

The battle of Gog and Magog wou<\/span>ld be something expected after the initiation of Yahweh\u2019s plan to reclaim the nations and, therefore, draw his children, Jew or Gentile, from those nations. The Gog invasion would be the response of s<\/em><\/span>upernatural evil against the messiah and his kingdom<\/em>. This is in fact precisely how it is portrayed in Revelation 20:7\u201310<\/a>.This passage is used and abused by all systems of eschatology. Critiquing those positions (as much as that is possible given prophecy\u2019s inherent ambiguities) is well beyond the scope of this chapter and even this book. See the companion website<\/a> for more discussion. However, it is sufficient to make the point here that it is illegitimate Bible interpretation to posit the notion that the Gog and Magog of Rev 20:7\u201310<\/a> is a different<\/em> Gog and Magog than in Ezek 38\u201339<\/a> in order to make one\u2019s explanation of end times work. We ought not to add to Scripture for the sake of a theological system. Any system must account for Rev 20:7\u201310<\/a> and<\/em> the fact that the Jerusalem temple and restored Eden follow in Rev 21\u201322<\/a>, just as Ezekiel\u2019s idealized temple follows in Ezek 40\u201348<\/a>. The correspondences and sequencing are no accident. For scholarly discussion of Gog and Magog, see Sverre B\u00f8e, Gog and Magog: Ezekiel 38\u201339 as Pre-text for Revelation 19, 17\u201321 and 20, 7\u201310<\/em>, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 135 (T\u00fcbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001); William A. Tooman, Gog of Magog: Reuse of Scripture and Compositional Technique in Ezekiel 38\u201339<\/em>, Forschungen zum Alten Testament 52, second series (T\u00fcbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>11<\/a><\/p>\n

Gog would have been perceived as either a figure empowered by supernatural<\/span> evil or an evil quasi-divine figure from the supernatural world bent on the destruction of God\u2019s people.The connection \u201cis also expressed in extra-biblical sources \u2026 [of] an eschatological tyrant (1 Enoch 90:9\u201316<\/a>; Assumption of Moses<\/em><\/a> 8<\/a>; 2 Baruch <\/a>(Syriac Apocalypse)<\/em><\/a> 36\u201340<\/a>; 70<\/a>; 4 Ezra 5:1\u201313<\/a>; 12:29\u201333<\/a>; 13:25\u201338<\/a>\u201d (see L. J. Lietaert Peerbolte, \u201cAntichrist,\u201d in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible<\/em>, 62<\/a>). Some other conceptual links are illustrative. First, the Septuagint at times interchanges the names Gog and Og, the giant of Bashan. One scholar notes: \u201cIn the LXXb<\/span> version of Deut 3:1<\/a>, 13<\/a>; 4:47<\/a>, Gog stands for Hebrew Og (king of Bashan). On the other hand, P 967 reads Og instead of Gog in Ez 38:2<\/a>\u201d (see J. Lust, \u201cGog,\u201d in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible<\/em>, 374<\/a>). Second, the name \u201cGog\u201d in Ezek 38\u201339<\/a> may reflect a personification of spiritual darkness if it derives from the Sumerian word g\u00fbg<\/em> (\u201cdarkness\u201d), though this is uncertain. See Daniel I. Block, The Book of Ezekiel: Chapters 25\u201348<\/em>, New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1997\u20131998), 433\u201331<\/a> (Block cites this possibility from a study by P. Heinisch, Das Buch Ezechiel<\/em> (Bonn: Hanstein, 1923), 183. Third, the Septuagint text of Amos 7:1<\/a> mentions Gog as the king of the locust invasion described in that chapter. Locust imagery for invading armies is familiar in the Old Testament, but Rev 9<\/a> connects that language with demonic entities from the abyss. This is significant not only since the abyss (a Greek term, abyssos<\/em>) is connected to the Underworld\/Sheol, but also because the original offending sons of God of Gen 6<\/a> (cf. 2 Pet 2:4<\/a>; Jude 6<\/a>; 1 Enoch 6\u201311<\/a>) were imprisoned in such a place. Rev 9<\/a> may therefore describe their release at the end of days to participate in a climactic confrontation with God and Jesus. This matrix of ideas may be designed to tell us that the Gog invasion does not describe an earthly enemy but a supernatural, demonic enemy. But as we have seen, both reality planes are frequently connected in the biblical epic. Fourth, the Nephilim giants are described as \u201clawless ones\u201d (anom\u014dn<\/em>) in 1 Enoch 7:6<\/a>, using the same Greek lemma used to describe the antichrist figure in 2 Thess 2:8<\/a>. Fifth, Jewish tradition has the great flood (and so, the episode of Gen 6:1\u20134<\/a>) coinciding astronomically with the appearance of the Pleiades. This is significant since the Pleiades are connected astronomically with the constellation Orion (the giant), which constellation is mentioned in an Aramaic Targum of the book of Job from Qumran, which uses nephila<\/em> (\u201cgiant\u201d) to translate Hebrew kesil<\/em> (\u201cOrion\u201d). See L. Zalcman, \u201cOrion,\u201d in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible<\/em>, 648<\/a>; Zalcman, \u201cPleiades,\u201d in ibid., 657\u201358<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>12<\/a> For this reason, Gog is regarded by many biblical scholars as a template for the New Testame<\/span>nt antichrist figure.The foe-from-the-north theme is also picked up in Dan 11<\/a>, a passage that many scholars believe in some way relates to the antichrist. Daniel\u2019s eschatological foe is connected to the north many times. The known invasion of Jerusalem by Antiochus IV (Epiphanes) in 167 bc<\/span> follows many elements that are detailed in Dan 11<\/a>. Antiochus attacked from the north (he was from the northern, Seleucid empire in Asia Minor). He committed the abominable act of profaning the temple by sacrificing a pig on the altar (cf. Dan 9:24\u201327<\/a>) and made Jewish customs such as circumcision punishable by death. These offenses started a rebellion in Jerusalem that led to a short period of Jewish independence. Therefore, those who saw the Gog enemy in Antiochus may also have been led to think of the new Jewish independent state as the final kingdom of God. History informs us clearly that it wasn\u2019t. Moreover, despite the elements of precision noted by scholars between the invasion of Antiochus IV and Dan 11<\/a>, there are clear contradictions between the record of Antiochus\u2019s invasion and parts of Dan 11<\/a>. Nearly two centuries later, Jesus still regarded the prophecy of the abomination of desolation (Dan 9:24\u201327<\/a>) as yet to come (Matt 24:15\u201321<\/a>). Regardless of the Antiochus issue, his association with the northern foe of Dan 11<\/a> nevertheless shows us that the foe-from-the-north motif is important. Later Jewish rabbis and early Christian scholars paid close attention to it.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>13<\/a><\/p>\n

While Magog and \u201cthe heights of the north\u201d aren\u2019t precisely defined in the Gog prophecy, the point is not<\/em> about literal geography per se. Rather, it is the supernatural backdro<\/span>p to the whole \u201cnorthern foe\u201d idea that makes any such geographical reference important. For sure ancient Jews would expect that the reconstituted kingdom of Yahweh would be shattered by an enemy from the north\u2014as it had before. But ancient Jews would also have thought i<\/span>n supernatural terms. A supernatural enemy in the end times would be expected to come from the seat of Baal\u2019s authority\u2014the supernatural underworld realm of the dead, located in the heights of the north. Gog is explicitly described in such terms. But there is another, similar thought trajectory in ancient Judaism and the early church that has been noted by scholars: The antichrist would come from the tribe of Dan, located in Bashan.<\/span><\/span>The famous church father Irenaeus is an early source for this thinking (Against Heresies<\/em><\/a> 5.30.2\u20133<\/a>). However, it is in the writings of Hippolytus that the idea is most fully articulated. See Charles E. Hill, \u201cAntichrist from the Tribe of Dan,\u201d Journal of Theological Studies<\/em> 46.1 (1995): 99\u2013117. Irenaeus tied this suspicion to the underworld and the fallen sons of God of Gen 6:1\u20134<\/a>. Irenaeus knew that in 2 Pet 2:4<\/a> the word for the abyss in which these fallen entities were imprisoned was not the expected abyssos<\/em>, but tartaros<\/em>. This word was considered a lower realm than the normal underworld in Greek mythology (see BDAG, 991<\/a>). Specifically, it was the place where the quasi-divine giant Titans were imprisoned. \u201cTitans\u201d (titanos<\/em>) was the Greek word used in many Old Testament passages for various giant clan names (e.g., Rephaim). Irenaeus noticed that one of the variant spellings of this word (teitan<\/em>) added up to \u201c666\u201d in Greek gematria (Against Heresies<\/em><\/a> 5.30.3<\/a>). (Gematria is the feature of some languages whereby letters of the alphabet were assigned numerical values, so that words convey numbers and vice versa). Irenaeus favored this answer for the number of the beast since it was not<\/em> the name of a specific ruler or figure, but an evil tyrant, and since the name was connected to the demonic realm. See G. Mussies, \u201cTitans,\u201d in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible<\/em>, 873<\/a>; G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text<\/em>, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle, Cumbria: Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 1999), 718\u201320<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>14<\/a><\/p>\n

The heart of the idea emerges from Genesis 49<\/a>, part of the messianic mosaic. The right to <\/span>rule Israel is linked to the tribe of Judah, and the one who holds its scepter is a \u201clion\u201d (Gen 49:9\u201310<\/a>). In contrast (Gen 49:17<\/a>), Dan is referred to as a serpent, fitting imagery for Bashan, who \u201cjud<\/span>ges\u201d his own people. Deuteronomy 33:22<\/a> picks up the theme: \u201cDan is a cub of a lion; he leaps from Bashan.\u201d Dan is an upstart inferior, who will attack from Bashan. Dan is thus an \u201cinternal outsider,\u201d <\/span>an enemy of Yahweh\u2019s people. Those who interpreted these references in this way were also quick to point out that Dan is omitted from the list of tribes that yield the 144,000 believers in Revelation <\/span>7<\/a>.<\/p>\n

My point is not to argue for a specific view of the antichrist. All eschatological systems are speculative in many respects. The point is that the supernatural worldview of ancient Israel and Judai<\/span>sm must inform our own thinking. The cosmic enemy from the supernatural north, where the council of evil plotted against Yahweh\u2019s council, was a fixed part of the worldview of the biblical writers\u2014especially when it comes to our next focus: Armageddon.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

<\/span><\/span>CHAPTER 41<\/p>\n

The Mount of Assembly<\/p>\n

Even people who have never studied the Bible have heard of Armageddon. Anyone who has ever investigated the term has undoubtedly read that it refers to a battle that w<\/span>ill take place at or near Megiddo, the presumed geographical namesake for the term Armageddon. Further research would perhaps detect the fact that in Zechariah 12:11<\/a> the place name \u201cMegiddo\u201d is spelle<\/span>d (in Hebrew) with an \u201cn\u201d on the end, tightening the association between that place and the term Armageddon.<\/p>\n

As coherent as all that sounds, it\u2019s wrong. As we\u2019ll see in this chapter, an identification<\/span> of Armageddon with Megiddo is unsustainable. With respect to the word itself, the scriptural description of the event, and the supernatural concepts tied to both those elements, the normative understanding of Armageddon is demonstrably flawed.<\/p>\n

THE MEANING OF \u201cARMAGEDDON\u201d<\/p>\n

The problems for the traditional identification begin with the term itself. In Revelation 16:12\u201316<\/a> we read:<\/p>\n

12<\/a> And the sixth poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrate<\/span>s, and its water was dried up, in order that the way would be prepared for the kings from the east. 13<\/a> And I saw coming out of the mouth of the dragon and out of the mouth of the beast and out of the <\/span>mouth of the false prophet three unclean spirits like frogs. 14<\/a> For they are the spirits of demons performing signs that go out to the kings of the whole inhabited world, to gather them for the battle<\/span> of the great day of God the All-Powerful. 15<\/a> (Behold, I am coming like a thief. Blessed is the one who is on the alert and who keeps his clothing, so that he does not walk around naked and they see h<\/span>is shamefulness!) And he gathered them to the place called in Hebrew Armageddon<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

John, the author of Revelation, tells us explicitly that \u201cArmageddon\u201d is a Hebrew<\/em> term. John does that in part because <\/span>the book of Revelation is written in Greek. There\u2019s something about the Greek word translated \u201cArmageddon\u201d that required, for Greek readers, clarification that the term had been brought into the verse from Hebrew.<\/span><\/p>\n

Those who can read Greek, or at least know the alphabet, will notice that the Greek term (\u1f09\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1\u03b3\u03b5\u03b4\u03ce\u03bd<\/span>) would be transliterated into English characters as h-a-r-m-a-g-e-d-o-n<\/span>. If you don\u2019<\/span>t know Greek, you\u2019ll wonder right away where the initial \u201ch\u201d in the transliteration comes from. The \u201ch\u201d at the beginning of the term corresponds to the superscripted apostrophe before the capital \u201cA\u201d in the Greek <\/span>letters\u2014what is known as a rough breathing mark in Greek. The Greek language had no letter \u201ch\u201d and so instead used this mark to convey that sound.<\/p>\n

As a result, the correct (Hebrew) term J<\/span>ohn uses to describe the climactic end-times battle is harmagedon<\/span>. This spelling becomes significant when we try to discern what this Hebrew<\/em> term means. The first part of the term (har<\/span>) is easy. In He<\/span>brew har<\/span> means \u201cmountain.\u201d Our term is therefore divisible into har-magedon<\/span>, \u201cMount (of) magedon<\/span>.\u201d The question is, what is magedon<\/span>?<\/p>\n

Two options have historically been offered for answering this quest<\/span>ion. The first is the traditional \u201cMegiddo,\u201d which I mentioned at the start. The meaning of the phrase would be \u201cMount Megiddo.\u201d Many well-meaning Bible teachers accept this phrase after looking at pictures of Megiddo, like the one below:<\/span><\/p>\n

\"Mount<\/p>\n

The problem is that this is an archaeological tell<\/em>\u2014an artificial mound created by successive layers of building and occupation over millennia. It is not a natu<\/span>ral formation. It is not a mountain, and there are no mountains in the entire region. The photograph shows just how flat<\/em> the area of Megiddo actually is.<\/p>\n

Revelation 19:11\u201321<\/a> informs us quite clearly t<\/span>hat when Jesus returns bodily to earth, he will do so to end the conflict of Armageddon and defeat the beast, the antichrist. According to 16:16<\/a>, this climactic event occurs at Armageddon. Students of<\/span> biblical prophecy will find these verses very familiar.<\/p>\n

Now let\u2019s take a look at Zechariah 12:9\u201311<\/a>, recalling that 12:11<\/a> is the verse I mentioned at the beginning of the chapter, wherein we find the <\/span>Hebrew for \u201cMegiddo\u201d spelled with a final n<\/em>. If we read 12:11<\/a> in context, we will see that Armageddon cannot be at Megiddo, so the appearance of the final n<\/em> in that verse cannot prove that the term po<\/span>ints to that city:<\/p>\n

9<\/a> \u201cAnd on that day I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

10<\/a> \u201cAnd I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem<\/strong> a spirit of gra<\/span>ce and pleas for mercy, so that, when they look on me, on him whom they have pierced<\/strong>, they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weep bitterly over him, as one weeps over a firstbo<\/span>rn. 11<\/a> On that day the mourning in Jerusalem<\/strong> will be as great as the mourning for Hadad-rimmon in the plain of Megiddo<\/strong>\u201d (Zech 12:9\u201311<\/a> English Standard Version
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>esv<\/a>).<\/p>\n

It is crystal clear that the final conflict occurs at Jerusa<\/em><\/span>lem, not Megiddo<\/em>. Megiddo is referenced only to compare the awful mourning that will result.The mourning at Haddad-Rimmon on the plain of Megiddo refers to the untimely death of the beloved King Josiah on that plain (2 Chr 35:20\u201325<\/a>).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>1<\/a> Not only does Zechariah 12<\/a> place the final battle where the nations see the risen, pierced Christ at Jerus<\/span>alem, but verse 11<\/a> tells us explicitly that Megiddo is a plain, not a mountain<\/em>!<\/p>\n

So where does this leave us? Does magedon<\/span> point to Jerusalem? It would seem that it has to, in light of (1) the term har<\/span><\/span>-magedon<\/span>, which describes this final battle, and (2) Zechariah 12:9\u201311<\/a>, which plainly sites the conflict at Jerusalem.<\/p>\n

THE SUPERNATURAL MOUNT OF ASSEMBLY<\/p>\n

In fact, magedon<\/span> does indeed point to Jerusalem, in an especially dramatic way. Har-magedon<\/span> is Jerusalem. The key is remembering that the term derives from Hebrew.<\/p>\n

T<\/span>o those who do not know Hebrew, \u201cMegiddo\u201d seems like an obvious explanation for magedon<\/span> since both words have m-g-d<\/span>. But in Hebrew there are actually two letters that are transliterated with \u201cg\u201d in Gr<\/span>eek (and English translations). Here are the Hebrew letters behind \u201cMegiddo\u201d:<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
\n

mem<\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

\u2013<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

gimel<\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

\u2013<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

daleth<\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

M<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

\u2013<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

G<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

\u2013<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

D<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

The same \u201cm-g-d\u201d can be represented another way, with a different Hebrew letter in the mid<\/span>dle:<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
\n

mem<\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

\u2013<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

\u02bf ayin<\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

\u2013<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

daleth<\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

M<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

\u2013<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

\u02bf<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

\u2013<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

D<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Neither Greek nor English has a letter (other than hard \u201cg\u201d) that approximates the sound of \u02bfayin<\/span>. That is why it is represented in academic transliteration as a <\/span>backwards apostrophe. The sound of the letter \u02bfayin<\/span> is made in the back of the throat and sounds similar to hard \u201cg.\u201d Perhaps the best example of a Hebrew word that begins with the letter \u02bfayin<\/span> in Heb<\/span>rew but is represented by \u201cg\u201d in English transliteration is \u201cGomorrah\u201d (\u02bfamorah<\/span>).See the transliteration in James Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Hebrew (Old Testament)<\/em> (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, 1997). The DBL<\/em> word number is 6686<\/a> (Strong\u2019s number 6017<\/a>).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>2<\/a> That familiar word is not spelled with a Hebrew \u201cg\u201d (gimel<\/span>) like the \u201cg\u201d in \u201cMegiddo.\u201d It is spelled with \u02bfayin<\/span>.<\/p>\n

This<\/span> means that the Hebrew phrase behind John\u2019s Greek transliteration of our mystery Hebrew term is actually h-r-m-\u02bf-d<\/span>. But what does that mean? If the first part (h-r) is the Hebrew word har<\/span> (\u201cmountain\u201d)<\/span>, is there a har m-\u02bf-d<\/span> in the Hebrew Old Testament?<\/p>\n

There is\u2014and it\u2019s stunning when considered in light of the battle of \u201cArmageddon\u201d and what we discussed in the previous chapter about the supernatur<\/span>al north and antichrist.<\/p>\n

The phrase in question exists in the Hebrew Bible as har mo\u02bfed<\/span>.I know of one evangelical scholar who makes these connections. See Meredith Kline, \u201cHar Magedon: The End of the Millennium,\u201d Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society<\/em> 39.2 (June 1996): 207\u201322<\/a>. Kline uses these points to argue in favor of a recapitulation view of the book of Revelation. Doing so allows him to see Rev 20:7\u201310<\/a> as an episodic repetition of Rev 16<\/a> and 19<\/a>, thereby requiring the admission that the \u201cthousand years\u201d refrain of Rev 20:1\u20136<\/a> does not speak of a literal millennial kingdom following the Church Age, but actually is<\/em> the Church Age. Hence he argues \u201cthe end of the millennium.\u201d My own eschatological views are not those of Kline\u2019s (amillennial), nor would my views align with any of the other systems. Nevertheless, Kline clearly grasped what was going on with the term Armageddon and sees the implications. See also C. C. Torrey, \u201cArmageddon,\u201d Harvard Theological Review<\/em> 31 (1938): 237\u201348. Greg Beale notes in regard to Kline\u2019s analysis: \u201c[Kline] demonstrates organic parallels with the immediate and broad contexts. Presupposing the correctness of deriving \u2018Armageddon\u2019 ultimately from har m\u00f4\u2018\u0113d<\/em>, Kline\u2019s contextual analysis of Revelation is quite plausible\u201d (see G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text<\/em>, New International Greek Testament Commentary [Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle, Cumbria: Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 1999], 840<\/a>).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>3<\/a> Incredibly, it is found in Isaiah 14:13<\/a>, a passage many readers will immediately recognize:<\/p>\n

12<\/a>  How you have f<\/strong><\/span>allen from heaven, morning star, son of dawn<\/strong>!<\/p>\n

You are cut down to the ground, conqueror of nations!<\/p>\n

13<\/a> And you yourself said in your heart,<\/p>\n

\u201cI will ascend to heaven;<\/p>\n

I will raise up my throne above th<\/span>e stars of God;<\/p>\n

and I will sit on the mountain of assembly<\/strong> [har mo\u02bfed<\/span>]<\/p>\n

on the summit of Zaphon<\/strong>;<\/p>\n

14<\/a>  I will ascend to the high places of the clouds,<\/p>\n

I will make myself like the Most High<\/strong>.\u201d<\/p>\n

15<\/a>  But yo<\/span>u are brought down to Sheol,<\/p>\n

to the depths of the pit (Isa 14:12\u201315<\/a>).<\/p>\n

Back in chapter 11<\/a> we saw that the phrase har mo\u02bfed<\/span> was one of the terms used to describe the dwelling place of Yahweh and his div<\/span>ine council\u2014the cosmic mountain. The phrase obviously would have been filled with theological meaning to anyone who knew Hebrew and the Old Testament well. But why would Yahweh\u2019s dwelling place be called \u201cthe summit of Zaphon\u201d? Didn\u2019t we just learn in the last chapter that was B<\/span>aal\u2019s abode?<\/p>\n

Recall that, in Psalm 68:15\u201316<\/a>, Yahweh desired \u201cMount Bashan\u201d as his own\u2014that is, he wanted to defeat the fo<\/span>rces of darkness and claim their customary abode as his own. The same is true of Zaphon. Look at what Psalm 48<\/a> says:<\/p>\n

1<\/a> Yahweh is great and very worthy of praise<\/p>\n

in the city of our God, in his holy mou<\/span>ntain.<\/p>\n

2<\/a> Beautiful in elevation, the joy of the whole earth,<\/p>\n

is Mount Zion<\/strong>, in the far north<\/strong> (Lit., \u201cheights of the north\u201d),<\/p>\n

the city of the great king.<\/p>\n

Psalm 48<\/a> makes a bold theological statement. It<\/span> evicts Baal from his dwelling and boots his council off the property. The psalmist has Yahweh ruling the cosmos and the affairs of humanity, not Baal. Psalm 48<\/a> is a backhanded smack in the face to Ba<\/span>al.<\/p>\n

So is Isaiah 14<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Both of these passages are textbook examples of how biblical writers adopt and then repurpose material found in the literature of other (pagan) cultures\u2014in this case, Ugarit\u2014to ex<\/span>alt Yahweh and to slight lesser gods. The Hebrew Bible has many examples, but they are obvious only to a reader of Hebrew who is informed by the ancient worldview of the biblical writers.<\/p>\n

The result i<\/span>n the case of Armageddon is dramatic. When John draws on this ancient Hebrew phrase, he is indeed pointing to a climactic battle at Jerusalem<\/em>. Why? Because Jerusalem is<\/em> a mountain\u2014Mount Zion. And if B<\/span>aal and the gods of other nations don\u2019t like Yahweh claiming to be Most High and claiming to run the cosmos from the heights of Zaphon\/Mount Zion, they can try to do something about it.<\/p>\n

And of course <\/span>they do. Armageddon is about how the unbelieving nations, empowered by the antichrist, empowered by the prince of darkness\u2014Lord (ba\u02bfal<\/span>) of the dead, prince Baal (zbl ba\u02bfal<\/span>), Beelzebul\u2014will make one la<\/span>st, desperate effort to defeat Jesus at the place where Yahweh holds council, Mount Zion, Jerusalem<\/em>. Revelation and Zechariah agree.As far as the \u201cn\u201d at the end of the word magedon<\/em>, John adopted the odd spelling found in Zech 12:11<\/a> not because he wanted to point to Megiddo as a location (since that verse clearly calls Megiddo a plain and the rest of the passage points to Jerusalem). Rather, he wanted to link the visible return of the Messiah in Zech 12:10<\/a> with the final cosmic-geographical conflict for the destiny of earth in Rev 16:16<\/a>. In other words, by taking the familiar and theologically charged term har mo\u02bfed<\/em> and adding the \u201cn\u201d to it from Zech 12:11<\/a>, John effectively unites the theological imagery of Isa 14:13<\/a> and Zech 12:10<\/a> with the battle he describes in Rev 16:16<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>4<\/a> Armageddon is a battle for all the supernatural and earthly marble<\/span>s at Jerusalem. Megiddo doesn\u2019t fit the profile in any way.<\/p>\n

\n
\n

A BATTLE OF GODS AND MEN: Another Zechariah Connection<\/p>\n

Zechariah 12:9\u201311<\/a> isn\u2019t the only passage in that Old Testament book that factors into the Armageddon event. Earlier, in chapter 30<\/a>, we saw that Z<\/span>echariah prophesied the coming of Yahweh with his holy ones, other divine beings of his council, in the final conflict against the wicked in all the nations who still stand against his rule:<\/p>\n

3<\/a> Then Ya<\/span>hweh will go forth and fight against those nations, like when he fights on a day of battle. 4<\/a> On that day his feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, which faces Jerusalem on the east; and the Mount o<\/span>f Olives will be split in half, from east to west, by a very great valley; and half of the mountain will withdraw toward the north, and the other half toward the south. 5<\/a> And you will flee by the vall<\/span>ey of my mountains, because the valley of the mountains will reach to Azal, and you will flee like you fled from the earthquake in the days of King Uzziah of Judah. And Yahweh my God will come, and al<\/span>l the holy ones with him (Zech 14:3\u20135<\/a>).<\/p>\n

Yahweh is cast in human appearance in this passage (\u201chis feet will stand on the Mount of Olives\u201d). John draws on this passage and its imagery of a human Yahweh <\/span>in Revelation 19:11\u201316<\/a>, the climax of Armageddon:<\/p>\n

11<\/a> And I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse, and the one seated on it was called \u201cFaithful\u201d and \u201cTrue,\u201d and with justice he judges and makes<\/span> war. 12<\/a> Now his eyes were<\/em> a flame of fire, and on his head were<\/em> many royal headbands having a name written that no one except he himself knows. 13<\/a> And he was<\/em> dressed in an outer garment dipped in blo<\/span>od, and his name is called the Word of God. 14<\/a> And the armies that are<\/em> in heaven, dressed in clean, white fine linen, were following him on white horses. 15<\/a> And out of his mouth came a sharp sword, so<\/span> that with it he could strike the nations. And he will shepherd them with an iron rod, and he stomps the winepress of the wine of the furious wrath of God, the All-Powerful. 16<\/a> And he has a name writt<\/span>en on his outer garment and on his thigh: \u201cKing of kings and Lord of lords.\u201d<\/p>\n

The incarnate Yahweh has the Name of the Most High. He is the Word of God in human form. He is accompanied by the armies of<\/span> heaven. The language is obviously drawn from the Old Testament phrase \u201cLord of hosts,\u201d which refers to divine beings.<\/p>\n

Traditional approaches to eschatology have recognized that Jesus returns with a d<\/span>ivine (\u201cangelic\u201d) army, but the divinization of the earthly children of God and their entrance into Yahweh\u2019s family council are often overlooked because of the unfortunate translation of hagioi<\/span> (\u201choly<\/span> ones\u201d) as \u201csaints.\u201d The armies of heaven who witness the final demise of antichrist and his hordes are a combination of Yahweh\u2019s elohim<\/span> and humans made divine:<\/p>\n

When the Son of Man comes in his glory <\/span>and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne (Matt 25:31<\/a>).<\/p>\n

So that your hearts may be established blameless in holiness before our God and Father at the coming of our Lord Jesu<\/span>s with all his saints (1 Thess 3:13<\/a>).<\/p>\n

And to you who are being afflicted, rest with us at the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with his powerful angels (2 Thess 1:7<\/a>).<\/p>\n

Behold, the Lord comes wi<\/span>th ten thousands of his holy ones, 15 to execute judgment on all (Jude 14\u201315<\/a> English Standard Version
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>esv<\/a>).<\/p>\n

Finally, there is a subtle addition to the description of Jesus\u2019 triumphant return in Revelation 19<\/a>: \u201cHe will shepher<\/span>d them with an iron rod\u201d (v. 15<\/a>). The language comes from Psalm 2:2<\/a>, which John had quoted earlier, in Revelation 2:26\u201328<\/a>, to refer to human<\/em> believers made divine in the resurrection afterlife, who wo<\/span>uld rule and reign with Jesus over the nations:<\/p>\n

26<\/a> The one who conquers and who keeps my works until the end, to him I will give authority over the nations, 27<\/a> and he will rule them with a rod of iron<\/span>, as when earthen pots are broken in pieces, even as I myself have received authority from my Father. 28<\/a> And I will give him the morning star (Rev 2:26\u201328<\/a> English Standard Version
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>esv<\/a>).<\/p>\n

The implication, of course, is that the<\/span> heavenly armies who return with Christ will be more than just nonhuman members of the divine council. The host will include believers who have been exalted into its membership, returned to displace the gods of the nations. Christian\u2014do yo<\/span>u know who you are? The day will come when the elohim<\/span> will die like men\u2014and you will judge angels<\/em> (1 Cor 6:3<\/a>).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n

CHAPTER 42<\/p>\n

Describing the Indescribable<\/p>\n

In the distant past, God disinherited the nations of earth as his coruling family, the original Edenic design, choosing instead to create a new family from Abraham (Deut 32:8\u20139<\/a>). The disinherited nations were put under the authority of lesser elohim<\/span>, divine sons of God<\/em>. When they became corrupt, they were sentenced to mortality (Psa 82:6\u20138<\/a>). The Old Testament is basically a record of the long war between Yahweh and the gods, and between Yahweh\u2019s children and the nations, to re-establish the original Edenic design.<\/p>\n

The victory at Armageddon of the returning incarnate Yahweh over the Beast (antichrist) who directed the nations against Yahweh\u2019s holy city is the event that topples the elohim<\/span> from their thrones. It is the day of Yahweh, the time when all that is wicked is judged and when those who believe and overcome replace the disloyal sons of God. The kingdom is ready for full, earthly realization under a reconstituted divine council whose members include glorified believers. The full mass of believing humanity will experience a new Edenic world in a resurrected, celestial state.<\/p>\n

What was ruined by the fall is restored\u2014and made irreversible\u2014by the incarnation of Yahweh, his atoning death, and his resurrection. But all that is relatively easy to talk about when compared to passages that deal with what comes last and remains forever.<\/p>\n

How do you describe the indescribable? Paul grasped the problem clearly. I still like the King James Version of his sentiments for their rhythmic, almost lyrical quality:<\/p>\n

Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him (1 Cor 2:9<\/a>King James Version
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>kjv<\/a>).<\/p>\n

How true. But in this last chapter, I want to try and sketch what the biblical writers were thinking when they wrote about the celestial bodies of resurrected believers and the eternal state of the new Eden.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

CELESTIAL FLESH<\/p>\n

We\u2019ve devoted a good deal of attention to outlining the New Testament\u2019s use of sonship, family, and adoption terminology for believers (e.g., Gal 3:7\u20139<\/a>, 23\u201328<\/a>; John 1:11\u201312<\/a>; 1 John 3:1<\/span>\u20133<\/a>; 2 Pet 1:2\u20134<\/a>; Gal 4:4\u20136<\/a>; Rom 8:15\u201323<\/a>; Eph 1:4\u20135<\/a>).See chapters 35\u201336<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>1<\/a> The logic of this language should be quite evident by now. In ages past the divine sons of God watched as Yahweh created the world (Job 38:7\u20138<\/a>). Y<\/span>ahweh then announced to his council his intention to create humans who would be his imagers, a status his divine sons also shared (Gen 1:26\u201327<\/a>). We were designed to be embodied reflections of God<\/em>. Tha<\/span>t point of biblical theology was at the core of Paul\u2019s most extended discussion of what we will be in the new Eden, a place we cannot go to until we die in Christ and are raised with him. He wrote in <\/span>1 Corinthians 15<\/a>:<\/p>\n

35<\/a> But someone will say, \u201cHow are the dead raised? And with what sort of body do they come?\u201d 36<\/a> Foolish person! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. 37<\/a> And what you sow<\/span> is<\/em> not the body which it will become, but you sow the bare seed, whether perhaps of wheat or of some of the rest. 38<\/a> But God gives to it a body just as he wishes, and to each one of the seeds its own<\/span> body. 39<\/a> Not all flesh is<\/em> the same, but there is<\/em> one flesh of human beings, and another flesh of animals, and another flesh of birds, and another of fish, 40<\/a> and heavenly bodies and earthly bodies. B<\/span>ut the glory of the heavenly bodies is<\/em> of one kind, and the glory<\/em> of the earthly bodies is<\/em> of another kind. 41<\/a> There is<\/em> one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the st<\/span>ars, for star differs from star in glory.<\/p>\n

42<\/a> Thus also is<\/em> the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruptibility. 43<\/a> It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory. It<\/span> is sown in weakness, it is raised in power. 44<\/a> It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there<\/em> is a natural body, there<\/em> is also a spiritual body<\/em>. 45<\/a> Thus also it is written, \u201cThe f<\/span>irst man, Adam, became a living soul\u201d; the last Adam became<\/em> a life-giving spirit. 46<\/a> But the spiritual is<\/em> not first, but the natural; then the spiritual. 47<\/a> The first man is<\/em> from the earth, made of ea<\/span>rth; the second man is<\/em> from heaven. 48<\/a> As the one who is<\/em> made of earth, so also are<\/em> those who are<\/em> made of earth, and as the heavenly, so also are<\/em> those who are<\/em> heavenly. 49<\/a> And just as we have borne t<\/span>he image of the one who is<\/em> made of earth, we will also bear the image of the heavenly.<\/p>\n

50<\/a> But I say this, brothers, that flesh and blood is not able to inherit the kingdom of God, nor can corruption i<\/span>nherit incorruptibility. 51<\/a> Behold, I tell you a mystery: we will not all fall asleep, but we will all be changed, 52<\/a> in a moment, in the blink of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sou<\/span>nd, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 53<\/a> For it is necessary for<\/em> this perishable body<\/em> to put on incorruptibility, and this mortal body<\/em> to put on immortality (1 Cor 15:3<\/span>5\u201353<\/a>).<\/p>\n

This passage generates a number of questions. The most fundamental is no doubt what Paul means by asserting that there is some sort of \u201cheavenly body\u201d (v. 40<\/a>) that is \u201cspiritual\u201d (pneumatikos<\/span>; <\/span>v. 44<\/a>) and immortal (vv. 52\u201353<\/a>). Whatever he meant by that language has importance for every believer, since they \u201cwill also bear the image of the heavenly [second] man\u201d (vv. 45\u201349<\/a>).<\/p>\n

There has actuall<\/span>y been a good deal of scholarly attention paid to Paul\u2019s thoughts in 1 Corinthians 15<\/a>.The most recent, lengthy scholarly treatment of this topic is M. David Litwa, We Are Being Transformed: Deification in Paul\u2019s Soteriology<\/em>, <\/em>Beihefte zur Zeitschrift f\u00fcr die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft<\/em> 187 (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2012), 119\u201371.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>2<\/a> In the ancient Hellenistic Graeco-Roman world of Paul, there was a belief that the afterlife dead had bodies th<\/span>at were not flesh and blood, but which were composed of \u201ca finer, purer substance.\u201dLitwa, We Are Being Transformed<\/em>, 137. Litwa makes this point in an extended treatment of Stoic philosophical discussion of the \u201csoul,\u201d the terms of which have several points of conceptual correspondence to Paul\u2019s description in 1 Cor 15<\/a>. However, Litwa moves on to focus on distinctive elements of Paul\u2019s conception. In other words, Paul\u2019s idea of a \u201cspiritual body\u201d was not foreign to his culture, though his conception differed at points. Litwa notes that one of the key distinctions was that, for Paul, the spiritual body was immortal and incorruptible. He writes: \u201cAlthough Cicero makes similar claims, other Stoic sources deny the immortality of the soul\u201d (p. 139).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>3<\/a> Many people during this time referred to this substance as aether<\/span>, and believed that stars were also composed of it<\/span>. This explains in part the propensity in extrabiblical writers to assert that the afterlife dead became stars or like stars. Since stars were thought to be divine members of the realm of the gods, the idea makes sense in its own context. Paul\u2019s thin<\/span>king, however, transcends this equation.See Litwa, We Are Being Transformed<\/em>, 139\u201346. See chapter 20<\/a> for the brief discussion of \u201cstar language\u201d as it related to believers. The noted early church scholar Origen tried to frame the believer\u2019s glorification by appeal to the aether and the stars. See Alan Scott, Origen and the Life of the Stars: The History of an Idea<\/em>, Oxford Early Christian Studies (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994).
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>4<\/a><\/p>\n

Paul was not dependent on Graeco-Roman paganism for thoughts about celestial immortality. The Old Testament <\/span>contains kernels of the idea, and many Jewish literary works of the Second Temple period address the topic. Daniel 12:2\u20133<\/a> ties resurrection life to the heavens (and stars) without speculating on the n<\/span>ature of resurrection existence:<\/p>\n

2<\/a> And many from those sleeping in the dusty ground will awake, some to everlasting life and some to disgrace and everlasting contempt. 3<\/a> But the ones having insight wi<\/span>ll shine like the brightness of the expanse, and the ones providing justice for the many will be like the stars forever and ever.<\/p>\n

The New Testament contains similar thinking. Matthew 13:43<\/a> says, \u201cThen<\/span> the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father.\u201d The point of the celestial analogy is apparently that a believer\u2019s body will be like that of Jesus, since Jesus\u2019 appearance at the transfigu<\/span>ration is described in similar terms: \u201cHis face shone like the sun, and his clothing became bright as the light\u201d (Matt 17:2<\/a>). Second Temple Jewish sources describe the same idea with respe<\/span>ct to the resurrected righteous.See, for example, 1 Enoch 39:7<\/a> (\u201cAnd I saw a dwelling place underneath the wings of the Lord of the Spirits; and all the righteous and the elect before him shall be as intense as the light of fire\u201d); 104:1\u20134<\/a> (\u201cI swear unto you that in heaven the angels will remember you for good before the glory of the Great One; and your names shall be written before the glory of the Great One. Be hopeful, because formerly you have pined away through evil and toil. But now you shall shine like the lights of heaven, and you shall be seen.\u2026 Be hopeful, and do not abandon your hope, because there shall be a fire for you; you are about to be making a great rejoicing like the angels of heaven\u201d). The translation comes from James H. Charlesworth, ed., The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha<\/em> (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983), 1:85<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>5<\/a><\/p>\n

Ultimately, this sort of celestial language is trying to telegraph a simple but indescribably profound idea. In the eternal afterlife with God, believers will have th<\/span>e same sort of body that Jesus had after the resurrection. We will identify with the risen Jesus bodily as we identify with the Spirit currently: \u201cHe who is joined to the Lord becomes one spirit with him\u201d (<\/span>1 Cor 6:17<\/a> English Standard Version
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>esv<\/a>).Paul is not espousing monism in 1 Cor 6:17<\/a>. He is expressing unity with that spiritual being who is Yahweh, the Most High, who is a personal deity, the creator of all things visible and invisible (Col 1:15\u201317<\/a>). Paul envisions unity of presence (i.e., joining in Yahweh\u2019s council in his abode) in a new earthly Eden, not absorption into an impersonal force in a nonterrestrial, immaterial dimension, indistinct from creation.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>6<\/a><\/p>\n

In our more modern language, we might say that the body Christ had after the resurrection was his earthly body, healed and transformed into a material form unbound by the limit<\/span>ations of human terrestrial existence. It was a \u201cglorious body\u201d (Phil 3:21<\/a>), both of earth and not of earth. This resurrection transformation is the final, unimaginably literal expression of being con<\/span>formed to the image of Christ (2 Cor 3:18<\/a>). As one scholar summarizes:<\/p>\n

To be conformed to Christ\u2019s Glory body is evidently parallel to becoming \u201cthe same image\u201d as a divine being (2 Cor 3:18<\/a>). Thus th<\/span>is luminous corporeality of God known from the Hebrew Bible has been granted to Paul\u2019s converts through their participation in Christ. They are assimilated to the super body of the divine Christ. They share in <\/span>the reality of Christ\u2019s divine body, which guarantees their participation in Christ\u2019s attributes of incorruptibility and immortality.Litwa, We Are Being Transformed<\/em>, 151.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>7<\/a><\/p>\n

\n
\n

GLOBAL SACRED SPACE<\/p>\n

The book of Revelation frequently describes believers as those who \u201covercome\u201d the assault of evil described in the book by retaining their faith in Christ, the Lamb of God who is the beginning and the end. On six occasions the term is used in conjunction with the reward of eternal life. The imagery invoked is unmistakable, as it is drawn from Old Testament descriptions of sacred space\u2014first Eden, then the ark and the tabernacle, then the heavenly abode inhabited by the new, resurrected high priest, Jesus himself. To live in the new Eden means to occupy sacred space reserved for God and his family-council.<\/p>\n

In Revelation 2:7<\/a>, 11<\/a> Jesus says of those who conquer, \u201cI will grant [to them] to eat of the tree of life, which is in the paradise of God.\u2026 [They] will not be hurt by the second death\u201d (English Standard Version
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>esv<\/a>). The reference to the tree of life is clearly Edenic. Revelation 2:11<\/a> is less transparent, but also echoes Eden. The first death refers to physical death, brought by Adam\u2019s sin and expulsion from Eden. Since all humans, believers and unbelievers, are resurrected before judgment, the second death is the final judgment (Rev 21:8<\/a>). Those who continue to live with God do so in a new Edenic world.<\/p>\n

Revelation 2:17<\/a> tells us that those who conquer receive \u201chidden manna\u201d and \u201ca white stone, and on the stone a new name written, that no one knows except the one who receives it<\/em>.\u201d Manna, of course, was a food supernaturally provided during the wilderness wanderings (Exod 16<\/a>). It was bread from heaven, an analogy to Jesus as the source of eternal life (John 6:31\u201358<\/a>). It was \u201chidden\u201d in the sense that it was reserved only for those who had believed to the end.See David E. Aune, Revelation 1\u20135<\/em>, Word Biblical Commentary 52A (Dallas: Word, 1998), 189<\/a>. Second Baruch (Syriac Apocalypse)<\/em><\/a> 29:8<\/a> says, \u201cAnd it will happen at that time that the treasury of manna will come down again from on high, and they will eat of it in those years because these are they who have arrived at the consummation of time\u201d (cf. Sibylline Oracles<\/em><\/a> 7.149<\/a>). Translation is from Charlesworth, Old Testament Pseudepigrapha<\/em>, 1:631<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>8<\/a> A pot of manna was placed \u201cbefore the Lord\u201d in the ark of the covenant in the holy of holies (Exod 16:33<\/a>; Heb 9:4<\/a>). According to Second Temple Jewish writings, manna was considered the food of angels and of the sons of God.Ibid., 189<\/a>. See Joseph and Aseneth<\/em><\/a> 16:14<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>9<\/a><\/p>\n

The meaning of the white stone isn\u2019t completely certain. Based on parallels found in Second Temple period Jewish literature, the white stone was a symbol of legal acquittal or a token of membership among the righteous. The meaning is therefore very similar to conquering believers receiving white robes referenced in Revelation 3:5<\/a>, which says: \u201cThe one who conquers in this way will be dressed in white clothing, and I will never erase his name from the book of life, and I will declare his name before my Father and before his angels.\u201d As we saw in chapter 36<\/a>, Jesus in fact introduces us to the council. A white stone and a white robe were signs of membership in God\u2019s family.Beale notes: \u201cA white stone was commonly associated with a vote of acquittal (cf. 4 Macc. 15:26<\/a>; Acts 26:10<\/a>) or a favorable vote. Conversely, a black stone indicated guilt. A white stone sometimes was also used as a pass of admission to special occasions. Against this background, the meaning here probably refers to the reversal of the guilty verdict issued by the world\u2019s institutions against the overcomer because of refusal to participate in its idolatrous meals. Accordingly, the \u201cwhite stone\u201d becomes the invitation to take part in Jesus\u2019 supper (cf. 19:9<\/a>). The notion that a banquet meal is in mind is supported by the reference to \u201cmanna.\u201d According to Jewish tradition, precious stones fell along with the manna (cf. Midr.<\/em> Ps. 78.4). Some commentators have seen here the two precious stones on the shoulder pieces of the high priest\u2019s ephod, bearing the names of the twelve tribes (Exod 28:9\u201312<\/a>). According to another Jewish tradition, these priestly stones were stored in the hidden ark, to be revealed in the messianic times (cf. 2 Bar. 6:7\u20138<\/a>).\u201d See G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text<\/em>, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle, Cumbria: Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 1999), 252\u201353<\/a>.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>10<\/a><\/p>\n

Revelation 3:12<\/a> draws on the temple. Jesus says, \u201cThe one who conquers, I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God. Never shall he go out of it, and I will write on him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down from my God out of heaven, and my own new name.\u201d The language is familiar from passages like 1 Corinthians 3:16<\/a>; 6:19<\/a>, but still startling. Yahweh\u2019s temple was sacred space\u2014and we are part of that temple. As we learned from the Old Testament, the temple was the abode of the Name, Yahweh\u2019s presence\u2014and now we bear that Name.<\/p>\n

Revelation 21:7<\/a>is the most explicit link between divine sonship and conquering evil and the nations: \u201cThe one who conquers will have this heritage, and I will be his God and he will be my son\u201d (English Standard Version
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>esv<\/a>). A \u201cheritage\u201d is of course an inheritance. Israel was Yahweh\u2019s inheritance, his portion (Deut 32:9<\/a>). We are part of that (Gal 3:26\u201329<\/a>) and also govern it as sons and daughters of his royal, divine household council. The inheritance of the believer is dominion with Christ and God.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

REVERSAL OF THE CURSES<\/p>\n

The Eden imagery at the end of the book of Revelation is obvious, as that can be the only context for the tree of life:<\/p>\n

1<\/a> Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life<\/span>, bright as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb 2<\/a> through the middle of the street of the city; also, on either side of the river, the tree of life with its twelve kinds of fruit,<\/span> yielding its fruit each month. The leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. 3<\/a> No longer will there be anything accursed, but the throne of God and of the Lamb will be in it, and his se<\/span>rvants will worship him.\u2026<\/p>\n

14<\/a> Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life and that they may enter the city by the gates.\u2026<\/p>\n

19<\/a> And if anyone takes away fro<\/span>m the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book (Rev 22:1\u20133<\/a>, 14<\/a>, 19<\/a> English Standard Version
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>esv<\/a>).<\/p>\n

Notice that the tree of life<\/span> is specifically now for \u201cthe healing of the nations,\u201d a clear reference to the reclaiming of the nations turned over to lesser gods at Babel (Deut 32:8\u20139<\/a>). The effect is also described: \u201cNo longer wi<\/span>ll there be anything accursed.\u201d The curses upon earth and humanity brought on by the fall are reversed. The other two tree-of-life references naturally link the eternal life of the believer to being present in Eden\u2014the place where God, the source<\/span> of all life, dwells.<\/p>\n

The Old Testament alludes to the reversal of the curse and the coming global kingdom in striking ways that echo the Edenic condition<\/span>s:<\/p>\n

\u2022 All those formerly sick or disabled will be restored to full health (Isa 29:18\u201319<\/a>; 30:26<\/a>; Mic 4:6\u20137<\/a>).<\/p>\n

\u2022 All will enjoy a supernatural abundance of milk, honey, fruit, and produce (Isa 4:2<\/a>; 7:21\u20132<\/span>2<\/a>; 25:6\u20139<\/a>; 30:23\u201324<\/a>; Joel 3:18<\/a>; Amos 9:13\u201315<\/a>).<\/p>\n

\u2022 There will be peace throughout all creation (Hos 2:18<\/a>; Isa 11:1\u201310<\/a>; cf. Ezek 34:25\u201328<\/a>); and all Israel (Isa 10:20<\/a>; 52:6<\/a>; Ezek 39:22<\/a>).<\/p>\n

\u2022 All nations (Is<\/span>a 19:19\u201325<\/a>; cf. Ezek 38:23<\/a>) will know that Yahweh is God.<\/p>\n

\n
\n

NO MORE SEA<\/p>\n

One of my favorite verses in the Bible is Revelation 21:1<\/a>. John writes:<\/p>\n

Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was n<\/span>o more (English Standard Version
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>esv<\/a>).<\/p>\n

In the ancient world the sea was a thing of dread. It was unpredictable and untamable. It was a place upon which humans couldn\u2019t live. Consequently, the sea was often used as a metaphor <\/span>for chaos, destruction, and death. The power and chaotic unruliness of the sea was symbolized in both the Old Testament and a wide range of ancient Near Eastern literatures with a dragon or sea monster, variously known as Leviathan and Rahab (e.g., <\/span>Pss 74:14<\/a>; 89:10<\/a>).Leviathan is certainly not a literal prehistoric sea creature that survived into the time period of the Old Testament. The name is known from other Canaanite literature, such as that of Ugarit, and is referenced in the same ways as we find in the Hebrew Bible. It was a well-known chaos symbol across the known ancient world. See C. Uehlinger, \u201cLeviathan,\u201d in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible<\/em>, 2nd ed. (ed. Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter W. van der Horst; Leiden; Boston; Cologne; Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge: Brill; Eerdmans, 1999), 511\u201315<\/a>; K. Spronk, \u201cRahab,\u201d in ibid., 684\u201386<\/a>; C. H. Gordon, \u201cLeviathan: Symbol of Evil,\u201d in Biblical Motifs: Origins and Transformations<\/em> (ed. A. Altmann; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1966) 1\u20139; John Day, God\u2019s Conflict with the Dragon and the Sea<\/em>, University of Cambridge Oriental Publications 35 (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1985); M. K. Wakeman, God\u2019s Battle with the Monster<\/em> (Leiden: Brill, 1973). Leviathan and chaos are important biblical-theological concepts that must be left for another time.
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>11<\/a><\/p>\n

Sea imagery conveys these ideas from the very beginning of the Bible. The waters of the primeval deep (Gen 1:2<\/a>) must be calmed and<\/span> restrained by God. The defeat of the gods of Egypt happens when the sea obeys its Maker (Exod 14<\/a>). Jesus walks on the sea and instantly brings it into submission. To the ancient mind these incidents <\/span>symbolized power over chaos and everything that might bring harm and death to humanity. Absence of chaos meant that everything was in perfect, divine order and calm.<\/p>\n

This is why Revelation ends as it <\/span>does, with God\u2019s return to permanently dwell with his family on a new earth. When Eden comes, there is no more sea<\/em>. All that was originally intended in God\u2019s vision of a global Eden has come to pass. <\/span>The final Eden has no death. The choices of God\u2019s free-will imagers that obstructed God\u2019s plan have been dealt with. All the imagers, human and divine, who dwell in the new Eden have chosen correctly\u2014they have believed that Yahweh is the God of gods and that his way is best. Their will<\/span> has aligned with his will. The \u201calready, but not yet\u201d has been realized. The \u201cnot yet\u201d has given way to now and forever.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n

Epilogue<\/p>\n

When we began our journey, I shared with you my own experience of venturing into the mind of ancient Israelites and the Jews and Christians of the first century and how that made it impossible to look at the Bible as I had before. It ruined me in an agreeable way. But I can only say that with hindsight. At the time of that experience, I had already taught on the college level and was in the midst of one of the nation\u2019s most respected Hebrew Bible programs\u2014and yet I hadn\u2019t been thinking clearly about Scripture. I hadn\u2019t seen much of what I\u2019ve written in this book. I\u2019d been blinded by tradition and my own predilection to keep certain things on the periphery when it came to the Bible. It was the worst possible time in my life to have everything put into upheaval, to have to rethink and reevaluate what I believed. It required that I be humbled, something that doesn\u2019t come easily to an academic.<\/p>\n

The realization that I needed to read the Bible like a premodern person who embraced the supernatural, unseen world has illumined its content more than anything else in my academic life. One question I\u2019ve been asked over the years when sharing insights that are now part of this book was one that I asked myself: Why haven\u2019t I heard these things before?<\/em> It astonished me that I could sit under years of biblical preaching and teaching and never have anyone alert me to the important and exciting truths we\u2019ve tracked here.<\/p>\n

I\u2019ve learned that the answer to that question is complex. Rather than dwell on it, God provoked me to do something about it. Most people aren\u2019t going to learn Greek and Hebrew (and other dead languages) as part of studying Scripture. Most aren\u2019t going to pursue a PhD in biblical studies, where they\u2019ll encounter the high-level scholarship that will force them to think about what the biblical text really says and why it says it in its own ancient context, far removed from any modern tradition. But everyone ought to reap some benefit from those disciplines. And so it has become my ambition to parse that data and synthesize it so that more people can experience the thrill of rediscovering the supernatural worldview of the Bible\u2014of reading the Bible again for the first time.<\/p>\n

The Unseen Realm<\/em> is the first step in that effort. If you\u2019re like me, what you\u2019ve read here will be fodder for thought for some time. And truth be told, it\u2019s just a starting point. My hope is that the book has alerted you to some terribly important principles that I\u2019ve listed below: strategies for pursuing the biblical-theological ideas that run through Scripture. They\u2019re my short list of research principles that, even though they are self-evident, I need to be constantly reminded of.<\/p>\n

1. Let the Bible be what it is, and be open to the notion that what it says about the unseen realm might just be real. The writers certainly thought it was. I would suggest that it\u2019s a good hermeneutical strategy to firmly grasp that they\u2014the biblical authors\u2014aren\u2019t us<\/em> while we seek to understand their<\/em> thoughts. That doesn\u2019t seem terribly profound, but it\u2019s critically important to reading Scripture as it was written.<\/p>\n

2. The content of the Bible needs to make sense in its own context, whether or not it makes sense in ours.<\/strong> I can\u2019t help but think of our discussions of Genesis 6:1\u20134<\/a> here. That passage says what it says because of what it addresses in the worldview of the writer<\/em>. Assigning a more \u201crational\u201d (i.e., nonsupernatural) meaning to it in order to make it more palatable in a different context amounts to erasing its intended target. Even if some passages of Scripture don\u2019t make sense in our world, and we cringe at what they say, changing their context to remove our discomfort isn\u2019t sound hermeneutical method.<\/p>\n

3. How the biblical writers tie passages together for interpretation should guide our own interpretation of the Bible.<\/strong> In academic jargon, this is referred to as intertextuality. It\u2019s important for understanding what a biblical writer was thinking and doing. It is how ideas are threaded through the canon. Most of our exegesis involves breaking up<\/em> passages and verses into their constituent parts, whereas the biblical writers were creating connections<\/em> between texts. Since the Bible is, unavoidably, something of an artifact to us, we have to pay careful attention to the parts. But too often we only gaze at the pieces in isolation and fail to observe how they are tethered to other pieces. Learning to pay attention to intertextuality is to follow an inspired breadcrumb trail where it leads.<\/p>\n

4. How the New Testament writers repurpose the Old Testament is critical for biblical interpretation.<\/strong> In other words, the Septuagint is a big deal. It does little good to remind ourselves that the New Testament is an inspired commentary on the Old Testament when we fail to discern just what Bible they were using (more often than not).<\/p>\n

5. Metaphorical meaning isn\u2019t \u201cless real\u201d than literal meaning (however that\u2019s defined). Whether we like it or not, the biblical writers weren\u2019t obsessed with literalism the way we seem to be. Frankly, I\u2019ve come to believe that every seminary and graduate school program in biblical studies ought to require a course on the hermeneutical methods of the biblical writers and first-century Judaism. It would be a wake-up call. Biblical writers regularly employ conceptual metaphor in their writing and thinking. That\u2019s because they were human. Conceptual metaphor<\/em> refers to the way we use a concrete term or idea to communicate abstract ideas. If we marry ourselves to the concrete (\u201cliteral\u201d) meaning of words, we\u2019re going to miss the point the writer was angling for in many cases. If I use the word \u201cVegas\u201d and all you think of is latitude and longitude, you\u2019re not following my meaning. Biblical words can carry a lot of freight that transcends their concrete sense. Inspiration didn\u2019t immunize language from doing what it does.<\/p>\n

Finally, my prayer for readers is that God will use this book in your life the way he has used its content in my own spiritual journey: to marvel at the intricacy of the biblical narrative, to be blessed by the love of God for his human children, and to acknowledge the role of the unseen world in the inheritance of salvation (Heb 1:14<\/a>).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\n

Acknowledgments<\/p>\n

This book has been a long time in coming. The idea for it arose while I was in graduate school at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. I wanted to decode what I was learning about the need for reading the Bible in its own original context for non-specialists. There was too wide a chasm between how scholars read the Bible and how it was read in churches. Lay people and pastors were missing the many interpretive payoffs to serious exegesis of the text framed by the worldview of the writers, not to mention the beautiful coherence of the Bible\u2019s epic supernatural narrative. I wanted to bridge that gap in some way.<\/p>\n

One of the first things I did toward preparing to write was create an informal online discussion group. I called it the Divine Council Study Group (DCSG). The original participants were James R. Black, Ronn Johnson, Doug Vardell, Stephen Huebscher, and Charles Kennedy. The discussions were stimulating and useful. They helped me discern many items that needed inclusion in what I would eventually write and produced questions that readers were sure to ask. The Divine Council Study Group
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>DCSG<\/a> was also the impetus for the creation of a sweeping bibliography for all things related to the divine council worldview. The Divine Council Study Group
\n<\/span><\/div>\n

„>DCSG<\/a> disbanded in 2004 after I graduated from my doctoral program and started work at Logos Bible Software, but it gave me direction to begin writing and start collecting material.<\/p>\n

The book began shortly thereafter under the title The Myth That is True<\/em>. In order to make myself accountable to produce something each month, I began writing portions in a monthly newsletter that I emailed to subscribers. That practice continued for almost eight years, during which time I abandoned the newsletter and started blogging. The first draft (or what I thought of as a first draft) was finished in 2012. Over those years I had a good deal of feedback from readers, far too many to mention all the names here. Some who proofread the initial manuscript version and otherwise encouraged me in the project include Mark Lutzow, Kevin Bucy, Tim Robinson, James Coke, Cathy Hawk, David Brewer, Brian Lopez, Cris Putnam, Ben Stanhope, Jonnathan Molina, Jeff Sievertson, Von Glitschka, Michael Krause, Kenneth Conklin, Keith Jentoft, Doug Overmyer, Anne Edsell, Russ White, Gearron Sublett, John D. Barry, Eli Evans, Rick Brannan, Vincent Setterholm, Carl Jacques, Corby Amos, Mike Brant, Will Penland, Doug Van Dorn, Brian Godawa, Steve Runge, Carl Sanders, Stuart Whitaker, Neil van der Gugten, Mark Lundgren, Sharon Shipwash, John Dunn, Ron Dupree, Dennis Linscomb, Paul DeSilva, Margo Houts, Justin Blystone, Greg Lyle, Marc Wilson, Jay Bradley, Amy Bradley, Jeff Franklin, and Jessica Tyson. Mike Adamo, Dino Schulmeier, Melissa Nienhuis, and Eric Joel Ortiz specifically assisted me in organizing my cumulative divine council bibliography, currently numbering over three thousand items.<\/p>\n

Dr. Bob Chisholm deserves special thanks for steering my first journal article (\u201cDeuteronomy 32:8 and the Sons of God,\u201d 2001) related to the divine council through the review process. His endorsement and advice was crucial. Dr. Gerry Breshears was another scholar who saw very early on that what I was doing had value. He was a consistent encouragement to keep working on the draft. I\u2019m thankful for David Burnett and his own research and its relation to the divine council worldview. David\u2019s the doctoral student I\u2019ll never have. It\u2019s been fun to watch him get absorbed by the material since he attended some of my early papers on the divine council at ETS meetings. My pastor, Dax Swanson, has also been a consistent voice of encouragement, not only for the project, but also for being able to teach the content to people in a local church context. I\u2019m also thankful to all those who received advanced reader copies of The Unseen Realm<\/em> and encouraged its readership through their endorsement.<\/p>\n

The book that you now hold in your hands, though, would never have reached you without the commitment and input of several people that deserve special mention. During the course of my time at Logos I had dozens of conversations about the content with Dale Pritchett, a vice president with the company for many years until his retirement. Dale read through the initial Myth That is True<\/em> draft on my website and, later, the uncorrected proofs for The Unseen Realm<\/em> numerous times. He became what I can only describe as an evangelist for the material. His son Bob Pritchett, the CEO at Logos (now under the parent corporation, Faithlife), was one of Dale\u2019s converts. It was Bob who made the decision after reading the initial draft that the book couldn\u2019t remain a leisure project. He was the irresistible force behind the launch of The Unseen Realm<\/em>. Bob wisely hired the Somersault Group to shepherd me through the editorial and promotional process. Those who read the early draft will quickly realize that my editor, Dave Lambert, did a wonderful job with the book. Dave is a seasoned editor, and I enjoyed the experience. Bob Banning, my copy editor, did amazingly thorough and insightful work. John Sawyer and Jeannette Taylor were equally proficient when it came to market analysis and promotional strategies. I learned a lot about publishing through their input. Their enthusiasm for the content was also encouraging. Emily Varner provided just the sort of competent guidance in getting the book exposure in the academic community that I\u2019d hoped for. Bill Nienhuis, Publisher Relations Director at Faithlife\/Logos served as liaison (read: my \u201chandler\u201d) with respect to all parties. He made sure that none of us overlooked anything that needed to be done. Bill, I need you full time!<\/p>\n

Finally, I\u2019m grateful to my wife, Drenna. She makes everything I do possible.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
\n<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

CHAPTER 36 Lower Than the Elohim The last chapter left us with a life-changing thought: We are the children of God, destined to displace the defeated, disloyal sons of God who now rule the nations. Believing followers of Jesus Christ are the fulfillment of God\u2019s plan to have humanity join the divine family-council and restore … <\/p>\n

\u201eThe Unseen Realm – VI\u201c <\/span>weiterlesen<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-226","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-allgemein"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/buch.jehovah-shammah.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/226","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/buch.jehovah-shammah.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/buch.jehovah-shammah.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/buch.jehovah-shammah.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/buch.jehovah-shammah.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=226"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"http:\/\/buch.jehovah-shammah.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/226\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2501,"href":"http:\/\/buch.jehovah-shammah.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/226\/revisions\/2501"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/buch.jehovah-shammah.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=226"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/buch.jehovah-shammah.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=226"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/buch.jehovah-shammah.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=226"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}